ADAMS: THE CONTROL OF THE PURSE. 20) 



finally the jealousy of the House and its determination to limit the 

 Senate's power, and to secure its own, was shown in a speech by 

 Mr. Hoar,''' in which he attacked Senatorial encroachment upon the 

 Presidential right of appointment. The House agreed to the resolu- 

 tion of Mr. Dawes by a vote of 153 ayes to 9 nays, 78 not voting. 



The message with the House resolution, received in the Senate 

 April 2, was laid upon the table. April 8, the resolution was referred! 

 to the Finance committee but without debate, Mr. Sherman merely 

 remarking that the right of the Senate to amend in the case in ques- 

 tion was undoubted. April 10, the resolution was reported back with 

 a recommendation that it be sent to the committee on Privileges and 

 Elections,;}; on the ground that the Finance committee had already 

 indicated its opinion on the subject. This was done and April 24 a 

 report§ was made upholding the general position taken by the Senate 

 but disapproving the Senate's action in amending the bill in question. 



There was never any debate in the Senate on the report, nor did 

 the Senate definitely agree to the report, although leave was given to 

 print extra copies. 



This comparatively short report|| of the committee on Privileges 

 and Elections is for the greater part one of the most logical docu- 

 ments in the long series of debates upon the constitutional provision 

 in question. A synopsis of the main points of the report follows: 

 I St. The Senate right to amend can only be understood by noting 

 what were the conditions in England between Commons and Lords. 

 There the Commons had exclusive control of money bills and the 

 Lords could in no way amend, but in the United States the House 

 was given the right of origination, and the Senate was given the right 

 to "amend as on other bills." 2nd. This leads to the question what 

 the right to amend implies. Again referring to England, the Lords 

 had power to amend any bill, except a money bill, in any way they 

 saw fit, and hence, since the right to amend revenue bills, "as on 

 other bills" is conferred by the constitution, the Senate has the right 

 to amend revenue bills as it sees fit. 3rd. The Senate acknowledges 

 that to "raise revenue " is not limited to iin-rcasc, but includes 

 decrease also, and also acknowledges that it has no right to so amend a 

 bill which is not a revenue bill, so as to increase or decrease revenue. 

 4th. And finally the Senate had no right to amend the House bill as 

 it did because that House bill was not a revenue bill, and some of the 

 Senate amendments did provide for raising revenue. The last 



*Oong. aiobe, 187l-7:i. pt. III. p. 2109. 

 + Ibid.. p. r«48. 

 t Ibid., p. 2319. 

 glbid., p. 2716. 

 Senate Reports. 2 Se.ss., 42 t'oiij;.. No. •> to 232.. Kepori Hti. 



