3IO KANSAS UNIVKRSITV QUARl F.RI.V. 



report of its Judiciary committee, and thought it would be unwise to 

 adopt this resolution because "the House of Representatives have 

 held for many years that the Senate cannot originate the ajjpropria- 

 tion bills. '"^ Mr. Hale also opposed the resolution because "it 

 would open all of those grave ipiestions that have been up and settled 

 practically for years as to the right of this body to originate appro- 

 priation bills. * * * In all these years there is to be found on the 

 records of the House but a single report conceding that right, "t 

 Under the rules of the Senate this resolution could have been called 

 up for vote on the following morning, but no more was heard of it. 

 Mr. Allison and Mr. Hale, as members of the House, had already 

 taken ground sustaining the House privilege in general, though 

 neither had before this debated the specific (piestion of the origination 

 of appropriation bills. Their action in the Senate was certainly con- 

 sistent with that in the House, and if Mr. Hale's statement is to be 

 accepted the control of the House over exijenditure had come to be 

 recognized as supreme. 



On the other hand the House itself did not seem to be so consistent. 

 A discussion . I came up Ajiril ii, 1.S82, over a Senate bill to provide 

 for a deficiency in subsistence for the Indians. Objection was made 

 as usual, and Mr. Randall, .Mr. Springer, Mr. Sparks and Mr. McMil- 

 lan all insisted upon a firm atlherence to the right of the House to 

 originate appropriation bills. The difficulty was overcome by the 

 introduction of a new bill in the House and by rushing it through 

 under a suspension of the rules. As to whether the cjuestion was to 

 be considered as settled or not, Mr. Randall replied in the affirmative, 

 adding "there has never been on the part of the House, so far as I 

 recollect, anything but an affirmation of its own right to originate 

 appropriation bills relating to the support of the government." § 

 From these two debates it would seem that both Senate and House 

 had at last come to the understanding that practically revenue bills 

 meant money bills, and that the term raising revenue included reducing 

 revenue. The latter jjroposition, indeed, had not been controverted 

 since the debate of 1871, but on the former the House reversed itself, 

 though its decision was rendered in an indirect way. On January 23, 

 1885, Mr. Hurd offered a resolution || directing the Judiciary commit- 

 tee to take charge of certain bills received from the Senate, in order 

 that the committee might report on the right of the Senate to origi- 

 nate bills which involved appropriations. The bill which was directly 



♦ Cong. Record. 47 Coiik.. 1 Sess.. pt. V. p. 4509. 



+ Ibid.. p. 4.509. 



tlbid..pt. III. p 2770. 



Silbid.,pt. Ill, pp. 2770-71. 



I Ibid.. 48 Coug.. 2 Sess.pt. II. p. 948. 



