2 12 KANSAS UNIVERSITY QUARTERLY. 



the House today is not at all that of an earlier period, and hardly the 

 correct one in view of the debates of the constitutional convention. 

 While many debates in Congress seem to have arisen upon exactly 

 the same point, yet there is a regular progression in establishing the 

 principle which is in force today. The earlier contest was between 

 the executive authority and the House, beginning with the debate of 

 1789 and closing with the law of May 10, 1800, and resulted in a 

 victory for the latter. Then followed a growing antagonism between 

 House and Senate, which meant that one party or the other must give 

 way. The debate of 1833 was carried on entirely by the Senate 

 which therein showed its disinclination to originate what it conceived 

 to be a revenue bill, although that bill ])roposed to reduce duties. In 

 1837 the House exhibited a determination to defend its privilege, 

 though its action was no more than an announcement of intention. 

 In 1843, the Senate, by its vote on the E.ans resolution, directly 

 disavowed any right to originate a bill reducing the revenue. In 1855 

 the unsuccessful attempt of the Senate to originate general appropria- 

 tion bills was a definite assurance that the House gave a broader 

 interpretation to the constitution than tliat of well known commen- 

 tators. The debate on the postoftice bill of 1859 was another indica- 

 tion of the House's positio-n, though political considerations affected 

 in no small degree the decision reached. The contest of 187 1, on the 

 reduction of the income tax. while it resulted in no formal agreement, 

 must be accepted as settling the question of the Senate's right to 

 originate bills to reduce the revenue as distinguished from bills to 

 raise revenue. The contest of 1872, on the Senate's right to amend, 

 showed that the House was determined that amendments must be 

 germane to the subject matter amended. The debates which have 

 arisen since 1872, with one or two. exceptions, have indicated that the 

 control of all great financial matters rests with the House whenever 

 the House cares to exercise it. 



The constitutional privilege merely provides that all bills for raising 

 revenue shall originate in the Hoise, but that the Senate may amend 

 as on other bills. The House, however, has gradually come to assert 

 that this constitutional provision means: first, that the House and 

 not the Secretary of the Treasury shall plan the expenditures and 

 receipts of the government; second, that the word "raise" in the 

 constitution means either increase or decrease; third, that Senate 

 amendments to House revenue bills cannot be of such a character as 

 to alter completely the intention of the bills, but must be germane to 

 the subject matter; fourth, that the Senate has no constitutional right 

 to originate appropriation bills, or, in other terms, that the words 

 "revenue bills" are equivalent to " money bills." In summarizing, 



