EXECUTIVE MANSION, _August 1, 1882_.
_To the House of Representatives_:
Having watched with much interest the progress of House bill No. 6242,
entitled "An act making appropriations for the construction, repair,
and preservation of certain works on rivers and harbors, and for other
purposes," and having since it was received carefully examined it, after
mature consideration I am constrained to return it herewith to the House
of Representatives, in which it originated, without my signature and
with my objections to its passage.
Many of the appropriations in the bill are clearly for the general
welfare and most beneficent in their character. Two of the objects for
which provision is made were by me considered so important that I felt
it my duty to direct to them the attention of Congress. In my annual
message in December last I urged the vital importance of legislation for
the reclamation of the marshes and for the establishment of the harbor
lines along the Potomac front. In April last, by special message,
I recommended an appropriation for the improvement of the Mississippi
River. It is not necessary that I say that when my signature would make
the bill appropriating for these and other valuable national objects
a law it is with great reluctance and only under a sense of duty that
I withhold it.
My principal objection to the bill is that it contains appropriations
for purposes not for the common defense or general welfare, and which
do not promote commerce among the States. These provisions, on the
contrary, are entirely for the benefit of the particular localities
in which it is proposed to make the improvements. I regard such
appropriation of the public money as beyond the powers given by the
Constitution to Congress and the President.
I feel the more bound to withhold my signature from the bill because
of the peculiar evils which manifestly result from this infraction of
the Constitution. Appropriations of this nature, to be devoted purely
to local objects, tend to an increase in number and in amount. As the
citizens of one State find that money, to raise which they in common
with the whole country are taxed, is to be expended for local
improvements in another State, they demand similar benefits for
themselves, and it is not unnatural that they should seek to indemnify
themselves for such use of the public funds by securing appropriations
for similar improvements in their own neighborhood. Thus as the bill
becomes more objectionable it secures more support. This result is
invariable and necessarily follows a neglect to observe the
constitutional limitations imposed upon the lawmaking power.
The appropriations for river and harbor improvements have, under the
influences to which I have alluded, increased year by year out of
proportion to the progress of the country, great as that has been.
In 1870 the aggregate appropriation was $3,975,900; in 1875,
$6,648,517.50; in 1880, $8,976,500; and in 1881, $11,451,000; while
by the present act there is appropriated $18,743,875.
While feeling every disposition to leave to the Legislature the
responsibility of determining what amount should be appropriated for
the purposes of the bill, so long as the appropriations are confined to
objects indicated by the grant of power, I can not escape the conclusion
that, as a part of the lawmaking power of the Government, the duty
devolves upon me to withhold my signature from a bill containing
appropriations which in my opinion greatly exceed in amount the needs of
the country for the present fiscal year. It being the usage to provide
money for these purposes by annual appropriation bills, the President
is in effect directed to expend so large an amount of money within so
brief a period that the expenditure can not be made economically and
advantageously.
The extravagant expenditure of public money is an evil not to be
measured by the value of that money to the people who are taxed for it.
They sustain a greater injury in the demoralizing effect produced upon
those who are intrusted with official duty through all the ramifications
of government.
These objections could be removed and every constitutional purpose
readily attained should Congress enact that one-half only of the
aggregate amount provided for in the bill be appropriated for
expenditure during the fiscal year, and that the sum so appropriated be
expended only for such objects named in the bill as the Secretary of
War, under the direction of the President, shall determine; provided
that in no case shall the expenditure for any one purpose exceed the
sum now designated by the bill for that purpose.
I feel authorized to make this suggestion because of the duty
imposed upon the President by the Constitution "to recommend to the
consideration of Congress such measures as he shall judge necessary and
expedient," and because it is my earnest desire that the public works
which are in progress shall suffer no injury. Congress will also convene
again in four months, when this whole subject will be open for their
consideration.