for the general improvements recommended, but about $14,000,000
were added for other special river and harbor schemes which had
obtained congressional favor. President Arthur's veto message of
August 1, 1882, condemned the bill because it contained
provisions designed "entirely for the benefit of the particular
localities in which it is proposed to make the improvements." He
thus described a type of legislation of which the nation had and
is still having bitter experience: "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." The truth of
this last assertion Congress immediately proved by passing the
bill over the President's veto. Senator Hoar, who defended the
bill, has admitted that "a large number of the members of the
House who voted for it lost their seats" and that in his opinion
the affair "cost the Republican party its majority in the House
of Representatives."

Legislation regarding the tariff was, however, the event of
Arthur's administration which had the deepest effect upon the
political situation. Both national parties were reluctant to face
the issue, but the pressure of conditions became too strong for
them. Revenue arrangements originally planned for war needs were
still amassing funds in the Treasury vaults which were now far
beyond the needs of the Government, and were at the same time
deranging commerce and industry. In times of war, the Treasury