DOCUMENTARY HISTORY OF THE FLORIDA CANAL 303

 Mr. CLArx. Estimates not in accordance with law cannot be submitted by
him, under our rules.
 Mr. CoPenAo. There is a law which permits him to submit estimates. May
I ask the Senator to enlarge upon the subject so as to justify us in taking the
position that the amendment is actually subject to a point of order?
 Mr. CLax. It appears perfectly clear to me that if the Director of the Budget
arrogates to himself the authority to submit an estimate for a project which
never has been authorized by law, he exceeds the authority given the Bureau of
the Budget in the very act tq which it owes its existence, and therefore it is not
an estimate authorized by law and not entitled to be considered in connection
with this rule.
 Mr. FLarCHER. Mr. President, will the Senator yield?
 Mr. CLABK. I yield.
 Mr. FLzroHa. I desire to say briefly that the rule is so plain that it seems to
 me it does not need any interpretation.
 In the last clause of the rule the language "or proposed in pursuance of an
estimate submitted in accordance with law" is used. This estimate was sub-
mitted by the War Department, by the Bureau of the Budget, and was recom-
mended by the Chief of Engineers. The estimate is made for the whole appro-
priation bill, covering the whole bill. Included in the whole bill is the item with
which we are now dealing. The estimate was made under the general law,
according to law, beyond any question whatever; and, the estimate having been
made according to law, the amendment is perfectly in order. It is made accord-
ing to the express language of the rule.
 How can it be assumed that the items here covered were never authorized by
 law? In my Judgment, they were authorized in the first place by law, and the
 question of delegating the power of Congress is not involved at all. There are
 persons who think the act of 1935 a foolish act; but we cannot help that. It is
 the law. It never has been challenged. The Senator admits that the President
 had authority to authorize the commencement of this project.
 Mr. CLABK. I not only admit it, I proclaim it. That is the very essence of the
 matter we are considering.
 Mr. FLwmt I think the Senator is absolutely right there. He admits that
 the President had authority to allocate funds for the prosecution of work on the
 project.
 That was done in accordance with law. In this instance there is no delegation
 by Congress to the President of authority to legislate. Congress makes the Presi-
 dent its agent in deciding upon what projects he will enter and decide upon and
 what allotments he will make for them. In the last Congress we included
 several items in the river and harbor bill, as the Senator will recall, being
 projects subject to the approval and endorsement of the Chief of Engineers.
 They were approved by the Senate subject to his endorsement. The endorse-
 ment was made.
 Mr. CLAKx. Mr. President, will the Senator yield?
 Mr. FLuoml I yield.
 Mr. CLABK. It seems to me that the Senator chose an unfortunate illustration,
 because the bill to which he referred carried no appropriation whatever. It was
 an authorization reported from the committee of the Senate having jurisdiction
 over such authorizations. It was not as though we had undertaken to make an
 appropriation as a rider on a general appropriation bill and made the appro-
 priation subject to the approval of the Chief of Engineers. I think the Senator
 will agree to that.
 Mr. FzLEOHEB In the illustration referred to, the projects having been au-
 thorized, Congress made appropriations for them, and by law made the Chief
 of Engineers the agent of Congress to pass upon the merits of the projects. We
 are doing the same thing here. I think by the act of 1935 we made the Presi-
 dent of the United States the agent of Congress to authorize projects and to
 allocate funds for the work on those projects. It is perfectly legal and accord-
 ing to law that estimates should be submitted to the Congress by the Director
 of the Budget and by the War Department with reference to the appropriation
 bill covering the requirements of that Department. Those estimates were made
 according to law. In my judgment, this project was adopted by the Congress
 through its agent, the President, according to law. But, anyway, the estimates
 are here, submitted in regular order as the law requires, and the estimates were
 before the Appropriations Committee. The Appropriations Committee have
 acted upon those estimates, and included in the estimates were the items which
 I seek to incorporate in the bill. I think, beyond any question, this amendment
 is in order, and is not subject to the point raised by the Senator from Missouri.