The Madisonian. [volume] (Washington City [i.e. Washington, D.C.]) 1837-1845, 1841-11-06
FOR THE MApisoNIAN.

A KENTUCKIAN vs.. THE VETO POWER
A few weeks ago the editors Of the National Intel
gencer announced their determination not to publish
any anonymous communications relating to the recent
differences in the Wing pary-uness the opinions
expressed in them should coincide with their own.
The propretors of paper certainly have right to
admit or reject such communications they please,
without assigning any for their deermin alton
Some respect, however, is due to consistency; and
except from viruent political opponent, we have
right to expect some little tolerance and liberalty
The course Of the ntelligencer shows merely deter
minaton to exclude from it's columns any thing which
may tend TO vndicate the course Of President TYLER
on the Bank question, justify him in the eyes Of
the moderate portion Of the Wing party Il has SO
far acted towards him the par, of virulent political
opponent fomenter of prejudice, and not peace
maker.
In the lnteigencer OF Tuesday last there is a com
munication on the subject of the Veto power, signed
henfuekidn which the editors say came to them by
mail from Kentucky, without any indications as to
the author, NOT merely anonymous, but without any
clue to the authors though the editors have no
hesitation in Pronouncing him lawyer by profession
and practical as well intelligent man
We have some suspicion that the writer of this
communication is no less parsonage than the great
Jonas of the unfortunate Wing party, who is probably
not altogether easy in conscience having SO publicly
suggested skulking course to the President
We shall state in the writer's own words the pro-
position which it is his object demonstlate math
ematically
"The injunction upon the President TO return bill
with his objections, if he does approve H. either
conditionally Imperative it conveys merely dis
cIetionary power
There hut these two instructions (qu construc-
uons) there Is intermediate third one the ex
crcse OF the power at all is discretionary il not
In every case where he dsapproves he must apply the
Veto as in many he may in his discretion sign
a law even though he does not approve it."
The writer then proceeds, by the reductio ad ab-
surdum, TO show that the injunction upon the Presi-
dent to return a bill which he approves cannot be i'm
perative that he may honestly sign bill which no
disapproves and ortior might honestly suffer such
bill to become a law by default
All this is very logical and conclusive-quite Eucli
dian; and President Tyler is apparently cornered
headed" and ready for impang on the remaining
horn of the mathematical dilemma.
But surely il docs not follow, because the President
is bound in every case to return bill which he
disapproves, that there cases in which he
Is bound, morally and constutonay To return bill
which he disapproves, The good of the People was
the only object in view in entrusting him with the
Veto power at ALL There therefore some cases in
which the injunction return the bill with objections
must be considered as imperative and in which as
aa honest man. the President has no discretion left
him in which he could not honestly sign BILL and if
he suffered to become law by default would betray
cowardly fear of consequence to himself person.
ally.
The writer himself does assert tina: in all cases
but only in many cases-the President may in his
discretion sign law Ia bill even though he does not
approveit" BY inference therefore he himself admits
that there may be in which he may not
sign bill Il he disapproves Of it, Now the Bank
bills were such cases in the opinion Of the President
and the decision with him. until can be incon-
travertiby shown that they were not
They were evidently not of tina, class of bills which
might be approved dlsapproved without creating