Staunton spectator, and general advertiser. [volume] (Staunton, Va.) 183?-1849, 1841-12-02

against the further continuance of the nobii-
ty, but the third Diet confirmed the resolu-
tons oil two former, aud the law became es-
tablished, Notwithstanding the royal negative.
The constituent assembly of France confer
rcd the veto power on the King in 1888, but
the very first exercise of it proved his ruin
1t was preposterous for such body, and at
such a time, to make such provision in the
constitution they were then passing, and as
affairs then stood, when judicious temporiz-
ing, and not royal prorogative, was required.
1t was equally preposterous in Louis to en-
ploy it. 1t but showed the waywardness of
the popular will, which could at one time
grant such right, and at another punish the
exercise oft. The negative is, however, held
by the present King, though it has never yet
been put into requisition.
BY the constitution of the Cor,ez, the King
OF Spain was vested with the same power, and
ii still forms provision of the Spanish Gov
ernment In Poland the veto power assumed
another shape. 1t was centred not in the
King, but in the former republic. Each
member Of the Die, could by his Me Pos
,cdiam q do not permit it) prevent the passage
of any resolution, and defeat the operation of
the rest. On the petition of Poland, Russia
confirmed this libcrum ceto to the Polish as
frustrating any effective or independent legis-
latiOn; well knowing that in its then distract
cd state. the continuance of this individual We
TO would be, as it proved, destructive to har-
mony of action and unity of design, and the
Me Poe'calam of the Polish representative
has been but an apple of discord to tina, noble
but suffering people
| Upon the proceedings of the American Co
lonial Assemblies, there existed double neg
alive, or veto; one vested in the Royal Gov
ernor, the other i'll the King. BY the Royal
| Governors the right was often exercised, and
the King frequently signifed his disallowance
of acts which had not only passed the Coloni-
al Assemblies, but even been sanctioned by
the Governor. This feature was one strong
~ set forth as prime grievance, in recount
ING the injuries and usurpations of the British
Monarch, in the Declaration of independence,
and its exercise was highly repugnant to the
interests of America
DIR. Franklin, in the Debates of the FEEDER
al Convention, thus shows the influence OF
the veto power under the Proprietary Govern
ment of Penn:
| 'The negative Of the Governor was constantly
| made use of to cxtort money. No good law
! whatever could be passed without private bar.
| gam with him. An increase Of salary, some
! donation, was always made condition; till, at
| last, 1t became the regular practice to have or
ders In his favor on the treasury presented along
| with the bills to be signed, so that he might ac-
| tuaiy receive the former before he should SIGN
! the latter. When the Indians were scaping the
Western people, and notice of it arrived, the con-
currence of the Governor in the means of self de-
fence could otbe got until il was agreed that his
estate should he exempted from taxation; so that
the People Were to fight for the security of his
property, whilst he was to have no share of the
burdens Of taXaton."
AT first sight, then, it appears strange that
the trainers of our Constitution, when they
| were originating new Government, which
should combine the experience of the past,
without borrowing any Of lis defects, should
bring in such power, the operation of which
! had proved so baneiul, and which had already
| Deen SO strongly rcprobated. But such was
the Tact. The war of the Revolution over,
the Articles of Confederation alone bound the
! States together, and the reaction which took
| place III several places urgently demanded
| some new form of compact more adequate for
| tie purposes ofGovenment, and more conso-
nant with the altered condition of affairs
Upon the 25lh May, 1872, the Federal Con-
ventIon met in the city of Philadelphia
Having organized themselves by the choice of
| proper officers, and the adoption of necessary
rules, Mr. Randolph, of Virginia, opened the
business OF the Convention by proposing, OH
| the 18Th May, series of resolutions. embo-
| dying his views as to what the crisis requir-
ed and on the same day Gen. Charles Pinck-
ney, OF South Carolina, laid before the Dele
gates the draught of Federal Government, to
| DE agreed upon between the free and indepcn-
dent States of America. The veto power en-
tered into the schemes of both these gentle
men, though centred by them in different
points. The Sih resolution of Mr. Randolph
says:
''ifeSolocd, That the Executive and convenient
number OF the National Judiciary ought to CON-
pose Council OF Revision, with authority to ex-
anime every act OF the National Legislature be-
,ore IL shall operate, and every act of part
Legislature neore negative thereon shall be fl
mai and that the dissent of the said council shall
amount to rejection, unless the act of the Ma
uonal Legislature be again passed, or that of
particular Legislature beagan negatved by -
OF the members of each branch"
The article embracing this feature in the
draught OF Mr. Pinckney reads thus:
Every bill which shall have passed the I,eois.
lature shall be presented to the President of the
United States for his revision; if he approves it,
he shall sign it; but if he does not approve it,
ne shall return it, with his objections, to the
House 1t originated in; which House. if two
thirds of the members present, Notwithstanding
the Presidents objections, agree to PASS it, shall
send it to the other House, with the Presidents
objections; where, if two-thrds of the members
present also agree c pass it, the same shall be-
come law. And all bills sent to the President. |
and not returned by him within--days. shall
be laws. unless the IpUc h,, tl,o;r oI;o.-