Southern Argus. [volume] (Columbus, Miss.) 1834-1842, 1842-03-01

10 secure lne plOO"''OA "
dent that, although almost every thing
in the bill would either have been omit
ted or amended by majority they
took it as il came from the Preslden-
tial hand, and passed it, letter for let
ter, as they received it. Without 60
Ing further, did not this fact prove that
the nossession of the veto power drew
after it the power eliminating laws.
Take another case in the bill now
before the Judiciary Committee. Was
there one man to be found in either
House of Congress, who would ever
have proposed such measure as tEe
Excheuuer Board provided in thatbill?
Yet, what had been the feeling? Had
it not Leen this: must we go home
without doing something? Had not the
feeling been, we are bound by the We
10 power, we cannot do what we
we would? Had not the feeling been:
we must take what the Executive Of
fers, or get nothing? Yes; already the
idea was becoming familiarized to the
minds Of freemen, TO men of only the
second generation after the days Of the
Revolution, of submitting to the dicta-
ton Of the Executive, because without
his assent theycould do nothing. Mr.
c.. warned the nation, that if this veto
power was not arrested, if it were not
either abolished, or at least limited and
circumscribed, in process Of time, and
that before another such period had
elapsed as had interviewed since the
Revolution, the whole legislation Of
this country would come to be prepar-
ed at the White House, or in one or
ether Of the Executive Departments,
and would come down to Congress in
the shape of bills for them to register
and pass through the form Of legisla-
ton, Just as had once been in the an
, cient courts OF France.
Then, TO enable a nation of freemer
, to carry out their will, to set Congress:
: free to speak that will, 10 redress the
= wroags and to supply the wants o
= those who sent them, Mr.. C. again de-
= clared that the veto power must bt
n modified and restrained. If not, thC
n question which Congress would have
! to decide, would be, not what is tn
= proper remedy for the grievances O
e the country not what will restore tn
: national prosperity-no; but what mea
e sure will be sanctioned by the Chic
: Magistrate.
o Mr.. c.. said, that as he had not tn
Il bodily strength to dwell more at larg
on the general subject, he would nov
n proceed to examine the objection
d which were urged against any fur
Il Their restriction on this Executive pow
:. er.
l. There had cotton up a notion {
k late years that some curb was neces
If sary upon the power of majorities, an
) that withoutth the selety of the cour
e Try must be in danger. Now, on VIII;
Is grounds had the principle been lounC
= ed th:.t in fee Government the m;
II jority must govern? On two ground
d The first was right that in a great pull
d lie, political partnership, the create
D, number should be satisfied with VIII
of was done, and that there was a create
l. chance Of wisdom in complying vii
is the will of the greater number. Q
as the score Of chances some must go
at ern, and who should it be? The m
er nority? Why? Because they posses
lg ed more wisdom? Why were the
Iy likely to possess more wisdom? I'll
We second ground was physical in its a
v pect: it held that the majority won
tie be allowed to govern, having the ply
a ical force which would enable the
e. to carry out their will. Now this do
re trine that minorities must Cover
3 whether with or without the veto, w
advanced by gentlemen who prole
o. sed and called themselves members
ID the Jefersonian school. But VIII
To was the doctrine of Mr.. Jefferson hir
n selfin regard TO maiiorities, and so
rb clared by him forty years ago? He
4d Mr.. G.. read an extract from Jefferson
us Works, in which it was broadly la
rs. down that an absolute acquiescence
IN the will OF majorities was necessa
ial in free Republican Government
IN But there were some particular
o. terests, ONE especially, in regard
n which the South felt great solicitud
aw which 1t was supposed would be no
lis safe under the continuance of the Y
he to power than without it. Now,
se the first place, MIR. G.. saw no diferen
ms in respect to safety between that ps
r. ticular interest and other interests
IS the country. If it was true that a
mt one interest would be more secure u
wv der the veto power than without til
e. all interests would be more secure,
I'd II no security was produced by the '
gs to, then that particular interest wou
lot not be more secure by the veto. it
mo- as we'll might gentlemen from the MOI
Ii rise up and say that the navigation
ms terest Tin regard to which they we
,r- more interested) would be more {
re cure under the veto power, or
,er friends of any interest, Northern, Sc