The daily Madisonian. [volume] (Washington City [i.e. Washington, D.C.]) 1841-1845, 1842-08-17

claim only to be representatives of the People,
ID order TO make room for an ambitious asplrant,
who will rule the nation as with '.rod of iron, I"
and In strict conformity TO their ulonarchicdt
notions OF Government. This is the object OF
TIE federalists. IT'S their love for Cesar, and
not Tor Rome, that gives impulse 10 the patriotic
aohorrence OF the Veto. Put their Cesar al
the helm of state, and let the nation be repre-
scented by majority of Democrats, and then
The "Veto" would become the watchword OF
Whlggery, as something too sacred and invioa-
Die TO be spoken lightly of-much less assaulted
with bllterness-a sedition law would be the
hrst act OF abomlnation TO shield IL from being
brought IN disrepute with the People.
The President, in the use of this power, has
been likened 10 the King of England. The
comparison does not hold. There is no sort of
analogy. The Veto of the King Of England is
absoute-he holds office for life--rues jare
dioino-can do no aorong and when his mega
tive is applied TO a measure, there Is an end
Of it.
The Veto Of the President is not negative
In the sense in which il is employed by The
King. "A most it is but qualified negative,
the effect of which is to arrest measure for the
time being. In no event can he prevent mea
sure from becoming law, if tWo-thirds OF Con-
gress shall decree otherwise If, however, tho
thirds should not differ with the President, a
bare majority Of the People, as provided in the
Constitution, eau remove him at the end of
FOUR years. What hardship is there in this ?
None, that we can see. The President pos
sesses not one of the attributes of King-he
does not hold office for life-he does not rule
jure dirino-he can do wrong, and measure
can be carried in spite of his opposition, immc
diateiy, if two-thirds desire ii, or at the end
of his four years, if The People disapprove his
conduct, or earlier, if by the intervening cleo
tons a ma ority of two-t thirds can be had.
The King, too, rarely, if ever, has occasion
to use the Veto, because his Ministers recon-
mend and Parliament adopts whatever measures
he pleases. Not so with John Tyler-but the
reperse He, as well as the nation, differs toto
cello with the present Wing majority in Con-
gress, especially in reference TO the uetoed mea-
sures. 1t is known that Mr.. yler cannot approve
certain measures, and he is called on to sign
such-he refuses, and proceeds respectfully to
give his reasons, required by the Constltu
ton. For this, he is called despot, tyrant, and
what not. There is no sense in ii, and there is
no analogy between the English and American
Vetoes. True, were Henry Clay President,
with the present corrupt majority in Congress
Veto, because that majority would be as sub
servien to him as the British Ministry is to the
King, and would submit to his will without a
murmur of discomfort The difference, how
ever is striking, and all danger from the Veto
here is mere phantom of Wing abstraction
but if there were danger, it comes from that
party with bad grace to complain Of it, when
it is admitted on all hands, to be the sole object
Of their legislation.
A more hypocritical game was never played
off before the eyes of the American People.
The report made yesterday to Congress by
the Chairman of the Committee of Thirteen,
shows, from the vindictive spirit in which 1t
was written, that no danger is seriously enter
tanned from the one man power" as men call
ing themselves patriots can trife with IL in a
manner TO make food for the qualification of the
cormoranl appettes of political rultures.