Vermont watchman and State journal. [volume] (Montpelier, Vt.) 1836-1883, 1842-02-14
MONTPELIER, FEBRUARY ~, 1912.

u HHu, III tne FRENCH IlOHdICHy, neNct
been exercised at ALL During the memorable pee
Rod Of the French Revolution, when new Con-
stiuiion was under consideration, this subject OF
the veto power had been largely discussed, and
had agllaed the whole country. Every one must
recollect how il had been turned against the un-
fortunate Louis XIV, who had been held up TO
the rdcule of the popuace under the title of
Monsieur Veto," as his wife, the Queen, had been
called Madame VeiO !" and although, after much
difficulty, the power had finally found a place in
The Constitution not solitary instance Ind oc-
cured of lis actual exercise. Under the colonial
state of this country, the power was transpantud,
from the experience which had been had OF It IN
Europe, to the laws relating to the colonies, and
that in double form, for there was veto of the
Colonial Governor, and also n veto Of the Grown.
But what was thought of this power Ivy the in
habltants Of these states when rising to assert
their freedom, might be seen in the words of the
instrument in which they asserted their indepen-
dence. At the head OF all the grievances stated
in thai pnpef, as reasons for sepatutiun from
Great Britain, was placed the exercise Of this We
ry power Of the Royal Veto. Speaking OF the
King. the Declaration of Independence employ
ed this language:
He has refused his assent to laws the most
wholesome and necessary for the public good
He has forbidden his Governors 10 pass laws of
immediate and pressing importance, unless sus-
pended in their operation till his assent should he
Obtained and, when so suspended, lie has utterly
neglected to attend to them"
No doubt the idea Of ENGRAVING this power up
on our own Constitution was adopted Ivy the Con-
venIion from having always found it rs power
recognized in European Governments, just us it
had been before derived by them from the prac-
ce and history of Rome. At all events, the pow
er was inserted as one feature, not only in the
general Constitution of the Federal Government,
but also in the Constitutions OF portion Of the
States. Fifty years bad now elapsed since the
Federal Constitution was formed, and it was no
dcrogation from the wisdom and the patriotism of
the venerable men who framed il, now to say that
the work OF their hands, though MS perfect as ever
had proceeded from human hands, neverthe-
less not absolutely SO because that was what no.
thing that sprang from man had ever been. But
now, after the lapse of half n century, il was in
teresting to pause to look back--to review the
history of that PERIOD and TO compare the piedlc-
tons OF those who then looked into the future
with the actual results of subsequent experience.
Any one at all acquainted with the conemporan-
eous history Of the Constitution must know that
one great and radical error which possessed the
minds of the wise men who drew up that instru
ment was an apprehension that the Executive Dc
partment OF the then proposed Government would
be too feeble to contend successfully in struggle
with the power of the Legislature: hence it
found that various eXpedients had been proposed
in the Convention, with the avowed purpose of
strengthening the Executive arm one of which
went Ear to propose that the President should
be Chief Magistrate for lie. All these proposals
had their origin in the one prevailing idea-that of
the weakness of the Executive, and its ccompe-
tence TO defend itself against the encroachmens of
Legislative domination and dication.
Now, let any man look at the actual working
OF the machine they constructed and sec wheh-
er the anlicipatons which haunted their mind on
this subject had been realized or fnsiied by the
subsequent political history of this Government.
Let him whether the Executive Department
was tho. weak spot in the system. Much had been
said about the encroachmens of the Federal Gov
eminent on the Government of the States from
which complaints had arisen what was called the
States rights party and its opposite; but an exam-
inntion of the facts Of the would demonstrate
that no solitary instance had yet occurred of any
such encroachment by the General Government
but, on The contrary, MIR. c. could demonstrate,
were this the proper time or occasion for doing so,
that there had been an abandonment by that Gov
eminent OF the exercise of lis own just powers in
relation 10 the States, and this TO such extent
that the existing state ofthe country presented We
ry much the same aspect rs the old Confederation
had once done, with all its weakness and mbecil-
ny.
But while there Ind been no such thing in prac-
lice encroachmunt by the Federal upon the
State Governments, there had, within the FEEDER.
al Government itself, been n constant encroac1I-
ment by the Executive upon the Legislative De-
parment.
First, it attacked the treaty making power
None could now read the language Of the Constl-
! tuition without AT once coming to the conclusion
that the intention OF the authors of that instru-
inent was that the Senate should be consulted by
! the President not merely in the ratification but in
| the inception of all treaties ; that in til, com
mencement Of the negotiations, the instructions Of
! the ministers appointed to treat, the character and
! provisions ut the treaty, the Senate should he
consulted and should first yield its assent, And
such had, in fact, been the Interpretation put up
on the treaty making power in the first aud purest
! years of our Government. Every one must
ollect the early history Of the exercise of the pow.
er, and the high sanction for such usage. The
| first President had been wont TO come 10 the Sem
ate, there 10 propose foreign mission, aud TO con-
suit with his constitutional advisers, The members
of the Senate, on the instructions To be given to
| the ministers who should he sent. Hut this prac
! tice had since been abandoned. The President
! now, without word OF consultation with the Sen
| ate, on his own mere personal sense of propriety,
| concluded n treaty and promised 10 the foreign
Power its ratification; aud then, after all this had
been done and the terms of the treaty agreed up
on, he for the first time submitted it 10 the Senate
! for ratification. Now every must that
there was great difference between rejecting
whit had been already actually done, and refusing
| to do that thing If asked beforehand. All must
feel that they often gave their official assent 10
what they never would have sanctioned but for
the consideration that the lfealy was already con =
cluded aad that the faith of the nation in
some sort pledged for its ratification. Another
consequences of this Executive encronchmeni was
one IRON which foreign Powers often experienced
great inconvenience-he meant the amendments
of treaties by The Senate nlter they were at length
submitted. So great had the Inconvenience from
this source been, that in more recent treaties il
had come TO be the practice 10 insert in the body
of the treaty itself provision against all aera'
ton, SO that il must be ratified in lis existing form
or not ratified at all.
The next Executive encroachment he should
notice was that which occurred in the dismissal
from office of persons appointed by and with the
consent OF the Senate. The effect of this prac-
tico was virtually 10 destroy all agency and coop
GRAFTON OF the Senate in such appointments. OF
what avail was it that the Senate should today
soemnly ratily and confirm the appointment OF an
individual to an office under Government when
the President could tomorrow reverse the effect