American Republican and Baltimore daily clipper. [volume] (Baltimore, Md.) 1844-1846, 1846-08-11


253 days, more than two-thirds of year. was
brought to close at noon yesterday, and were
it not for the fact that in less than four months
time, it will re-assemble again, we might en-
pect to see the country settle down quietly,
business revive, and capitalists pursue the
seven tenor Of their way" But as we are dis
posed to be thankful for small favOrs, we con-
graduate the country upon the fact of having
even four months respite. The late session has
cost the nation something like $4,000!
1t will be seen, that the bill which passed the
House, appropriating 100000 to effect a
treaty and settle the boundaries with Mexico
was lost in the Senate, for want of time.
VEro OF THE FRENCH SPoLArIoN BILL
The message from the President, containing his
veto of the French spoliaton bill, will be found
in another part of to.day's paper. We predict
ed some days since, that the bill won ID be dis
approved by the President, as the Union had
distinctly intmated that it should not pass
The reasons assigned by the President for the
rejection of the bill, are extraordinary and in
consistent. The first reason given is, that he
has not had time to ''extend his examination of
the subject into its minute details''-and vet, in
a subsequent portion of the message, he says
call information necessary to a correct judg-
ment OF them, (the claims) has been long
before the public" To plead ignorance under
such circumstances, is surprising. He admits
that these claims have been before the govern
ment for nearly half century-he has heard
their merits canvassed over and over again be-
fore Congress, but now rejects them, not be-
cause they are unjust, but because he has not
been able to examine the minute details Of the
subject. Again, he urges the former delay to
grant Justice to the claimants, as a reason why
their claims should be denied at the present
time. But it seems that he does not rest his
veto upon either his want of knowledge or the |
antiquity of the claims; but he objects to the |
mode Of payment and the conditions imposed |
upon claimants. He says-''if those claims be
just, they should be paid in money, and moth
ing less valuable" II is thus seen that he con-
siders the payment in land scrip as ''less yalu-
able" than in money-and yet, in the very next
sentence of the veto, no contradicts this posi-
ton, for he there says-''the bill provides that
they shall be paid in land scrip, whereby they
are in effect to be mortgage upon the public |
lands in the new States; a mortgage, too, held !
in great part, if not wholly, by non-residents of
the States in which the lands lie, who may Sc
cure these lands to the amount Of several mil
lions Of acres, and then demand for them exor-
bitant prices from the citizens of other States
who may desire to purchase them for settle
ment or they may keep them out of the mar
ket, and thus retard the prosperity and growth
of the States in which they are situated"
This is blowing hot and cold in the same breath {
You must not give lands in payment to claim
ants, because they are less valuable than money.
He has no idea that you shall thus cheat the
claimants out of part of their dues But then
you must not give them lands for different
reason-they may be able to realize by their
sale more than they paid for them. Again, he
opposes the grant of land because it might sub
tract from the receipts of the treasury-and
then because they might not be thrown into the
market Such are few of the Inconsistencies
which abound in this veto message. But at the
conclusion Of the message he assumes an entire
ly new ground for his disapproval of the bill, ,
viz: that 1t is inexpedent-and he says that he ,
REJECTS it upon this ground alone. That is,
granting that the claims are Just and that they
ought to be paid, he deems it nexpedient to pay {
hou MI al | r
sst the payment of his Just debts with as much F
honesty and fairness as is exhibited in the pre-
sent case. The last sentence of the message is |
in the following words: t
ain interposng my objections to its becom- !
ing law, am truly sensible that it should be
an extreme case which would make it the duty
of the executive to withhold his appreciation
of any bill passed by Congress, upOn The ground t
of its erpsdiency alone Such a case consider a
this to be-" G
And why ist inexpedient to pay these claim.' |
Can it ever be ineSpedient i'll government to do ;
Justice to its citizens? If so, then it fails to :.
answer the purposes for which it was instituted.
1t is considered inexpedient to pay the just and \
long withheld claims Of American citizens, but !
it is perfectly expedient to vote millions TO carry
the favorite project of annexing portion of b
Mexico 10 the United States. Such is the JUS t
tice of our republican governmental govern =
ment in which the will of the people is recog-
nized as paramount, and yet in which that will, C
as expressed by their representatives, is con- il
stantly overruled by the will of single ind- 7
yidual. 1t is time, we think, that some restrc- :
ton should be imposed upon the veto power u