Weekly national intelligencer., 1848-10-28
TIL E VETO.

mas frequently been remarked, Dy writer's VINO advocate
power in our Presidents that differs widely from that
belonging the Crown of Great Britain nasmuch as that
the British sovereign is absolute while that Of our President
qualified An impartial investigation Of the question would
Think lead different conclusion. The limit which our
constitution prescbes renders il in effect absolute
for is barely possible that any question which might be
thought by the President demand the exercise of this
could bring its support wothis of the members Of
both Houses Of Congress, and not that any bill
been passed against the negative voice of President
have before work published many years ago in Eng
land, which contains treatise to prove at the King has
absolute negatire roice in the passing Of bills Of common
right and justice for The public good"
The arguments and conclusions of this writer adopted
by the House Of Commons learn from order borne
the tepage in the words following s hfs 2sth
day Of March, 643 ordered by the committee Of the House
Of Commons in Parliament concerning printing, that this
book, entitled The Sovereign Por Of Parhaments and
Kingdoms, be forthwith printed by Michael Sparkle, ar"
And, they not inappGcabe our country and
times offer the following extracts:
"The fourth great objection of the King magnsnts roy
alists against the Parliament is that they deny the King
nsgatire roce ia Parliament, affirming declarations
that the King, by his coronation oath and duty, bound
give his royal such public bills OF sgh and justice
both houses have voted necessary for the wealth
safety OF the realm and ough, not to reject them which
questioned doubted in former ages.
"To this first, in general that, in proceed
ngs and transactions Of Parliament the King hath casting
absolute negative voice al all namely, in reversing
judgments given in inferior damning illegal
patents, monopoies imposons eIacons; redressing,
moving all public grievances particular wrongs complained
Of censurng judging delnquents Of all sorts Furnishing
the members of either house for offences against the houses
declaring what law OF difficulty referred the Par
lament Of which there sundy preceden In these and
such like particulars the King hath swaying negative
voice at all but tho houses may proceed and give Judgment
only without the Kings personal presence assent
the highest court OF justice but against his personal
gative disassent in he be present. infinite
pies Of present and former times eIpermentay manifest be-
yond all contradiction. Nay, not only the Parliament, but
Kings Bench, Common Pleas Chancery, and every inferior
Of justice whatsoever bath such privilege by the
law and Of the realm, that the King himself bath
negative voice at ALL much to stay delay for the
smallest momen by bis great Prvy SEAL any legal pro-
ceednes in it, much less eountemand, control, reverse,
by word Of mouth proclamation, any resolution judgment
Of the judges given in it, IT, them the King hath absolute
negative overung voice in Of his inferior courts doubt
less be hath in the supremes greatest court Of ALL the
Parliament which, otherwise would be OF less authority and
in FAR condition than every ty sessions court baron
in the kingdom.
"The sole question: hen in debate must be, whether the
King hath any absolute negative overruDg voice in the pass
ing Of public private bills.
"For resolving which doubt must thus distinguish :
that public private bills Of two Sorts First, bills only
OF grace and fsvor, Of right such s
general pardons, bills Of Naturalization ndenizaon confr
nation, concession Of franchises and privileges
poratons private persons snd the like IN all which the
King no doubt hath an absolute negative TO pass
to pass them because they Of grace (which de-
lights I've free and arbitrary because the King by his
oath and duty way obliged TO assent thereto neither
any subjects Of justice right require them his hands,
being in the Kings free power dispense his svors freely
when and where he peaseh, and contrary the very
Of free grace, to be either merited constrained"
"Sccondly bills Of common right and Justice, which the
kngdo in general and every subject whatsoever in parcu
lar without denial delay such oil bills for the peser
walton OF the public peace and safety Of the kingdom the
liberties properties and privileges Of the subject the peven.
on, removal, punishment Of all public private greyan
mschie wrongs Offences frauds persons csngs
the redress Of the defects inconvenience Of the
law the advancing regulating Of oil Of trade the
gon and ecclesiastical abuses, with sundy other laws enacted
every Parliament occasion and necessity require. In all
such bills these, which the whole State in Parliament shall
hold expeden and necessary TO be passed. conceive very
clear thshe King hath absolute negative voice but
bound in point Of Office, duty, osth law, justice, conscience
give bis royal assent them when they passed both
houses unless he render such substantial against
the passing Of them shall satisfy both houses This being
the only point controversy, my against the King
absolute, overswayng, negative voice such kinds of bills
these 4.
Frs because, being bills Of common right and Justice to
the subjects, the denial Of the royal them d.
ecty contrary the Law OF God, which commanded kings
be just 20 do justice and judgment all their subjects,
pecay to the oppressed and not TO deny them any just
quest for their rehe, protection, or welfare.
Secondy. because IL is pon, blank against the very letter
Of magma cnta, the ancient Fundamental law Of the realm
confirmed in at least sixty Psrlisments," sc.
Thirdly because such dissenting voice to bills Ct this
is inconsistent with the very Office dUty Of the King
and end for which he Instituted wit equal and
speedy administration Of common right justice, and assent TO