Richmond palladium. [volume] (Richmond, IA [i.e. Ind.]) 1839-1854, 1848-08-16

D ton from the mother country. In n
= enumeration Of the acts Of tyranny cor
planned of. the first one is in these word
ale has refused his Mt to laws the mo
wholesome and necessary for the public good
: Is the arbitrary exercise Of this pow,
any less oppressive and tyranuical by :,
Executive elected by the people. than |,
one who claims to rule by hereditar
} right!
In the Convention which formed ~,
Constitution a great differences of ooinio
existed as to the extent Of power wl,c
should be conferred on the Executive de
part,nent of the Government. The Fede
ralists contended that the Executive arr,
should be strengthened This was tn
main point Of contest between the Fele
ralsts and Republicans Of that dav.
was contended that the people were i'm
pulsIse ,amu'"ons and 5sft r1S'i't Sf
, nov. @..a.o;e.,t 10 enable him to ''checA
their fmrbnIcncc.'' The experience o
more than half a century has proved the
fallacv Of these opinions. The truth is
that the great danger To our system arises
not from the weakness, but from the
strength Of the Executive power: a power
ever prone. in all ages and all countries.
to usurpaton: skilful in encroachine on
the rights Of the people in a thousand
forms. And yet, with the history of tho
world before us proving as il does the
necessity Of checking and curtaiing this
power. we find here. in the year Of Grace.
l348. in the American House of Repre-
sentatives. these old, exploded doctrines
of Federalism. new vamp"d and clothed
in the mantle Of modern Democracy. and
zealously urged upon the country as DEM
ocratic principles. The doctrine is here
zealouslv urged. that it is not only the
''prerogative,' but the duty. Of the Presi-
dent TO interpose his veto to prevent the
passage Of laws which large majority of
The people believe to be '.the most whole
some. and necessary for the public good"
1t may be we'll to look at the reasons as
signed by the trainers Of the Constitution
for giving to the President the power Of
vetoing the acts Of Congress. and the
manner in which they supposed the pow
err would be exercised. II is very clear
that they never contemplated that it would
be exercised with the frequency. or Under
the circumstances, which have of late
years characterized its exercise. Those
Republicans would have
been shocked hey ond assure at the avow-
al OF such principles as we now hear daily
advanced in the name Of Democracy. In
the scvcnty-third number Of the Federal
list the veto power is discussed, and the
reasons which induced the Convention 10
confer it are given. 1t is there said: '.The
primary inducement to comforting the
power in question upon the Executive is.
10 enable him to defend himself" The
object. then, was not to confer upon tli,
President a power to check and control
the Legislation Of Congress whenever ca
price or party-spirit might induce ii desire
to prevent the enactment of any particu
lar law, but to place in his hands con-
power to protect the constitti-
tional rights of his own department from
The trainers of the Con-
stitution had then before them the exam
pie Of the King of Great Britain. who.
though vested with an absolute veto upon
the action of Parliament. had not tor ,i,anv
years previous yenturcd to exercise that
power in Il single instance. In the same
number of the Federalst it is said:
"Thc superior weight and influence Of the ie-
gIsative body ~ free government, and the haz-
ard to the Executive in a trial Of strength with
that body. afford satisfactory security that the
negative would generally be employed with
great caution; and that in its exercise there
would oftener be room for charge Of iimidity
than Of rasIlness A king Of Great Britain. with
all his train Of sovereign attributes. and with all
the influence he draws from thousand sources,
would, at this day, hesitate TO put a negative up
on o. The Joint resolutions Of the two Houses of
"lf magistrate SO powerful and SO we'll for
tilted, as British monarch, would have scruples
about the exercise OF the power under considera-
ton, how much greater caution may I've reason
ably expected IN President Of the 4. States
clothed for the short period Of four years with
the executive authority of a government wholly
and purely republican,
They seemed to suppose that the Presi-
dent of the United States would be more
cautious in the exercise of this power than
the British king, and, indeed, it was then
that the danger would be
that the President would be afraid TO OK
ercise il in a case Of clear and palpable
of the Constitution. In the same
article to which | have already referred
may be found the following passage in re-
gard 10 its exercise:
"But il will not follow that because il might
rarely it would never be exercised. In the case
Tor which it Is chiefly designed, that Of an imne-
date attack upon the Constitutional rights of the
Executive, or in a case IN which the public good
v as evidently and PalpabIy sacrificed. man of
lolerable firmness would avail himself Of his
Constitutional means Of defence"
These extracts present the views which
were at that time entertained of the veto
power. and the manner in which it would
be exercised. The action Of the earlier
Presidents conformed 10 these views
The power was very rarely exercised. and
only in such cases as secured the concur
renee Of the public will
But. Mr.. Speaker, i'm what manner has
this power been exercised in modern
times! Instead Of being used as means
Of protecting the Executive from an en-
croachment upon his Constitutional rights.
it has been used to overcome and control
the legislation Of Congress. 1t is now
claimed that the President is part of the
power, and that no laws should
be passed which do not conform to his
opinions of policy and expediency.-
President Polk has used this power in a