Oxford Democrat. [volume] (Paris, Me.) 1833-1933, 1851-07-04
The Liquor Law.-Thc Veto Power.

liile discussion and animaj'erslon IN the
public raPcrs. Il j. no part of cur present
intention TO call 10 question the PrOPririy or
tn canvass the merit, of this act rha, ., .
the offspring Of deep and earncs, conviction
in the minds of a lsrgc, a highly intelligent
and rrspectahlc poulon Of our ci,iIcns, Of the
necessity fct the enforcement oil provisions.
there can l. no doubt That II meets the
views 1t another class, equally intelligent
and respectable. equally Impressed with the
magnitude Of the evil To he met, and no less
dcsirou, Of correcting Il, j, not quite 50 Ger
tam. r.
!, nas. however. bccome law, and Ne are,
as eo,j ciii1rns. hound to ohcy Il. We are
uo, disposed tn call In view the correctness Of
the action Of men, the purity Of motive Of the
representatives Of the people in rs enactment;
on the contrary, We are bound to believe their
act.on 10 have been a true reflection oi the
wishes and viii of their constituency.
d j, not ior rs To go bchind the cu,lin and
inquire into the sccr,, motives which NAV
have Influenced the vote cf any man, or class
Of men, representing the B,i5 &c.
Whether fear Of responsibility, or a dspo-
,ition Q, cater for popularity, whether person
al feelings whether the influence Of dcml-
cocucs aud political gamblers, whether party
tactics have entered into the motives Of action,
and produced a willingness on the part OF
some Of the actors 10 shirk responsibility, and
To throw 3, where It dos no, belong, is not
ior d, to decide These ate questions which
every man must answer TO his own eousci.
cucr.
!, NAV, however, n asked, the question has
BEEN widely sri,aicd, Why DID no, the Cor
,r7or veto a bill obnoxious to the Objection,
Il a numerous and respectable ror,ioa ct our
ritzrns-of jouHful cousuiuuuualiy The
TACT that The law . cr doubtful constitution
alIy, NAV answer ihc question on part.
Had It been clearly unconstitutional, il
would 30 doub, have been vetoed. ON ju-
j.r.ll iubunils, have, however, been ar from
deciding osarV the principles involved 10
th,, law. and most 0f l,s questionable points
have hcyu the suh-c, of adjudication. 4
cas- UNDER a law Of Massachusetts, involving
ono Of ils mo., doubrful features, has bc,n be-
fore The United State, Count. and vas dcci.
d,I by a divided opiniuu II ,ha, tribunal and
D, b. now extremely prvblcma,ical ~ ha, nigh,
b. ihr opinion Of our Judiciary upon auy po.u,
ofcluI,oc4l construction involved IN this la~.
Should the executive, then, feel himself an.
lhorrrd To assume Judgment, to dictate, vhru
Doe tribunals to whom such questions. under
The constitution, are assigned, a'e themselves
involved in doubt
The ,c.o power vas never intended as a
part of ordinary Legislation. llcNists IN III,
Constitution Of the uuied States. and IN those
OF par, only q the several S,ltr., IN various
degrees Of efficiency. !, - an arbitrary pow.
-, rcro>.d in ouc individual, and. hence.
however dlscrcc,ly exercised. always more or
less ojious iu It, application. It was intend
cd Is a check merely, uPon ihr popular bran
chcs ct lcg .slaiurts, and can. IN Conformity
With the theory of our Institutions, he applied
uuly in cases Of hls,y, or iucousiJerate. or Of
unconstitutional acts. The Ssrmes, ad,o-
Gates yf this power, 10 the Dymocraiic ranks.
carry their yie-s Of IT, proper application no
further than this Our Wig friends. In tie
two last presidential can,asscs, have appear.
ed disposed to rcPutia'e the power altogether
and Il NAV BE- a matter Of doubt, even nav,
miJs, party strife, anal the imputed mi.aPph.
cation Of Ihe veto power, which way the pop
uIar sentiment 1t the Union bears IA relation
20 DO, exercise under any circumstances.
Whatever may be true IN this respect, there
can b. no prciencc tina, the law here IN qucs.
ton is Of character TO warrant executive In
reference There has been no haste in It,
enactment, and II incons,dcra,e, i, has not
ARISEN from want Of due time to deliberate
upon i,s Pro,isicus,'
Temperance reform la. been the subject Of
strong agitation, and Of progressive mo,emen,
for ,he las, twenty year,, IN this State. Laws
more or les stringent, have been successfully
enacted, aud IN a reasonable degree operative
during a large portion Of this time. They
have not, however, met the wishes, or real.
iled the antieiPa,iens Of some, At least, Of
their abci,on.
For the pas, several years there has been a
trOnc expression Of opinion in favor Of more
s,ringeu, Law than lha, Of 1916. One sub
siau,raIly the same as the present, (Si,h some
miiraiious In favor Of the laticr,) passed the
SeHaie aud House of Representatives in 1919.
Il vas vetoed BY Gov. Dana in a very able
and lucid message communicated 10 the leg
islalure, at the commencement Of It's session
in 1850
The subject matter Of this law has since
been before tWo Successive legislatures, and II
was passed by about tWo-thirjs majority Of
the tWo Houses At the recent session.
Executive interference under such circum.
stances, Wa out Of the question, surprising,
even, there were an inclination TO indulge 10
It. h~ould not under any considerable view
OF the theory and spirit Of our government,
have been tolerated ltwould have been stir-
maiized by the friends Of the law as arbitrary
and dielaiorial, BY others as uncalled for and
unwarranied. A SUBscRlRFR.
'Alihough there was an appearance of haste IN
TIE knal I,i..a.r u I'M. h~ b, the rrrrnt Lrri.L