Washington sentinel. [volume] (Washington [D.C.]) 1853-1855, 1854-07-02
Wasbingtnu gsntinsl.
PRESIDENTS VETO MESSAGE.
SPEECH OF HON. ISAAC ToUCEY
OF CONNECTICUT,

sFEECh oF HUN. lSAAC IOUCEr.
OF CONNECTICUT,
In the Senate, jane 81, 1854,
On the veto message OF the President, rejecting
the bill which had passed Congress, for the
benefit of The INDECENT Insane.
Mr. TOUCEY said The President Of the United
States has returned the bill for the support of the
INDECENT insane, together with his objections,
which have been entered upon the journal. For
the simple performance of this act, in obedience
10 the mandate OF the Constitution he has been
subjected 10 freedom Of criticism which think
cannot fail TO impress the public MIND with some
degree Of regret that the honest and fearless dis
charge of high public duty should be made the
subject OF censure. Sorry was 10 hear the hon
orable Senator from Vermont, Mr.. FooT,l in his
comments upon the veto message, speak OF CON
stitutional crotchetsn and modern constitutional
quirks," and even stigmatise this part OF the Con-
stituton as relic Of despotic power. When we
consider that II comes 10 MS from those patriotic
men who conducted these States through the
revolution that il has, over and over again,
cued the country from the most pernicious
schemes Of unconstitutional legislation and has,
at all times, received the most decisive approba.
tion Of the American people, il was, at least to be
expected that il might be permitted 10 direct the
action Of The Executive without being exposed 10
assault in the legislative department of the gov
ernment The most illustrious predecessors OF
the President, for none OF their political have
received larger share Of the applause of their
ercise of the veto power Such think will be
the fortune OF the present incumbent.
The honorable senator from Delaware, Mr.
CLAYTON admitting the power of the President
10 veto unconstitutional act, has yet presented
an argument here against the constitutional right
OF the President 10 participate in the legislative
powers granted by the Constitution; and he cites
the first section OF the first article in these words
"4 legislative powers herein granted shall be vested
n Senate and House of Representatives"
If that all, the argument would be well
founded but there is another clause in the seventh
section OF the same article, which provides that
every bill which shall have passed the House of
Representatives and the Senate shall before be-
come law, be presented TO the President of the
United States; if he approve, he shall sign il, but
If not, he shall return it with his objections, &c.
And II requires a concurrence OF two-thrds OF
both branches, upon reconsideration, 10 make il a
law Both these sections are 10 be taken together;
and If they do not give the President most po-
tent voice in legislation, if they do not contain a
clear and unequivocal grant Of a constitutional
right 10 participate in the Legislative power it is
because the English language cannot express it,
He has no option, except so far as his option can
control his conviction. IT. in view Of the whole
subject, OF all the circumstances attending IT, and
OF the respectful Difference due 10 the opinions oil
both Houses OF Congress- his convictions are still
such that he does not approve, it is his imperative
duty 10 return the bill, with his objections; and
his objections are returned, not on the ground
maintained by the honorable senator from Della
ware, that he is responsible 10 Congress- but that
these objections may be laid before that body. and
may there have the weight and influence 10 which
they are justly entitled. This is the Constitution
We cannot alter II five would. Ii is so written.
II might have been so written as 10 conform TO The
views of the honorable senator from Delaware.
and of those who think with him. IL might ha We
been written, " If il be constitutional he shall sign
il, if not, he shall return il with his objections.
But no member Of the convention that framed the
Constitution proposed such an amendment II
must therefore, remain as il is.
The honorable senator from Delaware further
said that the President had not the means of in
vestigaiing legislative question, while the Sen
ate and the House OF Representatives have con-
tinGent funds. which they could use for that pur-
pose. Here the argument entirely fails him.
Neither the Senate the House has any such
fund without act of Legislation to provide it,
The President, If necessary, can be supplied in the
same way.
The participation of the Senate in the executive
power is precisely analogous. The first section
fthe second article provides that
"The executive power shall be vested in the President
Of the United States Of America"
But the second section of the same article de
clares that
"He shall have power by and with the advice and con-
Of the Senate TO make treaties provided twohrds
the senators present and he shall nominate and
by and with the advice and consent shall appoint emba
sailors, and other public ministers" &c.
Here is a clear and unequivocal grant OF con-
stitutional right TO participate in the executive
power; and you might well deny the night of
line Senate IN one case, as OF the President in the
other.
The truth is, our whole system is one of checks
and balances. The object is 10 preserve the equ-
librium OF the government, 10 protect the rights
ofthe several departments, the rights of the States
and The rights of minorities, and 10 prevent rash
and inconsiderate legislation. The Senate is
check upon the House, the House upon the SEN
ate, and The President upon both. The especial
object OF this arrangement is TO prevent, merely
unconstitutional legislation, but inconsiderate and
jnexpedient legislation also. This is the object
oftwo Houses; the same object precisely required
the Presidents participation in the legislative
power. While the judiciary can arrest an uncon.
siitutionai ACT rash and inconsiderae enactment,
which has passed both Houses, can be arrested
by the President only.
The President has arrested this bill as an exer-
else OF unconstitutional power; and in that view
the Senator from Delaware admits, and all will
admit that il was his duty 10 send il back for re-
consideration. That is tie power which he has
exercised but, with the concurrence OF one third
Of either branch of Congress- the veto will become
absolute, and existing Legislation remain I'M
changed.
Sir, the question which is involved in this bill
is one OF more than usual importance, II involves
the restriction Of the money power of this gov
eminent not power over the gold and silver
which passes through the treasury not power
over the representative OF value, but over The
value ITSELF the thing represented not over the
form, bat over the substance, in whatever form il
may be. IL involves, too, the principle OF strict
construction of the fundamental law, without
which this government s no longer what il was
intended 10 be, and must inevitably take a fatal
direction. Sir have no hopes Of its permanence
without uncomprc missing hostility TO a constrpc-
tive enlargement OF its powers; and ifkept strictly
within its defined limits, see clearly its capa-
city for endurance, and for any necessary expan-
sion.
The rule Of strict construction is founded on an
essential principle Of public liberty-ihe right Of
each State TO govern ITSELF and TO r<Diate lis own
internal affairs without the external control Of
thirty other States. Such control is absolutely in
admissibe-mere TYRANNY without responsibility
mere arbitrary power without apology for its
existence. From the very nature Of the case, the
alienation Of the power of State 10 govern itself
must be clearly shown, or the power is not granted
away IL the grant do not clearly appear, but is
left doubtful, the assumption Of power by another
government is an assumption without grant; be-
cause every presumption is in favor OF this funda-
mental right of the people, Hence the rule Of
etri nuofr linn ha al 10