Washington sentinel. [volume] (Washington [D.C.]) 1853-1855, 1854-05-11


it. The House was in session until halfpast
ten o'clock.
THE WASHINGTON UNION AND THE
s VETO.
We annex an article, which appeared in the
Washington Union yesterday morning, relative
to the recent veto message, and the deductions
which have been drawn from it in some quar-
tiers. We regard the article referred to as
singular and somewhat significant; and we lay
it before our readers, so that they may form
their own opinions of its meaning, and test the
justice Of our comments. In our judgment, it
, is indirect, diplomatic, equivocal, and evasiye,
eminenty calculated to weaken the force of the
veto message, and increase the feeling of un-
certainty and distrust which aflicts the demo-
cratic party.
Vieyed in one light, the Union's article ap-
an effort to carry water on both shoulders--to
ride on both sides of the sapling-to occu py
both sides Of the fence at the same time
Viewed in another light, it appears as gentle
does not commit its author as to any bill ex.
cept that which he returned to the Senate, or
as to the principle Of any Of the land schemes
which are pending before Congress. And
press Of desire to diminish the veto message,
by fling it down and clipping its edges, in or
der to make it so thin and narrow as to trans
form it into a naked meagre veto of the insane
bill from which no guiding idea for the future
can possibly be drawn.
But the only circumstance which gives any
special Importance to the remarks of the Union
is the general belief that it enjoys the conf
dence and speaks by the authority of the adj
ministration, or portion of the administration.
It has denied that it occupied the position of
an organ; but the denial has been followed by
statements put forth in the tone and with the
accents Of authority, so that the disclaimer has
been without effect and the public, with great
unanimity, has connected the administration
with the unstable ideas and crooked course of
the Union. Much Of the dissatisfaction which
exists in the democratic party has sprung from
this cause; and it has made many, very MANY.
believe that the Executive is vascillating and
unsteady.
We fully agree with the Union in the opinion
that dit is not just to the President to strain his
language for the purpose of making deductions
that may be used outside of the particular meas
ure on which it was used We hold it to be
unjust to strain the language Of any one for
any purpose I; but we have seen no disposition
TO inaict that injustice on the President We,
for example, have drawn deductions from what
we considered the true purport of the message
as to the committals which we think that paper
contains. The Union is forced to concede that
sit is legitimate to discuss the applicability Of
the principles of the message to other bills be-
fore Congress-" but it couples the concession
with an attempt to render those who enter into
the discussion obnoxious to the suspicion that
they are urged to do SO by the wish to influence
Congress or embarrass the Executive, to preiu-
dice the President or operate on the course Of
the members of the national legislature.
We protest against such an intimation com
ing from the source it does, as calculated to
ininre the Executive, and wrong those who have
undertaken the legitimate task of examining the
message for the purpose Of ascertaining the