Staunton spectator. [volume] (Staunton, Va.) 1849-1896, 1854-05-17
The Veto Message


The National lntelligencer has an article Of
great ability on the subject Of President Pierce's
veto of the bill granting land to the States for the
benefit OF the indig emit insane. That paper has
always been distinguished for the courtesy of lis
treatment OF political opponents, but throughout
this article t4ere are indications of some want oil
reverence for the present Executive. The vene-
rable editors are evidently getting out of patience
With the powers that be-.
The Inteligencer commences its criticism by
quoting an opening remark of the Message, ex-
planatory of the Presidents views for not signing
the bill. he is actuated by desire to preserve
"our blessed inheritance of representative liberty
This de la :ation." says the Inteuigencer,
''seems little singular when the power of one
man is abJut to be interposed to defeat the en-
pressed will of the Nation through Represents
tives fres,h from the People,
The President also wishes to maintain the
States in their integrity, and to prevent their be-
coming suppliants for the bounty of the General
Government The relief of the needy and other
objects of local concern, he says, belong TO the
States exclusively. "What application" asks
the Imeli5gencer. "has this to the argument 3
The bill rejected did not propose TO do anything
withir the scope of the above remarks. ltappro-
prialet of the public lands a rateabe proportion 10
each State for the purpose of building lunatc asy
lums. There was no interference with any in
te nal regulation of the States in any of their 10
cal concerns They could reject the benelicent
appropriation, and, if they accepted it, the pro-
ce IDS were to be applied TO the object specified,
nnder their discretion. 1t was division, TO the
e It ent provided, of the common property of the
States among them in just proportion, and TO en-
CO urage an enterprise the most humane and benef-
t'Dt.
-'Nhen the President, therefore, thought it
wol Id create dependence of the States on the
Federal Government for the administration of
chart lies, he was making an appeal not fit for a
constitutional argument against measure which,
from it,' nature. could produce no such result.
"Seeing from the almost annual appropriation
of the public lands for canals, railroads, seats of
government. colleges, schools, and a variety of
other purposes. the President must needs endeavor
to place them upon different basis. These, he
says, are clearly distingu'shable in principle from
any which can be assumed for the bill herewith
returned, viz. upon the interest and duty OF the
proprietor Now, we take issue upon this point
with the veto, and allege that n this admission
the constitutional argument is surrendered"
"Who are benefited by the increase If the
value of the public lands? The answer n:uss be,
all The United States, which have a common M
terest in them. Now, we contend that, on this
argument, the appropriation made by the bill is
constitutional, because more benefits would be
conferred on the States respectively by carrying
out the objects OF the bill, than by any enhance
ment to the value of the public lands by appropri-
ating the same amount of land TO the construction
of railroads, canals or for any other local object
in the States where the land is situated. The
constitutionality Of the act, by the Message, is
made to depend upon the benefit secured TO the
proprietors Now, what is most singular in this
view of the case is, that the President assumes to
Judge of this benefit, and pays no respect to the
judgment of the proprietors. They have spoken
through their agents in favor ofthe bill; the Pres
ident is against it, because they, as proprietors,
are benefited by local application, and not bene-
flied by the appropriation made by the bill"
ave are quite sure that there is in the great
BODY OF our TedOeIS diso
sufficient knowledge of constitutional law, to
see the fallacy of the veto argument in this res
pect (; and that they will come to the conclusion
that the Constitution is the samein Virginia as it
is in Iowa or Wisconsin; and that if the public
lands may be appropriated in those States Tor the
general benefit; they may be appropriated in any
other State on the same ground. We believe that
no application of the public lands has ever been
made where the benefits were proportonably as
great as those that would be realized under the
vetoed bill. Besides, the calls of humanity, suf-
fering humanity, were perhaps never stronger in
behalf of any measure of Congress. The inter
ference in the domestic concerns of the State, as
in,imated, is, in our humble Judgment, an entire
misconception of the Executive. There is far
less interference in this respect by the proposed
bill than in the hundreds of appropriations OF the
public lands for local purposes.
eff an appropriation of public lands may be
made where the proprletors are benefited, there
can be no limit to the power. Whether more or
less benefited, would be question OF policy in
this view, and not question Of power. So that
we may safely say that the veto argument, which
was intended TO adhere to strict construction Of
the Constitution. authorizes construction that is
scarcely susceptible of limitation"
"There is no institutional power which inter-
poses an objection 60 the bill vetoed. 1t is the
first veto that ever has been given to an apTropr-
alton of the public lands, and it is exceedingly
unfortunate that the Administration should have
come before the country with a constitutional OBJ
lection when none can exist. 1t is generally
agreed that the veto power was not given to be
interposed except on constitutional questions.
Before Gen. JacksOn's administration, we believe,
no law was vetoed on question of policy.
1.-The argument of the President that the lands
are pledged for the redemption Of the public
debt, must excite smile in the reader. With
an overhuwing treasury seeking an opportunity of
purchasing stocks of the Government at pre-
MUM, this argument is brought up to strengthen
that which precedes it. We should like to know
whether the Secretary of the Treasury sets aside
the money received from the public lands to be
applied only to the payment of the public debt
The Government would be glad to apply ten
millions now in the Treasury to the reduction of
or debt at reasonable premium, but the holders
refer generally the stock and they will not part
with it unless they receive considerable ad-
vance"
The President has been very unfortunate in
his Message. He has not even succeeded in
pleasing the "strict construction politicians,
for whose special benefit the bill was vetoed.
Speaking of his views favoring the grants flands
to internal improvement schemes, the Richmond
Examiner remarks
.It is herein that the Presidents veto message
| runs counter to State Rights doctrines on. this
subject, and to the emphatic resolution of our Vir
r. MIA Democratic Convention of March 1852.
That resolution was in the following words:
"eIm.t Congress has no power to appropr-
ate drectv or indirectly, the proceeds of the sales
of The public au.,s. or to grant, directly or ndi-
rectly, the public lacds to The purposes of inter-