Eastern times., 1855-03-01
Eastern Timfs.
BATH, MARCH I, 1855.
The President S Veto.


House, will be found on our first page. 1t
has been severely criticised by the opposition
press. This was expected. The President
can do nothing to please the fault-fnders OF
the opposition and if he had signed the bill
they would have said he dared not do other
wise. Many of the French claims were held
in this State, and our sympathies have been
in favor of the claimants. But we are satis-
fed with the Presidents reasons for withhold
ing his signature from the bill; indeed his
facts and arguments have served TO remove
many of the grounds we supposed existed for
paying the claims.
We. honor the President for following
straightforward the convictions of duty,
cabinet, as is said, and regardless of the popu-
lar applause he might have gained in the
commercial states by giving his signature. 1t
shows the MAN TRUE TO DUTY, regardless OF
personal consequences, The Boston Post
says -
President Pierce, in very able, clearly
written, aud strong state paper, has presented
to the country the grounds of his veto: 1t IS
calm appeal to the people against decision
of majority of their representatives. We
hardly need commend this document to our
readers. 1t presents fully the history OF these
claims and is every way worthy OF their care
full examination The candid among those
who cannot accord with the reasonings of the
message will respect the patriotism and In
dependence of its author and they cannot bnt
see in this new instance TO show that the
country has an executive who will, under all
circumstances, act according TO his convictions
OF public duty.
A firm and conscientious discharge of duty,
: in a case like this, should command respect.
In this bill the President sees an exigency re-
quiring an application of the veto power
Those who have looked over our past with a
candid and judicial Judgment have deliberately
written of the veto, that g the real danger is,
these are Judge Story words, {. that the eX-
ecutive will use the power too rarely" 1t is
but an appeal 10 the Legislature 10 make re-
vision of its own Judgment; 50 it is in the ma
ture merely of rehearing, or reconsidera-
ton. and involves nothing TO provoke resent
ment OF rouse PRIDE adds Story. Thus far
every veto has been sustained for we believe
there has not yet been case where vetoed
act has been passed by two-thirds of both
branches.
The New York Evening Post considers the
Presidents veto message g a very full and
able statement of the argument which denies
the validity of the claims provided for in the
bill Just returned TO congress- Its Washing
ton correspondent, under date of the 18th,
writes as follows -
I" The great theme of conversation in Wash
ington is The veto message, which wac read
yesterday in the house. Of course ii is re-
ceved with small satisfaction by those who
are interested in the claims 10 which it thus
summarily gives the go-by, but TO impartial
men 1t comes with irresistible force, as the
most ably-prepared refu,aton of tie grounds
upon which the claims are urged that has ap-
peared since the celebrated speech of Sias
Wright. The President did not enter upon
the subject without an exhaustng investiga-
ton, and The intrepidity with which he has
faced its inevitable conclusions is adapted 10
renew the confidence of the country in his po-
liiical orthodoxy in regard to questions of the
kind. The present congress has shown
strong procllvlty 10 measures of questionable
policy, which it requires a more than ordinary
share of executive frmness to encounter" !"
The N. Y. Journal of Commerce, remarks
of the spoliation bill -
" Although we have been inclined to look
favorably upon these claims, we honor the
official vigilance which induced the President
to examine for himself the basis upon which
they rest, and the firmness which has prompt
ed him, as the result OF this examination, TO
return the bill TO congress with his objections
Tlaf thn Nf
vinced his own mind, will be equally eonvinc-
ing to all others, is not to be expected. 1t
must, however, be admitted that ha r--%-.''s
considerations ulIIcu are entitled to much
weight"
The Albany Atlas has the following brief
but comprehensive article on these claims -
Our commercial marine in 1889 suffered
from the conduct Of the French cruizers, and
Government after in vain demanding redress,
gave out letters of marque and reprisdl to
privateers, which retaliated our injuries upon
The commerce of France. 1t was in vain that
we appealed to the Directory for injemnifica-
ton-and when the directory passed away
and with IT'S enmiIies and its alliance. its pa
per assignais, its debts and treaties, it was
equally in vaia that we appealed to First Con-
sui Bonaparte 10 make reparation for these
wrongs.
We failed; and on the purchase OF Louisiana
agreed 10 pass by these and all other griev-
ances with France. They were buried and
Cor time iorgotten.
In 1927, for the first time, the pretension
was put forward that our government was to
pay these claims. For twenty-seven years
Congress has resisted pre,enson SO injnrl-
oas,-so fatal we may say for no country can
uphold doctrine which makes its govern
ment, the mere collector of damages, done to
lis commerce by belligerent powers, and the
insurer of the debt. Our government is
bound, in all honor to protect by reasonable
armament its mercantile commerce, and 10
seek redress from all aggressive powers. and
if need be, and circumstances Justify the at
tempt, to enforce it by arms. If it fails, or if
II dessts, 1t is not bound TO indemnify its mer-
chants for their losses. Such a doctrine
would offer bounty TO its mercantile marine
10 court injuries, and to run the blockade of
any nation, tempted by the prospect of profits
before it, and sustained by the endorsement of
its government at home.
Every nation in Elrope that fought Repub-
Iican and Imperial France, h1s the same story
of grlevances-bui hundred fold and a
thousand fold repeated. They made peace
without securing indemnifcation. Yet who