The daily union. [volume] (Washington [D.C.]) 1845-1857, 1855-02-20
THE VETO MESSAGE.


THE VETO MESSAGE.
The brief discussion which took place in the House of
Representatives Saturday when the message
received indicates with distncness that the main
question likely be urged upon public attention in
nexon with the subject is whether the made in the
message presents proper occasion for the exercise of the
veto power The exercise of this power is uniformly fol-
lowed by effort to excite popular prejudice against that
provision of the constitution which conrs it The result
however, has uniformly proved that the people fully
comprehend the conservative character of that provision
and properly appreciate its value check upon injurious
legislation The Difference universally felt for the popular
will manifested by the of maiortes in the
houses of Congress any given has made the
sentiment general that the veto power ought be resored
only extraordinary occasions The constitution vests
all the legislative powers granted by it in Congress but
the exercise of these powers coupled with the limitation
that it be ecacious without the approval of the
President The approval of the President subject
specified restrictions but he is left follow the dictates
his judgment and conscience under the obligations to OBJ
the requirements of the constitution emphacay
enforced in his official oath It is to be supposed that
the constitution contemplaes that the President win APP
prove dsapprove every bill presented to him after the
thorough investigation that they presumed to
dego in the two houses This would impose him the
duty of performing impossibily. When measure has
been matured and passed by maores in each house. the
President has right regard this fact furnishing pri-
acie evidence that the is both constitutional
and expedent He may adopt this evidence sufficient
and approve the bill without further investigation and
one could charge him with dereliction ofduty.
In much the largest number Of the President may
very well be content to act upon this prna ee evidence
But the constitution does not prevent him from requiring
further evidence from resorng to fuller investigation
In of extraordinary interest he would not fully dis
charge his official obligations if he failed to make such
further examination and if upon further investigation he
should be fully satisfied either that the
constitutional inexpedient know of that
would justify him in failing to withhold his approval and
it to Congress for reconsideration Extreme
may be supposed in which this provision of the constu
ton might be abused-and may suppose cases in
which members Of Congress might abuse their rustsbu
the constitution that the people will ntrust these
high offices to of intelligence and integrity, and,
therefore, it has left much to their enlightened discretion
Hence whenever the President deems it his duty to
prove bill upon the single fact that II has been passed by
the two houses but determines to subject it to further in
vesgaon the presumption is that he is acuated by high
motives Of official fidelity just the members of Congress
presumed to have voted and this presumption should
shield them alike from hasy and unjust condemnation.
The message of President Pierce furnishes abundant evil
dence Of the anxiety and earnestness with which he has
examined the provision of the constitution in regard to the
veto and that he has resorted to the investigation which
has resulted in its exercise under the conscientious
convictions of duty that brought him to the conclusion
that there is foundation in justice for the claims prov
ded for in the bill No President had a pro-
found respect for the popular will indicated by the
ton of Congress but he has still proounder respect for
the obligations imposed upon him by the constitution If
he could have consccnously fulfilled these without dis
urbing the decision Of the houses of Congress- he
would gladly have avoided the conflict In the execution
of his duty if his investigation into the merits of the
claims had failed fully to satisfy his mind their njus
ce doubt not that he would have cheeruly and glad
F shown his Difference to the two houses by approving the
bill But when this investigation left his mind without
doubt as the nvaidity of the claims he felt himself
constrained absolutely withhold his approval from
the bill he would have done if he had become satisfied
that its provisions were unconstitutional Neither in the
constitution in the precedcnts of the Executives
is there to be found any settled and defined rule for the
exercise Of the veto Most agree that when the
President believes a measure unconstitutional II is his
duty withhold his signature this rule has not al
been acqniesced in as proper though il is the
settled popular sentiment The constitution however,
prescribes such rule that instrument declares that f
the President approve BILL he shall sign III If he do not
approve he shall return it with his objections II does
distinguish between objections for unconstituton-
alty and those for inexpedency The obligation upon
member Of Congress to vote against which
he believes TO be unconstitutional is stronger than
to against when he believes IT to be inexpe
dent injurious to the public interests There diff
ference in the obligations resting Congressman and
the Presdentn the discharge Of their respective II
now generally agreed that the President ought to