The Nashville daily union. [volume] (Nashville, Tenn.) 1862-1866, 1866-04-14
Cnnrres, and The Veto.

To the Editors Of the I've nrg Pos
Thu recent yetoes Of the President
and the passage Of the Clyll Rights
Bill by twO-thirds OF me osnaIotla ~
votes. "oyer the head Of the President
as il Is frequently, but inapproprlateiy
called. have naturally excited the puo-
Iic feeling. and in this eXcltement many
journals "a well rs public speakers,
nave erpressed themselves as II q Pres
idential veto necessarily Implied hostll-
ity on the mart of the President toward
CSng,e.s aud. on the other hand, as
n rsnss-ing a vetoed bill by two-thirds
.rsre an At of hostility TO the Fresi-
dent A journal of this city has used
the most passionate language on the
subject
This ia entirely wrong. There may
n. norsonsI hostility between high
funciionRries, or q NUMBER Vi uleu IN
public bodies. So much the worse Tor
them but the people as feopie-tne
Nation has nothing 20 do with IL We
toing is proyided for by the Oohsttu-
ION and 40 is remedy against the
abuse Of the veto power provided ioF oy
the Constitution.
IftSe House passes bill which the
csrst. declines 10 pass, no hostility Of
AZ. senate towards the House Is inn
nliad ip Ire failure Of the House bill
Ia balongs 20 our constitutional ma
chinerv that \ bill must pass both
Houses n is the bioImcrat system.
II the President vetoes bill passed
bv 10th Uouses. there is no hostility to-
ward Congress IN the simple act OF the
veto. Ia belongs to the machinery of
our Constitution. Il may be very in
convenient bal that does not make At
illegal
n CuRgress repasses 5 vetoed bali 10y
tso-thirds there 10 no hostility 10 the
government In this fact it belongs to
our constitutional machinery. The
trainers of.the Constitution thought 10
wise te give 10 the Executive share in
the act OF perfecsing bill into law,
and they thought Il equally wise 10
limit this extraordinary power in one
man. in a strictly popular government
ike oure so the obliged The yetoing
Executive 10 give HE reasons why he
vetoed a bill. and gave 10 two-thirds OF
Congress the power Of peFfecnng bill
iuto = law without the sssent OF che
Executive, and notwithstanding the
giving Of reasOna
Ia there anything extraordinary in
this9 To make tgsothirds Of high le-
gislature-and two separate thlrds,
Ioo-equivalent 10 one mans opinion
or conYictiOni
There was very earnest debate ia
the Convention OF l716, whether the
ExecutiVe power should be vested in
one man. Happily, rs the writer Of
these remarks thinks an executive
committee. directory or two con-
suls we're discarded bat Il was equally
happy Cor us that the veto power was
not left absolute, in polity IN which
no Parliament can change the minis
try, - il the case in England
lis amazing 10 find that Americans,
ia the middle Of the nineteenth centu-
ry-men who pretend 10 be leaders Of
public opinion--can talk AZ though
three hundred national representatives
were presumptuous when they make
use Of our fundamental law, IS they
are in conscience bound 70 do, 70 cause
the conFictions Of tWo-ihirds Of them
70 prevail against the opinion or con
Viction Of one man, however high in 4
authority, whose main business Il 70
execute Avs, and whose share in per-
isoting bills is secondary aud inci-
dental NJ