Gallipolis journal. [volume] (Gallipolis, Ohio) 1837-1919, 1866-07-05
The Presidents Last Message.
lC0respcndenes Cincinnati Commercial. !

lNti2cspS11cuSs NsuSluuhll OtiuiurtciSlsg
WASHINGTON, June "a.
The Presidents extra official veto
Of the Constitutional Amendment is
the subject OF comment here, as /
suppose il must he elsewhere. ]
started out yesterday to fnd SOME
body in the ranks ofthe Union party
who indorscd it, and confess very
freely that my search was not sue
eessful. II is subject Of sincere re
gret to all who desiS the restoration
of harmony between she. President
and the party by which hewasGlect7
ed. that Mr. johnson should hashERQt
only set himself against cons6cdk
tional amendment voted for by every
man N The House of Representatives
elected on the ticket which carried
him into power, but that be should
have travelled so far out of the sphere
of his official duties as to send
message to the country denoHncing
it in such unmeasured terms.
Ofthe two and quarter millions
Of loyal men whose sutTrages placed
Mr.. johnson where he is, the number
of those who will be found with him
in his opposition to this amendment,
will not constitute fraction of one
hundreth part. This, I think, is
clesr, whether We tske as guide the
House of Representatives, the press
of the country or the recent State
Conventions. Call it q difference
of opinion" if you will. AS such, 1t
reminds me Of the story told of an
inmate of q lunstic asylum. "W hat
are you in here for, my msnf" in
quired q visitor. "Merely for q diff
ference ofopinion," said the non comp.
Difference of opinioni Why they
don't put men in such place IS this
for . difference Of opinion, do theyf"
"Well, you see. I thought the world
was crazy, and the world thought j
was crazy. The world being in the
majority, had to yield" Now it is
just so with Mr. johnson and his
difference ef opinion, on this ques-
tion. The Union party is unit in
favor of the amendment, and the
President Is, in more literal sense,
unit against it--so much of "dif-
ference of opinion" is there on this
particular subject. Or perhaps the
story Of the "eleyen obstinate jury
men" wiz better illustrate. A jury
of twelve men having been discharg
ed because unable to sgree, one of
them was asked what was the cause
Of their disagreement. ''There was
nothing to hinder US from agreeing"
said he, "if the other eleven fellows
hadn't been SO internally obstinate in
favor of conviction. ! wss for &C.
qaital right away, but the eleven
others were so cussed mulish that
they wouldn't agree with me, so we
broke up"
AS State paper, Mr.. Johnson's
last message is not calculated to add
to his reputation as q constitutional
lawyer. 1t is hard to believe that it
emanated from the same source that
gave the country the vetoes OF the
Civil Rights and Freedmens Bureau
bills-two documents in which :here
was a strength of reasoning and force
Of argument that challenged admira-
ton even from those who did not in
dorse their conclusions or agree with
their premises. Not having been
called for by any exigency forced
upon the Executive, the last message
bears the impress of 3 hot-house
plant, and lacks the health and vigor
of natural growth. Its premises
are not correct, its reasoning is weak
and its conclusions are most lame
and impotent. Mr.. johnson starts
out with an intimstion, which amounts
almost to an assertion, that a joint
resolution to amend the Constitution
should be submitted to the Executive
approval. Thirteen amendments to
the Constitution have already been
adopted. OF these, one was sent to
the President Mr.. Lincoln J, and he
returned it with q message to the ef-
feet that his approval was not neces-
sary. There is nothing in the Con-
stitutior either recurring OF dispens.