The daily phoenix. [volume] (Columbia, S.C.) 1865-1878, 1867-07-24
THO veto nrcaaaRe.

The New York Times, in its coms
ments OF the Presidents veto mes
sage, says; s
< The combativeness of the President
might be considered amusing, if the
interests affected by his champion
ship we're not vital in their character.
If it were merely display of dialeo-
tics, or trial of relative degrees of
tenacity, or o contest to determine
whether the President or Congress
could use the sharpest words, the
country might look on with sublime
indifference. Whether Congress dis
posed of Mr.. johnson, or Mr.. John
son bullied Congress into polite be-
hayior, would be an issue calculated
to keep alive curiosity, if nothing
else. We could afford to watch and
wait, confident that, even on that
ground, Congress would come off
best, but meanwhile applauding the
pluck of its indomitable adversary.
Unfortunately, more is at stake than
the prowess of the President or the
power of Congress. Though Mr..
johnson wages battle in his own name,
the people of ten States are the vic
tins of his rashness. Whatever plea
sure he may derive from the main
tenance of tone of defiance, on their
heads the storm he provokes must
eventually fall. In this respect, the
South has had, and to this hour has,
no worse enemy than the President,
who never loses q chance of quarrel
ing in its behalf. At one moment,
inspiring them with false hopes, ut
another, he is the means of inflicting
upon them the deepest humiliation.
But for MIR. johnson, the South had
not been deceived into the rejection
of the constitutional amendment.
But for him, there had been no occa-
sion for an extra session, OF the legis-
lation which forms the subject Of his
latest veto.
In its matter, the message we print
this morning is repetition of
thrice-told tale. 1t is thread-bare
argument against the policy of Con-
gress in regard to reconstruction.
The assumption underlying tue whole,
that the existing State organizations
are iAegal-the anomalies and incon-
sistencies of legislation during and
since the war-the unconstitution-
ality of investing military officers
with supreme authority. and of strip
ping the Executive of functions with
which it was specifically endowed
and lastly, the harshness of the des-
potism temporarily established over
the Southern people; these are the
points successively presented, as they
have been again and again, from the
same source, within the last few
months. But of what avail is all
this? OF what use is it to appeal at
every step to Constitution which
has 40 binding force or efficacy in the
exigcncy which Congress is required
to meet? What can possibly be gained
by reiteration of an argument which
circumstances growing out OF the re-
bellion render inapplicablc, or by
which the country has pro
nounced inadmissible? At first, un-
questionably, the argument looked
strong; assuming its premises to be
correct, its conclusions appeared logi-
cal and just. Now, that its novelty
las gone, however, the effort is no
Io niger worth the making. AS an ar
gu ment, 1t is untcnable-made SO in
part by the Presidents own acts. AS
an expression of hostility to Con-
3res.', it has proved Intellectual, and
now IL lis to command either attention
Or respect from the country.
-----S