Oregon Republican. [volume] (Dallas, Or.) 1870-1872, 1870-11-05
The veto Power.

'PO"Ct, auu especially over ITS exercise
by Gov. Grover ia the case of the
Portland su ,sidy Bill, which passed
the Legislature lately in Session, this
Warmth of feeling seems to have grown
out OF the fact that the people, as well
as the press, of that city were divided
in sentiment upon the subject. The
Oregonion aud the Bulletin both favor
ed the Bill, which in its terms was
siAAply permissfve, and proposed to
authorize the City of Portland to raise
by tax 100000, for the special benefit
of any man, or set of men, who should
secure to the City the terminus of the
Willamette Valley Railroad, which, of
course, meant Mr.. Holiday and Com
Pany. The Herald opposed the Bill,
and claimed 1t was unconstitutional.
and q great swindle besides, because it
was simply returning to Mr.. Holiday,
by the Democratic party, what HoIla
day had expended in the late election
60 defeat that party, Surely, il the
Herald were honest in that belief. no
blame can be attached or charged
rigntfully for its opposition but
neither the Oregonioa or Bulletin
could see il IN that light. The last.
named paper comes out aud most
shamefully abuses Gov. Grover for
Vetoeing the Bill, and claims that 10 so
doing, the Governor was entirely con.
trolIed by the Hon. Joseph Smith, and
very plainly intimates that our most
worthy Governor 10. very feminine
individual, possessing but little, if any,
mind, and deliberately comes to the
conclusion that Oregon has two Gov.
srnors under whose administration the
people must live for the next four years.
These rulers, they charge, are Messrs
Saith and Miller, one of Portland, the
other OF Salem, and they represent
Grover as the medium though Mhsch
those Governors operate.
Now this is grave charge, and
We are at loss to know whether or
not We should be safe IN disputing what
Mr.. O'Meara positively asserts to be
the fact In that respect, knowing, as we
do, that he 10 an old veteran 10 the
Democratic ranks, aRd is perfectly
familiar with their mode of operations,
but we will venture the assertion that
we have slight acquaintance with the
three persons named by O'Meara, and
had formed Of each different opinion,
but, If the editor of the BaHetia shall
insist that, from his intimate acquaint>
ance with all the secret operations OF
the Democratic party for the last ten
years, he is the better Judge, we shall
not persist IN our opinion. The Orego-
nian now comes out and says, There
10 one reason, and one only. why Gov
Grover has vetoed the Bill to enable
the City Of Portland to contract for the
construction Of . railway to terminate
within It's limits" and claims that
reason to be a partisan one. What
means of knowing that fact that pager
has. we know not; if they are able to
prove the charge, it is we'll; bat, if not,
it 10 certainly IN very bad taste. As to
the Bill in'question enabling the City of
Portland, ifit had passed, to secure the
terminus of the said railroad within
its limits, il seems 10 us a very
singular argument, under the circum
Stances. 1t n claimed by that paper
that nearly all the inhabitants and pro.
persy holders Of the city we're very
anxious that the Bill should pass, and
for what? so that they could have the
privilege contracting with the proper
parties for the terminus of the railroad
So Gays the Oregonian. But we are
entirely unable to see why the passage
of the Bill referred to should make any
material difference. If il be true that
the Inhabitants desire 10 good faith te
give Mr.. Holiday, or any other man
100000, in consideration that he
would terminate the road at that city
they can 90 easily give It, aod secure
the terminus without the passage o.
the Bill as with it; and it will be M
excuse iorahose who.des 70 give fol
that purpose. that the Bill did not pass
20