Daily Kennebec journal. [microfilm reel] (Augusta, Me.) 1870-1975, 1879-04-04
DaiIp Kennebet Journal.
Augusta, Friday MOrn'g, April a, 1872
The Veto Power.

lie tetO Il OWCi'
The assault upon the constitutional free
dom of the Executive to exercise the veto
power goes so far as to attack the power
itself, or at least to contend that 1t is not
employed as the trainers of the constitu-
ton intended. The New York World
closes recent lengthy editorial dsparag-
ing the presidential veto" with these
words: "The stalwart theory of the
American Executive veto power goes q
good deal beyond anything ever dreamt OF
either by the founders of American indie
pendence or by the builders of English
liberty"
Fortunately we are not left without good
authority as to what the founders OF
American independence understood by
the ''veto power when they placed it in
the constitution. 1t may be found in The
Federalist," the best authority we have as
to the meaning and intent of those who
framed the constitution. In article No.
LXXII, in the discussion of the the pow
ers proposed to be vested in the President
of the United States, is the following:
The first thing that offers itself to our OBJ
servation. is the qualified negative ofthe Pres
ident upon the acts or resolutions of the two
Houses of the Legislature; or, in other
words, his power of returning all bills with
objections; to have the effect of preventing
them becoming laws, unless they should at
forwards be ratified by two-thirds Of each of
the component numbers of the Legislative
body.
The propensity of the legislative depart
ment to intrude upol the rights, and to absorb
the powers, of the other departments, has been
already suggested and repeated; the INSULT
cheney Of mere parchment delineation of the
boundaries of each, has also been remarked
upon and the necessity of furnishing each
with constitutional arms for its own defence,
has been inferred and proved From these
clear and indisputable principles, results the
propriety of a negative, either absolute or
qualified, in the Executive, upon the acts
of the Legislative branches. Without
the one or the other, the former
would be absolutely unable to defend
himself against the depreciations of the latter.
lie might gradually be stripped Of his au
thorties by successive resolutions or annihil-
ated by a single vote. And in the one mode
or the other, the Legislative and Executive
powers might speedily come to be blended in
the same hands. If even no propensity had
ever discovered itself in the Legislative body
TO invade the rights of the Executive, the
rules of just reasoning and theoretic proprie-
~ would of themselves teach us, that the one
ought not to be left at the mercy of the other,
but ought to possess constitutional and eff
fectual power of self defence.
The above and more in the same arti-
Gle of like tenor shows that the 'veto
power" was intended by those who placed
it in the constitution to be an instrument in
the hands of the Executive for his own
protection as we'll as to prevent hasty and
bad Legislation. 1t was to be a vital pow
err, suited for use to such contingency as
has now arisen in the government. The
democratic majority have determined and
are endeayoring to compel the Executive
to sign the repeal of the election laws
which he is opposed to doing-by lacking
the repeal to the appropriation bills. If
he yields he yields to coercion, and is
thereby deprived of a right which is Sc
cured to him by the constitution. Can
there be any doubt who is the aggressor,
whose rights are invaded, and who will be
responsible if the needed appropriations
to carry on the government are not made
and disaster follows?