The Cincinnati daily star. [volume] ([Cincinnati, Ohio]) 1875-1880, 1879-06-23

the country will accept his view of the
scope of the bill; that it prevents the use of
troops at the polls in the manner that OBJ
tanned previous to his administration. If he
believed that the Republican Senators in
terpretation OF the bill was correct he
would certainly veto it.
National Associated Press to the Star.
THE PRESIDENTIAL VETO.
WASHINGTON, June 23.-The following is
a synopsis of the Presidents Message veto
ing the Judicial Appropriation Bill:
To the II use of Representatives:
After careful examination of the bill
entitled "An act making appropriations
for certain Judicial expenses" l re-
turn it herewith to the House of
Representatives, in which it originated,
with the following objections to its ap-
proval: The general purpose of the bill is
to provide Tor certain judicial expenses of
the Government for the fiscal year
ending June thirtieth, eighteen
hundred and eighty, for which
the sum of two million six hundred
and ninety thousand dollars is appro-
priated. These appropriations are required
to keep in operation the general functions
of the Judicial Department of the Govern
ment, and if this part of the bill stood
alone there would be no objection to its
approval. 1t contains, however, other pro-
visions to which | respectfully ask your at
tention.
At the present session of Congress a ma
iority of both Houses favoring a repeal of
the Congressional Election Laws embraced
in title twenty-six Of the revised statutes,
passed measure for that purpose as part
of bill entitled "An Act Making Appro-
priatons for the Legislative Executive and
Judicial Expenses of the Government for
the fiscal year ending June 30th, 1880, and
for other purposes"
Unable to concur with Congress in that
measure on the Goth of May last returned
the bill to the House Of Representatives in
which it originated, without my approval
for that further consideration for which
the Constitution provides. On reconsider
alton the bill was approved by less than
two-thrds Of the House and failed to be-
come law. The election laws there
fore remain valid enactments and
the supreme law of the land, binding not
only upon all private citizens, but also alike
and equally binding upon all who are
of the Legislative, the Executive and the
Judicial Departments of the Government.
1t is not brought by the bill before me to
repeal the election laws. It's object is to
defeat their enforcement.
Title twenty-six of the Revised Statutes,
referred to in the bill, relates to the elective
franchise, and contains the laws
now in force regulating the Con,
gressional elections. The second sec.
ton of the bill reaches much further
and is intended to make an extensive and
essential change in the existing laws.
Under the existing laws the failure of Con,
gress to make the appropriations required
for the execution of the provisions of the
election laws would not prevent their exc,
cution.
The right and duty to appoint the gen.
eral and special deputy marshals which
they provide for, would still remain, and
the Executive Department Of the Govern
ment would also be empowered to incur
the requisite liability for their compensa-
ton, but the second section of this bill con-
tains prohibition not found in any previ-
Gus legislation. Its design is to render the
election laws imperative and dead letter
during the next fiscal year.
1t is sought to accomplish this by
enforcement and by expressly prohibiting
any department or officer OF the Govern
ment from incurring any liability under
any of the provisions of title twenty-six of
the Revised Statutes authorizing the ap-
pointment or payment of general or
special deputy marshals for service
on election days, until an appropriation
sufficient to pay such liability shall have
first been made. he President is called
upon to give his affirmative approval to
positive enactments which in effect de-
prive him OF the ordinary and necessary
means Of executing the laws still left on
the Statute Book and embraced within his
Constitutional duty to see that the laws
are executed.
Ii he approves the bill and thus gives to
such positive enactments the authority of
law he participates in the curtaiment of
his means OF seeing that the law is faith
fully executed, while the obligation of the
law and of his Constitutional duty remains
unimpaired, the appointment of special
Deputy Marshals is not made by the stat
ute spontaneous act of authority
on the part Of any Executive
or judicial officer of the Government, but
is accorded as a popular right OF the citi-
zens to call into operation this agency for
SSCulliS luc Puilty anu iCcuoHi Vi tleC-
tons in any city or town having twenty
thousand inhabitants or upward Sections
twenty and twenty-onc, of the Revised
Statutes, puts it in the power Of any two
citizens of such city or town to require OF
the Marshal of the district the appointment
of the special deputy marshals
Thereupon the duty of the Marshal be-
comes imperative, and its non-performance
would expose him to a judicial mandate,
or punishment or to removal from office
by the President, as the circumstances OF
his conduct might require.
The bill now before ME neither revokes
this popular right of the citizens nor re-
lieves the Marshal of the duty imposed by
law, nor the President of his duty to see
that this law is faithfully executed. This
measure leaves the powers and duties of
the Supervisors of Elections untouched.
The compensation of those officers is pro-
vided for under permanent laws, and no
liability for which an appropriation is now
required would therefore be incurred by
their appointment, but the power of the
National Government to protect them in
the discharge of their duty at the polls
would be taken away.
The States may employ both civil and
military power at the elections, but by this
bill even the civil authority to protect the
Congressional elections is denied to the
United States. The object is to prevent
INV nIn 70 trNl IT,,tt tn1 Nnt-