The Rock Island Argus. (Rock Island, Ill.) 1877-1885, 1879-04-11
Tri3ay. April Il. 1879.
Will the President veto the Army B,llq

There are various opinions upon this
question all of which seem to point to a
veto Of the bill, although Hayes, as he has
done in the past, may disappoint the stall
warts Of his party. These opinions all
place the executive in very curious posi-
ton, that is, if Garfield is a correct expo
dent of Hayes opinion and position. At
the close of the debate upon the bill Gar
field said to the democrats:
You have right, however unWise and
independent it may be as matter OF par
liamentary practice, you have perfect
right TO put this on this bill and pass 1t.
When you send it to the Senate that body
has a perfect right to pass it. 1t is your
constitutional right aud theirs to pass 1t,
for the free consent of each body is the
basis of the lswmaking powef."
Just how Hayes can justify a veto 10
the face Of this frank admission is hard
to tell. Of course it can only be as poll
teal measure demanded by the extreme
men of the party, and it sounds very silly
to say he would sign the repeal Of the test
oaths and the use of troops at the polls if
they came to him in independent bills, but
that coming on appropriation bills he will
veto them. There seems something 80
unreasonable, even from Ithe republican
standpoint, in this that the report would
deserve little credit did it not come from
sources usually we'll informed
In the senate, the republicans seem to
contradict the house, and, if the re-
publican senator's; opinions are any
indication of Hayes desire, he wants
the appropriation bills to come to
him with political riders so that he can
have the form of the bills as a pretext for
veto, thus contradcting all republican
precedent and denying the right admitted
by Garfield, as quoted above.
Senator Bayard, who, it will be remem-
bered all along took grounds in tie caucus
against attaching political riders to the APP
preparation bills. offered bill in the sen
ate on the 9th repeating the test oath
This of course should have been supported
by the republicans, if they were honest il
the position laid down by republicans il
the house, that they would vote for the re
peal if presented to them separat
from the appropriation bills. No
30 however, for to the surprise of everyone
Senator Edmunds objected and demands
that the bill be sent to the judiciary Com
mittee; that is 10 say he and the repubi
can Senators rejected this overture for
good understanding. This course, if pei
sisted in, will place the responsibility Of
prolonged and angry session clearly upo
them. 10 presenting the bill Senate
Bayard said he did it in the interest {
harmony and good feeling in the countr
between both parties in the two house
and to prevent a useless and prolouge
strife over unimportant details, whic
would be injurious to the country. It's r
lection by the republicans show how eml
~ are the professions of those republican
who claimed to be in favor of the repeal
presented to them separately. 1t recall
ALS laCb NhaI III lllC hi Ob NdJS vi tlC Dc
sion they announced that they would o.
pose the introduction of these measures
separate bills, and yet when they were pact
oa.the appropriation bills they shoutt
revolution" IL is only determinati
Of the republicans to resist the repeal
any legislation which affects their power
prevent free elections and impartial juri(
Under these circumstances the democra
should adhere to their original determin
ton, and place the responsibility of bloc
ing the wheels Of the government up
the executive, or accepting, the will of t
majority Of the people as express
through their representatives in congre!
Hayes can rest assured that the people
this country will never yield their dema
for a repeal Of these measures they a
not ready to repeat the error Of the Il
man Republic when the Empire was esta
lished. The democrats arc ready to 60 /
fore the people with the issue of Stree elC
tious aud impartial juries."