Daily Kennebec journal. [microfilm reel] (Augusta, Me.) 1870-1975, 1879-04-30
THE VETO MESSAGE.
President Haves' Reasons for veteing
the Army Bill.

| have maturely considered the important
questions presented by the bill enclosed and
now return it to the House with nv obiec-
tons to approval. The bill provides for an
appropriation required for the support of the
army during the next fiscal year. If it con
tanned no other provisions it would receive
my prompt approval 1t includes, however.
farther legislation which. attached as it is tc
appropriations which are requisite for the eff
Client performance of some of the most nee
cssary duties of government, involves ques-
tions of the gravcst character.
This bill embraces in its sixth section leg
iSlaticn which is very Objectionable. In the
first place it forbids the use of troops to keen
peace at the polls. This provision is unnec-
cssary and uncaled for at this time. In June,
1873, Congress passed an act forbiddng the
use of |. :. troops by civil officers of the t.
:. as As posse comitatus, except in cases
where such use is expressly authorized bv
law.
Since the passage of that act no one pre-
tends that troops have been near the polls at
an election, or that he has any fears that the
soldiers will be used to influence elections
There is no purpose on the part of the Exec
utivc to make such use of troops, even if the
law of June, 1873, does not effectually pro-
hibit it. The pretence, therefore. that there
is any occasion at the present time for legis-
lation of this kind has no foundation in fact
and the President hints very strongly that it
Is not for the purpose of preventing military
interference with elections that the present
legislation is proposed.
The second effect of the sixth section of
the bill is to prevent the use of force by civil
officers OF the law to preserve the peace or to
enforce the laws of the L. 5. at the polls on
election day. This is the most Objectionable
feature of the bill The right of Congress to
enact federal election laws cannot be disput-
ed by any one who studies the Constitution
of the L. :. in the light of contemporaneous
comment. That right includes the protection
of the voter in his rights, and the honest
count of the votes after they are cast. The
necessity of such legislation must also be adj
united by every one who is familiar with the
history of elections in this country, especial
~ in large cities, during the last l. years.
The election laws are, therefore. constitu-
tional. They are necessary. They have
been properly enacted There is no serious
complaint against the execution of these
laws.
No laws can be enforced without some
friction, and if these need to be changed
Congress has the power to amend them. That
is not what Congress proposes to do in this
bill. 1t seeks to deprive the Executive of the
power to enforce the election laws which, so
far AZ this bill is concerned, are allowed to
remain upon the statute book unchanged.
That is a proceeding of which the Pres idcnt
says he does not approve. To forbid the en-
torccmcnt of law, or to say that no force
shall be used in the execution of it. is tanta-
mount to repeating the law itself If Con-
gress thinks that the election laws ought to
he amended the President saws then let it
put an improved enactment into the same bill
IN which they propose to wipe out the old law
so that the country may see that while the
present safeguards that have been wisely
thrown about the ballot box are removed.
others equally effective are enacted in their
place.
If objection is made to the present mode of
appointing L. $. marshals to serve at the
polls on election day, or if the present law is
considered partisan in this regard. let Con-
gress change it and cause the appointment of
marshas to be made by the same machinery
that is now provided for the appointment of
supervisors of elections. No objection would
probably be made to such change in the
law.
But the army bill proposes no such amend
mcnt AS this. 1t leaves the election laws cx-
actly as they were, but makes them in effect
null and void, by taking away from the En-
ccutivc all power to enforce them. 1t will
be noticed that the proposed legislation does
not attempt to change the law which, in pur-
suance of an expressed provision of the Con-
sttuton, authorizes the. President to use the
army and call out the militia for the enforce
mcnt of laws when they are resisted with
force. This portion of the veto message is
very strong, and covers the whole ground 1t
leaves the democrats no avenue of escape
-. Al.
squarcly out.
After having discussed the legislation en-
braccd in the sixth section of the bill upon
its merits, the President directs the attention
of the lIonse to the Objectionable method by
which it is attempted to force this legislation
upon the statute book. 1t is an extraneous
matter upon an appropriation bill. This
method the President crilicses as always OBJ
jectionabie and dangerous. 1t was not the
practice of Congress to resort to this exped-
ent in the early days of the republic, even in
single instance if secured during the first
~ wears after the Constitution was adopted
The object of attaching riders to appropria-
ton bills is to force through Congress meas
urcs which cannot stand upon their own
merits, or when the rules of one house or
the other stand in the way.
The President concludes, therefore, that
the purpose OF the House OF Representatives
in putting the sixth section into the army bill
is to coerce the Executive into approval of
Il measure to which he was known to be OPP
posed. This, the President believes, is sub
versive of the Constitution, and not to be toll
Grated for Il moment. 1t would make the
House of Representatives Il usurper of all
the powers of government. for, although the
army bill had the approval of the Senate IN
the present instance, and this fact makes the
situation more serious, the subject must be
dealt with in the light of history. The House
of Representatives in the last Congress at
tempted to force the Senate and Executive
to acccdc to its wishes, just as the two houses
now attempt to coercc the Executive. Under
other circumstances the powers of the Exec
utivc branch of the government might be
usurped by the House of Representatives.
Attention is called to the threat that has
been made to withhold supplies" if this po-
litical legislation is not agreed to, and shows
the absurdity and weakness of such an as
sumption. The appropriation bills, which it
is said Congress may refuse to pass, are in no
sense ''money bills, in the sense of being in
tended to impose taxation upon the people.
Congress, in pursuance of its right and duty
under the constitution, has established an ar.
NV and iyed by law its nay and cost of main