Fayette County herald. [volume] (Washington [Washington Court House], Fayette County, O. [Ohio]) 1860-1???, 1879-05-22
The second Veto Message.

The Second Veto Message.
WASHINGTON, May I2.-Following is
the message of the President of the United
States, returning to the House of Repre-
sentatives the. bill entitled can act to
prohibit military interference at cleo
tions:''
To the House of Representatives:
After careful consideration of the bill
entitled can act to prohibit military in
reference at elections, p return it to the
House of Representatives, in which it
originated, with the following objections
to its approval:
In communication sent to the House
of Representatives the goth of last month,
returning to the House without my ap-
proval the bill entitled 'FAn act making
appropriations for the support of the
army for the fiscal year ending June 30,
1880, and for other purpose 1 endeay-
ored to show by quotations from the stat
utes of the United States now in force,
/ and by brief statement of facts in regard
to recent elections in several States, that
no additional legislation was necessary to
prevent interference with elections by the
military, or the naval forces of the United
States. The face was presented in that
communication that at the time of the
passage of the act of June Is, 1878, in re-
lation to the employment of the army as
posse conottatas or otherwise, it was main
tanned by its friends that it would estab-
lish a vital and fundamental principle
| which Hynn1d SoouPn f0 thu ,naoDla q rro-
lection against the standing army. The
fact was also referred to, that since the
passage of this act, Congressional, State and
municipal elections were held through
out the Union, and that in no instance has
complaint been made of the presence
of United States soldiers at the polls.
Holding, as 1 do, the opinion that any
military interference whatever at the polls
is contrary to the spirit of our institutions
and would tend to destroy the freedom of
elections, and sincerely desiring to concur
with Congress in all of its measures, 1t is
with very great regret that am forced to
the conclusion that the bill before me is
not only unnecessary to prevent such in
reference, but is dangerous departure
| from long settled and important constitu-
tional principles. The true rule as to en-
ployment of military force at elections
is not doubtful. No intimidation or coer-
cion should be allowed to control or fnfiu-
ence citizens in the exercise of their
right to vote, whether it appears in
the shape of combinations of evil disposed
persons or of armed bodies of militia of a
State, or ofthe military force of the United
States. The elections should be free from
all foreible interference, and as far as
practicable from all apprehensions of such
interference. No soldiers, either of the
Union or of State militia, should be
present at the polls to take the place or
to perform the duties of the ordinary civil
police force. There has been and will be
no violation of this rule under orders from
me during this administration. But there
should be no denial of the right of the
National Government to employ its mill
tary force on any day and at any place in
case such employment is necessary to en-
force the Constitution and laws of the
United States. Tho bill before me is as
follows: ''Be it enacted, etc., That il
shall not be lawful to bring to, or employ
! at any place where q general or special
: election is being held in State, any part
of the army on navy of the United States
unless such force be necessary to repcl
: armed enemies of the United States, or t.
enforce section 4, article of the Consti
tuition of the United States and laws made
in pursuance thereof, on application o.
f the Legislature or Executive of the State
where such force is to be used; and S.
: much of all laws as is inconsistent here
with is hereby repealed
1t will be observed that the bill'exempt
k from general prohibition, against the EN-
g ployment of military forces at the polls
: two specified cases, These exception
recognize and concede the soundness o
|, the principle that military force ma!
y properly and constitutionally be used a
: a place of elections when such use is neces
sary to enforce the Constitution and law.
But excepted cases leave the prohibitiO
so extensive and far reaching that il
adoption will seriously impair the eff
:. cheney of the Executive Department of til
le Government. The first act expressly at
n thorizing the use of military power to ez
ecute the laws was passed almost as earl
as the organization of the Governmel
under the Constitution and was approve
by President Washington, May 2, 1872.
is as follows: "Sec. 2. And be it furthC
enacted, That whenever the laws of tt
: United States shall be opposed or the exc
r cution thereof Obstructed in any State
combination too powerful to be supprcssC
IN by the ordinary course of judicial pr,
II ceedings, or by power vested in the Ma
shals by this act, the same being notife
Dy 70 the President of the United States b
an Associate Justice or District Judge,
;. shall be lawful for the President of til
United States to call forth the militia
such State to suppress such combination
and cause the laws to be duly executed
and if the militia of q State where sue
combinations may happen shall refuse
be insufficient to suppress the same,
as shall be lawful for the President, if I'll
" Legislature of the United States be not
session, to call forth and employ SUI
ed numbers of the militia of any other Sta
or States most convenient thereto, as mi
be necessary, and the use of the militia
be called forth may be continued, if n
y, cessary, until the expiration ofthirty da