Ashtabula telegraph. (Ashtabula, Ohio) 1874-1880, 1879-05-23
SOLID SHOT.
The Presidents Veto on .he Eleefios
BIII-His Objections Set Forth.


dent of the .. States, returning to
the House of Representatives the bill
entitled can act to prohibit military
interference at elections.
| To the House OF Representatives,.
After a careful consideration of
the bill entitled can act to prohibit
military interference at elections"
| I return to the House of Representa-
tives in which 1t originated with the
following objections 10 is approval:
In the communication sent TO the
House of Representatives the 29th of
last month returning to the House
without my approval the bill entitled
"An act making appropriations for
the support of the army for the fiscal
year ending June 3Oth, 1880, and for
other purposes" I endeavOred to
show by quotations from statutes of
the United States now in force and
by brief statement of the facts in re-
gard to the recent elections in sew
eraI States, that no additional legis-
lation was necessary to prevent in
reference with elections by military
or naval forces of the United States.
The fact was presented in that COM
munication that at the time of the
passage of the act of June 8th, 1873,
in relation to the employment of the
army as posse comitatus or other
wise, it was maintained by its friends
that it would establish a vital and
fundamental principle which would
secure to the people protection
against standing army. The fact
was also referred to that since the
passage of this act Congressional,
State and municipal elections had
been held throughout the Union and
that in no instance has complaint
been made of the presence of United
States soldiers at the polls. Hold
ing as | do the opinion that any mill
tary interference whatever at the
polls is contrary to the spirit of our
institutions, and would tend to de-
strOy the freedom Of elections, and
sincerely desiring to concur with
Congress in all its measures, it is with
great regret that l am forced to the
conclusion that the bill before me is
not only unnecessary to prevent such
interference but is a dangerous de-
parture from long settled and i'm
pOrtant constitutional principles.
The true rule as to the employ
ment of military force at elections is
not doubtful. No intimidation or
coersion should be allowed to control
OF influence citizens in the exercise
of their right to vote, whether it ap-
pears In the shape of combinations Of
evil-disposed persons or of armed
bodies of the militia of State or the
military forces of the .. States. The
elections should be free from all fore
ible interference, and as far as prac-
ticable from all apprehension of such
interferences. No soldiers, either of
the Union or of the State militia,
should be present at the polls to take
the place or to perform the duties of
an ordinary 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 military force on any day and at
any place in case such employment
is necessary to enforce the Constitu-
tion and laws of the United States.
The bill before me is as follows: ''Be
1t enacted, etc, that it shall not be
lawful to bring to or employ at any
place where general or special cleo
.tion is being held in a State any part
of the army or navy of the .. States
unless such force is necessary to re-
pei armed enimies of the U. States
or to enforce section 4, article 4, of
the Constitution of the q. States and
laws made In pursuance thereof on
application of the Legislature or Ex-
ecuJive of the State where such force
is to be used, and so much of all the
laws as is inconsistent herewith is
hereby repealed" 1t will be OBJ
served that the bill exempts from
general prohibition against the en-
ployment of military forces at polls
two specified cases. These excep-
tions recognize and concede the
sOundness of principle that military
force may properly and constitution
ally be used at place of elections
when such use is necessary to enforce
the Constitution and laws. But the
excepted cases leave the prohibition
so extensive and far reaching that its
adoption will seriously impair the eff
ficiency of the Executive Department
of the Government. The first act
expressly authorizes the use of the
military power to execute the laws
was passed almost as early as the or
ganization of the Government under
the Constitution, and was approved
by President Washington, May I'd,
1882. 1t is as follows:
SEC. 2. And be it further enacted
that whenever the laws of the U.
States shall be opposed or the execu- |
tion thereof obstructed in any State
by combinations too powerful to be
oppressed by the ordinary course of
judicial proceedings or by the pow
ers vested in MarShals by this act,
the same being notified to the Presi-
dent of the U. States by an Associ-
ate Justice or District Judge, ii shall
be lawful for the President of the
.. States to call forth the militia of
the State to suppress such combina-
tions and to cause the laws to be duly
executed, and if militia of a State
where such combinations may hap
pen shall refuse, or be insufficient to
suppress tie same, it shall be lawful
for the President, if the Legislature
of the U. States be not in session, to
call forth and employ such numbers
of the militia of any other State or
States most convenient thereto rs
may be necessary, and the use of the
militia so to be called forth may be
continued if necessary until the ex-
piration of thirty days after the com
mencement of the ensuing session"
In 1895 this provision was substan-
TALLY re enacted in a law which re-
pealed the act of 1892. In 1907 the
following act became the law by the