The Indiana State sentinel. [volume] (Indianapolis) 1868-1895, 1888-06-20
Mr.. Cleveland and the Veto Power.

The journal the other day made a
vicious attack upon President CLEVELAND
for his use of the veto power. 1t declared
that he had done far more in asserting
and establishing the one man power in
his single term than any other president
had done in two. This, it said, was not
because he was a stronger man than any
of his predecessors, but because he was
naturally arbitrary, reckless in exercising
authority and poorly informed as to the
distribution of powers on which the gov
eminent is based" And then followed a
grave disquisition upon the nature, OBJ
jects and limitations of the veto power,
together with some more or less relevant
historical information. Among other
things we were informed that ''the trainers
of the constitution never intended that
the veto power should be used" as Mr..
CLEVELAND has used it.
Now upon this subject, perhaps one of
the leading trainers of the constitution him
selfmay be considered as good authority as
the Journal writer. Especially may this
be true, if he is no less person than
ALEXANDER HAMILTON, whose infallibility
is an article of republican faith. "The
power in question" wrote HAMILTON in the
Federalist, mot only serves as a shield to
the executive, but it furnishes an addi-
tional security against the enaction OF i'm
proper laws. 1t establishes salutary
check upon the legislative body, calculated
20 guard the community against the effects
of faction, precipitancy or Of any impulse
unfriendly 10 the public good lchich may hap
pen 10 influence q majority Of that body"
COOLEY says: THAT the president has a
discretionary power to veto bill for any
reason that appears TO him sufficient, is I'M
doubted. The constitution gives the
power and makes no exceptions. When
he does not approve bill he is to with
hold his approval; and he may do so on
grounds of mere expediency."
Experience has demonstrated that there
is little danger, in this country, from the
veto power. A far greater danger exists
in the propensity of the legislative to en-
croach upon and absorb the functions OF
coordinate branches of the government,
and especially of the executive. Nopresi-
dent in our history has shown more jeal-
Gus regard than Mr.. CLEVELAND for the
dignity and independence of the executive,
or has perceived more clearly or defined
more accurately the boundaries set by the
constitution upon the powers of the sew
eral departments of government The
Journal declares that eff he should be re-
elected there is reason to believe he would
do more during his second term to Obliter-
ate constitutional lines and change es-
tablished ideas of constitutional construc-
ton than any half dozen presidents we
have had" This language implies that
all our presidents have been more or less
engaged in "obliterating constitutional
lines" and changing established ideas of
constitutional construction" Certainly
some of our republican presidents
have done a good deal in this
direction. But what Mr.. CLEVELAND has
done by his bold stand against senatorial
usurpation, by his mastery exposition of
the relations of the executive to the legis-
lative, and by his intelligent, independ-
ent and courageous employment of the
veto power has been to remind congress
and the country sharply that ours is a
government of checks and balances, and
TO arrest the tendency of the law-makIng
branch to arrogate to itself functions that
belong to other branches of the constitu-
ton. His veto record is unassailable upon
any constitutional or public ground.