Alma record. (Alma, Mich.) 1878-1928, 1889-03-08
CLEVELAND VETOES 1T.
Ne Says the Direct Tax Bill is Un-
constitutional
And Votoes IL.


Cleveland has vetoed the direct tax bill,
and after describing the bill in detail and
giving full history OF the matter, says
The conceded effect OF this bill il TO take
from the money now in the treasury the
sum OF more than $l1 ,OOO,O 900, or IL the per
centage allowed Is not included, more than
&l5, 0OO, 900, and pay back To the respective
states and territories the sums they or their
citizens paid more than twenty tive years
ago upon direct tax levied by the govern
ment Of the United States for it's defense
and safety.
1t l.. my belief that this appropriation of
the public funds is not within the consti-
tutional power Of the congress. Under the
limited and delegated authority conferred
by the constitution upon the general gov
eminent the statement of the purposes for
which money may be lawfully raised by
taxation In any form declares also the limit
of the objects for which IL may be expend-
ed. All must agree that the direct tax was
lawfully and constitutionally laid, and that
IL was rightfully and correctly collected
II cannot be claimed, therefore, nor is 1t
pretended. that any debt arose against the
government and in favor OF any state or
individual by the eXaction Of this tax.
Surely, then, the appropriation directed by
this bill cannot be justified as a payment OF
debt of the United States. The disburse
ment of this money clearly has no relation
10 the common defense. On the contrary,
il Is the repayment of money raised and
long ago expended by the government to
provide for the common defense. The ex-
penditure cannot properly be advocated on
the ground that the general welfare OF the
United States is thereby provided for or
promoted This general welfare of the
United States as used in the constitution
can only justify appropriations for national
objects and for purposes which have TO do
with the prosperity, the growth, the honor
or the peace and dignity ofthe nation.
ahn hal cr1~uf TINT haC ni
upon states or individuals, based upon no
better reason than supports the gift pro-
posed in this bill, has never been claimed
TO be a provision for the general welfare.
But if the constitutional question involved
in the consideration of this bill should be
determined in it's favor, there are other OBJ
jections remaining which prevent my as
sent 10 its provisions.
The President here enumerates number
OF defects in the bill, among them the fol-
lowing: The fact that the entire tax was
not paid furnishes no reason that would
not apply TO nearly every case where taxes
are laid. There are always delinquents,
and while the more thorough and complete
collection o. taxes is a troublesome prob
lem Of government, the failure TO solve the
problem has never been held 10 call for the
return OF taxes actually collected.
The deficiency in the collection OF this
tax - found almost entirely in the insur-
rectionary states, while the quotas appor-
toned to the other states were, as a gener-
al rule, fully paid and three fourths or four
tifths of the money which it is proposed in
this bill to return would be paid into the
treasures OF the loyal states. But no valid
reason exists for such payment of the fund
in the fact that the government first could
not, and afterwards, for reasons probably
perfectly valid, did not enforce collection
on the other states
There were many federal taxes which
were not paid by the people in the REBEL
ious states; and if the non-payment by
them of this direct tax entities the other
states TO "a donation of the share of said
taxes paid by their citizens. why should not
the income taxes and many other internal
taxes paid entirely by the citizens OF loyal
states be also paid into the treasures of
these states Considerations which recog-
nize sectional divisions, or the loyalty Of
the different states at the time this tax was
laid, should not enter into the discussion Of
the merits of this measure
The loyal states should not be paid the
large sums of money promised them by this
bin, because they are loyal and other states
were not, nor should the states which re-
belled against the government be paid the
smaller sums promised them because they
were in rebellion and thus prevented the
collection Of their entire quotas, nor because
this concession To them is necessary TO JUS.
tify the proposed larger gifts to the other
states. The people of the loyal states paid
l believe the taxpayers themselves are con
tent. In the light Of these considerations |
am opposed to the payment Of money from
the federal treasury TO enrich the treasures
of the states.
The baneful effect OF surplus in the
treasury of the general government is daily
seen and felt j do not think, however
that this surplus should be reduced or
spread throughout the states by methods
such as are provided In this bill.
N~x1 H.. Ill l. a
President, is its unfairness and unjust dis
elimination in the operation of the plan Of
reimbursement. He continues
The existence of a surplus IN the treasury
is no answer TO these objections. II is
still the peoples money, and better use
can be found for il than the distribution of
it upon the plea Of the reimbursement of
ancient taxation. a more desirable plan To
reduce and prevent the recurrence of a
large surplus can easily be adopted-one
that instead of creating in
justice and inequality, promotes JUS
tice and equality by leaving in
the hands of the people and for their use
the money not needed by the government,
to pay the debts aud provide for the com
mon defense, and general welfare of the
United States" The difficulties in the
way OF making Just REIN bursement of
this direct tax, instead of eXcusing the inn
projections of the bill under consideration,
furnish reasons why the scheme as pro-
posed should not be entered upon.
am constrained upon the considerations
herein presented TO withhold my assent
from the bill herewith returned, because
believe it TO be without constitutional war
rant; because j am Of the opinion that
there exists no adequate reasons, either in
right or equity. for the return of the tax in
said bill mentioned, and because l believe
its execution would cause actual injustice
and unfairness.
After short debate the bill was pass ed
over the presidents Veto by vote of ~ to
..