Richmond dispatch. [volume] (Richmond, Va.) 1884-1903, 1894-03-25

whenever the question has been raised.
the Dispatch has taken tho negative side
of the proposition to amend the Federal
Constitution 10 a. to empower the Presi-
dent Of the United States 10 veto q part OF
q bill and approve the rest.
Our fathers "builded better than they
knew" Their wisdom and foresight seem
to us now to have been wonderful No
other such paper as the Federal Consn-
tuition can be found In the world. Eng
land has her unwritten law-lex non
scripta-which Is a wonderful product OF
evolution. but IL not Of the same nature
az our written Constitution. Not even
Magma Charta can be likened to the
Constitution which makes forty-four
States one State, and yet makes one state
forty-four. Distinct as the pillows, yet
one as the sea-" are the several States
comprising the grand national govern
ment. They arc one Of many-that Is.
one made Of many. The fathers ia do
ing their work seem to have been lar
ahead OF their times. The Federal Con-
stitution has grown into It's present con-
dition as a natural consequence Of their
labors.
The Constitution invests the President
of the United States with the veto power.
He can prevent any bill from becoming
a law unless two thirds Of the members
present of the two houses OF Congress
pass It again after 1t has been returned
TO Congress without his approval. But
this veto is a negative veto. IL does not
trench upon the rights Of Congress. nor
empower the President to make laws HIM
self.
The reader cannot but perceive at once
that the discriminating veto would change
the whole nature Of our governmental
structure. 1t would be an affirmative veto
substituted for negative veto. 1t would
make The President take part in the actual
legislation OF the country. 1t would, in
fact, be one step towards the destruction
of free government. and would convert
the peoples representatives in the two
houses of Congress into mere servants
OF the President. who would hold his
veto over the heads OF the members, and
never allow a dollar to go into the district
of any Congressman who should dare to
have an opinion of his own not coincident
with that OF the President.
Suppose the President now possessed the
power to veto part Of bill and allow
the rest Of 1t 10 become a law; how
changed would be the situation. What
would become OF our river appropriations?
The tax on incomes would be stricken
from every revenue bill. The fea-
lures OF such bills laying a tariff upon
iron-ore, coal. sumac. peanuts, etc. etc,
would be stricken out. SO as to the new
Bland BILL Part OF 1t would be per-
mitted to become a law and the rest Of
Il would be consigned to the tomb OF the
Capulets. So as TO the features touching
Internal taxes. Whatever Congress nigh,
desire to do, It would be powerless TO
do anything. Nobody could foresee what
the President would leave in a tariff bill
nor what he would strike out Of 1t.
There are thousands of articles named in
the Wilson bill, for example, and the
President, II he had the discriminating
veto, might strike out Of it a thousand
articles, and thus himself frame a new
tariff bill Is it not n clear case that
to provide for the discriminating veto
would be to minify Congress and magnify
the President? Is it not equally clear
that the whole governmental system
fashioned by the fathers would topple
to its fall?