Evening star., 1896-12-26

dency here and there to becloud the pub
lie understanding of the question at iss,-o
The most pronounced instance of this ten
dency is furnished by -,
made (and duly chronicled by Won in an
other column of the same issue of your
,i iIpeo oy the antagonists of Mr.. Olney tc
pace MIN in the attitude of contending
nat the President may ignore a law en-
acted In accordance with the Cons titution -
~ course Mr.. Olney claims nothing of
.ne kind, and this attempt to becloud the
pupilc understanding-to retain your own
milo metaphor-can only be regarded as
practical surrender by his opponents of
the real point at issue. On the other hand
the Tatter has been clearly and fairly
stated In your editorial columns only j
believe the issue to be in need of some
Iufther clearing of nebulous SURROUNDINGS
refer to the Introduction into the con
troVersy OF the legislative prerogative to
declare war-the "war-makine mower" as
1t is commonly called. This factor is
brought in by Mr.. Olney's antagonists to
bolster up their claims by affecting to fino
an inconsistency in the proposition tha,
Congress. though empowered to declare
war. has no power to recognize new
government. The greater power includes
the less they say.
Nobody is misled by such a catch phrase
What connection Is there between the
power to declare war and the power to
recognize a new government to warrant
any enc to say that the former includes
tne latter! None whatever, in the nature
OF Things; and for that reason l think you
erred in representing the present difficulty
10 arise from the silence of the Constitu-'
ton on the point of the exact powers of
the President and Congress midway be-
tween the power to declare war and the
power to receive ambassadors. This silence
of the Constitution is due no doubt to the
absence of any suggestion to its trainers
OF the pretended connection between these
powers. 1t is true, the power to recognize
a new government, if exercised by the
executive, might involve the country in
war; but so might other purely executive
acts be made the pretext by some foreign
government to declare war against u.s.
In short, all this talk by the antagonists
Of the administration about the war-mak-
Ing. power would be Ineligible if their
position were the exact reverse of what it
is. i.e.. If their claim were that the Presi-
dent has no power to recognize new
government at all. The total irrelevancy
however, Of this question of the war-mak-
Ing power can best be shown by restating
the real point at issue, which, in your own
language, is: Whether Congress-or rather
the law-making power, which is two-thirds
of Congress when the President opposes
can direct the President to go beyond his
voluntary exercise of constitutional func-
tions and recognize a government which
he does not choose to include within the
scope of his own lawful prerogative.''
1t goes without saying that an affrma tive
answer to this question would be tanta-
mount TO practical abrogation of all pure
ly executive powers as such, for if Congress
had thus the power to compel executive
action in one instance, no reason Is ap-
parent why 1t could not exercise this power
in any instance whatever. x.