The San Francisco call., 1896-06-07
Why Is He Given the Preroga-
tive if He Cannot Exer.
else It !?
THE GROUND FOR HIS ACTION
A Provision in the Measure Relating
to the Payment of French Spolia-
tion Claims.

WASHINGTON, D. c., June 6.-The
President sent veto message to the
House on the general deficiency appro-
priation bill this afternoon. He replies
briefly to the criticisms of his exercise of
the veto power, and says he has hurried
the preparation of the message in order
that Congress may take action in the mat
ter without delay. The ground for the
veto is the provision relating to the pay
ment of the French spoliation claim. In
his m essage the President says:
TT is difficult to understand why, under
the constitution, it should be necessary to
submit proposed legislation to executive
scrutiny and approval except to- invoke
the exercise of executive judgment and
invite independent executive action.
"The unpleasant incidents which ac-
com pany the use of the veto power would
tempt it's avoidance if such course did
not involve an abandonment of constitu-
tional duty and an assent to legislatio ?
for which the executive is not willing to
share the respons ibility. l regret that l
am constrained to disapprove an impor.
tant appropriation bill SO near the close of
the present session of Congress. l have,
however, Dy lmIDGQIdte dCtlOn d1ISI Tic
receipt of the bill, endeavored to delay as
little as possible reconsideration of this
proposed legislation, though | am thus
obliged TO content myself with less COM
plete explanation of my objections than
would otherwise be submitted.
"This bill is in many of its features far
removed from Legitimate deficiency bill,
and it contains a number OF appropria-
tions which seem to me to be exceedingly
rtln nCfl m q h q Without n a
tail many of these items l shall refer to
two OF them which, in my Judgment, JUS
tiff ed my action in the premises. The bill
appropriates 81 ,027 ,314 % for partial pay
ment upon claims which originated in
depredations upon our commerce by
French cruisers and vessels during the
closing years of the last century.
''They have become quite familiar to
those having Congressional experience, as
they have been pressed for recognition and
payment, with occasional intervals of re-
pose, for n early one hundred years. These
claims are based upon the allegations that
France, being at war with England, seized
and condemned many American vessels
and cargoes IN violation OF the rules of in
ternational law and treaty provisions, and
contrary to its duty to our country as a
neutral power and to our citizens; that by
reason OF these acts claims arose in favor
of such of our citizens as were damnified
against the French nation-which claims
our Government attempted to enforce
and that in concluding q treaty with
France in the year 1900 these claims were
abandoned or relinquished in considera-
ton of the REIMBURSEMENT OF certain
claims which France charged against US.
Upon these stat ments it is insisted by
those interested that we as Nation have
reaped benefit in our escape from these
French demands against US. Through the
ha, u g hn los, rf
against France the Government became
equally bound itself and its citizens to pay
the claims thus relinquished.
'I do not understand it to be asserted
that there exists any legal liability against
the Government on account OF its rela-
tions to these claims. At the term of the
Supreme Court just finished the Chief
Justice, IN an opinion concerning them
and the action of Congress in appropri-
ating for their payment, said: we think
that payments thus prescribed to be made
were purposey brought within the cate
CORY of payments by way of gratuity-
payments of grace and not of right.
These claims have been in an atmos-
phere of controversy ever since they were
conceived, and when it is alleged that the
abandonment of the claims against France
was in consideration of great benefits to
the Government it is as confidently al
legged that they were in point of fact
abandoned because their enforcement was
hopeless, and that if any benefit really
accrued to US by insistence upon their set
tlement in the course of diplomatic rela-
tions such result gave no pretext for tax
ing the Government with the liability to
the claimants.
cit Is, l believe, somewhat the fashion
in interested quarters to speak OF the
failure by the Government to pay these
claims as such neglect as amounts to re-
pudiation by the Government and denial
of justice to citizens who have suffered.
OF course these original claimants have
for years been beyond the reach of relief,
but as their descendants IN each genera
ton become more numerous the volume
of advocacy importantly and accusation
correspondingly increases.
eff injustice has been done In the re-
fusal of these claims it began early in the
present century, and may be charged
against men then in public life more con-
versant than we can be with the facts in
volved and whose honesty and sense OF
right ought to secure them from suspicion.
II have determined to submit this in
complete presentation of my objection to
this bill at once, in order that Congress
may act thereon without embarrassment
or the interruption of plans for an early
adiournm ent."