The Indianapolis journal., 1896-06-07
Attempt to Pass the Measure Over the
Veto Defeated I'm the House by
Vote of 40 to lao.
ANOTHER BILL INTRODUCED
THROUGH AT ONCE
AND SENT TO THE SENATE.
Objectionable Provisions First Elimi-
nated-Angry Debate bordering
on the Sensational.

WASHlNGTON, June b,-PreSldent Cleve-
land to-day sent message TO the House
Of Representatives vetoing the general de-
ficiency bill AS soon as the message was
read an attempt was made to pass the bill
over the veto. but the motion was lost. The
vote stood 40 yeas to d49 nays. Mr.. Cleve-
lands message follows:
ITO the House of Representatives:
II hereby return. without my approval,
House hill numbered $685. entitled An act
in the appropriations for the fiscal year
ending June 30, 1896, and for prior years
and for other purposes"
ITO the extent that the Constitution has
devolved on the President participation in
legislation, suppose his action on bills
duty To- be performei lIke others nertanine
to his office, with care and c,rcums pection,
and in full view OF his responsibility to the
people and his obligation TO subserve the
public welfare 1t is difficult to understand
why. under the Constitution, it should be
necessary to submit proposed leg
lsatlon 10 executive scrutiny and
| approval except to invoke the
| exercise of executive Judgment, and In
vite independent executive action. The un-
| pleasant Incidents which accompany the
| power would tempt its avoidance il such
course did not. involve an abandonment of
| constitutional duty, and assent TO legislation
for which the executive is not willing to
| share the responsibility regret that / am
| constrained to disprove an important appro-
ent session of Congress. 1 have. however,
| by immediate action. after the receipt Of the
s to delay s as little as possible
| ton, though / am thus obliged TO content
myself with less complete explanation Of
my objections than would otherwise be sub
This bill is. in many of its features. far
removed from legitimate deficiency bill,
and II contains number of appropriations
| which seem TO me TO be exceedingly ques-
| tionable. Without noticing in detail many
of these items, | shall refer e two of them
in the premises. The b:li arpropriates S. :
o27 3i4os for a partial Payment on claims
commerce by French cruisers and vessels
| during the closing years of the late century.
| They have become quite familiar to those
| have been pressed for recognition and pay
| ment. with occasional intervals of repose,
for nearly one hundred years. These Claims
| French. being at war with England seized
| and condemned many American vessels and
tional law and treaty provisions and con-
| trary 10 the duty she owed TO our country
as neutral power and TO our citizens; that
| by reason OF these acts claims arose in IA
vor of such of our citizens as were damni-
| fled against the French nation, which claims
our government attempted to enforce, and
| that in concluding treaty with France in
| the year 1900 these claims were abandoned
! or relinqushed in consideration of the re-
| linquishment Of certain claims which France
charged against US. Upon these statements
| it is insisted by those interested that we, as
nation. having reaped a benefit in our
| us through the abandonment of the claims
| of our citizens against France. the govern
| ment became equitably bound as between
| Itself and ITS citizens TO pay the claims thus
| relinquished.
NOT ENTITLED TO INDEMNITY.
| II do not understand 1t to be asserted that
| there exists any legal liability against the
| government on account Of it's relation 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 appropriating for their payment,
| said: We think that payments thus pre-
| scribed to be made were purposely brought
| within the category Of payments by way
| of gratuity-payments Of grace and not of
right From the time the plan was con-
| ceived TO charge the government with the
payment of these claims they have abideG
| proposition presented in their support has
| been stoutly disputed and every inference
suggested in their favor has promptly been
| challenged. Thus, inasmuch as it must,
| think, be conceded that IL state of war ex-
| listed between our country and France at
the time these depredstions were committed.
| our government was not justified in claim
| ing indemnity for our citizens, who, IL is
4 asserted, were at the time actually engaged
| iE war with the French nation. This posi-
| ton seems 10 be sustained by an opinion Of
| the Encouragement of the United States,
written in l7Ss. and by number of de-
ii after that time. we had certainly abrogated
| treaties with France and our cruisers and
armed ships We're roaming the seas. captur-
ing her vessels and property.
$50. also. when it is asserted that the
| validity of these claims was acknowledged
| in the treaty negotiations by the represen-
| tatives of France, their declarations 10 a
| contrary purport are exhibited. And when
| it is alleged that the abandonment OF these
| Gains against France was in consideration
| of great benefits 10 the government, ii is as
| confidently alleged that they were in point
| of fact abandoned because their enforce
benefit really accrued TO the United States
| by insistence on their settlement in the
| course of diplomatic negotiations. such re-
| suit gave no pretext for taxing the gov
| ernment with liability to the claimants.
| without noticing the other considerations
| and contentious arising from the alleged
| origin of these claims, brief reference to
| their treatment in the past and the develop
! ment of their presentation may be useful
| the fashion in interested quarters TO speak
| of the failure by the. government TO pay
these. Gains as such neglect as amounts to
| zens who have suffered. OF course the orig
| nal claimants have for years been beyond
| the reach OF relief; but as their descendants
| the volume of advocacy. Importantly and
| accusation correspondngly increases. II IN
| Justice has been done in the refusal Of these
| claims II began early in the present century
| and may be charged against then in
| pubic life more conversant than We can be
/ with the facts involved, and whose honesty
| and sense of right ought 10 be secure beyond
| suspicion.
EARLY LEGISLATION.
| LAS early as 1902 committee of the House
| of Representatives reported the fact connect
| ed with these claims. but apparently without
| recommendation. No action was taken on
| the report. In 1873 a resolution declaring
| that indemnity ought TO be paid was mega
tived by vote of the same body favor
able committee report was made In 1907. but
1t seems that no legislative action resulted.
In 1s0s an adverse report was made to the
Senate. followed by the passage OF resolu-
ton declaring that the relief asked by the