New-York tribune., 1909-05-20
THE PENSION BILL VETO.

If the Legislature had deliberately framed Il
situation to exhibit the Governor at the greatest
advantage and itself at the least, it could not
have done better than in sending the veterans
pension bill to him. No one can read his veto
message without being impressed with the fact
that the Legislature played the veterans con
temptibe trick and that the Governor treats a
ticklish question with enthusiastically inieXi-
ble courage and resolution. In passing the bill
the Legislature followed the old Albany maxim,
giving the veterans what they wanted and
making il unconstitutional. To be perfectly
sure. they made it dOuby unconstitutional.
Under the constitution only one bill providing
for an increase Of 81 100000 or over TO the state
debt can be referred TO the people in one year,
and the Legislature before passing the pension
bill had already passed a canal improvement
measure calling for the expenditure of S1,0oo,OoO
Furthermore. the constitution requires that such
bills shall fix the annual tax rate necessary to
meet the debt created by them. This was done
in the canal improvement measure which
meant 10 be constitutional. but omitted from the
veterans pension bill, which intended 10 be
unconstitutional
The Governor might have been content to
point out the unconstitutiOnality of the bill, for
that was sufficient reason for vetoing it. But
with characteristic courage he addresses himself
TO *he main issue and makes it clear that had
the bill been constitutional he would still have
vetoed it. Even then he would not have taken
refuge in the way that was open TO him, of de-
clining responsibility himself, and submitting
the question to the judgment of the people. "it
is the intent of the constitution" he writes,
that 10 bill of this sort shall be submitted to
1.-The people unless it is recommended by the
Legislature and the Governor"
The Governors objections to the plan of
state pension for United States soldiers are SO
sound md convincing that his veto ought TO dis
pose of such suggestions in the future. not only
in this state, but in other states. as completely
as his two-cent fare veto disposed of that sense
less agitation. State pensions for military SER
vice are indefenSible in principle and will breed
injustice in practice" the Governor writes. and
he shows it. IF the provisions of the New York
bill were followed generally. then only those
veterans who still resided in the states from
which they enlisted would be pensiOned. That
would be injustice. Moreover. as the Governor
well says, the citizens of Ohio are much in
debted TO the soldiers from New York as are the
citizens of New York Those soldiers did not
20 to the front to fight for New York, but for
the Union And as citizens of the nation the
citizens of New York literally pay their obga-
ton to those who defended the nation. irrespec-
tive of where they came from and where they
now live. not discriminating merely in favor of
the few who enlisted from New York and still
reside here. 1t is only the federal government
that can grant pensions upon a just and equal
basis. for il represents all the people and can
discharge the common obligation TO all who
served in a common cause" That sentence of
the veto message enunciates a sound principle
and deserves to be remembered whenever this
question is raised again.