Year: 1879

ence at lhe Polls without hfs Sig


nature.


The following are the principal points
of objection in the veto message Of
President Hayes in returning the mill.
tary non-interference bill without his
signature


Holding as do the opinion that any
military interference whatever at the
polls is contrary to the spirit of our in
stitutions and would tend to destroy
the freedom of elections, and sincerely
desiring to concur with Congress in all
its measures, it is with very great re-
gret that | am forced to the conclusion
that the bill before me is not only un-
necessary to prevent such interference,
but it il a dangerous departure from
long settled and important Constitution
al principles.


The true rule as to the employment
of military force at the elections Is not
doubtful. No intimidation or coercion
should be allowed to control or intlu-
ence citizens in the exercise of the right
to vote, whether it appears in the shape
Of combination Of evil disposed persons,
or of armed bodies of the militia of
State, or of the military of the United
States. The elections should be free
from all iorcible interference, and, as
far as practicable, from all apprehension
of such interference.


No soldiers, either of the Union or of
the State militia, should be at the polls
to take the place or to perferm the
duties of the ordinary police force.
| There has been and will Re no viola
ton of this rule under orders from me
during this administration. But there
should be no denial of the right of the
National Government to employ its
military force on any day and at any
place, in case such employment is
necessary to enforce the Constitution
and laws of the United States.


1t will be observed that the bill ex-
empts from the general prohibition
against the employment of the military
force at the polls two specific cases. The
exceptions recognize and concede the
soundness of the principle that military
force may properly and constitutionally
be used at the place of elections when
such use is necessary to enforce the
Constitution and laws.


But the excepted cases leave this pro-
hibitiOn so extensive and far reaching
that its adoption will seriously impair
the efficiency of the Executive Depart
ment of the Government. The first act
expressly authorizing the use of mill
tary power to execute the laws was
passed almost as early as the Grganiza-
tiOn Of the Government under the Con
stitution, and was approved by Presi-
dent Washington May ID, 1892.


Under the sweeping terms of the bill,
the National Government is etfectually
shut out from the exercise Of the right
and from the discharge of the impera-
tive duty to use its whole executive
power whenever and wherever requir
ed for the enforcement of the laws at
the places and times whore and when
its elections are held.


The employment Of its organized
armed forces for any such purpose
would be an offence against the law,
unless called for by and therefore upon
permission of the authorities of the
State in which tie occasion arises.
What is this but the substitution of
the discretion Of the State governments
for the discretion Of the government OF
the United States as to the pertOrman-
ces Of its own duties


IN my iu1gment this is an abandon
ment of its obligations by the National
Government, subordination of ma
tional authority, and an intrusion Of
State supervision over national duties,
which amounts in spirit aud tendency
to State supremacy. Though | be-
leve that the existing statutes are
abundantly adequate TO completely
prevent military interference with
the elections in the sense in
which the phrase is used in the title
: of this bill, and is employed by the
3 people Of the country, shall find no
difficulty in concurring in any addition.
al legislation limited to that object
which does not interfere with the in
dispensable exercise Of the powers of
, the Government under the Constitution
t and laws. RUTHERFORD B. HAYES.