Year: 1879

were finally resolved on in the dem
ocratio caucus last evening will no
doubt succeed mp to the point when
the contemplated bills are presented
to the President for his signature The
democratic majority in both houses will
force their passage, and they are certain to
become laws unless the President shall in
terpose his constitutional negative. The
whole interest of the legislative situation
at Washington centres in the question
whether. President Hayes will sign or
veto the bills which the democratic
majority have decided to pass. Since
the President cannot. without q plain
violation of decorum, announce his
purpose in advance, the question is
of that speculative kind on which we can
form no Judgment except by weighing the
probabilities of the situation. Still it is
| possible to narrow the grounds of conjec-
| ture and to mark out tho limits within
which the discretion of the President must
| be exercised. We wish it to be noted that
the only point which is mooted in this
| article is the probable action of tho Presi-
| dent on the bills which are pretty certain
|
! programme


The democratic caucus has decided that
| the repeating laws shall not be passed rs
| separate measures, but incorporated in the
appropriation bills. One Of the reasons,
or rather one OF the excuses, for this ANAL
| gamation, is the fact that under the rules
the political measures, if attempted sep
o<olx ho Dhckp oI nd of toA
| by parliamentary tactics. The session
might be prolonged indefinitely in
vain attempts to pass the politi-
cal bills against the obstructive de-
vices of the republican minority. AS
such obstructive tactics cannot be brought
into play against appropriation bills the
democrats have decided to engraft the re-
pealing legislation on the appropriations as
q means OF saving time and expediting the
business Of the session. Most assuredly it
is vicious mode of legislation to lump in
| congruous measures in the same bill, but the
history of Congress furnishes abundant
precedents for attaching general legislation
to appropriation bills, and the democratic
caucus has only resolved to do what has
often been done before.


The question which we are now consider
ing is whether this blending of unrelated
measures is proper ground for veto. We
| think it very clear that it is not. The con-
stitution makes the two houses the sole
judges of their own methods of proceeding
and of the forms of legislation which they
will adopt, and the President has no right
to call in question the action of Congress
in the passage of bills. Some of the State
constitutions limit the action Of their Legis-
latures in this respect. The constitution of
New York requires that certain classes Of
bills ''shall not embrace more than one
subject, and that shall be expressed in the
title" There is nothing similar to this in
the federal constitution, which leaves Con-
gress at liberty to combine as many sub
jects rs it pleases in the same bill. Our
State constitution also permits the Gov
ernor to veto particular items in
an appropriation bill and approve
of the other portions, but under the
federal constitution the President must
approve every bill as a whole or reject it as
a whole. 1t is not competent Tor the Presi-
dent to veto an appropriation bill because
it contains general legislation. If he dis
Judgment of its merits and not on his
opinion of the inexpediency of joining
incongruous measures in the samo act
of legislation. Senator Hoar's vehement
speech can therefore have no influence on
the action of the President. Senator Hoar' g
argument against this kind of Jumping
legislation is sound enough, but it is with
because it is no proper ground of veto.
the methods of legislation being beyond his
power of review. If he vetoes the bills it
must bo Tor some other reason than the
union of unrelated subjects. The engraft-
ing of political Legislation on appropriation
bills may properly and justly be ques-
toned elsewhere, bat it cannot be officially
objected to by the President.


II President Hayes votoes the legislation
which the democratic caucus has decided
to carry through Congress it must not be
on objections of form, but of substance. 1t
will be his duty to examine the conglom-
crate bills which are likely to be sent to
him with the same care and the same
| candor as If tho combined measures
were presented separately and to be
1 governed by his judgment and his con-
science as to the action he will take upon
them. II he thinks 1t better for the public
interests that the appropriations should be
lost than to save them by approving the
extraneous Legislation incorporated in them
he will of course interpose his veto. What
ever else may be thought of Mr.. Hayes, it can
not be disputed that he has shown himself
singularly self-poised man, subject to no
sudden gusts Of passion and possessing
sufficient steadiness of purpose to act on