THE VETO POWER.
{"newspaper_name": "The daily union.", "edition": "01", "page": "p2", "byline": ""}
{"character_count": 6319, "word_count": 1094, "ccnet_language_score": [0.9653000235557556], "ccnet_perplexity": [856.5], "fasttext_language": ["en"]}
The leading whig Journal, among its various
abuse of the administration, contained, few days
ago, an article on the veto power of the President,
and the manner of its being exercised, in which
British history and British precedens are quoted in
support ofits own opinions, and so-caled "prnci-
pies" on the subject


II is the misfortune Of the wings never distinctly
to comprehend that country and Its institutions,
mark distinct progress to which no analogous case
is found in the history Of ancient or modern Europe
The wings to this day are SO little weaned from
their colonial feelings, that they cannot, for the
life Of them, sympathize with the national aspira-
tons of the great mass Of people; and for this
reason, they never understand the people, and make
themselves only understood to be Stunned.


The National lntelligencer, in speaking Of the
veto power Of the President in it nothing but
power corresponding to that formerly exercised by
British snointed kings But that is rather its mis-
fortune than its fault. II cannot yet comprehend,
and probably never will comprehend, that the
veto power, in country where the President
Is elected by the electors of the people, is
strictly democratic element in our government,
and that the exercise of ii is nothing but appeal
Of the President from the Congress to the nation,
which failing, puts an end to the veto itself Be-
tween the exercise OF such power or rather duty,
and opposition to the popular will, by single man,
who claims to hold his power opr the people, and
independent of the popular consent, the Ma
uonal lnelligencer sees no difference Here
is the reason why the National Intelligencer
and its affiliated presses could never understand the
people of this country They made the same mis-
take regards the body, which they made in refer
ence to the head. If, in the President, they saw
nothing but the royal head Of the nation, they es-
mated our people no higher than the mobs of Eu
rope. The error is in the first assumption, and thus
all the consequences are wrong; but that is, as we
observed, rather their misfortune than their fault


The veto power receives its character from the
person who exercises it, lift be used by an hered-
ltary, irresponsible king-a king "by the grace of
God"-then it will not only be liable, but sure, to be
abused in the monarchcal sense, and to monarch
cal purposes. But if, the contrary, the veto be
exercised by chief magistrate like the President
of the United States Immediately and directly elect
ed by the people, then the veto power, so exercised
by the peoples immediate and collective representa-
tive, is substantially democratic, and cannot live a
year without being either supported or condemned
by the people. Where, then, is the similarity to
the royal prerogatve, except in the National InteI
gencer's head, haunted, it always is, by European
precedents, European reasoning, and European, or
at least English, visions'


Away with the shallow notion, then, drawn from
wholly false anaogies, that the qualified veto power
created by our constitution can be dangerous to
popular liberty 1t has no permanent force save as
it reflects the popular will. If further proof of
this be necessary, it may be found in the history
of the exercise of the veto power during the whole
existence Of our government. Since the adoption
Of the federal constitution, the Congress of the
United States has passed more than six thousand
legislative acts. Out Of this vast number of stat
utes, less than ttoenty.fpe have been vetoed by all
the successive Presidents of the United States Is
it not utterly futile to suppose that a power which
from its very nature has for more than fifty years
been welded with such reserve and caution
can become an instrument with which to attack the
constitution OF these vetoes, two at least were
given by General Washington; and one of these
as we lately showed, was on the ground of er-
pediency. OF this small number of petoes, some
eight or have been upon bills Of little Importance
and have hardly attracted the public attention. In
some cases, Congress has yielded at once to the
Presidents objections; and in one striking instance,
Congress yielded to veto Of General Jackson on
the motion of Mr.. Clay himself. In this case the
veto message was laid upon the table, and no at
tempt was made to pass the bill. OF the remaining
fourteen of fifteen veoes which have occurred under
k.I
three subjects of oflegislaton--the national bank, in
terna improvements, and the distribution of the pub
lie lands. Before the recent veto of the river
and harbor bill by Mr.. Polk, there have
been six vetoes on internal improvements in va
rious forms; one by Mr.. Madison, one by Mr.,
Monroe, and four by Gen Jackson. The Bank of
the United States has been four times vetoed; once
by Mr.. Madison, once by Gen. Jackson, and twice
by Mr.. Tyler.


Now it is most remarkable, that in all cases when
the President of the United States has imposed the
veto upon acts of Congress, he has done so to the
great dminution of his executive power and patron
age. But for the veto, we should have had an ex-
tensive and costly scheme of internal improvements
placed under Executive direction. But for the veto,
a national bank would have united the political and
the moneyed power Of the country in form emf
nently liable to Executive influence. But for the
veto Of the distribution act by Gen. Jackson, the
States would have become pensioners on the bounty
of the federal government. The whole history Of
the exercise of this power by the Executive in its
effect upon the Presidents patronage and influence
has been a record of Executive self-denia And
this is the power which the whig presses affect to
fear and clamor against if it were a monarchcal



There is one other remarkable veto in our early
history, which we would especially commend to the
attention of this whig school of patriots. In the
winter of l797 Congress passed act reducing the
standing army of the United States. Upon this act,
General Washington on the lst of March, only
three days before he retired from office, imposed
his veto. Nearly two-thrds of the House'o of Rep.
resentaves where the bill originated adhered to il
in the face Of General Washngton's objections
Their vote was fftyfve in favor Of the bill to thr.