{"character_count": 4210, "word_count": 748, "ccnet_language_score": [0.967199981212616], "ccnet_perplexity": [1522.0], "fasttext_language": ["en"]}
pays his annual millions to the laborers of Massachusetts, or is it Abbott Lawrence :! And yet is the daily effort of such individuals as Cambreling, Moore and Foster to excite the distrust, the envy, the animosities of the working classes against the men whose indus try, capacity and resources furnish them with daily employment and daily bread and against that very system of credit which alone provides the poor with an equivalent for the capital of the rich.

 THE GOVERNORS VETO. The following are the reasons of the Gov ernor for refusing to sign the bill repeating the charter of the New-H City Bank.

 To the Honorable Senate :-

 There has been presented for my appro- bation bill for "An Act to repeal an act entitled an act to incorporate the City Bank of New-Haven." This bill is herewith re- turned, with the following, as the reasons of my dissent to the same:

 There is no provision in the charter of this Bank making it repealable at the pleasure of the Legislature. This clause is usually in- serted in charters-and it's omission in this instance meant something. Had this clause been inserted, it may have had material ef- feet in preventing the subscription to the stock of the Company from being taken up, 0S JULIUS WH1CA wa SlNCl aS ation of the charter was very large, amount ing to one fifth part of the whole capital stock of the company.

 If the charter of the company has been vi- plated, and the violation is such as works a forfeiture, and the Legislature should be of the opinion that the public interests require that the penalty should be executed, it is proper that the charter should be, in some way annulled. am of the opinion that the judicial tribunals of the State are the proper forum for ascertaining the facts which work the forfeiture, and for pronouncing the judg- ment of the law upon those facts: and so far as respects this case, (whatever the fact may be when the charter contains clause making it revocable by the Legislature,) the General Assembly cannot, with propriety, interfere.

 It would be a blending of Judicial and Le- gislative powers in the same department of the Government, which by the constitution of this State must be kept distinct.

 Even should the General Assembly be con- sidered as having jurisdiction in this case, am of the opinion that the proceedings have not been regular. No specific charges have been exhibited against the Bank, nor have they been notified to appear and answer.- The forms of law usually regarded in Judi cial proceedings, and which are supposed to be of great value as safeguards of the liberty and property of the citizens ofthe State, have not been observed.

 am also of the opinion that the punish ment which will be inflicted in this case, docs not partake of the proper incidents of punish ment. It does not fall on the guilty, but most heavily on the innocent. Here, however, l find myself somewhat at a loss, as the of1en- ces for which this punishment is to be inflict- ed, are no where specifically stated. But so far as they can be conjectured, this appears to be their character: The President of the company is claimed to be the chief offender: :: some of the Directors, or perhaps all of them may be included, but the Stockholders, it is not pretended, have been guilty of any ot- fence.

 If the acts of the President and Directors which are complained of are reprehensible, am of the opinion that the proper and reg ular course would have been to have prohib- ited them by some public act, which at the same time prescribed the punishment.

 In fine, I see no sufficient reasons for the passage of this act, but, in my mind, it is ob- noxious to strong legal and constitutional ob- iections. For these reasons do not approve the bill, and therefore return it to the Senate, the House in which it is understood to have originated. r.

 deem it proper that the relation in which I stand to this Bank should be fairly under stood. l own no stock in this Bank in my own right, nor am interested in it in any way, excepting as Trustee. In this capacity there is stock standing in my name, the prop erty of widow and orphan children.

 HENRY w. EDWARDS.

 EXECUTIVE OFFICE,

 Hartford, June 10th, 1887.