Democratic Sentinel, Volume 3, Number 22, Rensselaer, Jasper County, 11 July 1879 — THE VETO POWER. [ARTICLE]

THE VETO POWER.

It is Exercised Once More by the President in the Case of the Marshals’ BUI. To the House of representatives: I return to the House of Representatives, in which it originated, the bill entitled “An act making appropriations to pay the fees of United States Marshals and their general depu T ties,” with the following objections to its cecorning a law: The bill appropriates the sum of $600,000 for the payment, during the fiscal year ending J one 30, 1880, of United States Marshals and their general deputies. The officers thus provided for are essential to the faithful execution of the laws. They were created and their powers and duties defined by Congress at the first session after the adoption of the constitution, in the Judiciary act, which was approved Sept 24, 1789. Their general duties, as defined in the act whi”h originally establishes them, were substantially the same as those prescribed in the statutes now iu force. The principal provision on the subject in the Revised Statutes is as follows: Section 787. It shall be the duty of the Marshal of each district to attend the District and Circuit Couris when sitting therein, and to execute throughout the district all lawful precepts directed to him and issued under the authority of the United States; and he shall have power to command all the necessary assistance in the execution of his duty. The original act was amended Feb. 28 1795, aud the amendment is now found in the Revised S'atutes in the following form: Section 788. The Marshals and their deputies shall have in each State," the same powers in executing the laws of the United States as Sheriffs and their deputies in such State may have by law in executing the laws thereof. By subsequent statutes additional duties havo been from time to time imposed upon the Marshals and their deputies, the due and regular performance of which are required for the efficiency of almost every branch of the public service. Without these officers there would be no means of executing warrants, decrees, or other processes of the courts, and the judicial system of the country would be fatally defective. The criminal jurisdiction of the courts of the United States is very extensive. Crimes committed within the maritime jurisdiction of the United States are all cognizable only in the courts of the United States. Crimes against public justice; crimes against the operations of the Government, such as forging or counterfeiting money or securities of the United States; crimes against the Postal laws; offenses against the elective franchise; against the civil rights of citizens; against the existence of the Government; crimes against the Internal Revenue laws and Customs laws; crimes against the laws for the protection of the Indians and the public lands. All of these crimes, and many others, can be punished only under the United States laws, which, taken together, constitute a body of jurisprudence which is vital to the welfare of the whole country, and which can be enforced only by means of” the Marshals and Deputy Marshals of the United States. In the District of Columbia, all of the processes of tho courts are executed by the ofiicers in question. In short, the execution of the erimin&l laws of the United States, service of all civil processes in cases in which the United States is a party, and the execution of the Revenue laws, Neutrality laws, and many other laws of large importance, depend on the maintenance of the Marshals and their deputies. They are, in effect, only police of tne United States Government Officers with corresponding powers and duties are found in every State of the Union, and in every oountry which has jurisprudence which is worthy of the name. To deprive the National Government of these officers would be as disastrous to society as to abolish Sheriffs, constables and police officials in the several States. It would be a denial to the United States of the right to execute its laws, and a denial of all authority which requires the use of a civil force. 9 (The law entitles these officers to be paid. Funds needed for this purpose have been collected from the people and are now in the treasury. No objection is, therefore, made to that pari; of the bill before me which appropriates money for the support of the Marshals an 6 Deputy Marshals of the United States. The bill contains, however, other provisions which are identical in tenor and effect with the second section of the bill entitled “An act making appropriations for certain judicial expenses.” which, on the 23d of the present month, was returned to the House of Representatives with my objections to its approval The provisions referred to are as follows: Sec. 2. That, the sums appropriated in this act for the persons and the public service embraced in its provisions are in full for such persons and public service for tiie fiscal year ending June 30,1880, and no department or officer of the Government shall, during said fiscal year, make any contract or incur any liability for the future payment of money under any of the provisions of litle 20 mentioned in the section of this act until an appropriation sufficient to meet such contract or pay such liability shall have first been made by law. Upon reconsideration, in the House of Representatives, of the bill which contained these provisions, it lacked the constitutional majority, and therefore failed to become a law. In order to secure its enactment the same measure is again presented for my approval, coupled in the bill before me with the appropriations for the support of tho Marshals and their deputies during the next fiscal year. The object, manifestly, is to place before the Executive this alternative, either to allow necessary functions of the public service to be crippled or suspended for want of appropriation required to keep them in operation, or to approve legislation which, in official communications to Congress, he has declared would be violation of his constitutional duty. Thus, in this bill the principle is clearly embodied that by virtue of the provision of the constitution which requires that “all bills for raising revenue should originate in the House of Representatives,” a bare majority of the Houee of Representatives has right to withhold any appropriation for the support of the Government, unless the Executive consents to approve any legislation which may be attached to appropriation bills. I respectfully refer to the communications on this subject which I have sent to Congress during its present session for a statement of the grounds of my conclusions, and desire here merely to repeat that, in my judgment, to establish the principles of this bill is to make a radical, dangerous and unconstitutional change in the character of our institutions. (Signed) Rutherford B. Hayes Executive Mansion. June 30. JOT** State Fairs for 1879. Illinois —At Springfield, Sept. 29Oct. 4. S. D. Fisher, Secretary, Springfield. Ohio—At Columbus, Aug. 25-29. James W. Fleming, Secretary, Columbus. Indiana—At Indianapolis, Sept. 29Oct. 4. Alex. Heron, Secretary, Indianapolis. lowa—At Des Moines, Sept. 1-5. John R. Shaffer, Secretary, Fairfield. Wisconsin—At Madison, Sept. 8-12. George E. Bryant, Secretary, Madison. Nebraska—At Lincoln, Sept. 8-12. D. H. Wheeler, Secretary, Plattsmouth. Michigan —At Detroit, Sept. 15-19. R. J. Johnstone, Secretary, Detroit. Minnesota —At St. Paul, Sept. 1-6. R. C. Judson, Secretary, Farmington. Chicago Exposition —At Chicago, Sept. 3—Oct. 18. John P. Reynolds, Secretary, Chicago. . St. Louis Exposition—At St. Louis, Sept. 22—Oct. 4. St. Louis Fair—At St. LouiS, Oct. 6-11. G. O. Kalb, Secretary, St. Louis. Colorado—At Denver, Sept. 23-27, W. R. Thomas. Secretary, Denver,