Rensselaer Republican, Volume 18, Number 46, Rensselaer, Jasper County, 22 July 1886 — CRITICISING THE PRESIDENT. [ARTICLE]

CRITICISING THE PRESIDENT.

Interesting Debate In the House on Mr. Cleveland’s PenL . slon Vetoes. Evidence Going to Show that the Executive Does Not Carefully Examine the Documents. The Democratic Chairman of the Pension Committee Take Issue with the President. [Washington dispatch.] Immediately after the reading of the journal in the House the Speaker announced that the regular order was the vote on the demand for the previous question on the motion to refer to the Committee ou Invalid Pensions the message of the President vetoing the bill granting a pension to Sally Ann Bradley. Amid a great deal of confusion Mr. Burrows, of Michigan, on the part of the Republicans. aud Mr. Matson, of Indiana, representing the Democrats, endeavored to come to some arrangement to prevent the time being frittered away with roll-calls. It was finally agreed that the demand for the previous qnostion should be withdrawn and that Mr. Grosvenor, of Ohio, should be allowed fifteen minutes to oppose the motion to refer, with permi sion to some Democrat to reply, if so desired. Mr. (Arosvenor snia he desired to heap no recrimination or condemnation upon the President for his veto messages. They were caused by a total misapprehension on the part cj the President of his relation to the administration of the Government. He (Mr. Grosvenor) had read all the vetoes coming from that prolific source of vetoes, and he thought the trouble was the President understood it was his duty to exnmine oarefully every act of Congress, and if he, as a member of Congress, would not vote for the bill, he gave no sort of consideration or weight to the fact that the legislative branch of the government had acted affirmatively upon it. The President acted upon the idea that the Executive had a right, and it was his duty to decide absolutely on every question. Another idea of the President’s was that no private act should be approved unless there was a law authorizing it, wholly oblivious to the fact that Congress was the lajr-making power and had a right to confer a pension upon anybody. Mr. Grpsvenor then detailed the facts of the special bill under consideration, and commented on the fact, as he asserted, that the President had approved the Fitz John Porter bill on the very day that he had vetoed the bill granting a pension to Sally Ann Bradley, the mother of four sons, two of whom had died on the battle-field, and tw o of whom were in the hospital disabled. Fitz John Porter would go on the pensionr<Jll, while Sarah Ann Bradley would go to the poor-house, and this was the Government which undertook to say that it was dealing generously and liberally with its soldiers. The House was paralyzed and terrified by the veto of a single man —a proposition tyrannical, in the direction of absolute usurpation, in the direction of turning from its normal position the Congress of the United States, and turning over the administration of the generosity of the Government to one mail. - [Applause on the Republican side.] Mr. Matson merely remarked in reply that he. had just learned that in the Fortyseventh Congress a Republican committee of the Senate had reported that the woman ought not to be pensioned for the same reason the President SRid he thought she ought not to be pensioned. [Applause on Democratic side.] Mr. Long (Mass.) suggested that at that time the woman had a husband living who was in receipt of a pension. The bill and message were then referred —yeas, 112; nays, 111. OTHEK PENSIONS. When the veto message of the bill granting a pension to Francis Deming was reached, the Republicans demanded and were accorded half an hour for debate. Mr. Boutelle, of Maine, arraigned the President for what he characterized as his crusade against the veterans of the country. The time had come, he said, when the Democratic, .party Mt itself., sufficiently firmlyseated in the saddle to utter its defiance and hostility to the men who went to the front to save the Union.

Mr. Brumrn, of Pennsylvania, denounced the Democrats as poltroons and cowards, who exonerated their President whenever ho chose to slap them in the face and spit upon them. 'J he.' action of the House reminded him of the play of Hamlet. | Laughter.] He would substitute or the young Prince the young, courageous man of nerve, President Cleveland, and for the poor old Polonius (he poor miserable cowards of. the Democratic party. {Laughter.] Mr. Hill, of Pepusylvafiia; made an argument to show that the Democratic party had the credit for much of the pension tegtehftion of the country.'**®'Mr. Curtin, of Pennsylvania, said thnt this vituperation and abuse of, the President was all wrong. He asserted his entire confidence in the integrity of the President and in his desire to do his duty. After further debate the message was referred without objection. The next and last veto message upon the Speaker's table was then laid before the -House. It was a message vetoing the bill granting a pension to Joseph Romiser, and a 3 this case is regarded * as presenting specially strong features, the Republicans determined to make a fight over its reference- . ■ .

Mr. McComas, of Maryland, said the President declared that though the Committee on Invalid Pensions had reported that Romiser had filed a claim for pension which had been rejected by the Pension Office, there was no such case in <he office. The President said that Romiser hod never filed a claim. If this were true the committee was indeed convicted of gross carelessness, and doubtless the President made the statement to illustrate the loose methods of the committee and his own accuracy in examining the private pension bills. If this charge were unfounded then the President was convicted of still grosser carelessness, because the report of the committee had warned him that there was a case in Ihi office. He (Mr, McComas) held in his hand the very bundle of pension papers in the case of Joseph Romiser. The packet recorded all the proceedings from the time of the filing of the claim in 1879 until its rejection. The records show- d that; tlie Pension Office found that though Romiser wa* seriously w .unded by a mmie l a 1 passing thro .gh his head and face, because he was not mnstered in the office was “coustiaried” to reject the claim. When the President's veto enme to the House declarthat there were no such papers be had te,ephoned to the Pension Office and had had no trouble in getting them. To-day had not the President done* likewise? Why had lie reproved the committee for what proved to be his own carelessness? The -committee had been diligent, the President negligent. Congress had been just; the President hail denied justice to a citizen whose case be had never con-.

aidered. Romlser, he aaid, was justly entitled to a pension, because he had been inspired by the spirit of the Minntemen of Concord and Lexington. There were many precedents for the bill. The very first Congress had passed a bill pensioning the Minntemen of Concord and Lexington, and George Washington, nniike President Cleveland, had approved it. Thomas Jefferson, the father of the Democratic party, had signed a bill granting a pension to men who had'never been mustered info the army, and Andrew Jack*on had signed a similar bill. Abraham Lincoln, iu a like cose, had said that he would not inquire whether a man had been mustered in but only whether he had done his duty. [Applause.] If members of Cbngress could not riso above party feeling and go with Washington, Jackson, Jefferson and Lincoln, let them go with Cleveland, and send back this woor soldier who had never received n dollar of pay, who liad the scars the bnllet left, and who had twenty-five years of neuralgia for serving his country. Evary man who thought that the fathers of the Democratic party were inspired with the heroism of Concord and Lexington, would vote for the Minutemon of 18G1, who got a bullet in his head when on his way to join “the Boys in Blue.” [Applause.] Mr. Burrows, of Michigan, also vigorously assnulted tho veto, and maintained that there was no reason why the bill should be referred to a committee. There were no facia to be ascertained, and in such cases it was customary to act upon a veto without reference. The last noteworthy case was the veto of President Arthur on the Fitz John Porter bill. That veto had been immediately considered by the House, without reference to a committee. The President had vetoed the Romiser bill because he had not been mastered in at the time be received his wound. It was true Romiser had not taken the oath to defend the Constitution, but he had been defending the Constitution against the domestic enemies of the flag. A mab who, in his enthusiasm and patriotism, went to the defense of the Constitution, without taking the oath to defend it, was entitled to as much consideration as the man who look the oath to defend the flag, and then violated that oath; and yet Joseph Romiser’s pension bill was vetoed, and Fitz John Porter was put upon the rolls. [Applause on the Republican side.] Mr. Warner, of Ohio, believed this to be a meritorious case, and to be in the line of all precedents, but he thought it ought to be referred to the committee.

EX-SENATOR WINDOM. He Believes that the Democrats Will Commit Blunders Inough to Insure Their Defeat. Hon. William Windom, of Minnesota, was recently interviewed at Chicago. To a reporter he said it was too early to express any definite views on the subject of general politics, as opinions given now coaid be little better than mere surmises. He was satisfied, however, that the country was growing tired of the present administration, and ho was confident that the Republicans would win in the next Presidential campaign. Democracy could not conceal its hypocrisy, and it was certain to commit enough blunders to make its defeat an easy matter. President Cleveland, the Senator believed, was strongly in favor of the civilservice law; but, being antagonized in that by his party, the reform so admirable in theory became a farce in practice. The Democratic party was opposed to civil-ser-vice reform, and even rs every Republican were at once turned out of office there would be only the few Democrats holding office still in favor of it. “Do you think Cleveland will be nominated?” “Thai is a question that cannot be answered just now. With the masses of his party he is not strong at present. Indeed, the party itself does not know its own mind, and its policies and doctrines are more vague now than before it came into power,” “You are Sure, then, that the Republicans will carry the country in 1888?” “Certain of it. We must do it. The people will demand it of ns.” “Who do you think will be the Republican nominee?” “It is impossible to assert whom the Republicans will nominate, but I don’t (hink it will be Blaine. However, it is vain to discuss these matters at this time.”