Action was the prerogative of a group of old hands who managed the important committees and who were divided among themselves on tariff policy.And now, the little bills which, by dint of persuasion and bargaining, they had first put through the committees, and then through both Houses of Congress, were cut down by executive veto, turning to their injury what they had counted upon to help them in their districts.
During the campaign, Democratic candidates had everywhere contended that they were just as good friends of the old soldiers as the Republicans.Now, they felt that to make good this position they must do something to offset the effect of President Cleveland's vetoes.In his messages, he had favored "the most generous treatment to the disabled, aged and needy among our veterans"; but he had argued that it should be done by general laws, and not by special acts for the benefit of particular claimants.The Pension Committee of the House responded by reporting a bill "for the relief of dependent parents and honorably discharged soldiers and sailors who are now disabled and dependent upon their own labor for support." It passed the House by a vote of 180 to 76, with 63 not voting, and it passed the Senate without a division.On the 11th of February, President Cleveland sent in his veto, accompanied by a message pointing out in the language of the act defects and ambiguities which he believed would "but put a further premium on dishonesty and mendacity." He reiterated his desire that provision should be made "for those who, having served their country long and well, are reduced to destitution and dependence," but he did not think that the bill was a proper means of attaining that object.On the 19th of February, the House committee on pensions submitted an elaborate report on the veto in which they recited the history of the bill and the reasons actuating the committee.Extracts from Cleveland's messages were quoted, and the committee declared that, in "hearty accord with these views of the President and largely in accordance with his suggestions, they framed a bill which they then thought, and still continue to think, will best accomplish the ends proposed." A motion to pass the bill over the veto on the 24th of February received 175 votes to 125, but two-thirds not having voted in the affirmative the bill failed to pass.The Republicans voted solidly in support of the bill, together with a large group of Democrats.The negative vote came wholly from the Democratic side.Such a fiasco amounted to a demonstration of the lack of intelligent leadership.If the President and his party in Congress were cooperating for the furtherance of the same objects, as both averred, it was discreditable all around that there should have been such a complete misunderstanding as to the procedure.
Meanwhile, the President was making a unique record by his vetoes.During the period of ninety-six years, from the foundation of the Government down to the beginning of Cleveland's administration, the entire number of veto messages was 132.In four years, Cleveland sent in 301 veto messages, and in addition he practically vetoed 109 bills by inaction.Of 2042 private pension bills passed by Congress, 1518 were approved and 284became laws by lapse of time without approval.The positive results of the President's activity were thus inconsiderable, unless incidentally he had managed to correct the system which he had opposed.That claim, indeed, was made in his behalf when "The Nation" mentioned "the arrest of the pension craze" as a "positive achievement of the first order.'" But far from being arrested, "the pension craze" was made the more furious, and it soon advanced to extremes unknown before.** March 19, 1887.
