Veto

in Roman history, authority given to the tribunes of the people to reject an act of the Senate by saying veto--I forbid. Under a constitutional form of government, a similar power of veto is vested in the king, president, or governor. In practice, the veto power varies. The autocrat of all the Russians, who vouchsafed his people a constitution, 1905-7, not only reserves the right to veto bills, but he forbids the reconsideration of a vetoed bill during the current session of the Duma. The Prussian monarch holds the power of veto and exercises it; the monarch of Sweden holds the power of absolute veto; the Swiss people have adopted the very sensible plan of retaining the veto power in the hands of the voters. No legislative act of importance may go into effect until opportunity has been given the people, if a small percentage signify such a desire, to pass on it by a referendum vote. To all intents and purposes the king of Italy has lost the veto power. In Spain and Portugal the monarch may interpose a "suspension veto," but if a second legislature, freshly elected, pass the same measure, the royal veto becomes null and void. Only a majority is required. In Great Britain the sovereign's power to reject an obnoxious bill has not been exercised since 1707, and has ceased to be a constitutional function. The House of Lords is relied upon to place any needed check upon the House of Commons; but a minister supported by a reelection of his party in the House of Commons, can easily bring the lords to terms.

In the United States the president may veto a bill by returning it to the house where it originated, giving his reasons for declining to sign. His veto may be overcome by a two-thirds vote of the House and a similar vote in the Senate. The president is allowed ten days, Sundays not counted, in which to sign or veto a law. In case he retains the bill over ten days without taking action it goes into effect without his signature. Buchanan was the first to allow a bill to go into effect in this manner. In case Congress adjourns before the ten days are up, a refusal to sign is the end of the matter. If an objectionable bill be passed during the last ten days of the session the president may evidently allow it to lie unsigned and become of no effect without giving a reason. Such a course is termed a pocket veto. Jackson was the first president to use this form of veto. On the whole, American presidents have used the power of veto with care. Washington vetoed but two bills in eight years. Jefferson never vetoed a bill. There were in all but nine presidential vetoes prior to Jackson, who vetoed twelve bills. Grant vetoed forty-three bills; Johnson, twenty-one. Cleveland vetoed more bills than all his predecessors. He refused his assent to 301 bills during his first term. Most of these were private pension bills relating to cases that in his judgment should have been allowed to take their regular course through the pension bureau. The first bill passed over a veto was a tariff measure vetoed by President Tyler.

The veto power was a source of contention in colonial days. One of the grievances against the king stated in the Declaration of Independence runs, "He has refused his assent to laws, the most wholesome and necessary for the public good." The modified veto, according to which the legislative body may pass a bill over a veto by a two-thirds vote, appeared first in the Revolutionary Constitution of New York adopted in 1777, and later in that of Massachusetts adopted in 1780. The wording of Massachusetts was followed closely in the national Constitution with the addition of the provision for the pocket veto. Franklin was nevertheless in favor of vesting the veto power in the president. He was of the opinion that one person as an executive was, in a way, more subject to public opinion than a body of legislators. "A single man," said he, "may be afraid or ashamed of doing injustice; a body is never either one or the other, if it is strong enough. It can not apprehend assassination, and by dividing the shame among them, it is so little apiece that no one minds it." The governor of a state is vested with the veto power relative to state legislation. The mayor of a city is authorized usually to veto measures passed by the city council.