Thank you for visiting SNEWPapers!
Sign up free
Editorial
June 27, 1836
Kentucky Gazette
Lexington, Fayette County, Kentucky
What is this article about?
Editorial sarcastically notes the Intelligencer and 'C.' approving Gen. Jackson's veto of a bill limiting Congress sessions, contrasting past opposition to the veto power. Critiques Commonwealth's remarks on Chambers-Cass correspondence as unflattering to its party.
OCR Quality
98%
Excellent
Full Text
Is there nothing new under the sun?
The Intelligencer, and even 'C. of the Intelligencer,' has approved of one act of Gen. Jackson! and that not the exercise of the veto power!! Who, who has read the Intelligencer for the last few years, would have expected that print, and especially under that signature, to have given its sanction to any act of General Jackson's? If our recollection does not deceive us, the Intelligencer has been vehement for withholding the veto power from the President—yet, in that paper of Friday last, is the following compliment to the President, and reprimand to Congress.
"The President has vetoed a bill limiting the length of future sessions of Congress. We are inclined to the opinion that the veto power has been here correctly applied. Hasty legislation had made a turbulent and headstrong Congress do a foolishly improper and unconstitutional thing, and the palpable error has met its proper remedy. C."
The introductory remarks of the Commonwealth to the correspondence between Col. G. W. Chambers and Mr. Secretary Cass, we should consider anything else than complimentary to its own party. We can only understand the latter clause as either admitting that no volunteers were to have been expected from that party, or that it was the practice of "fighting against truth, common sense, and the common interest of the country."
The Intelligencer, and even 'C. of the Intelligencer,' has approved of one act of Gen. Jackson! and that not the exercise of the veto power!! Who, who has read the Intelligencer for the last few years, would have expected that print, and especially under that signature, to have given its sanction to any act of General Jackson's? If our recollection does not deceive us, the Intelligencer has been vehement for withholding the veto power from the President—yet, in that paper of Friday last, is the following compliment to the President, and reprimand to Congress.
"The President has vetoed a bill limiting the length of future sessions of Congress. We are inclined to the opinion that the veto power has been here correctly applied. Hasty legislation had made a turbulent and headstrong Congress do a foolishly improper and unconstitutional thing, and the palpable error has met its proper remedy. C."
The introductory remarks of the Commonwealth to the correspondence between Col. G. W. Chambers and Mr. Secretary Cass, we should consider anything else than complimentary to its own party. We can only understand the latter clause as either admitting that no volunteers were to have been expected from that party, or that it was the practice of "fighting against truth, common sense, and the common interest of the country."
What sub-type of article is it?
Partisan Politics
Constitutional
What keywords are associated?
Jackson Veto
Intelligencer Approval
Congress Sessions
Partisan Press
Veto Power
What entities or persons were involved?
Gen. Jackson
Intelligencer
C. Of The Intelligencer
Col. G. W. Chambers
Mr. Secretary Cass
Commonwealth
Editorial Details
Primary Topic
Unexpected Approval Of Jackson's Veto By Opposition Press
Stance / Tone
Sarcastic Criticism
Key Figures
Gen. Jackson
Intelligencer
C. Of The Intelligencer
Col. G. W. Chambers
Mr. Secretary Cass
Commonwealth
Key Arguments
Intelligencer Unexpectedly Approves Jackson's Veto On Bill Limiting Congress Sessions
Intelligencer Previously Opposed Veto Power
Quote Praises Veto As Correct Application Against Hasty, Unconstitutional Legislation
Commonwealth's Remarks Imply Party Reluctance For Volunteers Or Opposition To National Interest