ple, and are responsible to them, and are therefore better judges of the wishes of the people than the senate. For the house of representatives represents the people, but the senate represents the states.

If the power of originating "money bills" were intrusted to the senate, it might lead to great dissatisfaction and difficulty, by giving the small states too great an influence.

Though the senate may. not originate "money bills," yet it may propose or concur in amendments as in other bills.

VETO POWER.

We have said that every legislative act must pass both houses of congress before it can become a law. But this is not all. It must also be presented to the President of the United States for his signature. If he approves the bill he signs it, and then it becomes a law.

If the President refuses to sign it, he returns it to the house in which it originated, with his objections, which are entered at large on the journal, and then the members reconsider their vote. If, after reconsideration, the bill is again passed by two-thirds, it is

Why?

Why should not money bills originate in the senate?

Must every act be presented to the president before it can become a law?

What if he approves and signs it?

What if he refuses to sign it?

sent to the other house with the objections. If there it is passed by two-thirds, it becomes a law, notwithstanding the President's refusal to sign it.

If the President keep any bill over ten days, Sundays excepted, after it has been presented to him, it becomes a law, unless congress has in the mean time adjourned.

Every order, resolution, or vote, except on a question of adjournment, is passed in the same way.

Thus, it appears that the legislative power is not all intrusted to the two houses of congress, but some portion of it is vested in the President. This is a slight intermingling of the legislative and executive powers. But the influence of the President is only negative. It operates merely as a check, for the President can originate no bill.

In England, the veto of the king is absolute, so that if he refuses to sign a bill, it can never become a law. But in the United States the veto of the President is limited, for a bill may become a law without his signature, as we have seen. In England, the veto power has not been exercised once for the last 150 years. In the United States, since the formation of the present constitution in 1789, a pe

Can a bill then become a law without the president's signature?
If the president keeps a bill over ten days what is the result?
Is there any legislative power vested in the president?

What is said of the veto of the king of England?

Is the veto of the president limited?

How long since the veto power was exercised in England?

What is said of the United States since the formation of the constitution?

riod of 65 years, upwards of 25 bills have been vetoed and retained by the Presidents.

There is still great difference of opinion in the United States respecting this veto power. The advocates of this power claim that it is a great preventive of rash and hasty legislation; that it is a salutary check that could not be removed without endangering the strength and permanency of the government; that the shortness of the presidential term is a sufficient guarantee that it will not be exercised except for the good of the country.

On the other hand, it is said that the veto power ought to be still farther limited; that it is a monarchical feature in our government; that it gives one man an opportunity to set his private opinion and will against the wishes of a majority of the people. But, as the question of the veto power is one of the unsettled political questions of the day, "we leave each one to his own opinion."

POWERS OF CONGRESS.

"Congress has power to lay and collect taxes, duties, imposts, and excises," in order to pay the debts, and provide for the common defence, and general welfare of the United States; but "all duties, im

What do the advocates of the veto power claim?
What do the opponents of the veto power say?
What are some of the powers of congress?
How must duties, imposts, and excises be laid?

posts, and excises, shall be uniform throughout the United States." That is to say, taxes, duties, imposts, and excises, can be laid and collected for the payment of the public debt, to provide for the common defence and general welfare, and for nothing else. If congress were to pass any law to raise a tax for any other purpose, it would be unconstitutional and void. For congress possesses no powers except those enumerated in the constitution, and necessarily implied therein.

TAXES.

"All contributions by whatever name known, imposed by government upon individuals, for the service of the state, are called taxes."

These contributions are known by different names. They are called duties, tithe, tribute, imposts, subsidy, customs, aid, excise, &c., but they are all included under the general name of taxes. That a government must have power to lay and collect taxes for carrying on its own operations, is evident. And if the government is to be an efficient national government, its powers of taxation must be as extensive as its wants and duties.

For what purposes may they be laid and collected?

Does congress possess any powers except those enumerated in the constitution or necessarily implied?

What are taxes?

Must every government have power to lay and collect taxes?
How extensive must the power of taxation be?

Taxes may be divided into two kinds, direct taxes, and indirect taxes.

Direct taxes may be divided into two kinds; first, taxes on land; and second, a capitation tax, or as it is often called a poll tax, that is a tax on the head or person of every individual.

Therefore a direct tax can be levied only on the person, or on land, or on both. It cannot be levied on personal property.

Every other method of raising a revenue, whether by duties, imposts, excises, &c., or by a tax on personal property, is called an indirect tax. It is necessary to understand the difference between these two kinds of taxes, because the constitution provides that they shall be "laid and collected" according to dif ferent rules. "Direct taxes are apportioned among the different states according to their respective numbers, three-fifths of the slaves being added to the free population." When a poll tax is levied, every tax payer in the United States pays equally. When a land tax is levied, all the lands in the United States are taxed, and every land owner pays according to the amount of the value of his lands.

But the rule is different with regard to indirect

Of what two kinds are taxes?

How many kinds of direct taxes?

What are they?

What are indirect taxes?

Why is it necessary to understand the difference between these

two kinds of taxes?

How are direct taxes apportioned?

Does the same rule apply to indirect taxes?