OF GROVER CLEVELAND.

lature and the villagers a lecture on local self-government, telling them that the statutes already gave the local board of supervisors full power in such matters, and they ought not to be found shirking the responsibility by appealing to the Legislature. On this point he said:

"By reference to section 21 of chapter 482 of the laws of 1875, it will be seen that the authority is vested in the boards of supervisors to authorize villages in the several counties to do precisely the things mentioned in this bill. The act referred to was passed, as its title declares, 'to confer upon boards of supervisors further powers of local legislation and administration,' and with the intent that the matters therein specified, being of local interest and importance, should be disposed of by an authority nearer home than the Legislature of the State.

"This intent accords with the letter and spirit of the Constitution, and with sound political principle.

"With a statute so plain, and containing requirements so easy of fulfillment, I can hardly understand why so many bills of the kind under consideration should be introduced and passed.

"The members of the boards of supervisors should not be allowed to shift the responsibility of increasing the taxes of their constituents to the Legislature of the State. They should know whether unusual expenditures are necessary in their localities, and should be made answerable to their neighbors, for the economical and proper discharge of their duties as local legislators. If this were insisted upon, perhaps fewer schemes involving increased taxation would be inaugurated.

"In this particular case I have before me the remonstrance of many of the best citizens of the locality against the passage of this bill."

Another case in which, with the strong business instinct that distinguished him, he insisted that responsibility could not and should not be shifted, was that of a bill passed authorizing the comptroller to compromise and settle certain claims against the sureties of the bankrupt First National Bank of Buffalo. Governor Cleveland refused to sign the bill, saying:

"The persons who seek to be relieved under this bill signed a bond to the State for the safe keeping and repayment on demand of certain moneys deposited in behalf of the State in the First National Bank of Buffalo.

"The bank has failed and is unable to refund the State's deposits. The securities in the bond have thus become liable to pay the money, and I can see no reason why they should be relieved.

"I am willing to do what I can to check the growing impressions that contracts with the State will not be insisted upon or may be evaded. The money deposited with the bank was public money belonging to the people and I regard it the duty of all having the care of State affairs to see to it that no part is lost by an improper indulgence to those who have agreed that it should be safely kept."

Wherever an encroachment upon the rights or the authority of a community was proposed, Governor Cleveland opposed an unyielding veto in the way. His belief in local selfgovernment was absolute and sincere, and he gave that principle every protection in his power. He would not permit the Legislature to interfere to disturb the working of local grants. In one case of this sort, it was proposed, by act of the Legislature, to change the character and increase the expense of the construction of a certain avenue in Long Island City. Governor Cleveland refused to sanction the act, saying:

"The bill before me expressly ignores the local authorities of the city within which the work is to be done, and in effect transfers their powers in such cases, as contained in the charter, to the commissioners named in the bill.

"The charter of the city provides that work of this description can only be done by the Common Council when a petition is signed therefor by the owners of a majority in lineal feet of the land fronting on the street within which the improvement is proposed.

"This provision, perhaps, furnishes the explanation for the effort made to procure legislation in aid of this project, instead of leaving its expediency to be determined by the people directly concerned, and who are to be taxed to pay for the work.

of

"I have before me a remonstrance, signed by many the owners of lots fronting on the avenue, protesting against the bill. This, and the consideration that it is directly opposed to my ideas of home rule, constrain me to withhold my approval from the proposed legislation."

These were among the minor measures vetoed by Governor Cleveland, but the principles which they involved were vital and of fundamental importance.

CHAPTER XXV.

The Five Cent Fare Bill.-The Public Faith Must be Kept.-Text of the Famous Veto Message.-How it Affected the People.The Veto Upheld.-A Brave and Just Act.-Honorable Men Thank the Governor for Upholding the Honor of the State.

Perhaps the most widely known of the veto messages of Governor Cleveland's first year was that which he sent in with what was known as the five cent fare bill.

The elevated railroads of New York city, under their charters, charged an uniform rate of fare of five cents during certain of the morning and evening hours in which the great body of workingmen went to and from their homes, and ten cents for the rest of the day. In 1883 the Legislature passed a bill to make the rate of fare five cents throughout the day. This bill the governor vetoed, upon the ground that it involved a breach of faith on the part of the State.

His principle was, "The public faith must be kept;" and to keep faith in this case was to maintain the promise of the general railroad law, which guaranteed that the Legislature would not reduce the rates of fare on any railroad if thereby the profits should fall below ten per cent. upon the actual capital. The governor held that the earnings of these roads were not such as to permit a reduction of fare without violating the promise given by the State. There were other considerations of a similar nature, which are stated in the veto; and this message, having a peculiar interest on ac

OF GROVER CLEVELAND.

count of its wide notoriety, is on that account given here in full, as follows:

"STATE OF NEW YORK, EXECUTIVE CHAMBER,

"ALBANY, March 2, 1883.

"To the Assembly: Assembly bill No. 58, entitled 'An act to regulate the fare to be charged and collected by persons or corporations operating elevated railroads in the city of New York,' is herewith returned without approval.

"This bill prohibits the collection or receipt of more than five cents fare on any elevated railroad in the city of New York, for any distance between the Battery and Harlem river, and provides that if any person or corporation operating such elevated railroads shall charge, demand, collect or receive any higher rate of fare, such person or corporation shall, in addition to all other penalties imposed by law, forfeit and pay to any person aggrieved fifty dollars for each offense, to be recovered by such person in any court of competent jurisdiction.

"The importance of this measure, and the interest which it has excited, has impressed me with my responsibility, and led me to examine, with as much care as has been possible, the considerations involved.

"I am convinced that in all cases the share which falls upon the executive regarding the legislation of the State should be in no manner evaded, but fairly met by the expression of his carefully guarded and unbiased judgment. In his conclusion he may err, but, if he has fairly and honestly acted, he has performed his duty, and given to the people of the State his best endeavor.

"The elevated railroads in the city of New York are now operated by the Manhattan Railway Company, as the lessee of the New York Elevated Railway Company and the Metropolitan Elevated Railway Company.

"Of course, whatever rights the lessor companies have