its own duties? In my judgment this is an abandonment
of its obligations by the National Government--a subordination of
national authority and an intrusion of State supervision over national
duties which amounts, in spirit and tendency, to State supremacy.

Though I believe that the existing statutes are abundantly adequate
to completely prevent military interference with the elections in the
sense in which the phrase is used in the title of this bill and is
employed by the people of this country, I shall find no difficulty in
concurring in any additional legislation limited to that object which
does not interfere with the indispensable exercise of the powers of
the Government under the Constitution and laws.

R.B. HAYES.

MAY 12, 1879.

EXECUTIVE MANSION, _May 29, 1879_.

_To the House of Representatives_:

After mature consideration of the bill entitled "An act making
appropriations for the legislative, executive, and judicial expenses
of the Government for the fiscal year ending June 30, 1880, and for
other purposes," I herewith return it to the House of Representatives,
in which it originated, with the following objections to its approval:

The main purpose of the bill is to appropriate the money required to
support during the next fiscal year the several civil departments
of the Government. The amount appropriated exceeds in the aggregate
$18,000,000.

This money is needed to keep in operation the essential functions of
all the great departments of the Government--legislative, executive,
and judicial. If the bill contained no other provisions, no objection
to its approval would be made. It embraces, however, a number of
clauses, relating to subjects of great general interest, which are
wholly unconnected with the appropriations which it provides for.
The objections to the practice of tacking general legislation to
appropriation bills, especially when the object is to deprive a
coordinate branch of the Government of its right to the free exercise
of its own discretion and judgment touching such general legislation,
were set forth in the special message in relation to House bill No. 1,
which was returned to the House of Representatives on the 29th of last
month. I regret that the objections which were then expressed to this
method of legislation have not seemed to Congress of sufficient weight
to dissuade from this renewed incorporation of general enactments in
an appropriation bill, and that my constit