Federal Aid- Part 2: President Grover Cleveland

In the Introduction to this series, we looked at the Greensburg tornado and the use of Federal Aid. In Part 1 we examined the first of three historical examples of men arguing against the use of Federal Aid. This post is the second in that series.

One of the great tragedies of our time is that we have such a poor knowledge of the people and principles who have guided us in the past. I am as guilty of this as anyone and was very interested to find another, “Davy Crockett” in our 24th President: Grover Cleveland. He showed an exceptional understanding of the Federal Constitution and the prescribed role of government. During his first term in office, farmers in parts of Texas were suffering from a drought. Congress proposed a bill that would give a relatively modest $10,000 dollars to help buy seed for these farmers. On February 16, 1887, President Cleveland vetoed the bill with the following insightful message:

"It is represented that a long-continued and extensive drought has existed in certain portions of the State of Texas, resulting in a failure of crops and consequent distress and destitution. Though there has been some difference in statements concerning the extent of the people’s needs in the localities thus affected, there seems to be no doubt that there has existed a condition calling for relief; and I am willing to believe that, notwithstanding the aid already furnished, a donation of seed grain to the farmers located in this region, to enable them to put in new crops, would serve to avert a continuance or return of unfortunate blight.
And yet I feel obliged to withhold my approval of the plan, as proposed by this bill, to indulge a benevolent and charitable sentiment through the appropriation of public funds for that purpose. I can find no warrant for the appropriation in the Constitution, and I do not believe that the power and duty of the General Government ought to be extended to the relief of individual suffering which is in no manner properly related to the public service or benefit. A prevalent tendency to disregard this limited mission of this power and duty should, I think, be steadfastly resisted, to the end that the lesson should be constantly enforced that though the people support the Government the Government should not support the people.
The friendliness and charity of our countrymen can always be relied upon to relieve their fellow-citizens in misfortune. This has been repeatedly and quite lately demonstrated. Federal aid in such cases encourages the expectation of paternal care on the part of the Government and weakens the sturdiness of our national character while it prevents the indulgence among our people of that kindly sentiment and conduct which strengthens the bonds of a common brotherhood."