Grover Cleveland

The necessity to the Government of a proper place to hold its courts is the only consideration which should have any weight in determining upon the propriety of expending the money which will be necessary to erect the proposed new building.

I am not satisfied that the expenditure of $150,000 for their accommodation, as proposed by this bill, is in accordance with sound business principles or consistent with that economy in public affairs which has been promised to the people.

This, of course, renders the proposed legislation entirely inoperative.

I transmit herewith, for your information, a report from the Secretary of State, inclosing the correspondence which has been exchanged between the Department of State and the Governments of Switzerland and Italy on the subject of…

At any rate, her rights should not be in the least jeopardized by the completion of the legislation proposed in this bill.

I do not understand that the present post-office quarters are either insufficient or inconvenient.

I do not understand that the claim has been finally rejected.

I respectfully urge the consideration of the convention by the Senate during the present session.

The Indian occupants have not given their consent to it.

I return without approval Senate bill No. 2281.

I am impressed with the belief that the bill under consideration does not sufficiently guard against an invasion of the rights and a disturbance of the peace and quiet of the Indians on the reservation mentioned.

I think little, if any, more infirmity than is usually found in men of the age of the claimant.

The fact is, in this case there is no disability which can be traced to the forty days' military service of fifty-four years ago.

It is hardly fair to ask the Government to grant a pension for the freak or gross heedlessness and recklessness of this soldier.

I am inclined to think it would have been a fortunate thing if in this case it could have been demonstrated that a man could thrive so well with the chronic diarrhea for fifty-two years as its existence in the case of this good old…

I herewith return without approval House bill No. 4797.

The Government ought not to be called upon to insure against the quarrelsome propensities of its individual soldiers.

I am entirely unable to see how the injuries are related to the claimant's army service.

There seems to be an entire absence of proof of this important fact.

The delay of twenty-one years in presenting the claim for pension certainly needs explanation.

I am entirely satisfied that the public building provided for in this bill is not immediately necessary.

Entertaining this belief, I am constrained to withhold my signature from this bill.

This does not furnish a good reason for disapproving the erection of other buildings where actually necessary.

I can not think that such a wholesome provision of law... should be modified upon the facts presented in this case.

I can hardly see how the Pension Bureau could arrive at any conclusion except that the death of the soldier was not due to his military service.