New Orleans daily crescent. [volume] ([New Orleans, La.]) 1851-1866, 1852-09-25


France it is punishable with death. In Eng
land it has been the same, to full or modified
extent, since the time of Charles H., who, afte,
ms restoration, gave testimony against I'll,
custom. In modern times Russia has visited
duelling with the death penalty. And yet. W,
have recent instances such as that Of the son O
the French Minister at the Court of Russia
who sednced the wife of q Russian General ana
was killed by him, where the parties, parties r
high places, with the death penalty before them
have appealed to the duel There has beer
| only one enactment against duelling which has
been, in any degree, successful. He referred tc
that adopted by both French and English tri-
bunals since 1929, refusing to make any special
legislation on the subject of duelling, and try.
ing cases of duelling as ordinary murders.
He would advise this Convention to adopt some
provision to punish the person provoking diff
Guilty and thus go at the root of the evil. 1t
would have great effect in lessening the records
of crime. 1t would make persons pause before
they committed assaults and batteries, and it is
proved by the records that four -fifths of the
murders committed originate in assaults and
batteries, although intent to kill can seldom be
proved, and therefore persons continue to COM
nit assaults and batteries, relying on slight
punishment. He knew that it was difficult 10
would press it, nevertheless.
Mr.. HAYS moved to postpone consideration
of the whole subject until article 1870 should
come under consideration--which was agreed to.
THE APPOINTING POWER.
Mr. CARTER moved a reconsideration of arti-
Gle 81, where, in the suspension of officers lnder
impeachment, the appointing power may make
provisional appointment, etc. He proposed to
strike out the words IS appointing power" and
insert ssGovernor."
Mr.. DrFouR opposed the reconsideration for
that purpose, because the appointing power was
not always the Governor In some cases the
Judges were the appointing power"
Motion withdrawn.
DISFRANCHISEMENT OF CoNyTCTs
Article 80. Laws shall be made to exclude
from office and from the right Of suffrage, those
who shall hereafter be convicted of bribery, per-
jury, forgery, or other high crimes or misde-
meanors. The privilege of free suffrage shall
be supported by laws regulating elections, and
prohibiting under adequate penalties, all undue
influence therein from bribery, tumult or other
improper practice.
Mr. HAYS offered the following as a substi
tute for the same:
Article 92 No one shall be eligible to any
office, or shall be entitled to the right of suf-
frage, who shall hereafter be convicted of any
crime or offence punishable capitally or by i'm
prisonment at hard labor
Mr.. PHILLIPS moved to amend the substitute
by inserting, at the end thereof the following
words, s' for period of five years or more .
MIR. RICHARDSON. of st. Mary could not see the
force of the gentleman's reasoning Those who
were sent to the Penitentiary for long term,
were, in many instances, men who committed a
rash and unfortunate act in the heat of the mo.
ment, but who had never forfeited their charac-
ter for honesty in the transactions of life while
the hordes that were sent to the Penitentiary
for six or twelve months, from the purlieus OF
Neworleans, were such cattle as ought never to
have possessed the right of suffrage, and GER
tainly ought not to have it restored to them.
The distinction, if one were to be made, ought
to be the other way from that proposed by the
gentleman from West Feliciana. But the true
course was to make the exclusion general.
The motion was lost
MIR. PHILLIPS then moved to amend by adding
that pardon shall restore competency
MIR. RosE1IEus said that there was no occa-
sion for that amendment, as pardon always re-
stores competency.
MIR. PHILLIPS was glad to have the informa-
ton IRON so high source; but it is considered
a point open to dispute. The Supreme Court
has recently decided that persons pardoned may
be jurors, but their restored right ought to bt
acknowledged by the Constitution.
Mr.. DUFoUR said that the question belonged
to the penal laws, and ought to be left to the
Legislature. We ought to let the Legislature
frame the laws. He moved to lay the subject
on the table, which prevailed The article was
then adopted without amendment
DISTRICT AND PARISH OFFICERS
s'Article 95 Ali civil officers for the State at
large shall reside within the State, and all dis
trict or parish officers, within their districts or
parishes, and shall keep their offices at such
places therein as may be required by law. And
no person shall be elected or appointed to any
parish office who shall not have resided in such
parish, long enough before such election or ap-
pointment, to have acquired the right of voting
IN such parish and no person shall be elected
or appointed to any district office who shall not
have resided in such district, or an adjoining
district, long enough before such appointment
or election to have acquired the right of voting
for the same
Mr.. SHAW moved to strike out the words. IS or
an adjoining district
Mr. BENJAMIN said that this clause was the
subject of much deliberation in the last Conven-
ton, and its insertion was the result of compro-
mise. He was of opinion that it had been cor
rectly inserted. He did not know why the peo-
pie should not be at liberty to take u Judge
from another district if they thought him bet
ter lawyer than they had within their own He
had seen enough to satisfy himself that this
clhuse ouSnt 10 remain IN the Constitution,
while in the parishes of Plaquemine and St.
Bernard, recently; there was marked scarcity
of lawyers, and it was quite necessary to apply
to can adjoining district" The people ought
not to be restricted in their cla s4ln such mat
tiers. The words adjoieiS g sytrict'' surely
give scope enough for lol Zion,
Mr. SHAw-If we allow an officer to be
selected out of the district, but in the adjoining
district, why not allow one to be selected from
any part of the whole State If we can sup
pose any parish in the State so destitute as to be
without persons qualified to fill it's offices, it is
just as likely that the adjoining district may be
equally barren. If, therefore, the words &c ad-
joining district are not stricken out, he would
move that the whole State be included.
MIR GUIoN was surprised at the motion of the
delegate from Concordia to strike out 1t was
not right to restrict the people in the choice of
their officers. The people felt both pride and
safety in good officers, and they ought not to be
limited in their choice, and compelled to take
an officer in whom they had not full confidence,
merely because he resided in the district
MR. RosELlus felt much surprised at hearing
the proposition from the gentleman that the
people should be limited to keep within the
boundary lines of any particular locality, par
ish, or district in making their choice of an
important officer. Why should they be thus
restricted? Because the people do not deserve
to be trusted with this choice or is it because
the people are usually anxious to go out of their
district-forget their friends and neighbors, and
choose strangers to fill their offices for them
In considering this matter, we are naturally
led to the old inquiry, what are the qualitica-
hot co tbn fnt tbEp Df