New Orleans daily crescent. [volume] ([New Orleans, La.]) 1851-1866, 1856-03-03

10 S0 anu " Vi purposes
and objects of these two articles are too clear to be
misinterprcted by honest and impartial minds
There are various ways provided by the Constitu-
ton in which untaithul officers may be suspended
from the exercise of their official functions and finally
removed from Office Art. Sc provides for the removal
of certain officers by impeachment Art. 50 requires
the Legislature to provide for the trial. punishment
and removal from Office of all other officers of the
State by indictment Or otherwise. And Art 81 pro-
vides that all civil officers with certain exceptions,
may be removed by address, 1t is clear that these
articles provide modes by which unworthy and M
faithful officers may be tried, suspended i'll their
functions, and finally removed from office. It is
equally clear that these articles have no application
tosanything which may have transpircd previous to
the induction of the individual to office. The first
mode of trial, which is for officers of certain grades
and belonging to specified departments of govern
ment, is by impeachment. Impeachment is univer
sally defined to be "a charge brought against some
official for mayersation in Office The charge
is referred to committee, and if the charge prima
face true, specifications ofchargcsar are made and the
accused put upon his trial and defence The tribu
nal to trYmpcachment in certain cases, is the State
Senate the Chief Justice or Senior Judge of the SUI
preme Court prcsiding-Art Sc. By reference tc
authorities the subject we do not find the power
of impeachment to be naked power to be exercised
capricously and in spirit Of political wantonness. Ii
every single case Impeachment to which the majority
Of the Legislature can point, there has been regu
larry organized and sworn tribunal-there has beer
the individual charged with official misconduct-there
have been written specifications of the charge
has been notice to the party accusedeyidence taken
and counsel heard-making together as dgniied and
solemn mode of trial as any known to the law. Such
is the course contemplated by our own Constitution
Art. sc. @
The seth article is too clear in its terms to require
comment. The Legislature shall ''provdc by law
for the trial punishment andremova from Office OF
all other officers of the State by indictment or other
wise" This article applies to justices of the peace, to
members of the General Assembly, etc. The pur-
pose of this article is III strict unison with the whole
spirit of the Constitution. Instead of comforting
upon the Legislature power to remove these officers
by the mere expression of its sovereign will it re-
qures that body to provide for the trial and punish
tlent of all other officers. This implies that there
shall be full, fair and impartial investigation. Trial
does not mean, i'll our law, mere one-sided express
sion of passion, prejudice power; it means eXaml
nation and deliberaton, i'll which the impetous tor.
rent of human passion has been stayed by the solem
nifty of an OATH and in Which the elements of sound
mind and pure morals are supposed to be i'll the
ascendant. The word punishment implies that there
has been guilt misconduct in g the other officers OF
the State, for whom the manner of trial is to he
provided and it is the fair intendment Of the words
I" their removal from Office" that in consequence Of
their official misconduct, trial and punishment they
longer worthy to exercise their official func-
tons. BY Indictment or otherwise is meant by
impeachment, information address, since these are
the only modes of proceeding against civil or poit
cal offenders prescribed Or permitted by the Constu
ton We think that article 50 is equally decisive
against the power claimed by the majority, article
% has been shown to be. There is not only no i'm
piled grant of any such power but there is abso
lutte exclusion from it, since the article demands that
the Legislature shall make laws which will give the
matter into the hands Of the judiciary, which
will give the Legislature jurisdiction by impeachment
or address.
All of the modes of trial and removal from Office
whether to be entertained by the House Of Represent
tatves under Article s., or by the Senate under Ar
tclc Sc, Or by the courts under Article 49, OF by both
Houses Of the General Assembly under Article 81, are
predicacd upon the fact of official malfeasancc. They
are modes Of trial. and are limited to the Investigation
Of the official acts Of the various officers known to the
Constitution of the State. Article 50 requires that
the Legislature shall provide by law for the trial Of al
other officers except those enumerated in Article So
by indictment or oheiwise-the rules Of proceeding by
indictment or information already fixed by law
The obligation is equally imperative on the Legisla
tue to provide, by law, for the removal Of an Officer
by address Article 81 contains the grant Of a naked
power, and enunciates mode Of trial and removal
the details of which, under Article 49, are to be direct
ed by law.
There is no provision of the Constitution, then
there is principle in the genius Of republican inst
buttons which will authorize or justify the moral anG
legal enory that there sor can be any question arts
ing i'll the administration of public affairs, over which
the legislative department of the government is cloth
ed with unlimited and therefore despotic power.
The Hon. speaker referred to before, thanks God
there such power in the Constitution he exults
in the asserted fact that the most damnablc feature
despotsm is engraved upon the broad charter of pop
ular freedom he reoice5 that there is an aperture in
the Constitution through which the majority of the
Legislature can escape to reye in the exercise of alb
solute and unbrdled tyranny he insults intelligent
people with the most cxubcant thanksgiving that the
organic law of Louisiana has been SO arranged as tc
enable q dominant and INSCRIPTIONS majority to dis
organize the entire official structure of the several dc
partnens of State government, and to annul the vii
of the people by ejcctng from Office men whom th'
people have duly and legally elected, merely on thu
ground that the political opinions Of those officers
obnoxious to the party in power. What an huma
ting essay upon the worth and stability Of constitu
tional government!
These are some of the inevitable consequences 0
the existence and exercise Of the power claimed b.
the majority Of the Legislature. lst. You assum
the position that sixty men, being majority of boil
| Houses Of the General Assembly, can set aside tn
legitimate voice of the people removing under artcl
| 81, without any reason assigned for so doing, til
! officers whom they have elected. If you can remov
one individual for political considerations, wthou
reference to or inquiry into his individual conduct
where is the limit to your power? fyou can remov
Hufty for no official misconduct of his, why not
still further and remove Judge Merrick? The sam
| argument which sustains you in the one shou
| justify you in the other. 1t is not pretended tina
there any irregularity in the election of Judg
Merrick He occupies his seat on the Supreme benc
by the voice and will of the native population of til
State. There was fraud or violence practiced il
New Orleans to prevent universal Europe, and eyel
free niggerdom, from combining their weight and in
| 1ucnce against him. But under the naked power O
address, by the same authority by which you renov
Iiufty you have thepower to remove him. You are no
required under the 9th art to offer reasons or to cit
10, oitl DIT