Daily American organ. [volume] (Washington, D.C.) 1854-1856, 1856-09-18

70 the qussuoh, wnssh - emu lnr 0nSu's 80
stony
Either every Monday under the existing ordinance,
10 the beginning Of stated session, OF there IS
but one session from the beginning 10 the emu OF Tue
year.
In the former case the supposed appointee would
hold an appointment until the end OF the weekly
session. 10 begin ON the Monday next ensnint his
appointment in the latter he would hold an appoint
snt NTH the dissolution Of the Council unless the
once were sooner vacated in one Of the specified
observe in the pubiished debate that it seemed
to be conceded by Aldermen on both sides Of the
chamber that there Is but one session In the year.
If this be 90 think IL clear beyond controversy
that the appointeea IN The reosss hold their Offices
for the whole period Of that session unless sooner
removed by the act Of the Mayor, by death, or by
resignation. In speaking OF the act Of the Mayor
by end with the adyics and consent Of the Board.
But think the incvitable legal consequence OF
this construction would be 10 render the power OF
the Board Of Aldermen over the subjecs OF perma-
nent appointments entirely nugatory
IL cannot be doubted that the appointments by the
Mayor alone were intended to be temporary, and that
the spirit of the charter looks TO the exercise of real
and substantial function by the Board of Aldermen
in the permanent selection Of officers Of the Corpo-
And yet was:the ssrsoess' to which the charter re-
fers that which should take place between the
weekly or daily adjoarnmentsy And did Congress
sssso" with reference to daily sitting of the cham
berS cannot bring myself TO think So
How, then, we to interpret these provisions of
the charterY In my opinion, they contemplated an
entirely different arrangement from that which now
obtains with regard to the meetings OF the two Boards
Such, likewise, was evidently the understanding of
the Councils prior TO the ordinance Of October 26,
1882 by which the weekly sessions were prescribed.
4 brief review Of the provisions Of the several
charters, in their chronological order, may throw
light upon this and the other matters now under
sideration. ag8i5 @
-.
absolute appontee of the President Of the United
States, and all the officers of the Corporation were
appointed by the Mayor alone. Twelve councillors
were annually elected by the people; and Of these a
"second chamber" consisting of five members, was
constituted by election held by the whole body Of
twelve among themselves. The two chambers were
TO hold their sessions annually, on the second Mon
day in June, with power to adjourn from day to day
lie good should require their deliberations.
Here the word " sessiO,s" Is manifestIy used with
reference to the annual meeting, which was TO be
continued, by adjournment from day to day, 30 long
Us there business to be transacted When called
together by the Mayor in extra sessions, the like
der Of proceedings was doubtless contemplated viz
continuous session, interrupted only by adjourn
ments. RE&
separately elective by the peoples but no change was
made with regard to the appointment Of officers or
the sessions Of the Councils Both Boards continued
To be elected for one year only.
men and Common Council, were first created by
those names; and the former was placed upon diff
ferent footing from the latter in being elective for
two years, &c and becoming connected with the sub
iect Of Offices. MHab
BY the first section it was provided that "each
Board shall meet at the Council Chamber for the
dispatch Of business on the second Monday in June
mex at ten o'clock in the morning, and on the same
day and at the same hour annuSsiy thereafter, with
power to adjourn from day to day &c, and with
power to the Mayor to call extraordinary sessions.
Here il was evidently intended that there should
be one continuous session, held annually, with adj
journments and extra called sessions II necessary
II is in my opinion, in contemplation of this state
Of things that th elanguage in relation to appoint
ments ia the "recess and the duration of such APP
pointments "pntit the end of The nea ensuing ses-
sion," was used He shall appoint proper persons
TO ll up all vacancies during he of the Board
of Aldermen, to hold such appointments until the
end Of the then ensuing secession.
In the charter of 1920 (still in force except so far
an repealed by that of l846) slight variation OF lam
Q,a0e may be observed; "He shall appoint persons
70 ili up vacancies which may occur during the re-
oess to hold such appointments until the end of the
then ensuing session" The words "may occur" do
not vary the sense however, as we have seen that
such appointee holds during the whole session and
thus the Office is not vacant at any time until the
recess has commenced 80 that strictly, the vacancy
occurs in the recess In this am supported by
opinions of Chief Justice fancy and Mr.. Legare,
upon cases submitted to them respectively while in
the Office Of Attorney General.
In the same same charter of 1920 new clause ap.
pears touching the sessions OF the Boards After
following the language of the previous charter to
the June session In every year, it is added, "and at
such other times ss the two Boards may by law
direct" M @gs as gfA
how the law stood at the passage of the act of 1882
There were -four sessions in each year in addition to
the meeting on the second Monday in june by law
directed the first session TO commence on the fourth
Monday Of June, the second on the third Monday OF
srJ has do in
the fourth on the second Monday in May each session
to commence at PM and to continue TO adjourn from
day to day until all business requiring the attention Of
both Boards is transacted "lt shall not be lawful
for either Board to adjourn for more than one day
without the consent of the other; and all adjourn
ments of stated sessions shall be BY joint resolu-
ton" ag s4
But the act of 1882 seems 70 have contemplated
that each meeting on Monday should be distinct
session. to be limited to day, with provso for
achievements to the next day. any other day with
in the week The limitation to any other day
within the week seems strngly to countenanee the
idea that each Monday was to be the commencement
of new and distinct (" stated session." da
Upon the letter of the charter there can be no doubt
OF the power the Corporation TO prescribe any num-
Der Of distinct sessions upon divers days. IN addition
to the session required by the charter; but very
much doubt whether il was ever contemplated by
Congress that by what is IN effect only an adjourn
menf from Monday to Monday, there shonld be fifty
distinct Sessions" and as many distinct "ytcesses
in the year. any more than that there should be three
hundred by adiournments from day to day.
In effect and substance Git may well be argued)
this il one annual session, continuing throughout the
year; which Seems to me equally far from the mind
Of Congress when empowering the Mayor to make
appointments to continue Ito the end Of the then
ensuing session" Such construction would render
the words " then ensuing session nsensible; since
each council only endures one year, whereas those
words imply that there shall may be some other
session or sessions of the council besides the
one then ensuing"
Under these circumstances, neither construction
appears to me entirely consistent with the intention
OF the charter But, of the two, that which is the
more compatible with il is to regard each Monday as
the commencement of distinct session; and conse-