New Orleans daily crescent. [volume] ([New Orleans, La.]) 1851-1866, 1856-04-09
NUMBER |. B 81.

z IN IJMBER 81.
the address in s oarnss s bs eas
~ # - s ssd sfs ns5r'S rss
psered Il, t N 4S nge ssases Of their removal
The Officer of these u dsSis III
asss se'ss eS e GSs e @ %
ofss ss capsfi9H shsfs sRs csRsss,Is q r.
bent than the grounds e removal. tits
pe@sF pps ps q 5a & s ss ~ g %ss hsB y
Bns shond the Of she forst
sce az 10 be governed by sue aotfves kno " no
public opinion and the by which their
Again III do not consider re-eracnent Die sa,ss *
t he a M f9RaPSs a9 sl5
This cd ssne which has Sefa anr M
grounds sr an q y . e
Of the Peace be ipeached in this the Le
sFf h. 81 ss s XII Il Sa @ m & @ sss
o aS sass a tel s
counsel u ha4 ad1ed argiment Al
al personal him l.at pretended that he had
his ed 81 eeans IS eonss coz that
i is against common right should be deprived Of his
Of being heard IN deense M =
q y e4ts M e gS & sS ii
without ont hearing and much more e take from him
M te poep sne ! o Sf
s a SSsT aass hSa , sn hssg I hs
vested i the two Houses oaI officers
Pahs #ors pe'i sns q 'he Boafa g
1rs,sbt an q TsaaFss
tuition Requires cause 70 be assigned for removal il preppo
ses hearing npon that cause IN order to ascertain whether Is
But where necessary the Constitution to assign
mode Of hearing Absolutely required
upon which the ordinary legislation and action of
The important Questions presented " hs case, although
eu and is soaf RSn af hat
the conclusion that the judgment Of the lower Court should
Buchanan 1.-THE presents my mind case Of IN
Conditional assumption power on the of the Legislative
Phs ss ass 9f the ssts sts
Of the Government Of the Louisiana ha be divided
ddea bedy Wit those which
la one hose which executive 10 another and
r No these any hold
longing either Of the others excepin tie instance
expressly d directed Or permitted z i. s @ . q, 5, "a,
two distinct branches Be styled The Honsef Repre-
the osr and both the General
Art 81 The judiciary power shall be vested in supren
Il n
Tha n h1s into es this last sss Ct
IaEsdieion to one Of which Courts establhede Firs
approved 18Th March, 1855
i'm Of Ct Sheriff. She, + II thu The parish
the grounds Of contesa;ion and may the application
either Rery order jury Try The issue and its decision tsr
And by section q the issue thus formed shall
eSnesfd and M submitted 10 hs according Y
bs o s
t. detsrmns by Their verdict which of parties entitled
shall ln haze No s,ios Faa Is in other
seetion ~ pnent non III anain # 4
jury shall b final and certifying the the Governo
ne verdict NAY - =
onthe 5t November, 1856 election of Sheriff held
HNfty Hud
and the former being elected he latter
orleans viii he ernaes ess:drbsd Pre- ~
cc 5 . This % fonsst % was as tried BY which rendered
heeor Re M m asr By the f G o4 n rss
it, upon complying viii the fornaiies prescribed By a'
s5ss S;ss 81 e.,
T efaas to ore rece
scattering the votes committed by hands OF lawles At
We have that the special tribunal created by lasor
trial pf such az sSs tribunal e F
lsEsjty hsys 81
s ts5 @ Sa II " n Ss
the o the SECOND article e the Constitution
Il power of deciding the question Of the legality and validity
elsfGn i M the s raised BY The
belonging to the jndieiHl depamen, Goyernnent
sess that neither o tie ohsF depassnts o Sovernms
ID qegisaye Exsentiye could eonstutonay exercise
lie ii the Constitution itself s"T1r > 5 s.ii
1t careful scrxtny Of that all its articles
mission am slsP ear at The 9t ar.5sls neither
e. sa e as ns Sf By Re &c ssPH 4 o esfn as #
GER and understand the No sol page SOY Of
session of 1856 as having imposed
eS po1iaions
effS. e PHSs &C. aE a oS
anSe Of certain re ct in the act set forth may
= determine. y, 5E ~ & 54 5}55 fas5l,5zJ $tfI4 W
ID the Constitution on the Of Impeachment and the
Of public officers 4 from ofe generally But Il Dc not find
am by which ae
n M rS to Ss up9n
But while make this admission, that the Legislature
Il power to remove Sheriff by atdress ot without
eesa.on preferred d. BY msm95n ri against the
'Ssa 'as Pet sGs IL
validity Of election Of Sheriff And this is what the Le
liz s of sppsaFng tedious rsgsat the Who'll
adrs bsng ptredaeory to the fssoaio
moya of Iiufy and containing the reasons ustiaeatoy
re Here the Judge repeated the address and sontnues
Il reasons contained in tie address er removal Hny
for f decision r ct M issue ssi s that m ha o
joy Of both Houses tat as well might be conended
lit may happen 10 contain bad logic bad law But With al
TO those who entertain such opinion and profes
su profound rsspsss NJ isgasys REane
nee 'ef Of his Tribunal eSpoun IN ths last resort @ those M
Ill action and nets administration which contained in
promulgated the expression of Legislative will III
Stne Of louisiana to determine if at any time the consiste
ar enactmens with the State Constitution be drawn
question: whether in truth they in contradictions and in
cn they that the statute must yield to the Cons
or the paramount law. The Supreme Court Of the Ur
" States, in in Sd Dallas to which Twill have occasion 81
refer have said that the State Courts the tribu
decide whether laws contrary to the State Constnon
yoid In the present the constuonaty Of the addi
removing the defendant from office expressly Pleaded
fact only issue. To this plea must needs
the addres itself And this the first occasion Of
exercise of hc power Of removal OF an by add
Id under the Constitution without precedcns to gnde
er the of the article of the Constitution in Tr
which he removal is said to have been made and Whie
" coped In the address, The first thing that strikes me in Ar
III that the address and removal simultaneous The
he used are a be removed by address, 1t is not as IN
o T the Governor who to upon address OF the LIE
ature the General Assembly itself removes the officer
me removal strictly act of the Legislature under this artic
led And plain that the Legislature have case be
u.s. taken this view Of the article For the address, after
preamble copied above proceeds to remove infty from
by resolution. BY second resolution, indeed, it is dire
that the address presented to the Governor But this un
stand to done in compliance with article 81 of the
ston which requires that every ORDER resolution or yot
ion which the concurrence of both Houses may be necessary,
~ cept on question of adjournment shall presented tothe
ernor before it shnll take effect, be approved by him.
ing disarproved, shall be repnssed by wothrds OF the
elected each House OF the General Assembly Th
ION dress the article 81 Of the CONSTITUTIONS therefore,
ave
go which
us OCCASION is in opinion the correct form OF an appcati
the article 81 of the Constitution Why then, has the
be appeaon address been used by the framcrs of
,od of officer Is