New Orleans daily crescent. [volume] ([New Orleans, La.]) 1851-1866, 1856-03-03
A POWERFUL ARGUMENT.
Legislature VS.. Hufty.


serious farce as the proceeding had by the majority
of the present Legislature in the effort to remove
Mr. Huftyr from the office of Sheriff in the city Oh
New Orleans. There are but few instances Ill the
history of our national or State governments IN
which power has been so boldly assumed by the rep
" resentatiyes of the people, and in which the prov
sions and purposes of Constitutional law have been
. 50 reckessy invaded There never was time III the
course of cur political being when the people suffered
with such slavish apathy, the exhibition OF this Le-
: gislative despotsm.
The majority of the present Legislature seem to be
afflicted with legal blindness, to be animated by a
! spirit of political desperation. 70 suppose them to
be in the exercise of their right senses, would be to
mpute to them degree of moral and political turpi-
tude which ought to render them infamous in the fl
ture history of our State.$s i5, -s.
The address of the General Assembly is predicated
upon the allegation that there was violence, fraud
and boodshed in the elections last fall in the city of
\ New Oreans that Hufty elected in consequence
that Bell really received majority or would have
ceived majority of the legal votes. They say, that
these facts were proven to the Committee on Con-
tested Elections and through them to the General
Assembly. They assume that these facts constitute
the Legislature by necessity, the grand inquest of
the State, and clote it with the power to transcend
ALI the provisions Of the law and Of the Constitution.
The Court Of the Star Chamber had no feature more
odous, Infamous and oppressive than this the dark
chambers of the nquisiton record no more revolving
picture of desperate and despotc authority than the
power which present egisature assumes to itself
We profess to be people whose constitutional and
statuary attachments efectually shield u.s. alike from
the impulses of passion and the caprces of power
people whose love of constitutional freedom is as
"a people who profess to hold that the great and es
sential defenses of popular and individual right are to
be maintained by strict and faithful construction
and exercise of constitutional authority But Of what
force are our Constitution and laws, if we have
gained in our midst, a tribunal of such tremendous
authority as to override at pleasure alike the and
the other; court so nquisitoria i'll its power and
proceedings as only to be rivaed by the dark legends
of the Vehm.
Suppose we admit everything as fact, which the
majority of the Legislature assert, still, under the
Constitution and laws Of State, their course is
nothing less than higthanded usurpation of power
and criminal violation of the text and spirit of the
Constitution which they have sworn to maintain.
The DIST art of the Constitution provides, that
both houses of the General Assembly shall judge of
the qualification election and returns of its members.
This power carries with it, the right and authority to
examine and adjudge all questions Of fraud, violence
bribery, tumut and other improper practices CON
nected with the election Of members to either houses
of said General Assembly
Over this branch of the State elections, each of said
houses has exercised its Jurisdiction to the fullest eN
tent; in fact to such extent that its exercise is
some what tainted with illegality The jurisdiction
which each house of the General Assembly now eN
ercise in matters of contested elections, is limited in
precise terms to elections of members to the General
Assembly. This is the only clause of the Consttu
ton which confers any authority the Legislature
to Judge of elections, Or which can be relied on to
constitute the State the grand nquisiton over ques
tons of elections The same section of the Constu-
ton provides but contested elections shall be de-
termned in a manner to be directed by law The
plain English of which is, the Legislature may Judge
of the election of its MEMBERS" but shall not
judge of the elections for other Offices. If the Con-
sttution intended to give the General Assembly this
grand supervision of elections, why did it enjoin
upon that body to provide by law mode for dspos-
ing of contested elections. The fact that the 21st
art. Of the Constitution, in the first part of it, gives
the Legislature power, absolute and exclusive juris
dcton over certain matters Of election aud limits its
authority in the latter part of the article, is
elusive that the Legislature has not and was not in
w
eral inquest over matters of elections No act Of the
Legislature is required to define the power belonging
to the General Assembly the mode of its exercise.
It is plain, palpable constitutional provision to
which mere legal enactment could not add anything,
and from which it could not detract. 1t is limited
within precise bonds, and confined to certain clearly
defined subjects that is elections of members to each
house of the General Assembly. The latter clause of
the same article provides for such elections as are not
embraced within the specific jurisdiction granted to
the Legislature. The Constitution neither indicates
the tribunals before which, nor the rules by which
such elections shall be tried but expressly requires
that they shall be determined in a manner to be pro.
vded by law. The inference is plain and irresistible
that the Legislature is excluded from this department
of State elections Their duty is however clear; it
is to provide by law for the mode Of determining con-
tested elections, which being done, the execution of
that law is vested in another department Of constitl-
tional power which the General Assembly will never
be permitted to invade; department jealous of its
Jurisdiction and unaffected by the pressure of political
enmties by which it may be surrounded.
The doctrine formerly was, and it was thought to
be healthy one, that 90 law is socmn expression of
Legislative wi'' This, however, may be fogyism
which ought to be exploded nevertheless it implied
the concurrence of both houses in the proposed
measure, as well as the approval of the Governor.
: The widest visionary never dreamed that la'c in
Louisiana could be defined to be the sovereign and
irresistible will of either house Of the General As
sembly.
In obedience to the plain letter and intent of the
2ls article of the Constitution the Legislature have
passed laws declaring the manner in which contested
| elections shall be determined. By the act of 1855
they have specially asserted the only power to deter
mine elections which the constitution gives them
and by the same act have clothed the Judiciary with
exclusive and final jurisdiction all other cases
contested elections They point oft the mode of pro
ceeding-the rules for taking the cvidence-the man
in which the court shall be organzed-and finally
they provide that the Judgment rendered shall be
fnanot evento be reviewed by the higher tribunals
of the Judiciary department.
They also require that the contest shall not be CON
fined to the single contestants, but that it shall have
the character of action by the people to vindicate
the freedom of suffrage and the purity of elections
What is meant by the word final? We understand
by it, constituting it with the whole spirit and mean
ing of the law that all questions of fraud bribery
force, tumut and other improper practices are to be
inquired into at the instance of specified number
citizens, and that the decision of the jury is moi
merely bar to the prosecution of the same contest be