Worcester daily spy. [volume] (Worcester [Mass.]) 1850-1888, 1857-04-22
Gbe 4alIg Pg.
wRpN espAY. APRIL aa. Sc.


Gus petitions for the removal Oh EuWafu OiSsi0J
Loring from the Judgeship Of Probate made 10
the senaae, on Monday, majority and minority
repor.s ON the subject The majority report ad-
verse to the rof the petitioners, was drawn
mn hv MIR Wells of Chicopee, and was signed by
Tohn M Merrick of walpole, of the Senate, and
nv 1obn Wells Of Chicopee, Richard Ramsdell of
M.,h,absad. and Henry Bradley of Tisbury,
of the House, all republicans, we much regret
to perceiye. The minority report, favorable
TO the PRAYER of the petitoneTs,and ably and elab
or,tely drawn up, was presented by 0. W. Albee
Of Marlboro, of the Senate, on behalf of himself
and lanes W. Ward of Arlington, of the House
The seventh member of the Committee John L.
Swift Of Boston, signs neilherreport' and makes
none other himself
The ground taken in the majority report very
absurd as 1t ses ms to uss,as stated by the boston
Trauefler, that sit is unconstitutional to under
take to do by statute, what the Constitution re-
serves to be done by the concurrent action Of four
branches of the government-the Senate, the
House. the Council, and the Governor namely,
tie removal Of Judge" Now, if tie address for
removal, passes by the concurrent action OF
botb the House and Senate and the Governor,by
the advice and consent of the Council proceeds
tn act in compliance Herewith, will not the act,
pray, be performed by "the concurrent action OF
these four branches Of the government
The minority report of Mr.. Alboe puts the
whole matter in its true light. After giving the
various petitions which have been presented ana
Judge Lorings protest. the report proceeds to
comment upon the report of the majority as
an Offset 70 the doctrine therein contained, that
section 18th of the Personal Liberty Act is un-
constitutional. it cites the report of the same
gentlemen. that it is iuexpedient to legislate =
on the subject of the repeal of the Personal Lib
erty Law. In one report the law is considered
unconstitutional; in the other it is virtually de-
cared constitutional by the refusal to take meas
ures to repeal it. The minority report then pro-
ceeds to defend at length the Personal Liberty
Act from the charge of unccnstitutionafty.
In respect to the opinion Of the Supreme Court,
to which the Governor referred in his message Of
May 81, 1855, the minority quote from the report
of the special committee of last year, on the Per-
sonal Liberty Act, signed by Henry S. Briggs,
showing that the Supreme Court have never
made any decision adverse to the constitutional
ty Of the law The minority next quote sections
Is and IA of the Personal Liberty Law, as fol-
lows -
'Sec. 49, No person who holds any office I'M
der the laws of the United States Municipalities
him 10 issue any warrant or other process, or to
grant any certificate under the acts of Congress
named in the 9th section Of this act, or to serve
the same, shall at the same time hold any office
OF honor, trust, mr. emOiumlent under the laws OF
the COMMONWEALTH.
See. IA any person holding any judicial Office
under the CONSTITUTION or Laws of this Common
wealth, who shall continue for ten days after
the passage of this act to hold the office Of Uni
tel SAFES Commissioner, or any Office under the
laws Of the United States, which qualities him
to issue any warrant or other process or grant any
certificate under the acts of congress named in the
9th section5of this act, shallbe deemed to have
Utotated good behavior, TO have given reason for
Toss of public confidence and furnished sufficient
ground either for impeachment, or for removal By
address" 95
In violation of this statute, whose provisions
are plain as open day, Edward Greeley Loring
continues to-day to hold his position of Judge of
Probate. It only lremains for the Legislature to
remedy the discrepancy, BY proceeding, in the dis
charge Of its duty, to remove him by address -
Says Mr.. Albee, pertinenty, on this point, in his
report, an abstract of which is published in the
Boston Traveller of Tuesday;--
Judge Loring admits, and it is proved that
he has exercised the Office of United States Com
missioner since the Personal Liberty Act was
passed. The Legislature Of 1855 declared that
such conduct would furnish sufficient ground for
removal. The Legislature of 1856 refused to alter
or repeal the law, and thus gave its sanction to
the constitutienality of the act. The Governor
has also admitted its constitutionality, BY APP
pointing Commissioners under it. The Courts
have also acted under its provisions. The law
has never been authoritatively declared uncon-
stitutional, and it stands unrepealed. 1t there
fore remains law of the State, and should be re-
spected as such BY magistrates and citizens. IF
one law may be violated with impuEity, so may
any other law, and anarchy would be the certain
result of such state OF things
Can the Legislature legally render the holding
oft offices, not specially rendered inseparable
by the Constitution, incompatible! This ques-
ton involves three distinct cases-lst, when
man holds an Office under the Constitution, and
is afterwards elected or appointed to another Of
fee created by the Legislature, but declared by
said Legislature Incompatible with the first of
fee; "a, when two Offices are held by one man,
and the Legislature afterwards declares them in
compatible; Sd, when one office is held under the
United States and the other is held under this
State, and the Legislature declares them incom-
patible.
There is no difference of opinion as to the first
case. In the second and third cases there is some
dispute of the power. Judge Lorng disputes it,
taking the ground that the Legislature can pass
no law which can GUST him from his Commission
ership. This the minority admit. But they do
not admit that the Legislature can pass no act
touching the holding of these two offices at the
same time, which shall be just cause for removal
by address, s
The law may not, of itself, remove a Judge from
his Office, though it might be supposed that
Judge who had cherished respect for Repub-
lcan form OF government and decent regard for
the popular will, would quietly resign one Of his
offices when the people had declared the Offices
Incompatible. The will Of the people has been
emphatically expressed, yet Judge Loring contin-
ues 20 defy public sentiment BY doing this, he
has furnished sufficient ground for removal. 9th
erwise, we abandon the fundamental principle of
the accountability Of public servants to the peo
pie.
The report proceeds to enlarge upon the subject
Of the accountability of public servants 1t quotes
MI. Jefferson, who lamented that the power Of
removal, by address, was not Incorporated into the
Constitution Of the United States. In a letter to
Thomas Richie, he said, "Having found, from
experience, thatimpeachment is an impracticable
thing, a mere scare-cEow, they consider them
selves secure for life; they skulk from RESPONSE
biity TO public opinion He coincided with
John Adams, and other Massachusetts, fathers,
IN their idea OF removal by address.
The minority next proceed to combat the doc
trine q Judge Loring, that judges can only be
They refer the judge to the debates in the Con-
veRti0n cf 1920, where il will be found that many
of the eminent men Of that day considered the
power of remDsaiby address, a great security 10
the people against proAlgate judges, or Judges
destitute Of the instincts OF liberty, and regard
less Of the moral sentiment Of the State. This
Convention retained the poweras it originally
stood In 1880.
The question Is next considered--H Has the Leg
i IA a 4. al 4 Y = ~