Arkansas true Democrat., 1859-04-27
From the Alkansaw Traveller


 mocrat, puts new phase upon the per diem question. He says that the act of the Governor in proroguing the General Assembly was one of clear usurpation, and that when the minority of the legislature obeyed the mandate, and dispersed, "the legislature died of its own act, and of course put an end to its session.'' He also de- clares his opinion that there were two dis tinct sessions of the legisature-one end ing on the 23d of December, when dis0ers- ed by the Governors proclamation; and one commencing on the l7th January when convened by virtue of the same proclama- tion, and that all the unfinished business of the first session, taken up, and finished by the last, is worthless and void It appears to us that the Gazette is a little inconsistent in it's argument. If the legislature was not adjourned by the Governors proclamation, neither did it reassemble by virtue of that proclamation. Then by what authority did 1t adjourn at all? And by what au- thority did it reassemble? Did the Gen. eral Assembly pass resolution to adjourn and reassemble? No. The Gazette says the Legislature died by its own act.''- What act? If the Gazette's article proves anything, it proves too much-for it will prove that the legislature was in session all the time-there being no act by which 1t was dissolved. The editor also says, that the only way to have kept the legislature alive, would have been to call the Houses together each day, and to have sent for members. This could have been done so long as the Speaker of the House and the President of the Senate, and three or five members of the two Houses met together for that purpose. But we know that 2S members bound themselves in writing. not to appear in the House and answer to their names from the 23d of December. to the 10th of January, and some of these 2S members, went to Nashville, Tennessee, some to New Orleans and others to their homes, so that the door keeper would have found it an impossibility to have procured | their tattendance; some of them remained in the city, and were in the House, ands voted on various subjects, but refused to answer to their names even on the 22d De- cember. If as the Gazette says there was no such disagreement between the two hou- ses, as would justify the Governor in pro- roguing the legislature, still we think he did what he thought best, and what the peo- pie will sustain him in doing That tha legislature voted their pay after they ha3 reassembled for the time they were adjourn. ed was no fault of the Governor In their legislative capacity with quorum present they were independent of the Governor and could vote away as much of the trea- sury as they pleased without asking his advice or consent. But when powerless to do any act, for want of a constitutional quorum, 1t was the Governors prerogative to protect the interests of the State; and we are glad that he had the courage to assume the responsibility of doing what he though right.
 lf as the Gazette contends, the legisla- ture dted 6y its oaon act, in dispensing un- der the command of the Governors proc lamation, and not by virtue of that procla- nation, which 1t declares clear usurps tion of power, we again ask, by what power did it reassembe? By its own act2 Then, indeed, is the age of miracles not passed for in this we have an instance of dead body resurrecting itseB? We can very req dily perceive how legislative body could be assembled by virtue of law, and in ex- traordinary cases, by proclamation of the Governor of State; but how in the name of common sense, body, without law, without existence, without vitality, could assemble, we cannot tell And if the po- sition of the Gazette concerning the Gov ernor's power to adjourn them is correct, then, nearly every act of the last legisla- ture IS null and void. They had no pow CT, on the 23d of December to adjourn them selves, but dispensing under the Governors proclamation, the legislature died of its own act, and the session ended. But few laws, and these of minor importance, had passed both Houses and received the Gov ernor's approval before the recess. Con- ing together again on the 17th January, haphazzard, without constitutional warran. ty, or precedent in law, oH their acts are unconstitutional and void. A new session it could not be; for if the Governor had no power to adjourn, neither had he the DOW CT to assemble the legislature. Viii the Gazette maintain this ground? for this we understand to be the sum and substance of its reasoning.
 We again say, that we have not seen an article Tn any paper, for or against, that presents this adjournment and per diem sub. ject Tn its true light. But the time is not yet; we want to hear aH that can be said on the subject.