Memphis daily appeal. [volume] (Memphis, Tenn.) 1847-1886, 1867-04-16

argument u5ed IS good Tor anything 1
establishes that every part Of every bill
must be read three times and adoptet
three times. This would do away viii
all pswer Of amendment, or, indeed, 0
making any change in a bill, after being
once read. That such power Of change
exists, is acknowledged, and the argt'
ment fails. But there is an objection t.
the other side at the outset. How does
your honor know this portion Of the bill
objected to, was not read three times
What authority has been brought for
ward to the contrary? But suppose
this is not insisted upon; l deny
the power of this court to &c
behind the record Of the legislature. We
have the executive, legislative and judi
eial departments Of state government
each supreme in its sphere, and it would
be absurd for 4 department to assume
the position of censor Of the rest. Tho
supreme court of the United States at an
early day exercised the power Of pro.
nouncing upon the doings Of other de.
partments Of the government with ex.
IRENE delieacy. The courts are asked tc
20 behind the record Of the state legisla'
ture. That is . dangerous thing at al
times, but should be particularly avoided
now. To judge of the constitutionality
Of an act is g power that may be exer-
eised, but it would be usurpation to 90
behind the legislative record, and inquire
| when a clause was introduced into a bill
and now often the bill was read. If we
could do this in every criminal or other
suit, we might question the legality Of
the act under which the case was brought
and thus render all justice uncertain.
The English law does not permit ques.
tioniDg an act of parliament duly au'
thenticated, and the same power liss In
the legislature of a state, so far as the
sphereofth legislatures powers extends.
The Judge has the same knowledge o.
/ the statute here in question as he has Of
notary's and other seals; how can thi;
knowledge be attacked in the judge him.
self, except to the extent Of inquiring, al
the proper Office, as to the g%enuineness Of
the publication Of The law brought before
this notice. The authentic record of the
act of the legislature deposited in the
office of the secretary of state, is anthem
tic without contradiction. This is tht
law. Then how can contradiction be
made here? The whole array Of author
ity shows that an act Of Legislature can.
not be gsinsaid or gone behind if there
is eonstitutionslity, It must appear OF
the face of the act, not in the manner o
IFS passage. Mr.. Hill read authorities
at great length, to show that the power,
Of the three departments Of government.
are absolute and independent, anC
ore cannot interfere with the ex
ercise Of another. When the legis
Iature t~ranscends It's powers, and the
face of their acts shows it, there is NJ
difficulty. It has been acknowledged II
all well considered eases, reported dow
to 1866, that the courts cannot go behinC
the enrolled and officially signed act
deposited with the secretary Of state
To do SO would be TO endanger all gov
eminent, render laws and all acts dom
under them uncertain, and shake thu
very foundation upon which the judi
ciary itself holds its powers.
Col. CAN'T regarded the argument jus
concluded as very plausible and very
able. Evils might come, possibly, by
making the inquiry sought for, but thu
inquiry is necessary. II abuses canno
be inquired into, il the signatures of tw,
speakers is aIl sufficient, all powerful
what is the use of constitutions? A leg
~islature might read bills once only in
stead of three times. In all that tn
previous speaker has said, he has no
denied that an evil exists, a wronl
has been done; he only show
if SC, there IS no remedy. Ii
the act new under consideration,
rape has been committed on the consti
tuition. A bill goes through all the read
ings, in both branches of the Legislature
then an amendment is added giving tn
government power to make appoint
ments extending to 1870, and abrogatini
the powers of an established court an,
extraordinary powers are granted refer
ring to the metropolitan police. An
then it is provided that the courts shall
grant no injunction interfering with th.
exercise of the powers conferred. Tn
speaker described the mode Of passing
the bill, and the imposition of the g. gag,
the previous question, to pass a cut an
dried measure. It being the fact that
is the duty of the legislature to read bill
three times, and on three separate days
II it fails to do so, we a 90 behind tn
face of the act. The supreme court hs
deferred deciding to thus go behind a
act drthe legislature, but it has no
decided that such a decision ma.
not be rendered when corruption an.
usurpation may require it. How dan
gerous not to do this! If your homo
fail to inquire into this, what is to pre-
vent the governor exercising u%nconsti
tutional powers, and the legislature fron
commanding "ThGu shalt not gran
iujunctions.r We are in a state Of thing
requiring responsibilities to be taker
the bench must stand up-history show
that if the bench has gone, all is gone
Difficulties may result from interference
by the chancellor in this case, but hOl
much worse and more fearful evils flow
if the courts refuse to interfere when liz
erty, right, and the constitution are q
stake. According to the propositio
Just laid down, if 8 so-cslled act VS.
never read, or voted on, at all, it wOul
be law, to pass without question, pre-
vided the speakers have set their name
to the bill. Mr.. CAN'T proceeded to eri
icise the authorities quoted by NJ
Hill, pointing out objections to the pos
ton sought to be established by thu
gentleman, when the chancellor defe
red further argument until ten o'eloc
this morning, when Col. CAN'T viii Gel
clude his argument, to be followed /
Messrs. T. R. Smith, w. NJ. Randolph
and +. NJ. TergeF.
New MEMPHIS THEATER. DAILY
; celebrated play of Leah, The F0rsGke
wss produced at the New Memphis Ia
night to a fair audience. The aetir
throuchont was good. the niece well %