New Orleans Republican. [volume] (New Orleans, La) 1867-1878, 1870-03-13

you act by address, you are acting as poll
ticians you are acting in your capacity as
legislators +; you are not acting as judges.
1t is the two branches of the Legislature
acting concurrently by joint vote, with
the approval of the Governor; you then
exercise your political functions, and in
the exercise of those functions you may
cause you please, whether it be personal
guilt or any other cause that renders the
officer disagreeable to you. A removal by
address is not followed by any Disqualified
ton for Office and there is no punishment.
This is mode instituted by the constitu-
ton of this State and of the constitutions
of nearly all the States, copied, as l have
said, from the British constitution, after
the reign of William the Third, for the
purpose Of getting rid of parties whom 1t
is desired to remove from office.
In the one case, in case OF ADDRESS, 1t Is
political action-in the other, IN case OF
Impeachment, it is judicial When You
impeach man you are put on your
GA hs-yCu are sworn to do justice-yol
institute a court-you send for the Chief
Justice of your State to preside over your
deliberations under the mandates OF the
constitution; you hear evidence; you de
termne according to the rules of
evidence and according to the laws
of the land; whereas by address you care
for no law, you are governed by no rule
except your own sense OF propriety-that
is the court OF honor which the learned
manager would have you institute. The
court of address is the court of honor,
the court of chivalry, and you could now
to-day drop this impeachment. in my
humble Judgment, and proceed by adj
dress to remove this officer for any cause
you see fit, whether these articles of i'm
parchment are proven or not. l speak by
the card when [ say that the two powers
are concurrent, because the very question
raised has been decided by the Supreme
Court of this State, decided under the
constitution of 1852, as will show you,
and on clauses of the constitution pre-.
cisely similar to those in the constitution
of 1868. Now, the constitutions of
1915, of 1852 and of 1854 contain,
all of them, the same clauses upon this
subject. | will read from the constitution
of 1852, upon which the case was decided
under the title of Impeachment" article
eighty-six, Impeachment of the Gov
ernor, Lieutenant Governor, Attorney
General, Secretary of State, State Trea-
surer, and the Judges of The inferior
courts-Justices of the Peace excepted
shall be tried by the Senate; the Chief
Justice of the Supreme Court or the senior
Judges thereof shall preside during the
trial OF. such impeachment"
In this the constitutions of 1916, 1852
and 1864 agree with that of 1868. Now,
in the constitutions of 1916, 1852 and 1864
are the two following articles. which are
omitted in the constitution Of 1868:
ART. SO. All officers against whom
articles of impeachment may be preferred
shall be suspended from the exercise of
their functions during the pending of such
impeachment; the appointing power may
make provisional disappointment to replace
any suspended officer until the decision of
the impeachment.
ART. SO. The Legislature shall provide
by law for the trial, punishment and re-
moval from Office of all other officers of the
State, by Indictment or otherwise.
You have undertaken in this case to
exercise the power of suspension, although
not granted in the constitution OF 1868,
article eighty EIGHT of the constitution of
1852 being omitted in the constitutio of
1868.
Observe this is all under the title
Impeachment" which provides expressly
for the impeachment of the high officers of
the government, the Judges, Lieu
tenant Governor, Governor, Attorney
General, Justices of the Su-
PRIME Court, but no other officers.
In the same clause of the constitution
they say, that the Legislature shall pro-
vide by law for the punishment, trial and
removal from Office of all other officers of
the State, whether by indictment or other
wise: SO that when an officer was not of
such Importance that the State should be
put to the expense of a trial by impeach-
ment, the mandate was given to the Legis-
lature that it should provide by law SUBJ
stitute for impeachment. Therefore,
under the constitutions of 1915, 1852, 1858
and 1864, there was a criminal mode OF
removal provided, by impeachment of GER.
tain designated officers and by authority
delegated to the Legislature to provide
by law for removal of all other officers
by indictment. Now, since the
constitution provided for the removal of
every officer either by impeachment or in
dctment, and for their punishment for
crime. then was this clause inserted,
article ninety-seven: GAIL civil officers, ex-
cept the Governor and Judges OF the Su-
preme and inferior courts, shall be re-
moved by an address of majority of the
members of both Houses, except those
the removal of whom has been otherwise
provided by this constitution" Now,
then, if the right of removal, by address,
was not concurrent with the right OF i'm
parchment, and the right to try an officer
by indictment under article ninety-nine of
the constitution of 1852, if it were not
concurrent. the previous articles OF the
constitution provided mode for the re.
moval of everybody by impeachment or
indictment. What, then, was meant
by saying that all civil
officers, except the Governor and Judges,
shall be removed by address. That was
the question that came up. The mana
gers have said that, because Mr.. Wickliffe
can be removed under this constitution by
impeachment, he can not be removed by
address. In the case am about to read,
the argument was that the Legislature
could not remove Mr.. Hufty, the sheriff,
by address, because article eighty-nine
provided that the Legislature should pro-
vide by law for his removal from Office by
ndictment-precisely the case, precisely
the principle here involved, and how
was it decided? The Supreme Court
decided that the two powers were
concurrent, so that this principle
being correct, which will show you by
the decision itself, the constitution of
1868 differs only from that of 1852 or 1864
in this, that in the constitution Of 1868