New Orleans Republican. [volume] (New Orleans, La) 1867-1878, 1870-03-15

tain rights are reserved; that when
men come together and form gov
eminent, it is at their own option
to limit it; and ours is limit
| ed government. An unlimited government
was thought, by our ancestors, to be an
evil. 1t was thought so at the time when
George Washington lived. 1t was thought,
from time immemorial, that there were
certain powers not to be exercised at all
by the government. Why? Because they
might be exercised wrongfully, aud hence
it was thought best that they should not be
exercised. Now, may it please the court,
We are governed by certain constitutional
principles in this country, and by the
reconstruction laws, as understand them,
and as hope they will be understood;
and | agree with my colleague, IN the hope
to see society consolidated, and to see all
good men come together in harmony. But
how is. that 10 be effected? Is 1T by
personal persecution? Is 1t by
setting aside fundamental laws Is 1t by
refusing to be governed by the law y! 1t
seems to me that this would be con-
fession. that our present system IS all
wrong.
We set out with this proposition, that
under the constitution of 1868, no man
can be deprived of his property; no man
can be deprived of shat which belongs
to him, without the commission of some
crime, by which he has forfeited his right
to it. Now, has man a right to his
office? Why, in any government, whether
it be monarchial or republican, he has
right to possess that which is his; he has
a right to his office. The learned man
ayers tell us that an Office is not property;
they contine no right to say so. They say
that no man has right to his office, even
interest, the Legislature sees fit to
abolish it.
We say that the public can not be de-
prived of the services Of an officer which
they have elected, and that this
property can not be taken away
from any person, unless it be
forfeited by some act. There are various
ways by which property can be acquired,
| and there are equally various modes by
| which property can be lost; and We have
| declared ia our own constitution that no
man can be deprived of his property with
| out compensation, or without due course Of
law. How is he to be deprived of it by
| due course of law? Has man property
in an office? Why, the Supreme Court
of the United States has declared, in two
| decisions lately, that not only has man q
title or property in his office, but he has
property even in the right to acquire it;
and they declare further, that the depriva-
ton of that is punishment, if taken away
from him. Now, this discussion has as
sumed this range; in the first place this is
alleged to be simply civil proceeding.
We do not care what name you give
| to it; we do not care under what
form you clothe it, but l do say
that to deprive us of this Office is a pun
| ishment, under whatever shape or form
you put it.
l presume. in this matter the Senate will
consider themselves court. presided over
| by the Chief Justice, organized for the
purpose of determining the guilt or in.
nocence Of the accused, and they will
convict or acquit him. There can be no
hung jury here.
The STATE of Louisiana is not here claim.
! ing the office, at the hands of Mr.. Wick
life; the State of Louisiana does not
speak through her representatives., to the
| Senate, sitting as a court, but the people
! of the State of Louisiana have a right. as
| contend, to the services of the officer
whom they have elected; how is he then
| to be deprived of his office? Is it simply
on political grounds? Political feathers.
What are they? Why, some of the best meI
in Greece were prosecuted by the Official
courts: Maria Antoinette, that beautiful
aud innocent woman, was tried anC
convicted by political court. Charles L
was tried, and, though he was acquitted
still it WAS trial; and my own Judgment
and the Judgment Of all sensible men. /:
that political trials are wrong il principle
and evils to be avoided. Yet, We are tol(
that this is political trial. To be triet
how? That this officer, elected by tn
free voice of the people, whom the,
trusted with one of the most importan
offices in the government, for so conside
it, that he is 10 be deprived of his offic
without the commission of any crime
Upon what crimes and misdemeanors cal
you convict an officer? How are you t.
ascertain what constitutes crimes and mis-
demeanors? You may find what Black
store says, but beg leave to say that
while il ordinary questions we may ge
along very well, there are in politica
trials scarcely two cases that present tn
same features.
Now, this being the case, how arr
you to proceed? Are you t.
decide according to your own opin
ion, or under the known law of tht
land? How are you to ascertain what
constitutes political offense? ask you
how? and appeal to those persons VIII
have sense enough to see that socet.
should rest on some sound basis; aDpea
to all who want peace and prosperity il
the land. Are officers created for the us
of the State, or are they simply to be q
the mercy of simple accidental majorit,
of the members of the Legislature? An.
are they to determine those questions o
political offe nses? Why how can there b
any peace, or security, if judge can b
flied, not for any crimes or misdemeanors
but because on simple political question
he may have given improper decisions
It is simply question Of politics, then.
Now. then, in each of the articles G
impeachment, they say, what ? They sa
that George NJ. Wickliffe was guilty of hig
crimes und miademeanors in one instaac
they say crime, and in all others misde
meanOrs.
Now, what is misdemeanor in office
can there be such thing as misdemeano
in office There may be crime. but Il
misdemeanor, because the Suprem
Court long before the convocation of thi
body, in the good times when whoIesom
; principles of law existed, declared tina
there was no such thing as misdemeeno
known to the law Of Louisiana. L thi
law or not If it is law are you willing t
be bound by it? hope there is not on
,