New Orleans Republican. [volume] (New Orleans, La) 1867-1878, 1871-04-26

s. sss.sii 4 A kis - l
5 lfhs vill g. 1band this zIpsnine Il 81
report 81 fhs Council pspceedings Ii
: subject that has called out this rathe
formidable document in length, at least
]. is the ordinance ''to provide for the NOR
efficient drainage Of the city Of New Or
leans and its environs, which is intende(
by the Council to be compliance will
the provisions Of act No. 30 of the LAS
session, and which become law without
the approval of the Governor.
The Mayor starts out with what pur.
ports to be history of the legislation, in
which he makes use of the rather unusual
language in an official communication,
that ''the Mississippi and Mexican Gulf
Ship Canal Company procured the enact
ment by the late Legislature of the law
upon which the obnoxious ordinance is
predicated. Whether the fact that some
parties interested, either from motives of
private gain or the public welfare, solicit
the passage of a law, ought to be deemed
to have weakening effect on the statute,
does not appear in the message;
but the inference is fair one that
the Mayor would hold law that had
been freely and voluntarily passed by the
General Assembly, like the one comforting
upon him the veto power, for instance, to
be much more binding than one that DR..
Noyes and his associates, or any other
company of private gentlemen, had s'pro-
cured" to be enacted. And he further
objects, or at any rate notes in the intro
duction to his message, that the company
was very prompt in notifying the Council
that it was ready to proceed with the.
work. So hastily was this notice given
that ''the ink promulgating the contract
was hardly dry before the company mott
fed the city that they were ready to go to
work" This hasty action did not COM
port with the Mayors ideas of delibera-
ton, and he therefore avails himself of
power which has been given him by the
Legislature, to arrest the Council in the
performance of duty imposed upon it |
by the same high authority.
But before going into the merits of the |
case, the Mayor pauses at the threshold |
to lecture one Of the Administrators for
what, no doubt, is a change of front on
the drainage question. The first view of
the Administrator of Public Accounts ap-
pears to have pleased the Mayor, for he
not only publishes liberal. portion of
what the Administrator then said, but in
PRODUCES it into his message in the most
terms. But we think the pub
lie will find it difficult to see the point. A
member of deliberative body has per-
feet right to change his opinion and his
vote as often as he pleases, and the vacil-
ations of the distinguished Administ1a-
Tor of Public Accounts can have no posi-
Die effect upon the constitutionality of
Ict No. 30, the ordinance under review,
II the propriety or expediency of goina
IN with the drainage business. We think,
therefore,, that to hold up the adverse
opinions of a member of the Council, ex-
pressed some weeks ago, as aereason for
'etoing the proposed measure which it
ppears he now sustains, is gratuitous on
he part of the Mayor, and entirely irrele-
ant. And the closing fact that the views
f the Administrator of Public Accounts
'ere heartily concurred in by the Coun- I
il, only establishes the fact that other Z
lembers as well as Mr.. Shaw have Il
hanged their minds. The ordinance is L
one the less legal or necessary on that n
count
We shall next notice the Mayors legal =
Elections He assumes that the COM !,
nlsory contract with the Mississippi and Il
exican Gulf Ship Canal Company is b
valid and unconstitutional, and cites as Il
lthority in support Of his assumption a ii
rmer opinion of the Council itself, and p
opinion subsequently obtained from 10
City Attorney. Neither of these =,
Unions is conclusive of anything, and g,
tn combined, even with that of the 3,
igor added, are not sufficient to destroy Of
2 natural and legal presumption in favor Gu
all the provisions Of the act. We had CT,
casion recently TO inform our respected 81,
not very brilliant contemporary, the sp
e, that it is not necessary to take di
'biscite to determine whether an act of cit
Legislature be law. And we 20 co
Il further with the Mayor, and inform V"
n that it is not even necessary to run w.
o court for permission to obey the de- 90. 90
es Of the General Assembly. When an 1h
has been formally declared unconsti- thi
ional by the courts, all parties receive be-
ice of the nullity. But until such res
laration is made the safer plan is to Mo
y the law. the
he Mayors discussion of the merits AS
let No. 80 is suggestive of the appre- ma,
lsion that he is calling in question the ~:
dom of the Legislature, and we began ~ s.o'
ear that he would actually veto the law ssr
If before he got through. But he for A
ately left it intact after having cast tire