The weekly clarion. [volume] (Jackson, Miss.) 1863-1882, 1873-12-04
The EIection.-.GOverno Powers.

sistent in dealing out Justice disapprov
ing what we did not like and in praisin.
when commentator was deserved. Ii
the matter of the election, we could no
have done otherwise than approve hi.
decision to square his action by the Con
stitHtion, which requires that election,
shall be "biennially." As the Chief Elk
ecutive of the State he is peculiarly stu
ated. To a weak and vacillating man
his condition would be a very embar
RAISING one. To a man whose only rule
of action is a conscientious discharge Of
duty, it offers no stumbling block what
ever 1t so happens, that in dischargine
bis obligation to the Constitution and the
law, and ia conforming to the opinion OF
the soundest jurists in the State, he may
seem to be consulting his own interests,
in trying to exc out his tenure of office
for one year longer. Although such a
position may be annoying, to a man of
sensibility, yet the requirements of duty
must be held paramount to all personal
considerations. The jibes and the jeers
of the censorious and fault-fnding, can
not be avoided by those Oh whom great
responsibilities are thrown. 1t is the
price which must be paid for reputation
and for the confidence and regard of good
and just men.
Those men who know Governor Powers
will admit that his views in regard to the
invalidity of the late election, are based
on the honest conviction of his Judgment.
1t is no late discovery, no new device, to
prolong his tenure Of power. As long
ago as January last, when he had every
reason to suppose he would receive the
nomination for Governor, he saw the diff
ficulty likely to arise from this conflict of
the laws, and called the attention of the
Legislature to the subject; that by time
ly legislation they might avoid the pre-
sent imbroglio. He did his duty, but
the Legislature did not act upon his
suggestion.
AS the time for the election approach
ed, this subject naturally enough claimed
his attention. What did duty require
of him? Should he have held his peace,
and allowed things to take their course
the election to be held-and all the diff
fculties likely to arise, from the disputed
question of the validity or invalidity Of
laws passed by Legislature elected in
Nov, 1872, to be perpetuated and added
to the other troubles which bcset the
State? If so those who now censure
him, would then have been still more
wide-mouthed in their denunciations. If
he had waited till after the election, he
might have subjected himself 10 the i'm
putation of being actuated by personal
feeling and dissatisfaction at the result.
He saw the people of the State about
to engage in an embittered party strug-
gle over an election, which would be inval
id if held. Here was but one course left
for him to pursue, that was to convene
the Legislature in session to decide this
questionable same Legislature, whose
attention he had called to the subject
ten months before. He consequently
issued his proclamation convening them
His message to that body on the sub
iect reflects great credit upon him, in Ian
guage plain and to the point--free from
all imputation upon the motives of any
yet expressing his opinions in bold and
manly terms, without evasion or subter-
fuge he left the responsibility for any
evils which might follow, where it pro
perly belonged.
The action, and also the non-action of
the Legislature constitute a part OF the
history of the res costa of this question.
There was evidently majority in both
Houses, of those then constituting the
Senate and House Of Representatives,
concurring in opinions with Gov. Powers.
The House of Representatives, more
lately elected in its entirety, and there
fore more likely to reflect the popular
will, acted promptly on the subject, by
passing a deelaratory law, setting this
vexed question, and providing that the
election should in conformity with the
constitutional provision for biennial cleo
tiors take place in Noy, 1876 In the
Senate, of those respectively holding seats
in that body there was a majority who
held the same now, to make the laws but
to execute them.
Now, what is the further duty of Gov.
Powers, under the circumstances ? With
his firm conviction Of judgment, that the
late election is invalid with the knowledge
as proven bv the record, that majority
in both branches of the Legislature con-
cur in opinion with him, with the patent
fact that large portion of the legal talent
of the State sustains his view Of the case
what can he do, but test this question
before the highest legal tribunal IN the
State? He can not do otherwise. tie
would be recreant to duty if he did not.
If he beIieves-and both branches Of the
Legislature believe, and the greater por-
ton of the Legal minds OF the State be-
lieye that under the Constitution, the
people of the State entrusted to him
the chief executive power till Nov, 1876.
then Gov. Powers would be untrue to
those who elected him and wanting in Il
deity to the principles of representative
government, if he were to allow the Con