The daily dispatch. [volume] (Richmond [Va.]) 1850-1884, 1874-04-01
IA a,ss bsts Se eonssf ssys:
duote literally: ssssysssss .- ssssss

Il
chief executive oaleer thereof: and VINO .l., sc
SHs ne s"es s the .'rSa. s
TO suspend or remove ssach osasers rn .ss,,e
they be elected or arpointea; TOT tu nian' to,on
and vti,age eGcers, sotose or Gp sfffa
soa shan slsessa 81 sssos;; , q s'9 ssfss;
ss sg2.zss 81 ssss ~
o ynGss a eessR and n .Ss
o1ices may be hereafter createa, o. y the Camera
cy sns P sIpees
ellis shall hold no other once ~, nlnnrsI Assembly
ofcer shall hold seat ~ In CONFLICT viii
Al iams Of Of nreccding sections shalt be volt
from rre and after til. adoption Of this Constitution.
lie shall have power to suspend or remoy
the various city officers, whether they D
elected or appointed. Now what says tn
| charter? -.
Section rchapter 81. The hustings or corpora
lion court for the Guy OF ~ a san ue
this act for matfeasance, mistssance gross mcgee
of ottical duty or for gross incompetencS;, suc
removal to be deemed racasson 81 eEs sd nv n
Judge Of the said court until the neat general e3ee
ton.
So it seems this charter proposed to do ex
actly what the Appeassays emo man OF an!
intelligence or information " thinks could d.
done. We quote again from the appeal: e
Our contemporary says: The Conslitut,Gtn, q q
| Virginia recognizes councils as the BODIES WhicI
must govern afi cities, and the Legislature canno
deprive common councils OF this right ana powea
Is that soY The only allusion made In the ConsIt
tuition Of yirgns to city councils Is In section q
Of article 9, which says: bali ,,,, ~
Members Of common councils snaii >. p6 pa "a.
aud mn ptf
seat In the General Assembly"
Now where, we ask, Is the authority FOR saying
mon councils as the sole repositories Of municipal
legislative authority Their powers and duties are
not defined by the Constitution at all. suppose
here was no charter for the city OF Petersburg tano
the charter is only law PASSED by The Legislature
there would then he no common councli, Douy
which receives truly Its very reath and being from
The charter and through 1t from the Legislature
1t is too bad to assert that the members
of the Legislature were such asses as to pass
the'charter bill in the form in which they
did if they had the power to do away WIN
the common council ITSELF Upon what
POSSIBLE idea could that charter have been
framed except upon the theory that the Con-
stitution recognizes common councils as the
bodies which must govern all cities, and
they could not be done away with? Why
authorize board of municipal commits
sioners to dominate the council if the coun-
Gil could have been swept out of the way /?
That device won't answer. That point has
been settled by the action of the Legislature.
We tell the appeal that under the Consti.
tuition the Legislature cannot take away
from any city any officer or authorities
which the Constitution recognizes or pro-
pides for. The Legislature cannot repeal
,ity's charter as to these officials. Formerly
It could; but that was because the Consti-
luton itself made no provision for the gov
eminent of cities. Now the Constitution
provides for certain officers for all cities and
owns containing five thousand Inhabitants,
nd the Legislature can no more deprive
hose cities and towns of those officers than
eau deprive the State Of its Governor. Or
be counties of their officers. All such city
Ulcers would if the city's charter were
epealed hold on to their offices under the
revision of the Constitution which declares
nat all officers shall continue to discharge
he duties of their Offices "after their terms
f service have expired untilth successors
ave qualified" This last We lay down as
be law in 1S74-not in 1868.
We quote from the Appeal again:
After enumera,lng what officers shall be elected
y the peope-to wit: Commonwealth'S attorney,
ity sergeant, Treasurer, Commissioner of The
revenue, Mayor, and Clerk Ithese are all-the vi.
rtice Of the institution provides that all other
otnted. as the General Assembly may direct. Now
Thy may not the Legislature direct that oudTd |
nay be appointed with powers of appointment Us
trccts, Superintendent OF the Waler-w orks. City
.ugineer, Police Justice, policemen ana oincers OF
be fre departmentEnone Oh T hI Tho onst, UE
flices are recognized In any way oy the Cohstilu-
lon?
For the reason already given that it is the
,rovince of the common council to do all
hese things. But the Constitution contains
10 such provision as the appeal supposes it
|oes, We have quoted its language above.
rhe words in italics are all the words that
efer to city officers SO far as the point now
,efore us is concerned. "The authorities "
# city are the mayor and its council-not
city Judge elected by the Legislature. The
sentence commencing "aA other officers"
means of course all other than city or town
is, State, county, and township
officers. This is a queer place for such
provision, but we think that is its evident
intention.] ... -, -...
Finally: The charter and the appears
arguments are based upon the erroneous
idea that the Legislature can confer upon a
new officer the functions usually belonging
to an officer named in the Constitution if the
Constitution itself does not define those
functions. This is gross error, as we can
prove in moment. The Constitution pro-
yides "for each circuit a circuit judge" II
does not define the duties Of the circuit
iud.es. but leaves that duty to the Legislature.
Now will any sane man contend that the
Legislature could appoint "judicial commits
in every circuit to perform part
of the duties by custom entrusted to the
circuit Judges? No indeed. And no more
can the Legislature do what it undertook to
do when it passed the Petersburg charter
bill.
BRUTUa FULMEN.-The papers quote the
Lexington Gazette as the author Of the fol-
lowing threat:
at is one of the easiest matters in the
world 10 set up new State of the Valley.
"Congress will be willing. The voters Ia
majority will consent.