The New Orleans bulletin. [volume] (New Orleans [La.]) 1874-1876, 1875-05-18


4 Legislature and subordinates profassed to
q IaCting under them. Under the Constitute
. an election would take place in Novembe
}, 1874. and though Governor was not then
It be chosen, Legislature was, and this Gle
It ton would enable the people to take substal
; tial control into their own hands. Such ami
Q cipations might well be INDUCED, even q
! ter making large allowances for election tricl
: cry and fraud, If the Kellogg government WI
!. 80 entirely lacking in popular support g W,
4 generally believed
But all anticipations proved greatly del
q Gent in their allowances TOR the resources
that government had what was believed to
an impregnable position in the election law
of the State, which seem ingeniously cor
, trived to enable q corrupt Executive to PEI
petuate his power. The whole machinery
the election laws was in the bands of tn
: Governor, who appoints all the officers. 1t
, 30 unusual in the States that the local election
officers shall be appointed by the Governo,
that this of itself was well calculated to excit
suspicion, which, however, might, to som
extent, have been allayed by the provision O
statute that the members of each election
board should be selected from the differen
political parties How much regard was pail
this will be apparent when it is seen that tn,
H
which the local boards were to send their re
turns for final canvass, and which, by the law
was to represent call parties" was, in fact
made up of the Governors party, anc
though one conservative was afterward.
placed upon the board by concession to an
| almost universal public demand, this one
representative of ssall parties but the Gov.
ernor's soon resigned, when a course of de-
liberate fraud was entered upon, leaving the
whole business of the Returning Board in the
hands of single party.
So far as this board was to act in canvassipe
the votes cast in the various precincts for
State officers, it answered to the ordinary State
canvassing board, and there could be no rea-
sonable objection to its being composed ex.
clusively of members Of one party. Its du-
ties would consist in an examination of the
local returns as to their genuineness, and q
footing up OF the totals, with declaration of
the results shown by such totals. These du-
ties would be merely ministerial, and while
the declaration would constitute prima .facie
evidence of the result of the election, it
would not be conclusive adjudication But
the election law of Louisiana made the State
Returning Board something more than
board Of State canvassers. It gave the board
authority to go behind the returns
whenever they were accompanied by
any protest of supervisor of registration or
commissioner of election, showing, under
oath, that violence, intimidation, or corruption
at or near the place of registration OF cleo
ton had prevented a fair, free, peaceable and
full vote; and to inquire into and pass upon
the effect Of such unlawful action. This evil
IDENTIFY conferred upon the board judicial
functions on cases in which protests were sent
up, but if they could exercise such functions
in other cases, it must be upon grounds not
as valid in other States.
Whatever may be thought of other powers
conferred upon the Returning Board, one of
The provisions of the election law must GER
ainIy be conceded to be very extraordi- |
cary. We ref-r now to the provis- |
on which made the board Judge |
# the election Of members of the Legislature, |
'equircd them to make return of those elected |
o the Secretary of State, who in turn was to |
transmit q list to the Clerk of the last House |
md Secretary of the Senate, respectively; and |
which provided further, that the persons
famed in the Clerks lists, ''and none other"
hould be competent to organize the two
Houses respectively.
We say this provision is very extraordinary,
or several reasons:
l. 1t is in utter disregard of fundamental
rinciple ofrepresentative government, as ola
least as the reign Of the first Stuart, that
ach House of the Legislature is to Judge of
he qualification, election and return Of its ,
wn members. That narrow and arbitrary {
undertook by his proclamation for |
is first Parliament to limit the choice of the ,
lectors in selecting representatives,
nd outlawed," as those who were not to be S
INT up. The electors of Bucks disregarded +
le admonition, and selected Sir Francis t
GOODWIN, who had been outlawed in civil pro. @
,edings. The sheriff refused to make the r
sual return, and another election was had, &
Id Sir John Fortescue was returned. The e
ouse OF Commons, then in the infancy of its &
over, and with but an imperfect understand O
g of the privileges ever since exercised with 9
'neral consent and appreciation, ignored the il
striction in the Kings proclamation, and b
we Sir Francis Goodwin his seat. The con- 8,
oversy over this action-the anger of the t.
ing, and the refusal of the house to listen to IS
Q advice or remonstrance Of the lords and G,
g Judges-are too familiar to historical stu Il
nts to require that the facts should be re- IL
ated here. 1t is true that the house at Ii
,gth, with the consent of Sir Francis Good re
n, and In order to avoid a quarrel with the ii
ng at the beginning Of his reign, consented X
a compromise. under which both Good win fu
Fortescue gave way to new election, but ca
, right of the house to judge finally on the eli
estions which the case raised has been to
'sidered as settled from that or
.iodf In America this parlia- m
ntary privilege of legislative bodies has al til
rs been regarded as one resting upon an
ut and undoubted right, as UNREASONABLE CO
the right to punish contempts Of its author ca
and as necessary to the proper execution tn
is powers.t And though it is customary sh
leclare in our constitutions that each House sh
II be the final judge in such cases, the de- ca,
alton is only out Of abundant caution, Just off
by the declaration that no man shall be WI
rived of life or liberty without due process ut
aw, we negative the existence of an arbi. tee
y authority which, without any such de- SD,
alton, is by implication denied in all pal
governments.i If. therefore, the Legis- the
re had the power to make this Returning Co
I'd the judge Of the election and return Of onl
nbers of the Legislature, its exercise of Wit
power was at war with the principles of ele
,bican government, and might Justly ex. It
the liveliest apprehensions. tes
BY the Constitution of the State such a left
I'd could not have pewer conferred upon lea
n such as was assumed to be exercised Lei
instrument expressly provides (Tit. 2, sea
34) that each house shall be Judge of the bee