The New York herald. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1840-1920, 1877-05-10

Mr.. O'Conor's Ideas OF Government.
The remarkable address delivered by Mr..
O'Conor in the Academy of Music on Tues
day evening was a brilliant exemplifcation
of the oft-quoted saying about the 'follies
of the WISE" The intellect of this con-
summate advocate is rather acute and in
genious than circumspect and comprehen-
sive His startling deviations from the
average sense of the community on
public questions support the maxim
that Everybody is wiser than anybody"
When at the outbreak of the civil war Mr..
OConor maintained the rightfulness of
! slavery he was not more out of accord with
the sentiment Of his countrymen than he is
now in his unique views respecting the
proper organization of civil government.
We cannot follow him over the whole ground
and will confne our comments to his two
leading practical recommendations. One
| of these is that our Legislative bodies should
consist Of a single chamber; and the other
that the Executive should not be elected
rs such, but be selected by lot from
members of the Legislature, to serve
| one month. and then give place to
another transient Governor, selected in
like manner by lot. and so on through
| the twelve months of the year. Both of
these projects are chimerical, but Legisla-
ture consisting of single chamber is not SO
wild as change of Governors every month.
Mr. O'Conor would have this strange plan
| al fa1 IN, he foIa mt w
as in the State governments.
First, as to Legislature consisting of
single chamber. It's practical effect would
be to remove all checks on crude or hasty
legislation. Even with the power of review,
amendment and rejection possessed by each
branch of the Legislature on bills passed by
the other, the Governor has frequent occa-
sion to exercise the veto power in every ses-
sion, and the vetoes are SO generally and so
manifestly correct that not one in hundred
is overruled. But the veto power is incom-
patible with Mr.. O'Conors plan of a
monthly change of Governors selected by
lot from members of the same Legislature
plausible argument in favor Of single
chamber involves a great fallacy. He says
that the conventions which frame our
written constitutions always consist of but
one chamber, and argues that if a single body
can be trusted to frame the fundamental
law a single body can also be trusted to
make the minor and subordinate laws. This
specious argument overlooks main element
OF the case. constitutional convention
does not enact constitution, but only pro-
poses plan of one for adoption or rejection
by the people, whereas the acts of Legisla-
ture are binding without submission to
the popular vote. Mr. OConor's argu-
ment cannot stand moment in the
face of this broad distinction. A body
which assemblies merely to frame pro-
posals does not need to be under the
internal check created by two chambers,
because there is a more efficient check in
the power of the people to reject its work.
But Legislature which, by the fact of its
being Legislature, enacts laws which bind
and coerce the people and does not submit
proposals which they are OF full liberty to
reject, does not stand on the same footing.
It is absurd to draw parallel between o
constitutional convention and Legislature,
and argue that the mutual checks exercised
by two chambers is not needed in the one
because it is safely dispensed with in the
other.
Secondly, as to a monthly succession of
Governors selected by lot from members of
the Legislature. This proposition is really
too grotesque for serious argument. Mr.
OConor, with the logical consistency in
which he seldom fails, would apply this
system to the federal government. Imagine
an important negotiation with foreign
! Power passing under the direction of six
different Presidents in the course of six
months If each of them were as we'll versed
! in foreign affairs rs was jefferson or
John Quincy Adams they would make sad
mess OF it; but if selected by lot from three
hundred members Of Congress our foreign
policy would be rs unintelligent as it would
be inconsistent. This system would be as
absurd as daily change of judges in the
course OF trial-as absurd as selecting a
member of the jury every day by lot to sit
upon the bench and decide the points raised
by opposing counsel. 1t is needless to argue
against so wild a crochet, for not even the
great name and fame of Mr.. OConor can
seduce anybody to think well of such a
proposition.
A Weak Spot In the Cabinet.
They say in Washington that Attorney
General Devens does not feel very comforta-