The New Orleans daily Democrat. [volume] (New Orleans, La.) 1877-1880, 1879-07-30
LIMITATION OF LEGISLATIVE POW
FRS,


stitutlons, and especially In the present one,
are embraced under this head.
The wild and reckless legislation OF the last |
twelve or fifteen years has been the main
source OF the widespread decentralization and
NAL administration Of our affairs. 1t would
tire our readers to sketch or dwell upon the
exercises and evils resulting from this I'M
bridled abuse OF political power by the tenn
porary and irresponsible legislatures that
have been entrusted with the lawmaking
power It Is more useful employment to
expose the source and exhibit the remedy for
this, the greatest Of all our political evils,
the fruitful spring Of woes unnumbered to
this long-oppressed, harried and lll-governed
community. The late Convention appears to
have fully mastered the causes and applied
the proper eorrectves for this unhappy condi-
tlon Of our political administration and legis-
lation.
Almost from the foundation Of our eOnfed-
crate system tho doctrine has been main
tanned by the courts that the legislatures OF
the States possessed all the powers not pro-
hibted to them by the constitutions OF the
Federal government and the State. This
doctrine Is the reverse of that applied to the
Federal Legislature, which has always been
restricted to such powers as are expressly
granted or necessary and proper to the exeoa-
| tion OF the same.
| Thence the wide range Of doubtful powers
exercised by our State Legislature. 1t
could pass any laws, exercise any powers
not prohibited by the constitution. The re-
served powers Of the people, If not
expressly mentioned In the constitu-
tion, were ignored and disregarded.
Our Legislature became moro omnipotent
than the British Parliament. To remedy this
great evil and restrict the baneful effects OF
this doctrine 1t has become necessary to in
troduce into the State constitution great
1 many limitations and restrictions which were
omitted from our older constitutions. It Is
these that have extended to such length our
new constitution.
Our new constitution has q long list OF
these limitations, borrowed chiefly from the
recent constitutions Of Pennsylvania and
1 Georgia.
i The first embrace regulations for the more
4 deliberate enactment of laws and their pro-
mitigation.
u ALI bills must receive majority OF the
votes of each house of the members elected,
and the names Of said majority must be re-
corded In the journal Of each.
Every bill, even after its enrolment, must
be signed by the presiding officer OF each
house, and before signing may be read on the
demand of five members. After SO signing IN
open house the bill must be taken at once or
the same day to the Governor by the Clerk o.
the House or Secretary OF the Senate.
The Governor Is allowed five days to con-
slider the bill. Ii he disapproves 1t must be
returned to the house In which 1t originated,
and by vote Of two-tnirds of the members
, elected the veto may be set aside and the bill
, become law. II not returned by the Gov.
ernor In five days it will become law, unless
, the Legislature by adjourning shall prevent
/ its return, in which case it shall not be law.
!, beneficial enlargement of the veto power
OF the Governor, first introduced into the Con-
federate constitution, has also been adopted,
which gives the Governor the power to disap
, prove OF any item or items OF appropriation
, bills, and to approve others. This is good
corrective of the great abuse OF log-rolling and
omnibus bills. Such change Is much needed
in our Federal constitution.
No law is to take effect until promulgated,
i except the general appropriation act or that
for the expenses of the General Assembly.
i PRONUNCIATION Is made by publication in the
. at such place of publication, and in all other
parts Of the State twenty days after such
i publication.
! Beside the other provisions contained