The daily dispatch. [volume] (Richmond [Va.]) 1850-1884, 1880-04-07
Can tne t,overnor Remove Him9

Gan the Governor Remove Him?
The Wing has some doubts as TO tho
mower Of the Governor to remove the AT
dltor from Office. Itenters into an argument
upou the subject that would be conclusive
n that journal had not omitted some OF the
facts which make against It's theory. In Few
-orss. lie theory Is that inasmach as the
constitution gives to the Gcners' Assembly
power 70 remove the Auditor'ee csnno1 ec;
rsmoved by the Governor. Lei us look iseo|
this teschin9,
Art,rlc ~, section 10, provides for Tie
.,.,.,,n n an Auditor Of Public Accounts
=, tho General Assembly. lie shall ''cen-
s,s.. ., office for the term OF two yosrs,
wsl.ss sooner relieved" The wovos acre
m.,lcised seem to a!lueAe TO an exercise OF
mower hy the Governor, not by ise'esnersl
sssembly. Relieved" is hardy thc word
which would be emrfsyed 10 <>cnosc reno
wa, br impeachment. 1t is word'of tech
meal meauiug. II oceans in military lam
pusec lust such proceeding as'sse reno
va, Of the Auditor 10y the Governor w0uio
be.
Article v, section 10, pSoyiecs as fol-
lows:
.Tne Goyerper, Lieu,ensss- Govrrpor,
x,aaas and allsshers offending AGAR st I nc
State nv m,ladmiuistratlcD corruption, ne
xlect OF dsty, OF other e'ah ,cr.,ne OF UT
Semeanor. shalt be impeachable by the
House OF Delegates, and he prosecuted De
sore The Senate, which shall have the sole
befeDf.0
O,e of the Wigs points is that because
she. Genersl Assembly is empowered 10 re-
.noye the Auditor be csun0t be removed by
the Governor. Waving tke facts tsat the
Auditor Ia not named IN the above section,
and thu the Convection which ira1ed the
4Ceustitution knew that the Au1itor'Sas by
law made removable by the ,verror, and
that il may therefore be presumed that the
Convention intended 10 leave that power
where IL was, we call sttent0n TO the fact
that although by the section ab0F quoted
the Judges are xN 'esa6e removable by i'm
parchment, yet ny auotaer secticn (section
20, Article VIZ thesane Judges are all made
removable Simply 'sby concurrent vote OF
both houses OF the general Assembly" SO
il il proved that the Convention which
framed the Oonstatutson saw 40 objection
10 having officers removable in two differ
ent ways. And the presumption Is violent
that inssa1uch as the law empowering the
iEoyernor TO remove the Auditor had been
upon the xtatute-kook for iDany years,
and must have been wei known 10
the good lawyers In the Convention,
that body did not intend in any way
to interfere with the operation OF tbe
law In question. The Governor cannot
"take care that the laws be faithfully exc
cuted" uuiess he Is permitted to exercise
some sort Of control over his subordinaies
I'm the Capitol. Mr.. MASSEY has been guilty
OF gross nisbehavor" III ii is not " mis-
behavior" for al executive officer to treat
with contempt the decisions OF the highest
court in the Commonwealth, no officer can
ever be guilty OF that offence. IL it Is not
misbehavlor" fOr Mr.. MASSEY TO tell his
subordinates TO disregard the judgment Of
that tribunal, then there IS no such thing as
official misbehayior." II it is not "mis-
behavior" for Mr.. Massey to preach WILL
LIAM ii. SEwARD's higber-law doctrine to
the people OF Virginia, and instruct his
subordinates TO obey that law and disregard
the law OF the State as laid down by the tri
bunal OF last resort. then Mr.. MASSEY can
violate the whole decaiogue with IMMUNITY.
But let us return to the question OF the
Governors power. The General Assembly
has the power TO pass any law not pro-
hibited by the State Constitution or the
Federal Constitution. Neither one of those
instruments fOrbids the Legislature 10 pass
"A law empowering the Governor to remove
abe Auditor. Itfoiiows that the Legislature
bad the power to pass the law we ere con
>sldering, and that the Governor has the
right under the Constitution to remove the
Auditor.
The only possible reply to this last argu'
sment Is that erpressio unias. &c.-that the
naming Of one way Of removal In the Con-
ssthution is the forbidding Of remov,l iu
any other way; that the Governor can't re-
move because the Constitution empowers
the Legislature to remove. But Thu, argu
,ment, though plausible, ~ seen to be falla.
,cious The moment we remind the oLiector
that the statutory and constitutional pro.
visions do In nowise. conflict the one with
the other. The one prescribes the method
OF removal when the General Assembly IL
in session. The other provides method
OF remoeal when the General Assembly Is
not in session.
Mr.. MASSEY will think twice before he
xeiuses to Obty 6 lawful order issued to him
by, Gsvernsx HOLIDAY in the exercise OF
Ms constitutional duty to see that the laws
are faithfully executed" See II he doesn't.
EnothsrApoeal to the Readlusters.
ga Poua-Nin, II % diu>terV still nreocbao