The Ouachita telegraph. [volume] (Monroe, La.) 1865-1889, 1881-11-25
rNew Orleans states.1

rNew Orleans States.1
Our friends of the New Orleans States
suggest that Baton Rouge should con-
tent itself with the regular session, and
that we should not embarrass the spe-
ciai session with complaint against the
call madc by the Governor. We Ger.
tainly do not wish to make q factious
opposition, but Baton Rouge has been
disregarded so long that she has to |
The States should remember that in
1873 Baton Rouge was selected as the
capital by popular vote, and that If our
rights In regard to the.extra session can
be passed over, we do not see what Is
to prevent the same reasoning to apply
to the regular session. Hinc lilac
MISREPRESENTATION Rouge Adr0cate.
Our esteemed contemporary miscon-
celves the spirit of our remarks on the
subject above referred to. The States
would, In sincerity, be glad could the
extra session be held In Baton Rouge
and, as we have previously stated, were
IL entirely clear that our Baton Rouge
friends are correct in their interpreta- |
tfon of the Constitution, we might join
them In protesting against the course OF
position Is, to say the least, debatable
one, and that 1t is quite safe to assume
that Governor McEnery has not made
q mistake. 7
1t Is true that Article $50 of the Con-
stitution provides that
.sThe seat of Government shall DO and re-
main at the City of Baton Rouge"
1t is also true that Article 72 says, in
substance, that on extraordinary occa-
sions the Governor ssahall convene the
General Assembly at the seat Of gov
eminent, etc"
Were these the only provisions bear
ing on the matter there could be no
doubt as to the obligation for the extra
session to meet at Baton Rouge. But
Article 81 reads as follows:
'The General Assembly shall meet ut the
seat OF Government on the second Monday
ofMay, 1881, at IL O'Clock noon, and bien-
nially thereafter"
Now, 1.-THE Constitutional Convention
did not contemplate the probable neces-
city of and extra session, under condi-
lions which might render it impossible
or extremely inconvenient to be held
at the seat of Government designated
by the Constitution before the date re.
ferred to above, why was that data SO
positively stated as the period at which
the Genetal Assembly should first as
semble there?
Had not such a contingency been con-
templated by the Convention, articles
~ and $50 would have been sufficient,
ok1
Immediately, or as soon as practicable,
to transfer the archives and Office of
the Government to Baton Rouge.
But the convention understood that
the Statehouse was in ruins, and that
time and large sums of money would
be required to restore it. How much
time the convention could not tell.
But it felt certain that the work could
be finished by May, 1881, the period
mentioned in article 81, and hence they
fixed that time for the absolute and
full transfer of the Government and its
operations to the new capitol.
The three articles above quoted seem
to US very clearly to give the Chief Ex-
ecutive discretionary power to call any
extra session That might be necessary,
prior to May, 1882, to assemble either
in this city or at Baton Rouge, accor.
dinghy as the work and preparations
for the government at the latter place
might be advanced or too incomplete
to accommodate tho Legislature. 1t
seems clear that the obligation imposed
upon the Governor to call any extra
session at the seat of government re-
ferred to all occasions or necessities
which might arise for such sessions
subsequent to May, 1882.
flour Baton Rouge friends arc right
In holding the extra session illegal if
held in New Orleans, then all the ope-
rations of the Government since the |
inauguration of the present Admins
tration are illegal and void, and we
are ON verge of q crisis which, when |
Baton Rouge precipitates it by an ap-
peal to the courts, will involve us in !
woful chaos. This does not seem to us
to be reasonable.
We have never exchanged a word |
with the Governor mr. his adx,;co~. ~, |