The Portland daily press., 1881-02-09
The Messenger Question.

| L. W. WEIGH, Sec'y.
The Messenger Question.
I The position of messenger to the Govern
or and Council is not very important one,
and at first sight it might seem that con-
test over the appointment was rather trivial
| But when we consider that this may be
merely the prelude or introduction to graver
differences, the necessity of having it settled
right becomes apparent. The report Of Col.
Robie for the committee of the Council,
hereto appended, very clearly sets forth the
position of the Council in the matter, and
seems fully to justify their action in the pre-
misses. 1t is of course unfortunate to have a
divided executive, neither branch of which
| can act without the concurrence of the
other. This is one of the difficulties which
the Republicans foresaw when they deter
mined to make Plaisted Governor in obedi-
ence to the dictates of honor, principle and
consistency. They knew that he was
quite capable of doing weak and partisan
things. They couldn't imagine, however,
that he would be guilty, at the very outset
of his career, of doing so shabby thing, es
pecially considering the circumstances un-
der which he became Governor.
Within thirty minutes after he took his
seat he attempted usurpation and an in
fringement of the rights and prerogatives of
his associates in the government. He at
tempted the removal of the chosen servant
r. -
faithful messenger and worthy man-seek-
ing to put in his place minor son of his
own. In this matter the Council seems
clearly right, and the Governor clearly
wrong. Beside the long custom and the
other reasons so clearly set forth in Col.
Robie's report, the only precedent which
exists sustains the Council. In 1858, Wm,
G. Crosby, Whig, was Governor. The
Council was Democratic and elected by bal
lot Democratic messenger, John d. Rich
ards of Ellsworth, and he served as such.
That is the only case of divided executive
until now.
Furthermore, the Governor has nominated
some men for places where no vacancy ex-
lists. What shall the Council do? Co nsent
to political removals or let him remove, and
they concur, at his pleasure? 1t is not diff
cult to see whittier that would lead What
safer course can they adopt than to say there
shall be no removals, except, of course for
good cause? Why should they not say in
effect, "You are Governor, legally inst allied,
representing one-half the executive depart
ment and one-half the people,-we are CO.
ordinate branch of the department, repre-
senting Republican Legislature and one
half the people. We cannot, therefore, har-
monize upon political removals, but where
vacancies occur neither branch can act
without the concurrence of the other
Therefore we invite consultation and fair
apportionment in filling these vacancies
this to be done in the interest of the State''?
We are fortunate in having at this impor-
tant juncture Council composed of expert
enced, able, conservative and responsible
gentlemen. Their task is a difficult and del
icate one and the people should realize it's
difficulties and give their representatives
support and encouragement in their efforts
to protect the State. so far as they may,
from the ills of the Plaisted regime. This
messenger business is only the beginning of
unpleasantness, but it is strong suggestion
of what is likely to arrive. We append the
report above mentioned:
The committee of the whole Council report
ed by Mr.. Robie, their chairman, recommend
ing that all further consideration of the nomi-
nation of Harold M. Plaisted, as messenger to
the Governor and Council, be indefinitely
postponed because
1st-The nomination is without the author
ity of law. Nominations of officers for confr-
nation by the Council are made by the Cover
nor. by virtue of Art V, Sec. VIII, of the
Constitution of Maine. The "civil office"
contemplated in that section, is one existing
at the time of the nomination, by some pro-
vision of law. No such office as Messenger to
the Governor and Council is created by any
provision Of the Constitution, or by any stat
ute of the State.
2d-The employment of some suitable person
to act as Messenger, has been a long estab-
lished custom, growing out of necessity for
such public servant to take charge of the
rooms, introduce visitors, and otherwise ac-
commodate the Executive and the public hav-
ing business at that department. The person
SO employed has never taken or subscribed to
the oath or oaths required by all civil officers,
in sec. S6, chap. 2, of the Revised Statutes.
has never given bond, nor has he ever re-
ceived commission or certificate of election
or of employment. He is responsible only to
the department that employs him. No one
would think of his being removed by impeach-
ment,, or by address of the Legislature, as is
provided in Art. g. sec of the Constitution,
in relation to all civil officers, in case of mis-
feasance in office. He is merely public serv-
ant OF employe, like night watchman and
other subordinates in the State House, whose
pay may be regulated by law as in chapters
425, IA and 150, of tire Public Laws of 1879,
Or fixed by those who employ him if not so
regulated.
3d-The manner of selecting a Messenger
Tor the first twenty-five years or more, in this
State, was through committee of the Coun-
Gil, who are instructed by a vote of Council
to employ q Messenger to the Council" as he
was then called, and this committee would
hire some man at price agreed upon, to per-
form the duties of that place and make report
to the Council what they had done; and if
their report was accepted by the Council, the
man employed entered upon his duties, then
that ended the matter. About thirty years
ago different mode was adopted and that has
been uniform up to the present year. That
mode was for some member of the Council, as
part of the organization, at tneir first meet
ing, to offer an order precisely as was done at
| this Board, on the 14th inst, for the appoint
| ment OF some person. named in the order, to
| act as Messenger, and if passed by the Coun-
Gil that concluded the matter, as the accept
| ance of the committees report did under the
| former method. 1t was so done by this Coun-
Gil, with no intentional diseourtesy to the Gov
ernor, and the motion being put by the Cover
| nor, in the chair, it was passed by the unani-
nous vote of the Council. There is no record
in thissdepartment, showing the nomination.
| appointment, or suggestion of the person to be
| employed, as having originated with the Gov
| ernor, but, on the contrary, invariably initi-
ated by the Council, and in ono of the two
| modes stated.
| MThis nomination, therefore, is new method
lnaugurated by the present Governor, without
authority of the Constitution, or any statute of
or,li ir,o ,trox ,<~ea
more than half century. Its recognition by
the Council would be the creation of "civil
| office" not now known to the law, and lead to
an extension of the power of appointment by
the Executive, of a class of State employees in
the Public departments, who have thus far
been employed by, and only held amenable to
those who needed their service
The committee think it safer to adhere to
the customs which have so long been observed,
than to adopt this new departure as a preced-
ent for the future action of this Department.
Report accepted unanimously by yeas and
nays.