Oxford Democrat. [volume] (Paris, Me.) 1833-1933, 1882-08-29

of the governor to remove him withou
the "consent" of the Council, and re-
quested the governor to submit the ques
ton Of his authority to the SUPREME
Court. To this communication the gov
ernor made no reply. Thereupon The
Council, in courteous manner requested
the governor TO join them in the proceed
ings necessary to submit the question tc
the Court This he declined to do, where
upon the Council, as the Constitution pro-
vides, made up the case and submitted
the following question to the Court: "Has
the governor the power Of removal with.
out the concurrence Of the council in man
ner as claimed by him." The Court took
ample time to examine the case and came
to the unanimous conclusion that the gov
ernor has no power to make removals
without the consent" of the Council.
The Reporter of Decisions was selected
by the governor for removal because the
act creating the Office says that such Off
Ger :" shall hold his Office during the plea
ure of the Executive" On this point,
after referring to the use of the word in
the Constitution and Statutes and by the
Courts and early officials Of the State, the
Court declared that "the words the Ex-
ecutive are employed to embrace in one
general in one general term both the gov.
ernor and council"
THE DECISION OF THE COURT IGNORED.
Despite this unqualified opinion Of the
tribunal 10 which the Constitution refers
all disputed questions of law for arbitra-
ment, Governor rlais,ed has refused to
recognize the force which the Constitution
gives to decisions. Until the Garcelon
conspirators declined to obey the decision
of the Court which blocked the way to
their usurpa;ion. the opinions of the Su-
preme Court had the binding force of pos
tive mandates with State officers but
following the solitary precedent of the
Garcelon cabal, Governor Plsisted has
not only assumed the preroga,ives Of the
council. but has condemned the opinion
of the tribunal created by the Constitu-
ton to interpret the law. 1t would be.a
no more fragrant disregard of the court If
a Sheriff should refuse to enforce its
judgment or refuse TO serve its wri,s.
Since that time Col. Spaulding has been
recognized by the Supreme Court as It's
Reporter, but Governor Plaisted has re-
fused to permit him to draw the salary
he has earned When the council has
made and passed report appropriating
money to pay all salaried officers, Gov
ernor Plais,ed strikes out the amount
voted to the Reporter of Decisions, thus
changing and classifying the report which
the council has signed and passed, and
making it his own without the shadow
of authority. And yet this council which
has been denounced as quarrelsome and
cap,ious, has permitted this high-handed
proceeding to go on without attempt to
resist it. Governor Plaisted in his letter
Of acceptance, makes no reference to the
Spaulding case or the opinion of the court,
which declares his assumption of the
power to remove officers TO be unconsti-
tu,ional and which makes his attempt TO
do so an usurpation. This is we'll; hav-
ing ignored the opinion of the court, it is
easy to ignore its existence. 1t is the
only way by which he could escape
confession that he is violating the Con-
stitution and the laws as construed by the
supreme Coull'
GOVERNOR PLAIsTED's COMPLAINT.
The governor, in his letter accepting
the Democratic nomination, says: 1.-The
council had sought to dictate appoint
ments to Office" and to prove it, goes on
to give report of the Committee on Re-
form School, where it respectfully ad-
vised" the governor to reappoint Albion
Little as Trustee of that institution. 1t
is the duty of the council to "advise" the
governor, and it did it in this case in the
form of report Of the committee to which
a nomination for that Office was referred.
1t is difficult to see where dictation comes
in here.
If Governor Plaisted has carefully read
the Constitution he must know that two
powers are necessary to make an appoint
ment-the governor and council. 1t de-
clares that the governor shall nominate
and, with the advice and consent Of the
council, shall appoint" If the only duty
of the council were to confirm, why have
have a council: And yet the political
experts who made the Maine Democratic
platform proclaim that the action of the
council in the rejection of nominations
was in "derogation of the Constitution
and subversive of the popular will" If
the opinion of the Supreme Court to the