The Democratic advocate. [volume] (Westminster, Md.) 1865-1972, 1882-05-06
Two Questions Considered.

The Baltimore 4mericaa of Thursday, I'M
der the caption of Signing the Bills, puts
the following questions;
Can the Governor sign any bill after the
adjournment Of the the legislature y
is there now any such person as Speaker
of the Houseg
It's with no good purpose that the Ameri-
can propounds and discusses these questions.
1t would seek to impress the people that the
acts are void, having been illegally signed,
and encourage resistance and litigation. If
: they be examined, however, the object of the
4meslcan will be apparent.
Precedent in this country is as strong as
law, and often more iealously guarded For
instance, there is not line in our constitution /
or laws against third term in the Presidency,
yet the precedent was established by Wash
ington, followed by Jefferson. Madison, Mon
roe and others, and is evenstronger grounded
in the public Mid than any provision Of our
national charter. The Republican party has
violated the constitution many times, and a
strong protest from the people has been the
only result. But, when the Republican party
attempted to give Gen. Grant a third term,
there was aroused such an opposition that
they were forced to abandon the idea Even
after lapse of one term-after the Hayes ad-
ministration had intervened-so strongly did
the people adhere to the precedent laid down
by Washington, that even then Grant was
forced to retire. He win be brought up again
in 1884. and even should he succeed in being
nominated, the people viii put him down at
the polls.
There is no provision in our constitution or
laws authorizing Legislators to delegate their
authority to others, but it is done every two
years. when they give the people the right to
vote on the question of granting liquor
licenses 1t is a precedent established years
ago. and the courts have sustained il. The
practice does not pertain to Republic; it is
that Of a Democracy Had ii been contested
when FIRST followed, it perhaps would not have
been sustained by the courts.
Just SO it is with the signing of bills afterthe
adjournment of the Legislature. 1t is very
doubtful whether the constitution authorizes
the Governor to sign acts after the adjourn
ment On the other hand the contrary would
appear. 1t expressly provides that no bill can
be introduced ten days prior to adjournment,
and bills that are unsigned six days after being
certified TO the governor, become laws without
hissignature, unless they be vetoed. There is
not line relative to signing bills after adjourn
menf. and IL the six day limit held good every
law which the Governor signed on Wednesday
would have been law without his signature.
But there is precedent for signing bills after
the adjournment of the Legislature. Il was
established years ago through necessity. and
has been followed by every Governor since.
The acts have not been tested as TO their le-
galitv on that point, and al this late day the
courts would probably Sustain them. It Is
proceeding beneficial in its results and in no
manner detrimental Ifany testy individual
would question an act signed after adjourn
ment, the courts would place the doubts I'M
der The constitution on the side Of prece-
dent, aud declare the acts legal.
is there nov any such person as Speaker
Of the House - is the second question Of the
4merican. Upon this point there is no doubt.
Mr. Keaholtz was elected Speaker. and Is
Speaker until his successor Is chosen. His
term as q member Of the House Is for two
wears. Just the same as other members. The
Legislature adiourning sine de did not yaeaie
his Office, any more than Il vacated bis place
as a member Of the House. Should an extra
session be called the officers Of the last SEES
sion would sill be the officers. as at previous
extra sessions. The Virginia Legislature has
recently had an extra session, and the officers
or the regular session served without question
1t the extra. whenshe United States Senate
met IN extra session hast fall, the Senate
changed its President pro TEN. when bargain
with Davis and Malone gave them temporary
advantage, but it brought on much discussion
and the weight Of argument was decidedly on
the side Of the Democrats, who opposed The
change. It vas claimed. and admitted BY able
men Of both parties, that officers held their
pisces for the session Of two years thar the
places ofpresiding officers could no, he subject
tochanee wheneyeroneo or the other side had a
temporary majority. Ifsuch proceeding were
permissible, as the Senate IS now 50 evenly
balanced changes could be made every day,
and If continual changes were made public
opinion would coon end them.
It will thus be seen that the Amaieaas
questions are not propounded With good IN.
tent. There is= nothing in them, when ex-
amined, and no reason exists for raising them
except to endeayor to show that the Demo-
cratic party is badly managing state affairs
and to promote litigation This must be the
reason, as the dnselicaa cannot have such
want Of knowledge az the interrogatories
wonld indicate.