Port Tobacco times, and Charles County advertiser. (Port Tobacco, Md.) 1845-1898, 1883-03-30

The Hagerstown AcH agrees with the
TINS in The opinion that il was the duty
of the Governor TO sign all the bills passed
at the last session, before the adjournment
of the Legislature, and shares our doubts
as to the validity of laws receiving the
signature and approval If ,he Governor
after the final adjournment of the Assem-
bly,. 1t says the Governor was of the
same opinion, and expressed such views
in one Of his messages t. the Legislature.
But it says ,ha, the Legislature disregard
ed this recommendation OF the Governor,
and persisted in rushing number of i'm
portant bills through in the last hours of
the session, passing them before they were
i'll fact engrossed, and leaving them to he
engrossed and presen ed to the ! residing
officers and the Governor fnr the slgn
lures after the adjournment OF tie t.c.is-
lature. 1t maintains. therefore, that the
bills were never presented to the Governor
for approval previous to the adjournment
and were not in shape to receive his sigma
ture that he was lett to the alternative
of calling an extra session OF the Lssisla-
ture, So that the bill S could be eugrnssed
and approved, or of signing them after
the adjournment and letting them take
their chances in the courts and that he
chose the latter course. In view of these
facts, it thinks that our charges against
the Governor in this connection were lib
eral, and..tha he should not be required
to do the impossible thing of approving
bills before they were presented to- him
for the purpose.
We did not have these facts in view at
the time We wrote, and in the light of
what our contemporary says, it would
seem that We did the Governor an iujus-
tic, which We are glad to have The oppor-
tunity to repair. For however illiheral
the Governor is accustomed to deal with
those who differ from his views and wish
es. We cannot afford to adopt he Ie. tai
Eonis in dealing with him. and will never
consent TO knowingly do any one an in
justice in what may appear in this paper.
We are under the impression. however,
that a number Of the laws hat were after
wards approved 10y the Governor, had
been presented to him in eugrossed form
before the adjournment which he then de-
clined to do; aud, in any event. we think
II he 81 Il ha
tertaining, as our contemporary says he
di L. grave doub's Of the validity of laws
receiving the executive approval after the
Adjournment Of the Legislature. to have
called an extra session oftha, body. His
course would have been fully justified by
the people, and the responsibility Souid
have fallen where j, belonged, upon the
Legislature. Tine course adop ell by the
Governor wo0lf seem TO have been due
10 . very sing slar 'imidity or rather in
dsfensibls pecklessness. especially a. the
general appropriation bill was amsng the
number whose validity he regarded as
doub'fu As the Governor has not OF en-
in his official career incurred the charge
Of timidity, his action wou Il seem to be
char.eable o the latter cause
Our contemporary appears to misappre-
\ hend our views with resari Ia the prnvi-
sions of Mr.. Vandcrisr,i's bill, which we
! intirna,ed might he in conflict with the
constitution. We Ind not objcc, To the
bill because it lsAi,ed the pub ishfng 81
the laws in the aewspa ,sers Ia such - went
| into force previous To June lst hat lie
cause it only provided f'r the pub ication
Of such laws. g.ing into force prev lou. to
June fst. rs might be determined upon
/ by beard Of 'wo, of whom the Governor
was the controlling power IL is tact.
We believe. ihst several laws, passed by
the Legislature to take eff ct before June
fst and approved, were selected by the
Attorney Genera. the other member Of
this dead lock board. for publication but
he Governor. actaated as we believe by
ressntfal and improper motives, would not
consent t. their publication aud So pre-
vented j. under the operation Of Wander
ford's bill.