The Bossier banner. [volume] (Bellevue, Bossier Parish, La.) 1859-1952, 1889-11-21

Oh S1SCbIOU sSNS4A Up dP JOAASOO ~ SAAeAp
body, and that no revision of regis
tration shall be made prior to hold
ing the election or elections con-
templated by the Act. On these
subjects the provisions of the general
election laws are different, hence the
contention is that the Act under dis
cussion is constitutionally vicious for
the reason that it proposes to amend
the general election laws byreference
to the titles only, and for the further
reason that it exhibits Legislative
attempt to enact special or local
law by the partial repeal of general
law. Ayowedly and inevitably the
election ordered by the Act was Of
necessity a special election. Article
$50, which is the only mandate of
the Legislature on the subject, pro-
vides in express terms, that sail laws
removing parish seats shall,
before taking effect, be submitted to
the electors of the parish, n at
a special election held for that pur-
pose, and be adopted by a majority
of votes cast at such election"
That construction of the Article
flows from its plain and unambiguous
language, it is nof only conceded to
be correct by plaintiffs counsel, but
it is pressed as an argument.
Now from the very text of Act SO
of 1877 as amended by Act 101 of
1882, which contains the general cleo
ton laws of the State, itappears that
they are intended to apply exclusive
ly to elections of State, district, par
ish aud municipal officers and of
Presidential electors and members of
Congress. There is no reference to
special elections for the removal of
parish seats in the amendatory act
of 1882, and there is, as there could
not be, any intention to regulate
such elections, in, the Act of 1877,
for the plain reason that the consti-
tutional provision which gives them
birth was itself not yet in existence.
It is therefore safe to conclude that
Article $50 cannot be construed as
requiring such elections to be con-
Quoted under the general election
laws, nothing in the Article or in any
other part of the Constitution directs
the manner in which such elections
shall be conducted, or suggests any
inference that the General Assembly
as inhibited from enacting special
regulations for the conduct of the
elections contemplated by the article.
Hence follows the irresistible conclu-
sion that the inherent power of the
Legislature to legislate on the sub
lject matter is unchecked or unre-
Estricted by any constitutional linita-
ton. It therefore existed and It's
exercise in the Act of 1883 is fully
warranted. It was in the exercise of
that unquestioned power that the
law-maker provides for the conduct
of the election in the 18th, 9Th, 7th
and 9Th sections of the Act. No
I.portion of the Act, and no language
used In its entirety can justify the
assumption that the statute purporta
or intends to repeal, amend, or in any
way alter any other law in the statute
books, and particularly any section
or provision of the existing general
election laws of the State. These
laws are yet in full force in their
original autonomy, unaltered and un,
touched by the statute under discus
cussion, or by any subsequent legis-
| ton that we are aware of, or which
| has been pointed out in this contest.
Until such legislation occurs, as it
was conceded in argument, any cleo
ton for Office to be hereafter held in
the State must be conducted by the
provisions of the general election
laws which are now contained in Act
50, of 1877, as amended by Act 1O1,
of 1882.
What then becomes of the argument
that either of those general laws has
been amended or modified by the Act
under discussionP AS it is demon
strated that the Legislature had the
untramelled power to regulate the
special election which it's constitu-
tional duty required it to order, it
follows that it had the unquestioned
right to borrow, as it were, certain
rules which it found suited to the
purpose in hand from the general
election laws, aud that, and nothing
else, is the purport and effect of the
eighth section of the act. As soon
as the elections ordered thereby have
been held, the object of the legisla
ton is accomplished, its mission is
filed, and to all intents and purposes
of future action it will cease to have
any effect or any existence.
But notwithstanding the foregoing
considerations the point is made that
by providing special rules for the con-
duct of that election the Legislature
has transgressed constitutional lmi-
tationa
4.
And that brings ua to plaintiffs
fourth ground of objection, which
rests on Article 46. which ia tn tho