Santa Fe daily New Mexican. [volume] (Santa Fe, N.M.) 1885-1897, 1890-05-05
Section II of article 4 is as follows:

Section II of article is as follows:
Each house shall have power to pun
ish it's members for dsorderly behavior
or for absence without permission of the
house, and by vote of two-thirds Of all
its members to eXpel any member, but
not second time for the same offense to
enforce obedience to its process, and to
punish by imprisonment, not extending
beyond the session, any person not a
member, for contempt or for disOrderlv
behavior in its presence, obstructing any
of its proceedings or any Of its members
or officers in the discharge of their duties
or for any assault, threatening, or abuse
OF member for words spoken in debate
but such punishment for contempt or dis
orderly behavior shall not bar criminal
prosecution for the same offense."
The portion which Mr.. Ross condemns
is evidently the clause with regard to ''any
assault, threatening or abuse of q mem
her for words spoken in debate"
One would suppose from what
he says that this was most extraordinary
and novel provision, but similar clauses
can be found in the constitutions of
Georgia, Massachusetts, New Hampshire,
perhaps others, as | have had no time to
make an extended and careful search on
this point. The language used is almost
identical with that in the constitution of
West Virginia. Such arguments as Mr..
Ross presents could, with equal prepriety
and force, he urged against the creation
Of any Legislature whatever. The powers
Of the legislature must of necessity be of
the most ample character, and there is
Away the possibility of such powers be-
ing abused, but We know from experience
that very rarely are they abused. The
reason of this is obvious, and is to be
found in the fact of the direct responsible
ity of the legislators to the people who
created them.
AS Mr.. Ross has seen fit to refer to an
act of the last legislative assembly OF New
Mexico as an "atrociOus libel law" evil
IDENTITY for the purpose of casting some dis
credit on the legislature, invite your at
tention to the law, which you will find on
page ii Of the Session Laws of New Mex
leo for the year 1889. There can be no
doubt that you, as a lawyer and law
maker, will fail to discover anything
'atrocious" in the law.
3.
Il is trne that the constitution requires
for the passage of bill the vote of a ma
jorty OF all the members elected to each
house, and that the clause as to the veto
power in terms requires the vote of two
thirds of the members present to pass a
bill over the governors veto. But is it
certain that these provisions have the
effect suggested by Mr.. Ross? He says
hat bill might be passed over the gov
ernor's veto by less number than is re-
CURED for ts original passage before the
veto. Section Is of article provides
that mo bill shall become law
except by vote of the majority Of all the
members elected to each house" Clearly
this is applicable to the vote by which
any bill beComesa law, whether before or
after the vote. 1t is a cardinal rule of
construction that constitutions and stat
utes are to be 80 construed that effect is
to be given if possible to the whole in
strument and to every section and clause.
"If different portions seem to conflict,
the courts must harmonic them il prsC-
ticable and lean in favor of a construc-
ton which will render every word opera
tive, rather than one which may make
some idle and nugatory."
COoley's Constitutional Limitations,
page IS.
Such q construction rs that given by
Mr.. Ross would make the words OF the
clause above quotedNas to majority ofall
the members elected, idle and nuga-