Daily Kennebec journal., 1914-02-27

it is exercising the unusual powers ex-
pressly conferred upon it by the Con-
| stitution, powers somewhat akin TO
| those of a judicial tribunal The two
are absolutely distinct and the reIereIl- en-
dunn applies to the one but not to the
| other.
This legislative power is specified.
and defined in Article Nv of the Con-
stitution, which in part first, treats OF
the House of Representatives as one
branch of the Legislature, i'm part sec
ond. of the Senate as the other, and in
part third, of the Legislature as
| whole. composed of both branches.
| 1t is this Article " which in ex-
press terms is amended by the resolve
/ Resolves 1907. Chapter 121, and 1t is
| the only article in the Constitution. that
is thereby amended.
Section / of part first of Art. " is
amended by striking out the words
the style of their laws and acts, shall
be "Bt it enacted by the Senate and
ture assembled" and inserting in place
| thereof, but the people reserve TO
! themselves power to propose laws and
to enact or reject the same at the polls
| independent of the Legislature, and al
SO reserve power at their own option
| to approve or reject at the polls any
| act, bill. resolve or resolution passed
by the joint action of both branches of
| the Legislature, and the style of their
laws an dacts shall be BE 1T enacted
by the people of the State of Maine.
linen lOIlUWS the dfneliuiileHt W oSC-
tion / of part third of Article " so
as to read: .tThe Legislature shall con-
vene on the first Wednesday of jan
uary, biennially, and, with the eXcep-
| tion hereinafter stated shall have full
| power to make and establish all rea-
sonable laws and regulations for the
defence and benefit of the people of
| this State, not repugnant to this Con-
stitution nor to that of the United
/ States.
And finally carries the various sec
tions. numbers 16 to %, which provide
for the initiative and referendum and
which are made additional to part third
of Article ", that part. before amend
ment consisting of Is sections only.
The purpose and scope of these
amendments are obvious. The design
was to have the legislative power not
/ final but subject to the will of the
! people. a will to be called into exercise
/ by the somewhat complicated ma
chinery of the referendum. Before
amendment their laws and acts bore
the title of BE it Enacted by the Sen
ate and House of Representatives in
/ Legislature assembled" Since amend
ment the title has been BE II enacted
i by the People of the State of Maine,
the people and not the Legislature be-
ing the real arbitors of the laws to be
| finally accepted. That is, the central
| idea of the charge was to confer the
law-making power in the last ANALYSIS
upon the people themselves a step from
representative toward democratic
+ form of government. This. too marks
! the Limitation of the amendment. III
applies only to legislation, to the max
| ing of laws, whether 1t be a public act.
/ a private act or resolve having the
force of law.
This is shown clearly and conclu
Sively by the language of Section of
part third of Article ". under the gen
! eral head of Legislative power"
Every bill or resolution having the
/ force of law to which the concurrence
of both houses may be necessary
which shall have passed both
houses. shall be presented to the Gov
ernor. and If he approve. he shall sign
| it," etc. The referendum applies and
was intended to apply only to acts or
resolves of this class. to every bill
or resolution having the force of law
that is. to what is commonly known as
/ legislative acts and resolves, which are
passed by both branches, are usually
| signed by the governor and are em-
bodied in the Legislative Acts and Re
solves. as printed and published. And
the words NO act or joint resolution
+ of the Legislature etc, before quoted,
1 in the referendum amendment must be
construed In the light of the context
considering all the sections and parts
and articles together as meaning no
act or joint resolution of the Legisla-
ture having the force of law This is
| the simple and plain Interpretation OF
simple and plain language.
| So much for the Legislature as law
! making body and for the class OF acts
and resolves covered by the referen-
dunn
Now let us turn to another and dis
tinct power lodged with the Legisia-
ture by the Constitution. that of pre-
pairing an address to the Governor Tor
| the removal of public officer rms
power is conferred not under Article
! ", before considered, the article which
was amended by the referendum, but
under distinct provision. viz: Section
3 of Article TX, the article being en-
titled General Provisions and COW
ering a wide variety of subjects. Sec
| ton 5 reads: Every person holding
any civil Office under this State, may
be removed by impeachment for misde-
meanor in office: and every person hold
| ing any Office may be removed by the
governor with the advice of the coun-
ell on the address of both branches of
| the Legislature" This section remains
unrepealed and unamended. The refer
endum amendment did not refer to ii
and did not affect it. Under this sec
tion and within this distinct category
falls the resolution in the case at bar.
1t was passed by the Legislature in no
sense as legislative act, law nor
| q proposed law. but was rather in the
nature of a complaint in criminal
proceeding. 1t was the first step in
setting in motion the machinery of re-
moval, and in the exercise of an ex-
traordinary power conferred upon one
| ernment, but entirely apart from the
ordinary powers of legislation as such.
II was resolution, or vote'or expressed
determination to proceed to the trial OF
a public officer. 1t preceded the trial
itself, was preliminary to 1t. and the
logical conclusion of the theory of the
contention is that as this resolution
could not become effective until at least
the expiration of ninety days from the
adjournment of the Legislature, the
subsequent trial whether held or not
and its outcome whether favorable or
not to the accused would be wholly i'm
material since the people have the
right to determine whether the reso.
luton should be effective and any trial
at all held. This, of necessity, would
work a repeal of so much of Section
) of Article TX as relates to address
proceedings and would effectually de-
prive the Legislature of the power
thereby expressly conferred, because II
no resolve of this nature can take eff
feet until the expiration of at least 90
days after adjournment, and perhaps
not even then, the Legislature, the con-
stitutional tribunal, would then have
ceased to be in session and no trial
could be had at all. In effect this
would be an attempted transfer of the
proceedings for removal of a public
officer from the Legislature to the peo
pie at large and would effect an i'm
practicable and quite impossible species
of recall.
1t is almost inconceivable THAI sucl
revolutionary result could have beer
within the contemplation of the Leg
isiature that in the first instance sub
mitted to the people the referendum