Year: 1859

tied to ln the convention, and counties op-

 posed, not as many as they were entitled to;

 l regard 1t as worse, infinitely, than the

 action of the legislative caucus-but if the action of the caucus was the cause of the war,

 1t could long since have had an end-since

 months ago, the True Democrat disapprov- ed the action of that caucus-but peace was not wanted, hence the effort to find new fuel to feed the flame, which was found first in the adjournment of the legislature by Gov Conway. Col Hindman compares this act to the edict of some tyrant, or 6 to the act of Louis Napoleon in dispelling at the point of the bayonet the chambers of France" He says the Governor is far sighted and crafty; and had for an object the raising of the per diem question, in order that the attention of the people should

 be directed from the iniquities of the legis- lative caucus. As to the constitutional power of the Governor 10 adjourn the le- gislature on the state of facts shown by the record-there Is considerable difference of opinion by many. The power vested on this subject, by the constitution in the Governor Is discretionary one, similar to the power given, under certain circumstances, to convene the legislature in extra session." If the power is one of discretion, of course, there can be no question as to the legality of the proclamation and the adjournment under it. 1 do not, however, consider the power a discretionary one, but power only to be used under specific state of facts, which ere, when the two houses shall dsa

 gree as to the time of adjournment The re- cord shows such state of facts did not exist-but it also shows both houses had excused members to such an extent, as to leave either house without quorum to do business--being excused, the respective houses could not, as directed by the consti- tuition, adjourn from day to day and issue writs for absent members-and 1t may be question, whether having in this way com mitted self murder, they were not by ope- ration of law adjourned to the next regular term, unless convened by the proclamation of the Governor. The record shows the Governor was notified by the President of the Senate, that there was no constitu- tional quorum to do business, and the two houses had disagreed as to the time of ad- Joul ulilCilI- anu litII dtdCu d IiidIlCi OI economy, it is respectfully suggested that according to the power vested in your Ex- cellency by the constitution, you adjourn the legislature; and here is a state of facts amply sufficient under the constitution, to warrant the Governor in adjourning the le- gislature, assuming the most rigid construc- tion to be the correct one. The commu- nication of the Speaker of the House, how ever, simply stated the facts of the House being without a constitutional quorum that to that extent, members had been ex- cused and no writs had been issued for ab- sent members, and then the action of the two hpu>es on the resolution to adiourn.- If the power be one of discretion, then here is certainly an ample state of facts calling for its exercise. The Governor

 however, recapituated the facts in his ad- journing message as they had been trans mitted to hm-if the facts on which this act of the Governor was based were incor- rect the two houses should certainly have, in an authoritative manner called the attcn- ton of the Governor to the error-if he exercised what they conceived to be an un- warranted power, it was certain y the sworn duty of members to have obiected--they took the recapitulation of facts as correct, and the act of the Governor as legal, and

 in obedience to the proclamation, adjourned and went to their homes, and no ba> onets were used to coerce them. If the Cover nor used doubtful constitutional power the legislature sanctioned 1t by their act, and If the power used was a discretionary one, certainly was never state of facts more deserving the exercise of that dscre- ton, for the legislature had disabled them selves and were quartered on the treasury. Returning from their homes in obedience to the proclamation of the Governor, the legislature convened, and then arose the question of "per diem pay for the recess" Was this pay legal? If so, was it obtained

 in legal manner? The claimants contend it was legal and as proof whereof, alledge congressman have been in the habit of draw ing pay for Christmas and Sundays, when Congress was not in actual session-and other state legislatures have since the or ganization of the State drawn pay for Sun days and national holidays, when the legis- lature was not in actual session. Lukily, however, we have higher authority than sophistical argument of this character to bring to bear on the question, which is de- cision from the supreme court of Alabama on the chief questions which were involved.-- it may not be amiss to add, the decisions of no State court are more highly esteemed by the courts of Arkansas than those of Ala bama, and the bench at the time of this decision was an exceedingly able one. The case IS Pickett, eX-parte, 24th Alabama reports, which was an application for a 'mandamus against the Speaker of the House of Representatives to compel him to certify to the comptroller of public accounts, an amount of money claimed by petitioner for per diem for the recess of the legislature, or for mileage in going to and returning from the legislature, on account of such recess or for both. The Alabama and Arkansas cases are nearly parallel, only differing in this-in the Alabama case the legislature adjourned themselves-int the Arkansas case the Governor adjourned them--and the Ar kansas legislature had few days the long est recess-the law in both States is, think, the same, relative to the compen- sation of the members of the legislature Chiffon, c. J., delivered the opinion of the entire court, and after setting the question of jurisdiction, went on to say, :" a mem Der may be engaged in attendance on the General Assembly during periods of tenn poary cessations of legislative functions by the respective bodies; and the per diem compensation was intended as remunera- tion for the services of the members, as well as to provide for their expenses during the period they were required to be absent from their homes in attending to the duties of legislation, as those duties are usually and ordinarily performed, and the object in limiting his compensation to each days attendance, was to secure on the part of the member who was not within the exemp- tions provided for by section forty-four, (which is, if claimed by sickness he shall receive pay, the performance of legislative duty during those days which the house to which he belonged deemed necessary to devote to the business of legislation. It was neverintended that the members of the legis- lature should not receive pay for Sundays or Dpn1Ino tom phrorv o1iuorpmnntS upOn bo-