shall be established by law; but no law inoreasing their compensation shall take effect during the existence of the Legislature, which enacted it."

By Art. IV, Part Third, Sect. 1, it is made the duty of the Legislature to 66 convene on the first Wednesday of January annually," &c.; and by Art. IV, Part Second, Section 2, it is made the further duty of that Body [the Legislature] "at every (subsequent) period of ten years, to cause the State to be divided into districts for the choice of Senators;" and by Art. X, Sect. 1, it is provided, that "the Treasurer shall be chosen at the first session of the Legislature annually," &c. Is not the Legislature here spoken of as an institution unlimited in its duration? Is it not evident that the framers of the Constitution so considered it? Nevertheless, Sect. 7 declares that "no law increasing their [the Members] compensation, shall take ef fect during the existence of the Legislature which enacted it;" and if the Legislature is a body unlimited in its duration, it is difficult to conceive what advantage the members thereof could derive from the passage of such a law! Indeed, it is not easy to see by what authority they have been paid, session after session-the pay-day contemplated in the Constitution surely has not yet arrived! Let the people look to it.

What is meant by the phrase, "the Senate" in the Constitution of Maine? Was it intended that the whole number of the members returned, should be considered

"The Senate"-or that a quorum of such members should constitute that branch of the Legislature? Do the members elect constitute the Senate before they have organized? or after?

Sect. 5, Art. 4, says:

"THE SENATE" shall, on the said first Wednesday of January, annually, [here the Senate is spoken of as an institution of unlimited duration-the Constitution does not every Senate shall" &c.] "determine who are elected by a majority of votes," &c. -and goes on to make provision for filling vacancies, if any exist.

say

SECT. 8. "THE SENATE" shall choose their President, Secretary, and other officers.

"SECT. 3. The meetings for the election of Sena. tors shall be notified, held and regulated, and the votes received, sorted, counted, declared and recorded, in the same manner as those for [the election of] Representatives."

Again-"All other [expunge "other"] qualified electors, living in places unincorporated, who shall be assessed to [for?] the support of government by the assessors of an adjacent town, shall have the privilege of voting for Senators, Representatives and Governor in such town; and shall be notified [an Americanism] by the selectmen thereof for that purpose accordingly." [to what?}

"SECT. 4. The Governor and Council shall, as soon [after] as may be, examine the returned copies of such lists, and, twenty days before the said first Wednesday of January, issue a summons to such persons, as shall appear to be [to have been] elected by a majority of the votes in each district, to attend that day and take their seats."

2*

"SECT. 5. The Senate shall, on the said first Wednesday of January, annually, determine who are [shall have been] elected by a majority of votes to be Senators in each district; and in case the full number of Senators to be [to have been] elected from each district shall not have been so elected, the members of the House of Representatives and such Senators as shall have been elected, shall, from the highest numbers of the persons voted for, on said lists, equal to twice the number of Senators deficient, in every [any] district, if there be [shall have been] so many voted for, elect by joint ballot the number of Senators requir ed;" &c.

The phrase "from the highest numbers of persons voted for," &c. seems to us to be arrant nonsense! Claiming the privilege of a yankee, we guess-"from the persons having the highest number of votes," or something like this, would have given the meaning intended. But there is a wide difference between the meaning of the two phrases.

"SECT. 7. Their [its-the Senate] judgment, however, shall not extend farther than to removal from office, and disqualification to hold or enjoy any office of honor, trust or profit under this State.'

"Farther" should be further-farther properly relates to place and distance.

ARTICLE IV-Part Third.

LEGISLATIVE POWER.

"SECT. 2. Every bill or resolution,having the force of law, to which the concurrence of both Houses may be necessary, except on a question of adjournment, which shall have passed both Houses, shall be presented to the Governor, and if he approve, he shall sign it;

af not, he shall return it with his objections to the House, in which it shall have originated, which shall enter the objections at large on its journals, and proceed to reconsider it."

"Every bill or resolution, having the force of law, to which the concurrence of both Hou ses may be necessary," &c.! We would ask, if, according to the Constitution, any "bill or resolution" can have the force of law, unless both Houses concur in passing it?

Does

a bill or resolution ever have the force of law, until it has passed both branches of the Legislature, and received the signature of the Governor?

Again "except on a question of adjournment." Does a resolution "on a question of adjournment" ever have the force of Law? Should not the words-"to which the concurrence of both Houses may be necessary, except on a question of adjournment," be struck out, as surplusage?

"SECT. 5. Each House shall keep a journal, and from time to time publish its proceedings, except such parts as in their [its] judgment may require secrecy," &c.

"SECT. 7. The expenses of the members of the House of Representatives in travelling to the Legislature, and returning therefrom, once in each session and no more, shall be paid by the State out of the public Treasury to every member, who shall seasonably attend, in the judgment of the House, and does not depart [shall not have departed] therefrom without leave."

Against this we protest! If we understand the language of this section,"every member"

is entitled to receive the travelling expenses of the whole House! "The expenses of the members shall be paid (out of the PUBLIC TREASURY) to every member"! We are sure the members of the Legislature have never understood their Constitutional rights, or at least have never claimed them; or they would not have returned to their homes, at the close of each session, year after year, as they have hitherto done, with only a few shillings in their pockets, when they were entitled, by the Constitution of the State, to hundreds of dollars!

If this article is to stand as it is, it is to be hoped, that in future, the members of the House, in taking the customary oath to support the Constitution of the State, will except the "7th section." We should be sorry to have them bound by an oath to pay to each other, "every member" the travelling expenses of the whole! Oaths should not be broken -and taxes are high enough already!

This project we are sure will meet the views of every friend of Retrenchment.

Seriously, of what use is our written Constitution? Is it said, that our Rulers and our Judges will put the right construction upon the language of it. If words are to have no fixed meaning-if they are not to be understood according to their common acceptation, a few marks made upon a shingle with a rusty nail, might as well be called a Constitution, the safeguard of our liberties, as the "thing of paper," now called by that name! As long as all should agree, that certain