THE CONSTITUTIONAL AMENDMENTS,
On motion by Mr. JEWETT the House then resolved itself into a Committee of the Whole (Mr. Jewett in the Chair), and resumed the consideration of the three reports from the Judiciary Committee on the question as to whether the proposed Constitutional amendments were properly referred to this General Assembly.
Mr. STEWART said he did not intend to detain the House at any length by discussing the question under consideration. As a member of the Committee it will be expected that I say something on the question. It has been under discussion by members on this floor and by the people of the State for many months. As Representatives we are each to discharge our duty in this matter in the light in which we may discern the question of the legality of the pending amendments and believing as I do that every member of this House has made up bis mind on the question, and that the conviction Is firmly fixed, I do not feel called upon to debate the question at length. In my opinion, if the Senate had on yesterday reached a final vote and the House had done the same the result would not have been any different from what it will be when the final vote is taken. I can better serve my constituents by voting correctly on this question than by consuming the valuable time of the House in useless debate. It is a question, however, that each member must settle for himself, and I will patiently hear any member who feels called upon to express himself in regard to the legality of the pending amendments. The people are much more interested in how we shall vote than they are in what we shall say before we vote. That certain amendments to the Constitution were proposed and received a majority of the votes of members elected to each of the two Houses of the last General Assembly; of this there is no doubt, and that an exact copy of these amendments can be procured there is no doubt. I think the proper entery has been made on the journal. The object of entering the resolutions on the journal in that they may be identified. There is no pretense such that the identical resolution can be offered to the General Assembly. The public is as well informed of the identity of these resolutions as though they had been entered in on the journals with every "i" dotted and every "t" crossed. It is not dangerous to submit any question to the people. In this matter we enact no law, we simply prepare the way for the legal voters of the State to determine whether or not they desire certain amendments to the Constitution. I believe, as a lawyer, that the amendments can be legally submitted to the people, and of right ought to be so submitted.
Mr. MOODY said: This is a deliberative body. It is not a caucus nor a political Convention It exercises the highest power and occupies the most responsible position that it is possible to confer upon man. It is one of the results of a great experiment that was begun upon this continent over a century ago, under circumstances that astonished the civilized world. We stand here to-day as a great inquest upon every fundamental element which carried into practice gave us this Government. We have no governments in this country except the law. We have no law except that made under prescribed forms. The first prescribed form is the Constitution, and our Constitution is the result of the deliberative judgment of the representatives of the people assembled in Convention over fifty years ago. Thirty years ago a Convention was called and gave us our present Constitution. The first obligation taken at the bar of this House by every member thereto is to support the Constitution. This support means more than tacit assent thereto. It means more than mere page: 117[View Page 117] obedience. It implies sacred duty. And all attempts to avoid or evade any of its provisions should be condemned. The Democratic party, in its last Convention, declared in favor of the submission of the proposed amendments in accordance with the provision of the Constitution for its owe amendment. One of these provisions is that the proposed amendment shall be entered upon the journals of the two Houses. I do not propose to inquire at any great length into the reasons for this provision They are manifest as precaution against any mistake and fraud. Bun it is enough for me that there is such a requirement in the constitution which I have taken, in common with other members of the House, an oath to support. Has this requirement of the Constitution been complied with? Is is found upon examination that none of the proposed amendments have been entered on the journals of either House. There is a well-known and recognized distinction in the proceedings all Judicial, Legislative and deliberative bodies between filing, noting and entering.
The Committee rose, reported progress and asked leave to sit again at 2 o'clock.
The report was concurred in by the House.
The House took a recess for dinner.
