Delaware tribune. [volume] (Wilmington, Del.) 1867-1877, 1870-01-13
The 10Th Amendment.

DEBATE IL TIE NEW YORK SENATE Of THE |
RESOLUTION ANNuLLlNG RATIFICATION.
In the debate in the New York Senate, on
Wednesday, on the resolution TO withdraw |
the assent of the Senate to the 18th Amend |
ment, Senator Goodwin, of Cayuga opened !
the discussion in strong legal argument on
the right OF The present Legislature to res
oind the action Of previous Legislature on
this subject. He said the question was
novel one, and although two o.. three States
had attempted 10 take such action, yet
there had been but little discussion of the
question compared with lis importance.
Prominent Democratic Senators in Congress
had scarcely ventured 10 express an opinion
In favor Ola right ota State TO do such
thing, and he construed their silence as an
admisgom that the right could not he main
tanned by argument. 1t seemed, however,
that the majority in the present Legislature
of this state was determined to exercise the
right, and the minority could only enter
their protest against it. The power Of
State 10 take any part whatever in amend
| ing the Constitution Of the United States
was only derived from Congress. A State
can neither propose an amendment nor die
tate its terms. Its action In the premises was
not in the nature off legislative enactment
The ratification Of an amendment IS not sub
| mitted to the Legislature because it is a law
making. body. If its action was an enact
ment there might be power TO rcscnd or
abolish it, but when State once assents to
amendment its power over the subject cea-
SEES. Suppose the amendment had been sub
milted to II convention instead Of the Legis-
l:.ture. as il might have been, could tho con
vention, after having ratified it and adjourned
Sine die. reasonable and take reverse action
on the subject! Ii not, then how could The
Legislature do IL: The Constitution OF the
United States gives TO a State legislature the
same power ever the subject as ii gives To u
convention, and no more. Because II Legisa-
ture may resc'nd adverse action, on an
amendment, is by no means follows that il
can resclnd affirmative action. Adverse nc.
tien is simply nullity il is no action ut
all, and leaves the question open for future
action. Again, when State has once rati-
fled an amendment it is not alone interested
in that action it then becomes the common
, property OF all the States, and cannot be re-
. called without their consent NJ power
having, therefore been conferred upon the
: present Legislature TO do this thing, the cx-
ercise of such power would be no more
nor less than usurpation. 1t was In the same
spirit as the action OF OF so large portion
OF the Democratic Party when rebellion rear.
ed its head in the country, and they justified
' and encouraged it.
l THE REscIYpING BY NEW YORK AND RATlFI
CATION By ONO.
From the Ciacirn ii Gazette, stsl
We hold that New York can not legal,
/ rescinG the action of the preceding Legisla
q ture ratfying the 18th Amendment, while
Ohio may ratify, Notwithstanding the retlsa
of the preceding Legislature to do SO.
The amendment Of the Constitution was
: submitted by Congress, two-thirds of botl
-,
when ratified by three tlonrths Of the State.
: it shall be valid as part OF The Constitution
. 1t is provided that when the Legislature OF 0
! State shall ratify proposed amendment
. certified copy of the ratifying resolution
shall be forwarded to the Secretary OF State
: This completes the contract SO far as regards
:; the ratifying State, and places the matter
4 beyond The control of the latter
: When State refuses to ratify, il is no,
p necessary that its action should be reported
at Washington. The reporting the failure
c to pass Il ratilyng resolution is equivalent
to reporting negative action. \ State. there
+ fore, that has once ratified, is bouid by tina,
D action while 1t is competent for any State
10 ratify so long as the question remain,
: open
Besides, We have precedent in this case
$ The Ohio Legislature ratified the lil
: Amendment. A subsequent Legislature re-
sclnded lis action and applied 10 secrctar,
Seward for permission to withdraw the ratf
flying resolution. Mr.. Seward refused. on
n the ground that there was no law authoriz
i ing such Withdrawal Subsequently, the re
c scinding resolution was presented to The
g Senate, on which occasion Senator Sumner
J, said There is no provision for any with
II drawal of such assent when once given
/, The assent of the State once given is final.
o Then, on the 2lst Of July following, tn,
A Senate passed resolution recapituatins
|, the States that had ratified the ltth Amend
o ment, in which Ohio Wds included. an,
e thereupon the 18th Amendment was declare,
L to be part OF the Constitution Of the Unite,
If States.
e The Enquirer will observe that there il ,
G wide difference between negatice and posi-
y tirs action in this case, and herein lies th,
l. difference between New York and Ohio. Tn
r action takea by the former is final, and can
,r not be changed without the consent OF tn
IS other parties to the contract. while it /
$; competent for Ohio 10 join the ratifyin
lie States.