The Wheeling daily intelligencer. [volume] (Wheeling, W. Va.) 1865-1903, 1870-07-25
A WeakInyention.

A correspondent OI the CAaFle9lou
Courier, who signs himself IS, pre-
sumedt to be sMrrn) has discovered that
tho. Amendment Of 1885 is not .
part Of section ! Of Article 8, for which
Mr. FLIcK's, amendment proposes q sub
stitute; and that therefore the proposed
Substitution would not strike out the dis
(rancnising clause. The Courier catches
eagerly at the ideAs-and Celebrates 1t
through column and y half The. point,
US worked up BY the Courier, is that the
alBendment Of 1855 was "addea generally
tGGhs Constitution, not specifically TO the
secIlgu;" OF, as Il quotes from the resolu-
tlOn proposing ItRnd interpOlates, It was
proposed 5aas an amendment 10 the
Constitution OF tits State mot to
section ~ article. By to be aided Mt
the end Of lie, first section Of the third
article thereof, to become part [not Of sec.
/, art. 0, butt cfAaid Constitution when rat
ifed." This language itself rsfltes the
idea intended 10 be established by the
quotation Of it, viz that the addition
was made to the Constitution generally
aud not to any specified part Of it The
phrase employed III tho resolution IS the
language Of the Constitution ITSELF in the
part providing for amendments, (Art. XII,
sec. ~ that amendments when ratified are
to he "part Of, the Consultation Of the
State" leaving the particular place ofth
amendment TO be designated by the Leg
stature in proposing it e Part of the
Constitution is the language Of the cor
responding section Of the Federal Consti'
tuition, and Is, ule. phrase employed when
cveran amendment lis proposed by Con-
gress or whenever the Secretary of State
proclaims one ratified. y,rE.
The Courier't idea that the language Of
the resolution quoted from is "mcrey
equivalent 10 amending the Constitution
by'tacking On an additional Clause, in the
mode adopted In amendiug the Constitu-
tioaa of tie United State" Is clearly erro-
neous. Every amendment to that instru-
lnent Is designated by number 1t takes
its place in a particular part Of the Con-
stltution By virtue Of its number as one Of
the articles of amendment. Ifour amend
ment had been intended for p separate
clause, Il would have been numbered as
such. It5Eould. have been numbered as
an additional article or an additional sec
ton 10 some existing article This was
not done because Il was not meant to be
an, independent section or article. The
lstsectioR.O 81 article Sd was tho one that
defined heGualihcations Of voters, and as
this amendment imposed an additional
disqualification, ) proper place was iuI
that section. If the lalguage Of the reso-
luton were itself ambiguous, the well
known fact that theAutRbrS Of tic amend.
ment intended TO incorporate il in that
section, that both tile Legislatures which
passed and the people who aduptedN 50
understood lis purpose, and that never till
now was the thought Of any other purpose
evenisuggested, would furnish d strength
Of cotemporaneOus construction that no
court in Christcndom would disregard.
lust as Z explicit as it could he, It
makes the clause n part Of tue Cops,i.
tuition" in the very, phrase Of the inslru.
ment itself ana then distinctly dcsirpates.
inst as every Il; proposition 10 amend any
constitution tioes, where the clause shall
taEs i ts pla sS THE fact that It does not
ciye,he clause a tsep i e. number is OF
itself conclusive proof Of its incorporation
in an existing section, and the language
piles prodrupon proof It's TO be added
at the end of the LIST section of tho Srd ar!
tiCle." Nothing could be more explicit.
Add" means, according 70 Webster, 40
join or unite, rs one-Sum or thing TO an.
other, soas 10 hleaaaSc'tte Htfnbertf' mig
ment thequantity' enlarge the magnitude,
or - y to form into one aggregate" Tie
Joining or amung o. !hs cause 10 the
Original seSaoIl' mSa &c, II l, o. Tue SeO'
''on' aug 9F '"s "' n'o o"o