The Portland daily press. [volume] (Portland, Me.) 1862-1921, 1880-11-30
Bangor Whig.l
The Constitutional Amendment
It's Legal Effect

Does the Constitutional amendment provid.
ing for the election OF Governor by plurality
OF votes apply to the present year? This de-
pends on the construction of the resolve SUBJ
uniting the question Of amendment to the
people. The resolve reads as follows, viz:
"The constitution of this State shall be
amended - by striking out the word ma
jority' wherever 1t occurs therein and inserting
in the place thereof the word plurality; and
plurality OF the votes cast and returned for
Governor at the annual September election for
the year 1880 shall determine the election of
Governor for the years 1881 and 1882"
What does this mean? The first rule of con-
STRUNG statutes and legislative resolves, as
well as wills and written contracts is to deter
mine the intention and then, if fair and rea-
sonable construction Of the language used ad-
mits it, to give that intention effect What,
in this case, was the intention of the Legisla-
ture in passing the resolve, admits OF no doubt,
because it is uDmistakably expressed. Does
the language used, when fairly judged, con-
vey this meaning? OF this there can be no
doubt. The whole proposition is as plainly
expressed as language is capable Of. The two
propositions are parts of one and the same sem
tence, separated only by a semicolon and the
meaning is continuous This settles the whole
matter, and no further argument would seem
to be necessary. But there are many other
considerations going to support the same con-
clusion l. the latter part Of the proposition
was not intended to be voted upon why was it
introduced at all. No one was SO ignorant as
not TO know that it could have no legal effect
or force unless it was voted upon and adopted
as part of the Constitution. 1t was obviously
introduced for that purpose and could have
been for no other.
Then too the form of the whole chapter
brings us to the same result. 1t consists of
three sections, the first containing the pro-
posed amendment, the second the mode of
taking and determining the vote upon it, and
the third prescribing the duty of the Secretary
OF Stat in connection with the vote. II the
clause in question had not been intended for
the vote of the people, but merely to express
its effect when adopted, it would have taken
the form OF a separate resolve or section and
not part of the one containing the amend
ment proposed. The simplest rule of legisla-
tive rhetoric would have taught the craftsman
and every legislator to commit no such bung-
ling work as was done if our proposition is not
correct. a c--5rr- t-- T-r
Then again the language of the second sec
tion, submitting the amendment to the people
confirms the same conclusion. BY this they
are "to give their votes upon the amendment
propoeed in the foregoing resolce" speaking of
the whole resolve as a unit. s -
The form of putting the question does not
conflict with this view of its meaning, for it
does not purport to contain the exact words of
the amendment, but only its general character
as is always the case whore questions of amend
ments are submitted as was this to the people
to vote upon.
Then to0 what mora reasonable concIno;oc
can be drawn than that when the voter with
one hand cast his vote for Governor and with
the other at the same time, for the proposed
amendment, he did it with the conviction that
former. Can any proposition be suggested
more reasonable as governing the intention of
the Legislature and voter too.
1t is not perceived from the foregoing con-
siderations how there can be any doubt that
the whole sentence was propounded and ac-
cepted as part of the Constitution. The an
omaly OF dividing single sentence into two,
regarding one half as proposed and the other
not, is altogether too absurd to warrant rea-
sonable doubt of what is the legal result of
the amendment,
But there is still another and conclusive
proposition which settles the whole case.
Without the latter and questionable part of
the sentence the legal construction and effect
OF the amen dment is to make it applicable to
the election and count of 1880. By the vote
It'll now a part of the Constitution as much
as any other part. The Gubernatorial count
does not take place till January, and then it
mnst be governed by the Constitution as it is
then. If a part ha been repealed under the
same circumstances the count could not have
been made under the instrument as it was
The Legi -lature of next winter must take the
Constitution as they find it and by that
plurality of votes for Governor elects whether
the doubtful words are in or not,
There is no such thing as an unconstitutional
Constitution, unless in conflict with that of the
United States. Even Legislative enactments
are often passed having retroactive effect, and
legally SO. They are in such case void only SO
far as they are OF the nature of er post tdcto
laws or impair vested rights or the obligation
of contracts. But the right and power Of the
people to change their Constitution is subject
to no such disability. Their will is supreme.
That will when duly expressed controls all
Legislative action. Whether prospet tive or
retrospective in its effect in all matters such as
this, that will must be obeyed. So that
whether the latter claus- Of the alleged amend
ment be or be not part of the Constitution
the former is and that is enough.
A. W.P.