The Middlebury register. [volume] (Middlebury, Vt.) 1850-1882, 1882-11-17
A Warming to Constitution Members.

= It is pretty hard experience for the
people who worIrod co long and ear
nestly TO incorporate prohibition in the
Constitution of Iowa to lose the fruit
of their labors by technicality, but the
case may at least serve as warning to
those who attempt to change the fun
damental law of state, to attend close
ly to every detail. The amendment in
question originated in the Senate of the
Eighteenth Assembly. and was passed
by that body and the House. After
ward it was passed by both branches of
the Nineteenth Assembly, and was rat
flied by the people by large maori-
ty, after the most earnest efforts by the
temperance workers. When it was
first passed by the Senate it contained
this clause:
ono person shall manufacture for
sale, as beverage or to be used, any
Intoxicating liquor whatever, includ.
ing ale, wine and beer"
When it passed the House, the
words cor to be used" were omitted.
perhaps by accident, perhaps by design
the cause of the omission being in
dispute. When the amendment was
passed by the Nineteenth Assembly
and reached the people it did not con-
tain the four words above quoted,
which were part of it at first. The
question of the validity of the amend
ment having been submitted to the
supreme court of the state, that body
has decided that the amendment which
was passed by the Nineteenth Assem-
bly, and ratified by the people is not the
same amendment as that which origi-
mated in the Senate of the Eighteenth
Assembly. The omitted words, the
court holds, were an important part of
the amendment, because they involved
absolute inhibition for even sacrament
tai, medicinal, culinary or scientific
purposes. The case, it is understood,
will be carried up to the supreme court
of the United States. lint it 10 probable
that the decision OF the lower court will
be confirmed.
This is a very singular instance of
the defeat of an important movement
by sheer carelessness. The temper
ance people of Iowa spent eight years
in the labor and agitation which ended
in the adoption Of this amendment, and
their labors led up to campaign
which showed not only great earnest
ness but very effective and thorough
organization. The person most active
in the advocacy of the amendment was
lawyer, and there were plenty of law
yers enlisted in the cause. 1t was, we
believe, especially claimed that the
amendment was SO drawn as to leave
no loophole for evasion. And yet, the |
important fact seems to have been
overlooked that, to comply with con-
ranniramnnis. on onaend
ment must be passed by two legislatures
before it goes to the people, and that it
must be the same amendment, not two
forms of an amendment. Even techni.
cal changes, as in punctuation, might
be held to invalidate an amendment,
under some circumstances, but in this
case the change was of kind to affect
the scope of the provisions, and to
make it signify, in its second form,
different thing from what it stood for
at first. If the change was made by
the enemy it ought to have been de-
tected. If it was made by those who
had the amendment in charge, with a |
view to modifying it, it should nave
been sent back to the body in which it
fol. .acquiescence in the mod
ification, before being passed ON to an
other Legislature. The mistake is a
serious and probably fatal one. The
Iowa people were likely to have hard
enough time at the best, in making
tiivii now law operative, but il must be
u Dltter ulsapPvfUturons tv tIivIr tv Lv
deprived even OF the opportunity for
making the effort by an error like this.
-lBoston journal.