The Indianapolis journal. [volume] (Indianapolis [Ind.]) 1867-1904, 1883-01-24

rolled statute. They are both evidence,
and the courts are to determine on their
weight. My brothers accept as conclusive
the weaker evidence. | insist that the
stronger, the more carefully prepared, and
Solemnly authenticated should prevail"
The Justice expresses the opinion that pro-
found establishment will follow the
announcement that the validity of
laws depends upon the journaIiza-
ton of the houses of the General As
sembly. Under this rule the journals must
be in the hands of every lawyer, of every
justice of the peace, to be consulted and
studied before 4 case can be decided or an
opinion given as to its effect and purpose.
The most perplexing labor will follow this
establishment. l express the opinion that an
examination Of the journals will reveal the
fact to be that they often fail to show
enactments in the form and language in which
they appear on the statute books. This
opinion is based Upon the manner OF keep
ing these journals and the haste of their
preparation"
Upon a question already argued in the
Journal, Justice Beck says:
"The constitution does not direct whether
the proposition for amendment she'll be by
statute or joint resolution. 1t surely
may be made by either. l have also
pointed out that the resolution for amend
ment was entered in the journals according
to the meaning of the word and according to
the legislative practice, and as contemplated
by the constitution, 1t cannot be doubted
that these considerations remove all grounds
OF distinction between statutes and the joint
resolution proposing the constitutional
amendment"
1T is a rule of law that the papers or docu-
ments referred to in a writing or instrument
OF any character, if sufficiently identified,
are to be read with and become
a part of the document. In this case
l am warranted in saying that the
enrolment of the resolution is sufficiently
referred to by entries upon the journals to
identify it. The rule OF law just cited re-
quires the enrolment to be read with the
journal, and to be regarded as a part of the
journal when so read. The enrolment thus
becomes a part OF the journal. We should
so regard it,
No reasoning could closer tit the condition
of affairs in Indiana than this. But in this
State, as we have repeatedly said, there is the
additional and conclusive fact that the pend
ing amendments are in every respect pre-
cisely in the condition of ali other amend
ments which have been regarded as valid.
There has been legislative and executive, and
judicial construction, as well, to the effect that
amendments passed through such methods
as have thus far obtained with respect to the
pending propositions are valid parts of the
constitution. Assuredly no court would
now attempt to reverse the unbroken cur
rent of precedent in this State, and invite the
disastrous consequences that must ensue.
Justice Beck concludes his dissent by say
ing:
1.-THE mischievous- consequence which will
follow the recognition by this court of the
doctrines upon which their opinion is based
l will not stop to consider. They will crowd
upon the minds of all intelligent members of
the profession. Believing these doctrines are
in conflict with principles and authority, and
with sound public policy, l dissent from the
conclusion of the majority of this court"
We have copied at length from the unani-
nous opinion of the Kansas court, and from
this opinion of Justice Beck, those paragraphs
and arguments which will be a contribution
to the discussion now prevalent in thisS State.
We are certain they will be received with in
teres5 by all classes.