Wheeling register. [volume] (Wheeling, W. Va.) 1878-1935, 1883-03-21
THE DYNAMITE AMENDMENT.
No. Hsuaton Attempts to Avoid ths
AnAIAaw-

Explosive Quality.
To re EdiSo- Of ne Rertsser.
Union, w. Va, March I2.-If you
and your readers are not weary, just q
single shot at the "bull's eye" Of the
amendment assuming that it has a
bulls eye to hit, and I will not con-
same space by citations of authority,
but refer only to the elementary princi-
pies of construction well known to all
lawyers and thinking men.
lst. The amendment must be voted
on at the general election In 1884, as 1t
now reads. The power of the Legisla-
ture with reference to it is at an end.
The opportunity for proVisOs has gone.
No power in the State can reach it. 1t
is in the hands Of the people.
End. The amendment il adopted is
SCJ-erecUting, because it has left nothing
for the Legislature to do. Did the
Legislature attempt anything it could
only insert in the present election law q
new date for holding the election. The
act of the Legislature would be the
mere echo of the peoples voice. Could
it say that the election should not be
held until 1886? This is beyond the
power Of the Legislature. If in 'S6,
why not SO? The amendment, there
fore, passes into and becomes q part of
the election law of the State, and must
Ice construed as it stands.
3rd. Theamendment, if adopted, only
nullifies and repeats that part of the
election law with which it is in con-
tiict. 1t does not, therefore, alter the
provision for general election every
two years. 1t only changes the date
from October to November.
4th. The first election under the
amendment must be held in 1886
and not in 1884. Why? Because,
first, the amendments power be-
gins with the day after its
adoption, not affecting by retroaction
the work of the people on that day.
Seeondly-The election law both be-
fore and after the adoption of the
amendment provides for only one gen.
eral election in two years. One has al
ready been held in 1884, that at which
the amendment itself was ratified. II
another election was to be held in No
vember, 1884, that would be ia viola
ton of the election law. But you may
say the ratified amendment, being self
executing, undoes what was done in Oc-
tOber, and requires another election i'll
November. II this is true, then the
amendment saws off the limb upon
which it itself is perched. If the act of
the people in October ratifying the
amendment stands, so must their act
on the same day In the election of OIL
GERS stand, making another election in
1884 a violation of law, being in
opposition to the biennial require
ment. Well, to all this it may be re-
piled, that il no election is held until
November 1856, the time intervening
between general elections is about one
month more than two years. True,
here is chasm, but to the Director |
would say it is not as great as the jam
at the other end, if tw" lectiOns are
held i'm violation of law ia toe ye2~ 1854.
But this brings us to the last point.
5th, This chasm is tgidged by the
plain and manifest intent of the Legis-
fature, without doing violence to the
literal meaning of the amendment. Or
q necessity where there is change OF
date, time must either be lost or gain
ed. As the amendment itself fixes no
date for the first general election under
it. / ask why not in 1852. You reply,
because an election was held in 1854.
So when it is argued that au election
must be held in 1884. 1 reply one has
already been held in October, 1854, and
if it was not valid election, then the
amendment was not adopted by the
people.
All of these points could be elaborated
and supported by authority, but my
object has been only to make a Logical
statement of what consider true con-
struction of the proposed amendment
as it stands in connection with the gen.
eral election laws. Respectfully,
A. {. HOUSTON.