The Emporia weekly news. [volume] (Emporia, Kan.) 1881-1889, 1884-06-05
Col. John a. Martins Position on the
Question OF Re-SubmissIOn.

Jul may 70 CdAAC0 ny q lCBlS4dIuIC, Dub i
his proposition must be voted upon "at
he next election OF members of the |
legislature" and "it q majority of all /
the electors voting at such elections,
shall have voted for q convention, the /
legislature shall, at the next session, /
provide for calling the same"
An amendment TO the constitution, il |
will be seen, cannot be legally submit |
ted prior TO 1.-THE election tor representa- |
tivesr in 1886, and q constitutional con-
ventiOn cannot legally be voted for until |
the election for members to the legis- |
lature," which will not occur, after the
next session, until 1885
Thus the proposition to re-submit the
question involves, II in the shape of an
two years, and If through
convention, four years of
agitation, strife, doubt and uncertainty,
over q question which the people of
Kansas have, In their sovereign capacity
as electors, definitely settled. For il
must be apparent that II q constitutional
amendment to repeal the prohibition
amendment IS' submitted to vote by
the requisite two-thIrds majority of
both branches OF the legislature, il will
be equivalent to a declaration that the
people of Kansas regard prohibition as a
complete failure, and will, when the
vote is taken, adopt the proposition for
repeal. No other possible construction
could be put upon such u vote, by such
an overwhelming majority of the legis-
lAture, for a proposition to repeal the
prohibition am endment, and the effects
must be that, without waiting for a vote
of the people on the question, the state
would have two years OF free, unrestrain-
ed liquor traffic.
No man will say that the people of
state can be denied the right to alter,
amen1 or change their organic law if
majority of them choose TO do so. But,
on the other hand, q majority of the
people have no right to demand that the
majority shall permit them to inaugur-
ate, when ever they pleased to agitate
tor IL, q reign of doubt and uncertainty
concerning provision of the organtic
law. Slavery has been abolished in this
country, by constitutional amendment.
There are thousands of people who be-
lieye that amendment was secured by
force, and that 1t was not legally adopt
ed. But should this minority be per-
mitted TO demand resubmission of the
question, because they believe this? A
vast majority Of the American people
will answer emphatically mo; the
question is settled, and shall not again
be re-opened."
1t must be conceded-indeed, we think
no sensible man will question these prop
osItions-first, that a majority of the
people have an unquestlonable right to
amend or change their organic law at
their pleasure; and, second, that MI
noritY have no right TO demand that q
provision of the organic law, adopted by
majority, shall be regarded as an un-
| settled question, or resubmitted to graf
/ ff1 THAR uhiun n that dOVht and nnraF-
talnty respecting its enforcement shall
| continue indefinitely. Anarchy and
chaos will be the legitimate and inevita-
BILE results of such a condition of affairs.
Let US see, then, what are the facts
concerning the Kansas prohibition
| amendment. 1t was submitted to q vote
| of the people by two-thirds majority
OF both branches of the legislature in
| 1879. 1t was voted npon at the presI-
Dental election of 1880, when the full
est vote ever cast in this state was Polled
The vote stood:
For ........... ........... ............. 9l,SI4
Majority for. .........-............. ,s37
Total Vote.-...--. --.............. l95.SIl
| The total vote polled at that election
for president, was POI ,226, so that %, 315
voters did not cast their ballots on the
amendment. This Is the sole and only
reason that has ever been urged as a rea
/ son for resubmission. But is it fair tC
assume that these % ,315 voters were op
/ posed to the amendment? at the same
election q legislature was chosen which
| by two-thirds majority in both branches
| voted for law to enforce prohibition
| and house of representatives, elected il
1882, two years later, contained a major
ity equally large in favor of sustaining
that law. Gov. Click 3 election, in 1882
was not an indication that the people
desired repleal OF the amendment. A
dozen causes which 1t is unnecessary Il
again state, contributed to the result.
The vote at that election, too, was nearly
$4,000 less that cast in 1880, and the to-
tai vote cast for Gov. Glick-S3, 237-
was S,637 less than the vote cast for thu
prohibition amendment in 1880, which
was 81 ,674; and 800 less than that cast
against the amendment the same year
which was 84,037. That the people
are against a constitutional convention
the vote of 1880, on proposition to cal
one, need only be cited. 1t stood %, So
for and 146,27 against, or about sever
TO one against. The amendment adopted
has, too, been affirmed in every possible
way, by the courts of the state. Including
our highest judicial tribunal. The lie
gality OF its adoption has been judicIallN
determined, and the laws enacted to en-
force 1t have been affirmed.
There is, therefore, no possible excuse
tor this democratic demand that thu
question shall be re-opened; that thu
agitation concerning 1t, which has dis
turbed the peace and harmony of TIT
state for the past five years, shall con
tinue the only question at issue for al
indefinite period; and the doubt, uncer
taintY, and incidentally and unrestraineC
liquor traffic, shall prevail Throughout
Kansas during the next two years O
more. The people of Kansas have set
tied this question in their sovereign
capacity as electors, and have reaffirmeC
their decision by electing two legIsla
lures pledged to enforce the amendment
There is not shadow of possibility
that majority of the next Legislature
much less the two-thirds majority neces
sary to re-submit the question, viii
favor re-submission. He is wilfulI.
blind who does not see that the publ1l
sentiment IN this state in favor of glvinI
prohibition a far, full trial, ha
been enormously strengthened during
the past two years. BE is still NOR
blind who does not see that open de
fiance of law has intensified the feeling
in favor of compelling obedience to thu
law; and that thousands of people whI
originally doubted whether prohibition
was the best measure of temperance re
form that could be devised, and whC
voted against the amendment, are nov
as firmly determined that the constitu
tion and laws shall be respected as ar,
the original prohihitIonists. And the vas
army of Kansas voters who know tina
lawlessness breeds anarchy, and tina
anarchy always ends in despotism
and there can be no truA liberty whert
respect for law does not prevail; tina
the people have passed upon this ques
ton, fairly and regularly, and settled It
and that the demand for its re-openin,
comes from a restless minority, rein
forced by those who, since the law wen
into effect, have been persistently ant
continuously law breakers-this vas
majority of Kansas electors will quietly
IN their own good time, practically dem
onstrate the fact that they intend tina
law shall be respected; that the minori
ty shall not make 1t contemplate; anC
that the question shall not be reopene,
unless, after fair, full trial by tn
thorough enforcement of law, all good q
well as bad people bowling in humbl
submission to the majesty of the law, j
shall be demonstrated that the law IS
failure.
According to our esteemed mornini
contemporary, the Topeka Capital, tn,
Fort Scott Monitor, Wichita Eagle
| Win daId CO,,riar J;0vyetha TVS-IS s,o,,.