The Austin weekly statesman. (Austin, Tex.) 1883-1898, 1889-02-14
TO CURE THE STATE CONSTITUTION.

mltted; and now TO cure IL Is now tne
question of the hour.
There may be two remedies-First-By |
amendment; second, by new Constitu-
ton framed by constitutional conven-
ton. As to the first there are many SER
ious objections, namely:
First-The members of the legislature
are not elected to make organic law, but
to provide for its operation.
Second-Constitution amendments, if
submitted at any other time than at a gen
eral election, are adopted or defeated by
a small minority of Notes.-The bare ma
jority of Ia minority thus fixing the Or
ganic law.
Third-If submitted at general cleo
ton they, :.are overlooked in the excite
ment of a scramble of from fifteen to
twenty thousand, candidates for office. The
candidates.and party issues only are then
discussed on the hustings and the amend
ments are forgotten until tickets are be-
ing made out, when naturally the voter
scra tches the issue presented by the
amendment, as knowing nothing of it's
merits or dement's.
observation-disclosures are patchwork
often forced by sudden and unexpected
events upon attention, hastily submitted
by the Legislature and adopted by minor
ity votes after the excitement had sub
sided. For instance, the clamor for an
amendment to abolish the smoke-house
tax, occasioned by one little comptroller's
circular, had SO died out that less than a
tenth of the voters of the state felt enough
interest to attend the polls and vote for
it, and it was carried by the votes of those
not affected by the tax.
Fifth-Piecemea work in perfecting an
acknowledged defective Constitution when
the defects are radical and Astounding
throughout, is too slow process for a.
rapidly growing state.
Sixth-The making of Constitution
not being the province of the legislature,
but other duties absorbing the best atten-
ton of members, in the multiplicity of
their measures monopoliziug their delib-
erations, they are led to concede the de-
mands for unnecessary Constitutional
amendments through inattention, and
swayed by special interests working ac-
tively-a persistently. So it happens
their amendments are generally de-
feated.
Seventh-If legislatures we're fitted to
amend the Constitution, their amendments
would generally be adopted. On the con-
trary, they are generally rejected as stated,
because the legislature misjudged the
public sentiment or because public opin-
ion will seldom be expressed at elections
upon amendments.
Eighth-People vote against acceptable
amendments because other amendments
they have demanded and deemed more de-
sirable, are not also submitted at the same
election.
Ninth-The practice of formulating
the organic law by amend
ments creates a feeling of uncer-
tainty as to the permsnency of any one
of its provisions, and the same apprshen-
sion is created that now prevails with re
spect to the statutes. The frequent
changes in the co tend to unsettle bus
mess, bring troops of interested lobbyists
about the Legislative halls to resist limo
vations or promote selfish aims, and en-
courage legislation in the interest of spec
ulation. Instability of the organic law,
biennial assaults upon it, and the constant
efforts to amend and change 1t Matched in
an assembly not instructed or elected to
change it, is worse than the uncertainty
about the legislative codes.
On the other hand, as the Constitution
requires renewal almost entire, and as
shown, amendments will not answer the
purpose, Constitutional convention, the
rational method, seems absolutely the
proper thing at this time.
A convention would be composed of a
less number of members than the legisla-
ture. It is assumed the delegates would
be the leading prominent citizens of each
district. 1t is assumed that every ques.
ton relating to the Constitution would
be discussed and the delegates in
structed. 1t is assumed the delegates
would be prepared to make an
acceptable constitution. In 1875 the dele
gates made an acceptable Constitution
Then the people were easily satisfied
they wanted, as now, to get from under an
unpopular Constitution. But in 1876 they
had only lived one year of democratic rul'
under the Constitution of '69. They at
tributed the oppression under which the!
had suffered many years to the Constitu
ton; they were fierce and clamorous t.
change it entire; they were not aware o.
what they wanted, though perfectly agreed
of what they didn't want. Hence, the in
evitable result was to adopt Throughout
every provision most clearly and RADICAL.
in COD Aict with the theories and SYSTEM
of the old Constitution. The popular feel
ing ran wild in a paroxysm of triumph