St. Tammany farmer. [volume] (Covington, La.) 1874-current, 1891-05-02

OPINION or CHIRF JUSTICE
BHRMUDRZ IN THE
LOTTERY CASE.
Tie following Il the coacurrial
opinion Of CAief Justice Bermuda,
In he revsoue Ansadmeaa case.
State ex relatione John A. Morri.
VI. Hon. L. +. Mason. Secretar,
Of State.
There can be no doubt that th.
issue presented IN this memorial.
litigation involves constitutions
questions Of . high character, touch.
ing which honest minds may plausi.
bly, differ.
They have commanded aad re.
ceived the most patient and Impair.
tial consideration Of the justices
who compose this court, but who,
Notwithstanding the most earnes,
desire which actuated them "a
reach a correct and similar conclu-
sion, have been unsble to agree up
on = unanimous solution.
Apparently, the questions to be
determined seem very plain. Re
duced to their simplest expression,
they are merely:
Whether or not tho Secretary Of
State shall be compelled, By the
process Of this court, to publish du-
ring the time and in the manner
prescribed by the organic law. tn II
Legislative action which II repre-
sented to him ~ . proposed amend
ment Of the constitution by the
general assembly with the view that
the same be submitted to the peo-
pie at the next general election.
Yet, the subject briatles with dif-
EQUITIES.
The elaborated views delivered are
that the forms through which the
project u required to pass have
substantially been observed, and
that it ID the ministerial duty of the
Secretary Of State 10 give it the de-
handed publicity in order that it
may be known and voted upon.
for or against, BY the qualified
electors in the State ut the follow
ing gener II election.
1t would serve no useful purpose
here, to enumerate and discuss the
numerous objections set up to re-
sist the publication asked.
II s"tiices to say that the Record
establishes prima facis . least,
without stronger counter-proofs.
that the proposed amendment was
duly offered, read, spread Oh the
journals, voted upon in both Houses
VI the Legislature, in point Of time
and manner, and was published in
the Official papers according to Gus
tom ard rule rs the constitution re-
quires; that there existed no ne
cessity to transmit it to the exrcu-
tive for approval aud that the veto
pat 70 i. was an idle and vain cere-
that the vote cast thereafte.
TO pass the amendment over the
Governors veto was useless and
did not, failing, do away with The
previous final action upon it, which
had to stand and stood. a. it never
vas recalled; that It j. immaterial
In what form the proposed amend
ment Was drafted, whether with or
without title; that it had but one
object which needed not to be ex
pressed in . title: that il il he
On any technical ground,
no sufficient reason has been adj
iuced and proof furnished to blot
i out of existence that practically
1 is nothing but the ,aerc proposal
II an agent 10 n principal. which
he latter, by ratification or repu-I
1iation. may bring into life OF abso- |
utely destroy.
Inc proposed amendment 10
rExDERED ~ 1wo-rH,xps
If all the members elect of both
souses Of the General Assembly, in |
vhosc judgment it IL in suitable |
'hape and has passed after . reas-
'nably full observance Of all con-
strict exigenciee.
1t would seem that the import
nee OF the subject has been some
that unnecessarily ma2ni6ed, ~
he judgment Of this conrt will
lot, proprio rigare, en2rais and
ivet the proposed ameodmeht Of
he constitution.
The salatary effect Ct that jujg.
nent will be that the Secretary Of
tate shall publish the proposed
amendment, during the prescribed
'eriod, in the manner required, for
ubsequent submission to the peo-
lie. II By the terms Of the consti-
ution the Legislature could, Of it.
wn motion, amend the organic Law
rithout consulting the people.
urely . more rigid compliance with
be previous form would have to be
but, - the constitutional
aereIy enables the General Assem-
" to propose
Asl8xDX4NTs TO TEE rHorLI.
be question Of irreproachabls full
llment loses is gravity. and sub
lautial, reasonable adherence mast
z held n aatiafaet0rv-