The Pacific commercial advertiser. [volume] (Honolulu, Hawaiian Islands) 1885-1921, 1894-05-26
LEGISLATIVE OR ADVISORY.
(. communication From Judge Hart
we'll on the Convention.


T. the function OF the Constitu-
..ana, Convention legislative or advis-
saye ;s.,
\ .hIs question, not in partizan way
mt dispassionately and with sole re-
ID for the interests of the whole
country.
IF the sole duty of the Convention
RI "frame Constitution and if
.h;s duty does not include nor imply
.nsctment of constitution so to be
framed, then the question remains to
answered, by whom shall such consti-
.,,.;on be enacted 81 as to become the
sunreme law of the land?
IF the Convention has legislative
newer for enacting the proposed con-
stitution, is it desirable or proper that
when so enacted by the Convention,
= shall not become the supreme law
ri the land until submitted to and
ratified by popular vote?
IF the Convention has full legisla-
tive power in itself, not requiring rat
i6cation by popular vote, are there,
nevertheless, reasons based on policy
and on the general theory OF popular
government, why constitution voted
nv the Convention shall, before going
xnto operation, be submitted to the
.zVoters?
If sound policy requires such course
4 To be taken, it is best TO take tiff
there are no valid objections TO it
simply as a matter of policy.
Tn view of the interest felt IN this
subiect, it is useful to refer to the pro-
visions of constitutions OF the states,
as summarized in Stimson's American
Statute Law, and IN compilaeIson
of .iThe Methods of Changing the
constitutions of the States" by Pro-
lessor James A. Thayer, of the Har-
ward Law School.
Ry the constitutions now In force In
most of the States, amendments When
proposed by either house OF the Legls-
fature, and agreed to by the next Leg
;sIature, must then be ratified by a
majority vote of the electors In
New Jersey and Pennsylvania
amandments cannot be submitted
IN the people oftener than once
in five wears, and in Tennessee In
six wears. In the following states
If two or more are submitted at
the same time, the electors must be
permitted to vote on each separately:
New Jersey. Pennsylvania. ohio, In
diana, Wisconsin, Iowa, Minnesota,
Kansas. Nebraska, Maryland, West
Virginia., South Carolina, Georgia,
louisiana. In Illinois and Colorado,
the Legislature cannot propose amend
ments to more than one article In any
one session.
at present, in most OF the states, an
of ha
}may be made by convention callea
Ffor the purpose whenever two-thirds,
or in some cases three fifths, of the
elected members of the Legislature
vote that such convention is neces-
saryt, and the electors vote for sucn
convention.
The following States contain pro-
visions for conventions, but no pro-
vision for ratifying the work OF con-
vertion: Alabama, 1875; Delaware,
1891; Florida, 1858; Iowa, 1857; Kan
sas, 1883; Michigan, 1850; Minnesota,
1857: Nevada, 1854; North Carolina,
1875: South Carolina, 1868; Tennessee,
1870; Virginia, 1870 !; Wisconsin, lS4o;
The following States have or had
constitutional provisions for amend
ment of their Constitutions by con-
vention called by vote OF a majority
of electors, but with no provision for
ratifving the work of the convention s.
Illinois, 1878; Indiana, 1915; Kansas,
1851: Kentucky, 1892, 1893, lS5O
louisiana, 1872; Maryland, 1851; Mis-
souri,, 1871; Nebraska, 1S66-67; Ohio,
1882; Tennessee, 1896; Massachusetts
1850.
In the following instances, constitu-
tions have actually been ratified by
majority vote of the electors without
any express provision requiring sub
mission to the people: Alabama, 1861,
1875: Delaware, 1881 Florida, 1868;
Georgia, 1868; illinois, 1S48, 1870; In
diana, 1851; Iowa, 1857; Kentucky,
1850; Maryland, 1854 Michigan, 1850;
Missouri, 1882; Nebraska, 1873; New
York, 1857; Ohio, 1851 south caro-
4 lima, 1858; Tennessee, 1884; TeAas,
1865.
These last cited instances show that
it is q perfectly proper course to sub
NIT a constitution to popular vote
even if unnecessary for the purpose OF
giving it validity. In other words,
the absence of necessity or SUBMISSION
for ratification, in order to legailze
the constitution, is Of itself no valid
objection to it's submission
But as it appears to me that there
are valid reasons against send1ng tne
constitution to be framed for Hawaii
before the voters for their approval or
rejection, and also that the popular
view at present is decidedly III FAVOR
of submitting it, and against any
other course, I propose, at the risk of
~ eneountering popular ulsappioFai'
which I by no means enjoy doing, to
state those reasons for the calm renec-
ton of readers, relying upon them TO
weigh the pros and cons dispassioh-
ately.
First. then. this is not the case or
CONSTITUTIONAL amendments, to be
voted or rejected separately. Nor is
it the case of revision of the constl-
tuition. It is new constitution,
which is proposed to be made and
carried into operation.