Kansas agitator. [volume] (Garnett, Kan.) 1890-1905, 1894-08-30
The Suffrage Amendment.

Mr.. Pickering's discovery OF an
inaccuracy in the submission OF the
Woman Suffrage Constitutional
Amendment has disclosed nothing
new to the State Suffrage Associa-
ton. 1t was known to our officers
as soon as the session laws were
published -. that an error appeared
ttSefein in the printing OF the pro-
posed amendment. The matter was
canvassed at that time and the opin
ion of Attorney General Little was
published in the Star OF Fept. 3,
1898, and appeared in other papers
on the following day, and was to the
effect that the amendment would not
be invalidated by the error aforc-
mentioned.
The history of the joint resolution
to submit the amendment is briefly
as follows The senate committee
reported the resolution with pro-
vision which made the required
length of residence for voters zone
year" In the house Mr.. Troutman
moved 10 amend by substituting
"six months for one year. His
motion carried. In the senate Mr..
Householder moved that the senate
concur in the house amendment
Motion carried. In both houses the
resolution as amended received the
required two thirds vote and more.
1t was the desire OF number OF
friends of the measure to witness
the appending of the governors
signature, remember that | read
the joint resolution to the governor
in the presence of the secretary OF
the senate and a considerable COM
pany and the resolution which the
governor signed was exactly the one
which had been adopted as amended
by two.thirds vote of each house.
The voting residence as therein pro-
vided for was "six months" but by
some clerical or typographical error
it appeared in the statute as lone
year"
But the constitution does not re-
quire the printing in the statute
book of the proposition to amend
that instrument. The printing OF
the amendment with the yeas and
nays thereon in the journal is requlr-
ed, and that requirement has been
met, Maj. Pickering to the contrary
notwithstanding, and doubtless a
further examination of the journal
will disclose that fact to his know
lodge.
vss~required publication OF the
n. ,osed amendment in the news
Ills has been fully accomplished.
Dis, the amendment which the
81, ATTIRE voted to submit and
a received the governors APP
al, has been put before the peo-
3, according to constitutional law.
THAT else remains to be done to
W, the pending amendment apart
he constitution Nothing but
. isive it a majority vote.
rhe fact that an inaccuracy APP
ers in the printing of the propos-
ed amendment in the statute book
does not invalidate it. The history
of law making in Kansas shows sim
liar errors which did not prove fatal.
We have had decisions OF the SUI
preme court in more than one such
case, which gives good ground fOr
our conclusions upon this question.
For example, in oath Kansas, page
III. Justice Brewer says: "ln con
stitutional changes the popular voice
is the paramount act. While tC
guard against undue haste and TEN
porary excitement, to prevent un
necessary haste and freque, 7 appeals
for constitutional amendments, thu
,raassent of two-thirds of the legisla
&c IRE is prescribed as condition prec
Aftsent, yet, after all, that which de
tTodue&taf JcQReitaiiaAA QhaRgsA- !
8 Governor Lewelling, as a put
as grown wonderfully in two yea E.