The Caldwell tribune. [volume] (Caldwell, Idaho Territory [Idaho]) 1883-1928, 1897-07-17
FEE BILL.
The Supreme Court Says 1t Vas Not
Regularly Passed.
THE QUAKER FRIENDS WERE HERE.
They Like Idaho and Are In Love With
Caldwell May Come Here to Live
A Camas Prairie Curiosity Big Puff
balls.

A Camas Prairie CuriOsity-Bi Puff
balls.
A Boise correspondent to the Salt
Lake Tribune under date July 9th
says; One of the most important
opinions ever rendered by our sup.
RENE court was filed today in case
brought to test the validity of the bill
passed at the last session regulating
the fees of county and precint officers.
The act is declared unconstitutional
because of the failure of the Legislature
to comply with the provisions of the
Constitution in the passage of the bill.
The decision is of the most far-reach-
ing Importance because of the pos
sible effect upon other laws. A great
many measures enacted since State
hood could not stand the test laid
down. The court holds that it can 90
back to the enrolled bill to determine
whether or not the constitution has
been violated in its passage, and that
it the journal does not show that any
particular thing was done, the assum
ption is that it was not done. Sus-
pension of the provision requiring rea-
ding on separate days cannot be sus-
pended except by yea and nay vote
on each measure on which such ac-
ton is desired, and it cannot be sus-
pended excepting in case of urgency.
The practice has been to suspend by
unanimous consent or by unanimous
resolution. Again, it is held that a
bill materially amended in either
house, when sent back to the house
where it originated, must be treated
as new bill and read on three separ-
ate days.
THE SYLLABUS.
The syallabus of the opinion says:
First-The provisions of the Consti-
tuition requiring three several read
ings, the printing of bills and an aye
and nay vote on the final passage of
any bill are mandatory.
Seeond-To ascertain whether or not
the Legislature, in the passage of
bill complied with the requirements
of the Constitution, that the court may
go back of the enrolled bill to see if
the journals of both houses of the Leg
islature show that the requirements of
the Constitution were obeyed in the
passage of the act in the question.
Third The journals of both houses
of the Legislature must affirmatively
show that the provisions of the Con.
stitution in regard to the passage of
any law were substantially followed by
the Legislature in the passage of the
act, the validity of which is question
ed,
Fourth-While the journals of both
houses of the Legislature are entitled
to absolute verify and cannot be contra.
dicted, yet if the journals fail to show
that any step required by the Con-
stitution in the passage of law was
taken, such failure to show that such
step was taken is conclusive evidence
that it was not taken.
Fifth-N9ither house of the Legis.
lature can suspend the provision of
the Contribution which requires three
readings on separate days in each
house. except in case of urgency, and
then only on and aye and nay vote by
twO-thirds of the house voting with
reference to only one bill then before
such house.
WHAT JOURNALS MUST SHOW.
Among other things the opinion
says; 1.-The journal of the Senate fails
to show that the bill was read on three
separte days in the Senate, after it
bod been amended twenty-five times
by the House or that it was read in
the Senate at all after it was amended
by the House, or that the bill with
the House amendments thereto, was
ever finally voted on in the Senate af-
ter it had passed the house"
Again, "A bill which passes the
house and is materially changed by