The Saint Paul globe. (St. Paul, Minn.) 1896-1905, 1897-03-06
A PROPER CONDITIoN.

A bill requiring that amendments
to the constitution of the state should
receive an affirmative vote equal to
one-half of the entire number Of votes
cast at the election in which it is pre-
sented to the people embodies a proper
and necessary condition.. 1t seems re-
markable to us that, when presented, it
should have been met with SO many
objections as to be laid aside tempo
rarily. The principal charge against ii
is that it would be practically impos.
sible to get out enough votes to amend
the constitution, if this condition were
enforced. AS a matter of fact. that
statement is one of the strongest ar
guments in it's favor We do alto
gether too much amending the consti-
tuition, just as we pass too many laws
on all subjects. The craze for consti-
tuition tinkering keeps pace with the
appetite for law-making. Every crank
wants his mental kink fastened on the
constitution. 1t is coming to be so
that every man who wants to accom-
plish something that could be done nor
fectIy well by statute is not satisfied
unless he can put it into the constit,1-
tlon So, few years ago, Prohibition
lists were not satisfied with passino
state laws, but were demanding that
their experiment be embodied in con-
situations; only because 1t would be so
difficult to get it out
constitution Is a serious
and ought to be pretty ca
cred, document. Only on rare occa.
sions should 1t be amended. The con-
stitution of the United States stood
unchanged, after the adoption of tha
amendments secured by Jefferson to
guard personal liberty, until the abo.
lition of slavery gave 1t a few other
changes. Who can deny that a mart
of our governmental stability Is due RI
the difficulty of making over the fed
eral constitution every time that Soma
craze carries the people off their heads2
1t would be an equally positive gain to
as exempt from frequent change
Outside Of this general argument
however. what can be fairer than II
require that, in a matter as vital as
the amendment of a constitution, at
least half of those actually voting
should declare for it? This does not
be 1t remembered, include the stay-at
homes, as it very we'll might. It would
not be unreasonable to require
that constitutional amendment
should have the assent of half
the entire qualified voters of the
community. The condition proposed is
much more moderate. 1t says that, OF
the men who actually go to the polls
and put in ballot, at least half should
favor a constitutional amendment be-
fore it can be adopted. The process OF
making laws itself is subject to sim
liar restriction when no bill can be en-
acted unless it receives the affirmative
vote Of half the members-elect Of each
house. That is, indeed, much severer
prescription, similar to conditioning ar
amendment upon the approval of half
the voting population.
What the directors to this change ask
is that a majority of those voting on
an amendment, however small the to-
tai, shall have the power to change
the constitution at their pleasure. \
mere handful Of voters may, at any
time, owing to the difficulty Of interest
ing and informing the people where
great body Of amendments are to be