The county record. [volume] (Kingstree, S.C.) 1885-1975, 1900-11-15
iHE AMLhDMtNi MUUDLE.
A Clerks Blurder Sets Aside the VIII
of tha People.

Vi lu- FCOpISs
The assistant attorney general, NJ.
Gunter, in talking about the bond
amendment matter, said:
ut has been called to the attention
of the public that the tickets voted In
the general election on the constltu-
tional amendment in reference to the
towns of Columbia, Rock Hill, Charles
ton, Florence and Georgetown allow
ing them exemption from certain sec,
tions of the constitution. were inaccu-
rate inasmuch as the proposed amend
ment purports to amend a section
the constitution that in no wise affects
the subject. The proposed amendment
contains the folloing: Be it enacted
by the general assembly of the State Of
South Carolina, that the follow ng
amendment to section Of article VIII
of the constitution be agreed to: Add
at the end thereof the following words:
Provided that the limitation imposed
by section 5, article " Of this consti-
tuition shall not apply TO bonded In.
debtedness incurred by the cities OF
Columbia, etc. AS will be seen the
amendment proposes an amendment to
section 5, article w of the constitution
which has no bearing on the subject
OF the proposed amendment. That
amendment reading: a lieutenant
governor shall be chosen at the same
time, in the same manner, continue In
office for the same period and be pos
sessed Of the same qualifications, etc.
OF course the proposed amendment was
to allow the cities Of Columbia, Ro
Hill, Charleston, Florence and George
town certain exemptions under restric-
tions offered by section Z, article VIII
OF the constitution, the main feature
OF which section was to limit the
bonded debt of all cities to per cent.
per annum of the assessed value Of all
taxable property thereof.
"The proposed amendment as voted
upon was an amendment to this Sec
tion the support Of which was to allow
these cities to exceed the 8 per
cent. limitation as we'll as to allow
them the privilege Of establishing
sewer system, etc.
"In the bill as passed the general as
sembly the said section Z, article VIII
was properly referred to as well as
was section 5, article w above referred
to (Which had no bearing on the mat
teri The evident intention was not
only to propose an amendment to ar
ticle VIII, section 7, but also to article
x, section 5, inasmuch as that section
also limited the bonded debt in any
municipal corporation to s per cent. OF
the assessed value of the taxable pr7p-
erty therein. But for some reason this
section was not referred to and no:
voted upon.
"It will be noticed therefore that
while article VIII. section Z, which
limits the bonded Indebtedness to 8
per cent. Of the assessed value OF the
taxable property, was purported to be
amended, that article x, section 3,
which also purports to limit the bond
ed indebtedness OF any municipal cor
poration to 8 per cent. OF the assessed
value was referred to in the act p9sse1
by the legislature. There is no doubt
that this section was intended to be
referred to when the section in refer
ence to the tenure of the lieutenant
governor was referred to. This is made
manifest by the fact that the original
bill as certified to contains the same
reference to sections and numbers Of
the constitution as the ticket voted
upon, but that the bill as introduced
and amended contains different num-
bers. The bill as introduced and
amended referred to article x, Sec
ton 5, whereas in the engrossing de-
partment it was changed to article ",
section 5. Upon an inspection OF the
bill as amended it was evidently diff
cult to determine whether the article
referred to was article x or article 4.
which was probably due to the hurr ed
legislation. It is thus evident that the
error IS due to a clerk in constituting K
into the figure 4, and, as has Already
been stated, from an inspection Of the
original papers, it is hard to tell which
was intended. Upon inspection Of the
original papers 1t appears that the in
sertion Of the phrase section 8, article
X was an amendment to the original
bill and was Of course, in the handwrit-
ing of the lieutenant-goVernor. The
tickets as sent out by the Democratic
executive committee, who, without any
obligation sent them out, did so after 2
careful examination of the original act
and the printed act. This was their
duty and having done so the question
as to the constitutionality must be de-
termined by the courts"
There has been much interest in the
blunder that occurred in the enrolling
Of the joint resolution under which the
voting on the constitutional amend
ment as to municipal Indebtedness
was had.
The supreme court OF South Carolina
in two early cases decided that it re-
quired three readings in each house