Evening times-Republican. [volume] (Marshalltown, Iowa) 1890-1923, 1900-11-24
'Bl'[| [ ! ! On Tx NDD|l['
:Ex.speaksr Of the Iowa House Con
tends Titus amendment Il
Not Defective
Claims Terms Of Omeers Elected
In 1898 Expire December
81, 1900
Believes There Is No Necessity
For On Extra Session Of tho
Legislature.

Legislature.
Special to Timea- Republicans.
Des Moines. Nov. 24.-H. w. Byers,
ex-speaker Of the house and member Of
the twenty-fifth and twenty-sixth gem
eral assemblies. has expressed the opin-
Ion that there is no defect In the Titus
amendment. He holds that the terms
of officers elected in 1898 expire at mid
night Of Dec. 81, 1900 which construc-
ton would remove any dificulty relative
TO extension Of officers terms OF Office.
The Leader prints the following inter-
view with ex-speaker Byers:
In the first place the Titus amend
5ment Is without single defect either
In form or in the manner Of its pas
sage thru the legislature and submis-
sion to the people. The language used
IN the Amendment is definite and GER
tain, 1t is harmonious IN. all its parts
and expresses the intent and purpose.
OF the people in terms that cannot be
misunderstood. A joint resolution, as
required by the constitution. was
agreed to by majority Of the mem
bers OF both houses Of the twenty sew
enth general assembly. the resolution
set out in full in the Journals Of both
houses and the yeas and nays on the
passage recorded as required. The
same joint resolution In exactly the
same form. without the change OF a
single word, was agreed to by q ma
jority Of both houses Of the twenty
eighth general assembly, and every
succeeding step required by law was
properly taken to submit the question
TO vote of the qualihed electors Of
the state voting on the proposition
voted in the affirmative the proposed
amendment became and is now 10 all
intents and purposes part Of the con-
stitution of this state.
Some claim is made that the same
defect exists in the Titus amendment
that was found in the prohibitory
amendment submitted in 1882 Again.
1t Is claimed that the constitution re-
qutres amendments to be submitted to
the people so that they may be voted
upon separately and that this was not
done. Neither Of these claims can be
sustained. The point upon which the
prohibition constitutional amendment
was declared invalid was that the same
resolution proposing the amendment
| was not agreed to by two general as
semblies-that is, the journal of the
senate showed that there was differ
ence In the wording between the reso-
luton finally adopted and the one first
passed by the former general assem-
bly,. No such error is found in the pro-
ceedings on the passage Of the Titus
amendment.
Two propositions were submitted to
the people on the same ballot. /. e., the
Titus amendment and the question OF
holding a constitutional convention
but the vote was separate upon each
question and was in full compliance
with the law, so that it may be re peat
ed that the Titus amendment is today
the law Of this state upon every ques-
1 ton covered by its terms.
4 "Second-The whole difficulty grow
Ling out Of the adoption OF this amend
ment is due to the unwarranted as
sumption that the terms OF the public
\ officers who were elected in 1898 do not
4 expire until the first Monday in Janu-
airy, 1901, and It's claimed that some Of
\ the officials who were elected in 1896
will insist on holding over another year
and justify their action on the theory
4 that their terms do not expire unit
1901, therefore under the constitution
they have been given an additional
4 year.
IF there be man IN Iowa who de.
stres to make this kind Of a spectacle
4 of himself the courts will have to set.
lie, ft1css <{r,,
4 presented will be purely one OF -statu,
tory construction and not constitutional
|construction. 1t will not be necessary
4 for the court to put any strained or I'M
4 reasonable construction upon the con,
stitutional provision. contained in tn,
4 Titus amendment. The whole question
will be settled by construction Of tn,
statutes governing the class Of puDllc Of
ficers who, it is claimed, are going /,
raise the question and II will be settled
4 against them, and the decision whe,
4 rendered will be in harmony with tn,
d provisions OF the Titus amendment. o
course, it would never do for the gu
a preme court to say that when the peopl
voted for q proposition extending tn.
terms Of public officers whose term
would otherwise expire in 1901, that /
should read 1902" This would be til,
rankest kind Of judicia legislation.
A It is claimed this could be done be
!. cause that was the intention Of the leg
islature to use the term 1902. !" The tern
used was understood by the Legislature,
u just as 1t reads, but even II it was TIL,
intention Of the legislature, that inten
ton would cut no figure in construin,
I this constitutional provision. Legisla
i lures amend statutes hut the naonI
amend the constitution.
Nor can this controversy, II there Ii
to be one. be settled by an extra sese!ol
4 OF the legislature as has been proposed
because IL the provision in the THU
4 amendment that, the terms OF the offic
Of all elective state. county and town
ship officers whose terms Of office woul,
4 otherwise expire in the year, etc. ap
/ plies and refers to the officers elected Ii
q 1893. then their terms are already ex
II tanded a a red yoJ I'D,