Ottumwa semi-weekly courier. [volume] (Ottumwa, Iowa) 1899-1903, 1900-12-18
THE TITUS AMENDMENT.

Hon. A. w. Buchanan, of this city.
is In receipt of an exhaustive opinion
of Senator Titus, concerning the
amendment which bears his name.
known as the Titus amendment, Mr.,
Titus holds that the supreme court
cannot hold the biennial election
amendment defective or improperly
submitted to the people, and therefore
invalid and not adopted He says that
the constitution requires that amend.
nents shall be entered" on the Jour.
mails of the houses of the assembly
but that this word entered" was not
meant by the makers of the con-
stitution to be equivalent to copied
! in full on the journals. Therefore
he argues, the amendment was not i'm
properly omitted from the house Jour-
nal in 1898. His argument to sustain
this position is elaborate and includes
citations from numerous cases.
The strongest part of Senator Titus
showing, however, is the language in
the prohibitory amendment decision,
In which a majority of the court held
that the amendment should have been
entered "at length" upon the journals,
or, "at least" the court says in that
opinion, $50 entered as to leave no
reasonable doubt as to its provisions .
This was done, Senator Titus, Major
Fleming and others argue, in behalf OF
the biennial election amendment
Mr.. Titus speaks in this connection.
partly as follows:
Let it be borne in mind that in the
Case Of Koehler VS. Hill, Goth Iowa, 544,
tine prohfbitory amendment case) not
Withstanding what the syllabus indi-
Gates the court did not decide in that
case that the word entered as used
In the constitution meant "to copy
In full" In the majority opinion the
theory of a copy in full is discussed.
In the majority opinion by Judge See
vers in the original case, p. $50, he
says: THE evident intent of the con-
stitution is that the proposed amend
ment should be entered at length in
the journal, or at least, SO entered as
to leave no reasonable doubt as to its
provisions. On page 557, he says:
when the object intended to be ac-
complished is considered, we think
there is no doubt that it is the de-
sign and intent of the constitution,
that it can be known, by an examina-
ton of the journals, what it is that
has been agreed to by each house of
the general assembly which first acts
thereon, to the end that the succeed
ing general assembly may certainly
know what it's predecessors did,
Judge Day, in the majority opinion of
the rehearing, p. 645 of the same case,
says: Placing the most liberal con-
struction upon the provision of the
constitution under consideration, of
which it is susceptible, we think it
requires at least that the entries upon
the journals shall show the terms of
the amendment submitted But in
neither Of these opinions do they posi-
lively decide that entered" means to
be copied in full. The editors OF the
American and English Encyclopedia
of Law (second edition), vol. vi, p. 9O5,
in foot notes, commenting upon this
case state that this point is not de-
cided.
The biennial election amendment.
it will be ascertained, is sufficiently
identified to come within their final
liberal conclusion.
On page 556, Koehler VS. Hill, Judge
Sewers says: ut may be suggested
that to enter or entering on the jour.
nal does not necessarily mean spread
ing the same at length thereon. This
will be conceded, but that it may SO
mean must also, we think, be con.
ceded."
1t seems to me that it is fortunate
for the state of Iowa that in that case
they did absolutely decide that ZEN
tered" meant to spread in full. And
If they had, think it highly proper
for the court not to follow such pre-
cedent.