Evening times-Republican. [volume] (Marshalltown, Iowa) 1890-1923, 1901-01-24
BOTH SIDES CONFIDENT
Favorable Decision Anticipated
by Both Sides Of Amendment
Controversy.
Hearing Before Supreme Court
Attended BY Large Number
of5Lawyers.
Synopsis Of the Oral Arguments
Presented by the At
torneys.
pecial to Times Republican.

| Special to Times Republican.
| Des Moines Jan. "a. case before
the supreme court for several years has
attracted to the city so many lawyers
of the state as the Titus amendment
case. The court room was crowded
with lawyers and interested persons,
among them being a number of ladies.
Senator Titus was an interested specta-
ltor, and after the oral arguments of a
concluded he expressed himself as we'll
satisfied with the manner in which the
case had been presented. He is still
lconfident of victory. In fact. among the
lawyers who met in groups in the corri-
.dors to talk it over, the opinion was
| frequently expressed that confidence in 4
the legality of the amendment had been
Isconsderably strengthened by the
Iispeeches of the day. But, for that
matter, those who believe the amend
ment is void because of errors in the
lcieri i work connected with lta adop-
| ton, are of the same opinion still, and
/ appear also quite confident. There was
no attempt at oratory in the arguments
| yesterday. The time was far too limited
for8the proper presentation of the argu-
ments unadorned. The speakers real
lized that oratory ia of no avail before
six Wise JUDGES They refrained from
anything that would detract from the
cold, hard controversy which has inter
| ested the entire state. Only once did
the court ask questions. Chief Justice
Given questioned Mr.. Bailey as TO his
exact meaning and contention on one
| point, in order that there might be no
misunderstanding, and then suggested
to him that he was reading too many
lof the decisions quoted. This all in
kindly spirit. The entire court listened
to the arguments No objection was
made to any of the judges sitting in the
case That question az not raised.
1
4 The argument of a, b. Cummins for
4 the validity of the amendment seemed
g be not quite up to his standard. in
! that It was loosely thrown together. But
he presented nothing BUT material mat
4 tefs He confined himself TO material
IiqutStiens. Al the outset he took up the.
iiilicn quoted decision in the prohiio-
Iitoiy amendment case and showed that
the precedent set there ought not TO be
/ tlsed mere He said he believed that de-
clsion was right. He would nor attack
II in any way. He recalled the history
of the case He reeiiec the points,wf1ich
the court was called upon 10 scons!d de,--
first, the want of Jurisdiction: second
the determination whether the action ,lf
the nineteenth general assembly WAS,
Judg msnt on what the eighteenth did.
and third, that the. journals of tha
eighteenth We're the only evidence Of
what was done by that assembly. When
the court reached a decision on this, Ia s..
named point the case was over. Far an
investigation of the journals Of the
eighteenth general assembly disclosed
the fact that the resolution which
passed that body was an entirely diff
felent article from the resolution which
passed the nineteenth. Right there the
case ended. IL was never necessary for
me court tc decide that The resolutions
should be spread in fun upon the rec
ords he resolutions were shown 10
oe not identical. But IN the present
case the complaint is not that the res,-
buttons are different. but hat the rec i
ora IS incomplete. All that relates TO
.he inethod OF adopting an amendment
is a mat ter OF form, ard in such matters
ehere must ever be latitude. 1t is in the
that there must be conlpli-
sihce with the strict rules When there
mas been substantial compliance with
'ie forms which are necessary to make |
certain the intent of the legisla torsf and i
me people you have compliance with
the constitution. These matters must
f,ps,i5e
tent of the people and with the end ac-
complished. The journals Of the two |
houses must be considered together If /
the house had amended the. resolution a
part of ii would have been spread on (
the house Journal The resolution must F
be spread on the journals and this
means spread upon the journals any
where With such Identifying references
as will make the meaning clear In the
prohibitory amendment case the recital
by the nineteenth general assembly of (
the fact that a certain resolution was
passed by the eighteenth was not ac- !
cepted as conclusive as to what was
done in the eighteenth. because it was
asSailed as a falsehood, and SHOWN te
be sleh. But no such falsehood is
claimed here. The recital by the twel- f
ty-eighth of what was done in the TWEEN
ty-seventh is conceded TO be correct. All t
that is asrailed is the record itse,f--not I
the resolution. The cases are radically
different. 1t is not asked that in this
case the recital shall cover up false +
hood. But what the twenty y-eighth gem 4
eral assembly did was to decide that in
a matter in which it had jurisdiction
the law had previously been complied /
with.