Evening times-Republican. [volume] (Marshalltown, Iowa) 1890-1923, 1901-02-01
Held That c Constitutional Amend
ments Must Be Entered in
Full in Records.
Involves Changing Constitution
and Details Mustbe Deiinitly
Followed.
Decision Given by the Full Court
..Prohibitory Case Followed
Closely.
Special to Times-Republican,

Special to Republican.
Des Moines. Feb 1.-The supreme
court put a final auietus on the Titus
amendment today, fully sustaining the
decision of Judge Dewey in. the, test
case. Decision was by the court and
without dissent. The line of reasoning
followed in the prohibitory amendment
case was adopted in full.
The court holds that in that case the
decision was not dictum, but matter
of actual decision by the court The
prohibitory case was knocked out by
reason of the fact that certain Words
were found in one of the resolutions
passed which were not found in the
other. 1t was contended that what the
court said in that case regarding
spreading in full upon the record was
NOT before the court. The objection to
giving great weight to dictum is that
what is thus stated is beyond the power.
of the court to decide, because the court
can only ad5udicate questions which
are before it, and that as the question
was not before the court. what is said
must be understood as having been
Aaid without the advantage Of argu-
ment
says the court. ON which the Koehler
case was submitted shows that by the
pleadings an issue was plainly raised
as to whether it was necessary that the
proposed amendment be entered in full
on the journals of both houses of the
general assembly in which Il is first
proposed that under The evidence the
amendment which was agreed to by
the senate. of the eighteenth general
assembly was no. entered in full on
the Journal of the house of that Assem-
bly,; that this was one of the grounds
ments cmfwpy shrdlu shrdIu shdslu uu
on which the trial court held the
amendments not a part of the cons titu-
ton; that the ruling of the court on
this point was assigned as error; and
that this assignment was fully argued
by counsel for both sides.
In the iirsr opinion of the court in
that case and again in the opinion on
re-hearing the conclusion of the court
is definitely expressed that the entry
on the journals required, by the eonsti-
tuition is an entry in full on the jour
nails of each house and that reference
by title To the resolution proposing the
amendment is not sufficient as to either
Journal The judge who dissented on
the original hearing and again on re-
hearing treated this question as in
volvel and decided ON the majority
opinion Ii is therefore decided TO he
conclusive that in the prohibitory
amendment case the court definitely
decided that an entry in full is required
on both journals For this reason the
Titus amendment is declared TO he de-
fective and not a part of the constitu-
ton.
The conclusion of the court follows:
The conclusion, therefore. expressed
by this court in the Koehler case is not
dactum. but is decision" concludes the
court, and we must either follow 1t or
overrule 1t. We consider that mas
much as 1T involves the construction OF
our own constitution and has been
recognized for many years as making
definite and certain the method to be
pursued in amending the constitution.
1t should be followed And in concIu-
eion. with reference to that case. we
consider that 1T is not for us to deter
mine that of tle two questions in
volved relating to the method OF
amending the constitution one only was
regarded as decided, while the other
was simply discussed. The conclusion
OF the court as to either one OF these
two questions would have determined
the case !. and one conclusion Is as
binding: upon us as the other.
Therefore, following the decision OF
the court in the Koehler case We hold
that the proposed amendment no. hav-
ing been entered upon the journal OF
the house sof the twenty gen.
eral ASSEMBLY,, was not proposed and
adopted as required by our constitution
and has not become part thereof.
This conclusion makes 1T unneces-
sary to tdiecuss the Interpretation OF
the language of the amendment and
letds to the result that relator :e en-.
titled to the Office which he claims.p
The Interest aroured In the case haa