Evening times-Republican. [volume] (Marshalltown, Iowa) 1890-1923, 1901-01-08
upnng 5arshalu, jnr prsdag aaarg g.

Jlldr5ll ltnl1rlr, ju1ua, 8
SO we have this startling conclusions:
Voting for the amendment. 1S5, 100
Voting against the amendment
CT not voting ~. .'..E..i....- 34S, zoo
Leaving majority not voting
for the amendment OF. ~. l60. l45sl
In other words of the number of
electors who voted for president in 1900,
35 per cent voted for the amendment
against So per cent Who did not vote for
the amendment.
1t is true the law providing for vot-
ing on constitutional amendments pro-
vides that the electors voting thereon
shall determine the issue. With this we
are content; but when we learn that
only 30 per cent Of the electors voting at
the general election voted for the
amendment ii noifies the intense de-
mand that the Will of the people should
be respected, And IL courts should
ever permit themselves to b. influenced
by the great demand of the people in
determining true legal proposition.
thine In this case the courts had better
be turning their attention. e the de-
Imand of those who did not Vote for the
Iamendnent. 10 be protected in their le-
I gal and legitimate rights
lin fairness TO the legal status as ex-
planned herein, may 1t no; he a reason,
Iable conclusion to reach, that since the
proposed amendment had rot besn le-s
gally press ntesi TO the pc pie, such q
great portion found thelns Ives unin-
form s,s1 o What action IL, legislature
lin tbelI. effort 70 amend IT,. consEitu-1
ltion, Desired to amend, thu I hey either
Voted agaiast any change OF Withheld
! their Votes altugsther.9
We have commented fully on this
subject. as the sentiment so eXtsn-
'sively presented in the Kansas prohib-5
| tory amendment case-2lst laansas, se0
=-and he learned jsliist wiIo prepared
that upiilion lays great stt - on the
lfact that an uverwhelnling majority of.
the psaple have spoken. 81, and I'M
/, deed, assigns this rs, a principal reason
/ for sustaining he ailenains 1T.
But on the ttther hand, the laws of
4 Iowa look With such high regard upon
| the rights of all the peopc that If the
/ majority voting for the amendment had
I been 50 overwhslmin that but .bak-
ei's dozen had been found opposed 70 it
/ the LAW extends to them the same pre-.
tectlpn and guarantees 10 them the
same highsright as To IA r. eat majority.
III IS Il standard rule OF law that on
issues determined by the ps eple the n,i-
nority haye5at all times the right to de-
naand Of / he majority that they proceed
4 just az the law directs and not To in
any manner deviate ,ilerefrom.
Indeed. tn IS isone of the highest and
( purest purposes FOR Which the judicial
4 system issconstifslted; TO protect he
weak from the strong the oppressed
from the opp,essor; tbs majority from
tramping on the rights of the minority.
We turn our attention To another.
and az ii appears TO the court a defect
IN the proceedings leading up TO The
submission Of the amendment. equally
as grave as these herein passed upon
Referring to the record, NE learn tina,
There was presented 10 the senate:
First, joint resolution No. j. propos-
ing 10 amend the stitution; then
Second substitute for joint res9lu-
sleion No: ]. proposing to amend tn e con
Isiitution; then
Third, substitute for substitute for
joint resolution No. /. proposing Id
! amend the constitution.
'.T8y the sa.i.s record We find that the
last prevailed WAS declared TO have
lpase,sd the senate and title agreed To-.
by referring TO the record OF the
A housa we learn that on the sane day
q Feb. "a as tbs report Of tbs pc ssags
4 by the senate for,ne adop.ionso. sub
lstitute for Substitute fot joint fss6lil-
q tion No 4 he secretary Of the ssTlslts
by his message informed The house al
follows:
RI