The Vermont watchman. [volume] (Montpelier, Vt.) 1883-1911, 1902-08-27

Editor Daily Journal In the speech
es of f. w. McGettrick and Thomas
w. Moloney, delivered at the Demo-
cratic rally in Montpel.tr Tuesday
evening, the claim was made that a
referendum law, as proposed by the
Republican platform, would be I'M
constitutional, and Judge H. H.
Wheeler of the United States District
Court, and Judge Jonathan Ross late
Chief Judge of the Vermont Supreme
Court, were quoted to support the
position of the speakers In this
connection the Supreme Court de-
cision entitled State V. Parker, 26
Vt, 357 was referred to, and Hon.
John W. Stewart was challenged to
state over his own signature that he
believed such a law constitutional.
The latter, and the other gentlemen
who constructed the referendum
plank, are fully able to defend their
position, but a few words in this con-
nection may not be out of place. Up
on this subject do not ask any per-
son to take the opinion of the writer,
but to consider carefully the language
of the Supreme Court of Vermont.
When any law of Importance is
passed which in its provisions departs
in any great degree from established
fOr,pc q cuac+io,, oricoc rocnao+;pO
constitutionality. That question
arose in 1858 after the passage of the
prohibitory law and the constitution
ality of that law was carefully con-
sidered in the case just mentioned by
the following judges who composed
the Supreme Court of the county of
Windsor which decided the case :
Isaac F. Redfeld, Pierpoint Isham
and Milo L. Bennett. The law in 1862
in effect provided that the prohibitory
law should take effect on the second
Tuesday of March, 1863 with pro-
viso that meetings of the freemen of
the State should be held on the second
Tuesday of February, 1858, to vote
upon "their judgment and choice in
regard to this act" and "if major
ity of the ballots cast shall be No,
then this act shall take effect on the
first Monday in December, 1858, 3"
which latter date was after the next
session of the Legislature to be held
in 1858.
The position of the Republican
party as fairly deducible from its ref
erendum plank is this: That the next
Legislature enact a licensed local
option law and provide that it shall
take effect upon the vote of the peo-
pie in it's favor. That is the fair
meaning of the Republican platform,
but the Democratic party do not choose
to give the language that construc-
ton, and claim that the wording of
the plank does not provide a constitu-
tional provision for submitting the
question to vote of the people.
Following the arguments advanced
by the Democrats and others who are
VI Illc sdhO Oplilloh, Notc Va tlle
Legislature enacting a charter fol
the city of Montpelier and providing
that the charter should not take effec
until the voters of the city of Mont
pelier voted to accept the provision
of the charter would be unconstitu
tional and yet that is exactly wha
was done when Montpelier became
city
The whole argument of the Demo
Gratis is so fully and plainly met b.
the court in the case of State V. Par
ker that any person who has no partic
ular knowledge of law can under
stand the law upon this subject b.
reading the following extract fror
the opinion of the court in that case
and the language is that of Chic
Judge Isaac f. Redfeld, who was on