The independent., 1905-03-23

In state or congressional officer Is
voted for, or wherein any question may
be voted on, by the electors or the en-
tire state.
Sec. 2. When majority of the elec-
tors voting at state election shall by
their votes signify approval of law
or resolution such law or reso-
luton shall stand as the law Of
the state and shall not be overruled,
annullcd or set aside and suspended,
or in any way made imperative except
by direct vote OF the people. When
such majority shall signify disapprov-
al, the law or resolution SO disap-
proved shall be void or OF no effect"
On March 10, 1901, this amendment
passed the Nevada legislature and on
March 6, 1908, it passed second leg
islature In Nevada every constitu-
tional amendment must pass two leg
islatures before it is submitted to the
people. 1t was submitted on Novem-
ber s last and carried by a vote of
4,404 in favor to 794 against, save
that in Eureka county, the two Sec
tions were voted separately and the
second section received % less votes
. In favor and less against. These are
that Nevada is the fourth state in the
Union to embed the referendum in its
constitution.
/ am president of the National Di-
rect Legislation league and editor of
it's organ, and hence in touch with the
movement all over the Union. In 1902,
searching through the laws passed the
year before, / found out about the first
passage Of this amendment and print
ed it in the June, 1902, Direct Legis-
Iation Record / wrote last spring to
the secretary Of state and he sent me
Rn entirely different amendment mod
eled closely on the Oregon amendment
and said 1t was passed March H., 1908,
or six days after the second passage
of the amendment recently voted on.
Further inquiry of the secretary of
state and of the mover and seconder
of these amendments brought no re-
ply; so supposed the earlier amend
ment had been allowed to lapse SO
that the better one might pass.
But month after the election after
AluGA oCdl CllluE OA dAOtACA ludttOAt 4
find Nevada has actually enacted ref
erendun amendment. wrote Mr..
Shibley at Washington and he inter-
viewed the Nevada congressman and
neither of them knew this fact.
suppose that I was the first one out
side of the state to know this import
ant piece of real news, and only got
1t incidentally about a month after
the election. do not know and seem
to be unable to find out who worked
for its passage.
This procedure is characteristically
democratic. A man sees the need OF
the referendum, he has heard about
it from some Of the literature floating
around and he goes ahead and does it.
That's all. A need is felt and it is
met by the initiative of some unknown
man. There is no blare Of trumpets,
no Dragging about it, no oratory. Be-
side this unheralded and almost un
heard of change in their fundamental
law, the choice of a president between
several men is relatively unimportant.
And probably the readers of this ar
ticle, hear of it for the first time.
At times when / look at the rapid
concentration of wealth, at the manner
in which the president and congress
and the central legislative bodies are
often unconsciously drawing towards
themselves power and crushing out the
opportunities for development of indi-
vidual initiative, / feel that this coun-
try is going the way all other coun-
tries and civilizations have gone when
they have become wealthy and when
because of their wealth, power has
concentrated, creative ability been
shackled and corruption and autoc-
racy been fostered. But every now
and then, If / watch closely the cur
rents of life, some such incident as
this passage OF the Nevada amend
ment, I will see. some quiet, untalked
of incident where some unknown man
x Ts>l