The Republican. [volume] (Oakland, Md.) 1877-current, 1905-03-30
TO VOTE ON AMENDMENT.
Court of Appeals of the State so De-
cided THURSDAY.

At Annapolis with all eight judges
cOncurring in all the principal fea
lures of the decision and three dissent
ing in many of the essential facts of
the proceedings, an opinion was hand
ed down Thursday by the Court of
Appeals in the mandamus proceed
ings against Governor Warfield to
compel him to proclaim the elective
franchise amendment.
The opinion, twenty-five typewrit-
ten pages, affirms the decision of the
lower court and instructs Governor
WartielG to proclaim thesamendment.
1t denies that he had the right to
either veto the bill or cause its pas
sage by failing to return il. to the Leg
islature within six days of its present
ment.
Three Judges discussed as to the
wording in which the matter should
be placed before the voters, they
placing a construction on the word
ing which would appear. that there
had been some effort made to have
the bill imperative at any stage.
The coart,icities at great length
opinions on proceedings instituted on
lines similar to the present contention,
which were handed down in Pennsyl-
vania and Louisiana makes use of the
language of article IA of the Maryland
constitution, which stated that pro
posal of an amendment by the Gen
eral Assembly in the form of bill
shall have its passage by three
fourths;of all the members elected to
each house, the entry of the proposed
amendment On.the journal, the publ
cation by order of the Governor for al
least three months before the next
general election, "a vote of the people,
and if majority of the voters are fav.
Orable to its adoption, proclamation
by the Governor, declaring the amend.
ment to be adopted and henceforth
the amendment shalt part ofl:the
constitution.
The court holds that there is not a
word or syllable to be found in any
of the provisions even suggesting that
the Governor is entitled to partici
pate in any way in formulating and
proposing amendments to the consti
tuition.
Coming to the second section of the
bill the opinion uses the following Ian
guage:
The second section of the franch. sc
amendment bill is in these words
And be it further enacted that the
foregoing section hereby proposed as
an amendment to the constitution OF
of the state shall be, at the next gen
eral election for members Of the Gen
eral Assembly to be held in this state
submitted to the legal and qualified
voters thereof for their adoption OF
rejection in pursuance of the direc-
constitution, and at said election the
vote on said proposed amendment
shall be by ballot and upon each bal
lot there shall be written or printed
the words for the constitutions
amendment or against the constitu
tional amendment, as the voters shall
elect, and Immediately after sale
election due return shall be made t.
the Governor of the vote on the sale
proposed amendment as directed 10y
said article of the constitution"
Now it cannot be pretended, con
tinues the court, that the clause di
recting the amendment to be submit
ted to the legal and qualified voters o
the state at the next general election
for the General Assembly is distinc
lively and essentially Legislative
provision, requiring the Governor
approval, because it is precisely wha'
article II prescribes shall be done ,anC
il the clause had been entirely omit
Ted from the section the constitute
onal mandate would have been opera.
tive, as it still is effective in this par
ticular. Nor is the requirement thai
the vote on the proposed amendment
shall be by ballot a legislative enact
ment, because the constitution itself
in section l, article declares that nj
elections shall be by ballot.
The proposed amendment to the
constitution of the state, which hai
for its purpose the DISTINGUISHING o
a large portion of the illiterate negro
vote, was offered by Mr.. Wilson at The
last session of Legislature.
The amendment was adopted il
caucus by the Democratic members
but subsequently it was learned that
it did not meet with the approval OF
the Governor, who wanted among
Others, property qualification. Tn,
Governor also objected to othel
features and had prepared IA message
vetoing the measure.
When his intentions became known
the Democratic leaders, after passing
the amendment on both sides, con
suited Mr.. Bernard Carter ard Other