The Montgomery advertiser., 1909-07-12
PROHIS HIT A SNAG
FLORIDA AMENDMENT MAY BE uN-
CONSTITUTIONAL.
IL People Adopt Resolution, LegisIa-
ture VIII Not he In Session
to Pass Laws Enforce
ing Measure.


to Pass Laws Enforce
ing Measure.
-
Tallahassee. Fla. July 11.-(Special)
Will the proposed constitutional
amendment for State wide prohibition
be effective after being ratified by
the people of Florida? is the question
creating much attention throughout
the State at present. Prominent law
yers give heir opinions upon the ques-
tion, among them Senator Donald C.,
McMullen, author OF the resolution.
Doubtless more attention and some
excitement followed the opinion of
Hon. g. B. Wells of Plant City. in
which he declared that even should
the people of Florida adopt the amend
ment offered by the recent Legislat ure
providing Statewide prohibition the
amendment could not be effective until
1918 and for two years the State would
have a law without a penalty, than
any other topic recently.
The amendment is: BE II resolved
by the Legislature of the State Of
Florida, That Article XIX. OF the Con-
stitution of the State of Florida be
and the same is, hereby amended SO
as to read as follows:
ARTICLE XIX, Section l. The manu-
facture and sale, barter or exchange Of
all intoxicating liquors and beverages,
whether spirituous, vinous or malt, are
hereby prohibited in the State Of Flor
ida. except alcohol for medical. sci
entific or mechanical purposes, and
wine for sacramental purposes; the
sale of which alcohol and wine for
the purposes aforesaid shall be regu-
lated by law.
Sec. Q. The Legislature shall en-
act suitable laws for the enforcement
Of the provisions Of this article.
Sec 8. This article shall 20 into
effect on the first day Of July, A. D.,
1911"
Mr.. Wells contends first. that should
this amendment be adopted by the pGo-
pie, 1t is of no effect. because It pro-
vides by Its terms that 1t does not go
into effect until July 1. 1911. date
nearly year subsequent to its adop-
ton.
Second that should 1t be constitu-
tional, there could be no laws enacted
for the punishment of its violators In.
til the session of the Legislature which
would convene in 1918. This conten-
ton is because IT provides that II shall
go into effect on July LIST, which Is af-
ter the session of the Legislature Of
1911 shall have adjourned, and that
the 1911 session can not enact q law
providing for the penalty of a viola.
tion of this amendr emit because II will
not be an amendment or part OF the
law until after the said session shall
have adjourned.
Immediately, the attention of SenaA
tor Donald C. McMulien. author of the
amendment, was called to those con-
tentions; whereupon a quick answer re-
suited. To begin with, the Senator be-
lieves some other than Hon. G. B.
Wells wrote the article. as he SAYS:
''My attention has been called to the
article signed by q. B. Wells. Esq.
in which some one. over Mr.. Wells
signature. feebly attempts to show the
proposed amendment to the Consti-
tuition to be Intellectual"
"The people of Florida are not go
ing to permit their fair State to be-
come the dumping grounds for the
undesirable citizens OF the other
States. We will win by from 10000
to $4,000 majority"
In taking up Mr.. Wells contentious,
Senator McMullen says: 1.-The irst
ground of the argument reminds inc
of pompous but stupid fellow who
was in the law class with me. who
made the discovery that the Consti-
tuition was unconstitutional in several
points. The author of the Wells ar
ticle discovers that because the SUI
preme Court in re advisory opinion to
the Governor, "a Florida, page 500. ad-
vises that an amendment to the Con-
stitution which prescribes no time at
which 1t shall go into effect, becomes
operative at once; that, therefore. the
people are powerless to adopt an
amendment to the Constitution going
into effect at a date subsequent to rhe
date of the election at which It Is
adopted He seems to forget that the
Constitution is creature of the peo-
pie of Florida. and that they can
amend IT as they please. He alsa
seems to have forgotten. If he ever
knew, that constitutional provisions are
divided into two we'll recognized class
es, viz: Those that are self executing
and those that are not. A constitu-
tional provision that is not self eXecut-
ing remains imperative until the Leg
islature, in it's discretion. shall by sup
Elemental legislation, carry it into ef-
feet And a constitutional provision
which requires subsequent legislation
to carry 1t into effect is not self exc
cutting. 1t seems to me that the ar
gument of the author of the Wells ar
icle on this point is so absurd, so ut
terly lacking in precedent or logic that
1t is hardly worthy of considerat on ="
LAS to the second contention, I am
quite sure that the consideration was
given the language of the proposed
amendment, or different conclusion
would have been reached"
The Senator's argument continues for
some length. giving reference after
reference for his contentious. citing
authorities for all points.
while 1 thing Col. G. B. Wells
opinion partially correct. I am unable
to agree that the amendment will not
be a part OF the Constitution IL adopt
ed by the people. or that the Legisla-
ture of 1911 will be seriously handi-
capped in enacting laws for its ef-
feotive operation" says Mr.. Reaves,
in his opinion and Of course the Gov
ernor would call a special session Of
the Legislature If found necessary, but
in my opinion an extra session would
not be required"