The Bridgeport evening farmer., 1909-08-18

the Proper Course
 Are Many
 INCOME TAX AMENDMENT
 The Constitution of the United States is amended so infrequentiy that when an amendment is proposed the states men who must start it on it's way, and the public officials who must steer its course after it leaves the congress, have to rumage through the musty records before they. are able to act intelligently. Some confusion ex- ists even after the records have been consulted. The wise men of the past did not always agree as to what the precise course of an amendment should be. The income tax amendment which congress has just voted to sub init had rather easy sailing in both the senate and house because there was not much opposition to it. It had a clear two-thirds majority of the total membership of each house. IT the vote had been close the question might have been raised as to whether the Constitution requires two-thirds Of those voting, a quorum being present of two-thirds of the entire member ship. This question has aroused much debate. in the past, but in both the senate and house the presiding officers so far as the records show, have ways held that two-thirds of those voting, provided quorum was pres ent was sufficient. Citation has been made to the fact that the first con- gress had about 65 members and the first amendment proposed to the Con stitution was voted on by 37 members obviously not two-thirds of the entire house.
 Asher Hinds. the parliamentarian of the house in his ''precedents" recalls that in 1869 the senate agreed by a vote of ayes, 39; nays IS; to the re- port of the committee on conference on a resolution proposing suffrage amendment. Garrett Davis, of Ken lucky, made the point of order that as the senate consisted Of "A mem bers a vote of 50 was necessary to constitute the two-thirds vote. Dur the debate Lyman Trumbull, Of Hi nois, recalled that the same question was raised before the war, in the last years of MT. Buchanan's admin istration, when MT. Breckenridge was presiding officer of the senate and af- ter debate the senate decided by a large majority that the two-thirds re- quired was two-thirds of the senators present, if a quorum.
 Another question that might have arisen, while the income tax amend anent was under consideration, but did not, is whether a proposed amend ment to the Constitution may De amended by a majority vote This question was first debated at length way back in 1920 and the decision was then and has been since, that majority vote is all that is desired to amend a constitutional amend ment.
 One of the burning questions about congress the last few days was as to whether the income tax resolution should be presented to the President for his signature; Parhamentar1,an c,a. sively settled that such a resolution should not be presentedNto the Presi- dent This is another question that was debated in 1869, when the suf- conference report on that resolution was presented by George s. Boutwell,, of Massachusetts, George w. wood ward, of Pennsylvania, raised the point that the report of the commit fee would have to be sent to the Pres ident for his approval. He based his argument on the provision of the con- stitution which says that:
 "Every order, resolution or vote on which the concurrence of the senate and house of representatives may be necessary (except on a question of ad- journment) shall be tpresented to the President of the United States"
 The decision of the speaker was that the resolution should not be sent to the President. He pointed out that the
 question was raised distinctly in aS03, in the senate when motion was made that a resolution for a proposed amendment should be sent to the Pres ident By a vote of 23 to 2 the senate of that day voted not to send the reso- lution to the President.
 The amendment of June, 1866, re- specting citizenship was the subject of some debate in congress after it had been filed with the secretary of state by the chairman of the committee on enrolled bills of the house of repre- sentatiyes The following day the house adopted a resolution requesting the President of the United States to transmit forthwith to the executive of the several states of the United States copies of the amendment, etc." and that The request the executive of each state that may ratify said amend ment to transmit to the secretary of state certified copy of such ratifica- tion.'
 was received from the President sub hitting a report of the secretary of state relating to the submission of the amendment to the legislatures of the states, calling attention to the fact that the amendment was not submitted to the President for his approval: that several states were still out of the
 Union and stating that the act of the administration in submitting the amendment should be regarded as purely ministerial and not as an in dorsement of it.
 On February 22, 1870, occurred a l learned and carefully considered de- bate in the senate concerning the pow | CT of a state to recall its assent duly given to a constitutional amendment. :. I The debate arose over the action of the I legislature of New York in attempting l to recall the assent of a previous legis- l lature to the 50th amendment
 | It is not customary for a President
 to notify congress of the promulgation of the ratification of a constitutional l amendreent. but 1t has been done. lRxaaidank Grant in March 18zo. hx