Arizona republican., 1910-03-12
Oklahoma Attempt at Disfranchise
 ment.

The democrats of Oklahoma also sought to disfranchise d considerable number of voters in that state They were trying to do it by the adoption cf d grandfather" clause amendment to the constitution by which the negro vote of the state would have been eliminated
 The bill, d senate measure. encoun- tered in the democrat. Governor Has keI. opposition similar to that which an Arizona bill for disfranchisement encountered in republican Governor kibbey Whether the Oklahoma leg islature can override the governors disapproval remains to be seen. but for reasons pointed out by the gov
 ernor in his veto message. the law would fail in a constitutional test
 Governor Haskell perhaps objected to the bill chiefly on that ground and also on the ground of it's palpable un- fairness He may have had no desire to preserve to negroes the right of suffrage. A dispatch from Guthrie re- garding the veto of the bill says:
 The rIrst reason assigned by the governor is that the bill provides that the ballot title to any measure sub mitted under the initiative or referen- dunn is to be prepared by those sub hitting the proposition and not by the attorney general. as provided in the present law. This the governor de clares would permit of a preindiced ballot title and place the attorney gen. eral in the attitude of defending q ballot title that he did not prepare and which might contain preiudiced statement of the substance of the proposition.
 Another reason for yetoing the bill IS that it provides that the ballot may be printed at any place on the ballot that the election board may designate. which would give the election board legislative power and that the words for the amendment" shall be printed in the same sized type as the ballot title and run in with the body of the ballot title making no distinction in that matter.
 As the bill provides that those who want to vote against the amendment must strike out the words for the amendment" the governor holds that an unfair discrimination is thereby made against the amendment. The | governor also objects to the feature ! which provides that initiative or ref i erendum petitions shall be filed with i the secretary of state and that all protests must be filed within five days i after such filing. but does not provide l that the secretary shall give public | notice of such filing.
 The governor suggests that the bill should provide for the publication of legal notice in a newspaper of general circulation at the capital of the state | of the date of filing. so that anyone | opposing the proposition might have opportunity to file protest. The pro- | visicn which makes it illegal to pub | fish sample ballots except those fur i nished by the election board is also I objected to by the governor. He stat | ed in his message that this might bar | the publication of sample ballots in | newspapers and would prevent cam i paign of education relating to any |, question to be submitted to the peo- ! pie.
 The governor also expressed the De- lief that the governor should perform | the same duties with regard to filing | petitions as under the present law on that subject. and that this provision is necessary to a full and free consid- eration of public questions coming be- fore the people. The action was taken by the governor after he had conferred with the attorney general with regard to the bill and had been advised by 1 that official that some of its provi- sions are unconstitutional and that other provisions are unfair.