The Vinita daily chieftain. [volume] (Vinita, Indian Territory [Okla.]) 1902-1913, 1911-11-04
REFERENDUM ACT
TO Be SUSTAINED
Question BY Justice White Leads to
Belief That Progressive Measures
Will Not Be Killed.

Washington, D. c., Nov. 1.-The crit
ical manner in whic hthe supreme
court of the United States Friday list
ened to arguments that the initiative
and referendum method of legislation
in this country was unconstitutional
brought encouragement to the friends
of the system. Oral arguments were
completed.
e. S. Pillsbury of San Francisco and
r. r. Duniway of Portland, Ore, were
heard in opposition to the method in
two Oregon cases When Mr.. Pills
bury remarked that there could not,
with due regard for the federal consti-
tuition, be two legislative powers in a
state, namely the legislature and the
people, Justice Lurton interrupted him.
What is a state constitution but an
organic act of legislation by the peo-
ple?" inquired the justice.
THAT is expressly what 1 understand
it to be-" responded Mr.. Pillsbury.
Then there is legislative power in
the people"
ITO make a constitution; yes"
Mr. Pillsbury suggested that the peo-
pie might put into their state constitu-
ton anything not in conflict with the
restrictions of he federal constitution.
What are the restrictions which you
claim are violated in this particular
case?" inquired Chief Justice White.
"The provision for legislature"
The chief justice asked him to read
it.
Il cannot read it; it is implied in a
dozen places" said the attorney. "And,
also, the constitution has been con-
strued by this court to imply that there
must be legislature"
The chief justice asked for the cases
in which the point had been in issue,
but the attorney did not give them,
1t was further argued that taxes inn
posed under the initiative method were
not by ''due process OF law" and vio-
lated "the equal protection of the laws"
so long as some persons were taxed
under initiative laws and others under
legislative enactments.
Attorney General Crawford of Ore
gon declared that the question of
whether the method violated the guar
anty of the United States in the federal
constitution of a republican form of
government to every state" was a
political question for congress to de-
eide and not judicial one for the
courts to pass upon. He inquired how
the court would enforce its decision if
congress and Oregon were opposed to
it.
Frank S. Grant and William C. Ben
bow of Portland, Ore, spoke in the
interest Of home rule" George Fred
Williams Of Boston, argued that only
q PoAI VI Tic guaranty ln6 SJdJ6,
could ask the United States to make
good its promise that every state
should have republican form of gov
ernment. A corporation he said, could
not do so, because the guaranty was
to the state.
Il have heard no state objecting to
the Oregon form of government" said
Mr. Williams.
Chief Justice White suggested that
the word form" in the constitution
lent support to Mr. Williams interpre-
tation of the word guaranty"
Jackson H. Ralston of this city con-
tended that the opponents of the
method were wrong in arguing that the
word republican" was used in the
constitution as a synonym for repre-
sentative" He argued it was used in
contradiction with "monarchial."