Evening capital news. (Boise, Idaho) 1901-1927, 1912-10-27

turc to reduce the number II expert
ence should prove its advisability.
(c) To require Z distribution Of the
required per cent Of signatuses. a. IN
each Of the two-fifths Of the counties
OF the state, 10 unwise because need
lessly burdensome and expensive.
This IL q favorite and plausible
"jQker', and q dangerous one. 1t has
up to date injured the effectiveness Of
the Montana amendment passed In
1906. 1t has been found unexpectedly
burdensome in Missouri. which re-
quires the given per cent to be signed
in each Of two-thirds Of the congress
sionai districts. The Wisconsin pro-
vision IL the least dangerous 1t re-
quires that no county shall furnish
more than onc-half Of the petition. A
voters signature should count wher-
ever secured.
ca II this 10 peoples government.
there Is no valid reason why an
amendment to the constitution should
require more signatures than a sta
tute law.
VI. The Majority.
Gay All meaeures submitted to the
people should be adopted or rejected
by majority OF the votes cast there
on and not otherwise.
To require a majority Of all the
votes cast for candidates I'm the cleo
ton" IL to put premium on ignor-
ance and carelessness and increase the
political power Of those who care lit
tie or nothing for good government. It
is now conceded by the men who
framed the Oklahoma constitution
that the insertion of this "joker"
Though done without knowledge Of its
fatal character) has practically de-
stroyed the value Of the initiative.
With the establishment Of the pub
licity pamphlet as used in Oregon. sent
to each voter in the mails. the voters
have opportunity to educate them
selves, a large vote Is insured. and
there is no danger OF so-called mi
nority rule"
WI. When in Force.
Measures adopted by the people
should go into effect automatically at
the expiration OF a given number Of
days after election, or upon the gov
ernor's proclamation, which should be
within a given time.
The Enabling Act.
An initiative and referendum amend
ment should be made self executing,
which. Of course. permits it's immedi-
ate operation under existing laws: It
should also be supplemented by an
enabling or celebrating act. covering
many minor details Of the system
which cannot well be placed in an
The purpose Of the en-
abling act is to facilitate the opera
ton" OF the initiative and referendum
and not to impair its value and use
fulness by unreasonable technical re-
quirements. The following are the
main points 1t should cover.
I. The Petition.
(a) The act should provide the form
In which petitions are to be submit
ted:
(b) Verification: The affidavit Of
the solicitor should be required and
made sufficient to establish the legal
ity and genuineness of petitions.
(c) All signatures. addresses, etc.
should be duplicated by the solicitor.
Hundreds of names and addresses
are poorly or ilIegibly written. Unless
a key is given the clerks must
throw the mout. The Oregon method
~ hdNAh6 sAhV SiShdtuiC Go ICW IlltcH vi
the back Of the petition sheets by the
solicitors has been found to add heav-
lily to the work OF notification. Either
the size Of the petition sheets should
be enlarged so that names may be re-
copied on the same size. or a separate
sheet of the same size could be used
and attached. 1t must be understood
that this duplication Of signatures by
the solicitor is only to provide for the
and accuracy in checking
up petitions by the officials. The
original signatures validate the petit
tition.
(d) Protection from fraud The
securing or signing Of petit
tions should be made felony
(e) Sufficiency: The official with
whom the petition is filed should pass
upon its sufficiency..
This is usually the secretary Of state
and time limit should be set after
which his decision cannot be ques-
toned in court. He should be re-
CURED to announce his decision by a
certain time. and opportunity given
the petitioners to complete the petit
ton before the election IL 1t is found |
In case petition is enjoined on the |
Of insufficiency the burden of
proof should be placed upon the OBJ
jectors.
An Injunction was brought against
a petition in Chicago court by "the |
interests The Judge proved hostile
and forced the petitioners to establ1h |
the sufficiency Of their petition. This |
and the attorneys fees cost them
nearly as much as securing the petit |
ton, which was declared valid, but |
not until after the election.
The proof that 4 petition contains |
fraudulent signatures should not be |