The Fargo forum and daily republican. [volume] (Fargo, N.D.) 1894-1957, 1913-03-25
NEWS OF THE NORTHWEST

as it had passed, and we were not now
voting on the bill itself. If the So
called clincher motion had prevailed,
/ two thirds vote would have been re-
quired to reconsider IT, while the fact
that the clincher motion did not pre-
vail left the bill subject to reconsid-
Grafton by a majority vote at any
time during the next twenty-four
hours, the same course as most bills
usually take. The senate was prac-
tically evenly divided On this measure.
Now, what was the fairest course for
me rs presiding officer, to place the
absolute control, as far as any further
consideration of this bill was con-
cerned, in the hands of one-third of
the members OF the senate, or to vote
SO as to allow the majority to rule? II
the friends of this measure actually
had twenty-six votes for the measure,
1t could not nave been reconsidered,
but 1t was reconsidered and never
passed again.
The papers, in their reports of my
vote, did not take the pains to say
anything about the provisions Of the
bill, but laid particular stress on the
fact as they had it, that my vote
killed the initiative and referendum,
and on deploring that in all likelihood
no initiative and referendum measure
would be passed during this session.
The initiative and referendum being
considered a progressive measure,
their intention evidently was to con-
vey to their readers the impression
that |, having been elected as pro-
gressive republican, and being known
as having affiliated with the progress
sive wing of the republican party,
failed to make good when 1t came to
the test. If those interested will take
the trouble to look up the vote, in
the senate journal OF March s, on this
H. B. No. 1873, they will see whether
or not | staid by the progressive mem
bers of the senate.
In justice to myself and to the SEN
Ators who voted against H. B. No.
1871 want to call attention to some
Of its provisions. In the first place. 1t
attempts to amend five sections Of our
constitution. It has at least three dis
tinct propositions, which, in my opin-
ion, should have been submitted sep-
arateiy to the members Of the legisla-
ture, as we'll as to the people, in order
that they might have the opportunity
to vote for or against either Of said
provisions separately according to
their convictions. 1t provides for the
initiative and referendum as to statu-
rory laws, it provides for the initiative
and referendum as to the constitution,
and it provides for the recall OF all
puDlIS OlllCClS III LAG SIsNC ~ SNLbSD
tina not more than 8 per cent of the
legal voters Of the state shall be re-
quired to sign a petition to apply the
initiative to any measure, that not
more than 5 per cent Of the legal Vot-
ers of the state shall be required to
sign a petition to order the referen-
dunn, and that not more than Is per
cent of the legal voters in at least
half Of the counties in the state shall
be required to sign a petition to call
for q vote on the constitution or on q
constitutional amendment. Notice,
! that irf every case it says mot more;
it limits the maximum, but not the
minimum. Under this provision 3 per
cent, l per cent, or even 10 of l per
cent Of the legal voters of the state
! could by petition force a vote on any
part Of our laws, or initiate new laws,
or order the referendum; and. as to
the constitution, a petition signed by
one legal voter in each of half of the
counties in the state could under this
provision force a vote on any part of
our constitution.
1873 said that the legislature would by
law regulate the number Of signers
required, etc, but cad this %proviso:
This amendment shall be s~elf-eXecut-
ing, but legislation may be enacted
especially to facilitate its operation"
| may be mistaken, DuL LnlS Toes not
sound right to me.
This bill also extends the powers
Of the initiative and referendum to the
electors of each municipality and dis
trict "as to all local, special, and
municipal legislation of every Charac-
ter" and it is se~lf-executing. Now,
supposing that some municipality or
district would vote to grant license
for the selling Of intoxicating liquors,
what should prevent them from doing
so? If this bill became part of our
constitution, 1 DO not see that the
prohibitory provision of our constitu-
ton would be of much value.
/ am no lawyer, and l may have
interpreted this bill entirely wrong,
but according to my judgment the
people of our state do not want this
kind Of initiative and referendum.
am in favor Of submitting to the
people Of our state the question of
initiative and referendum, but we
want something that is properly
safeguarded, SO that a mere handful
can not by petition force a vote on
any part of our laws or constitu-
ton.
S. B. No. 80, providing for the
initiative and referendum as to statu-
tory laws, and senate bill No. 70, pro-
Viding for the initiative and referen-
dunn as to the constitution and con-
stitutional amendments, passed both
houses and will come before the people
for a vote, as / understand, at the
next general election. Both these