Ottumwa tri-weekly courier. [volume] (Ottumwa, Iowa) 1903-1916, 1914-01-15
THE CAPITOL GROUNDS CASE

A.
Under the heading Of "1n New
Role" the Des Moines Register and
Leader says:
! The Ottumwa Courier devotes
nearly a column to proving to its
readers that the issue before the
state is the right of the legislature
to appropriate the money Tor the
capitol extension without vote OF
the people.
The supreme court having already
answered that question. it is apparent
that what the Courier is really driving
at is a recall of judicial decisions.
The Courier has not in the past
been notably prompt to respond to
the call of Mr. Roosevelt for judicial
recall.
But now. in the most effective way
possible. the Courier joins the recall
ranks.
It would be interesting, if we had
recall of judicial decisions, to follow
the leadership of one OF the stald
conservative standpat newspapers or
the state in a demand for the first
recall.
In taking that position the Register
and Leader is putting its own con-
struction on the article it refers to.
What was the reason that this capt.
toll grounds extension bill was put
through both the house and senate in
such a hurry. 1t looks like pre-
meditated attempt to jam this measure
down the threats of the people with
out giving them an opportunity to
know what they were being made to
swallow.
The house journal shows that the
bill was called up the morning OF
April 8. There were two votes taken
on amendments. A member then
moved the previous question. Thus
debate was shut off, A motion was
then made to suspend the rules which
was done and the bill read the third
time and passed. :.
There is a legislative rule to the eff
feet that any bill passed by one body
must lay over until the next leglsla-
tive day before it can be passed by the
other body Of the legislature. But
all signs went astray' in this capitol
grounds extension bill, and the bill
was brought up in the senate on the
afternoon of the same day 1t passed
the house. The senate journal says 1t
was read a first and second time and
q motion then made and carried that
the rule by which no bill may be read
che second and third time the same
day was suspended. The bill was
then read for information. A motion
was then made that that reading be
considered third reading the motion
prevailing. The bill was then passed.
In both the house and senate mo-
tons were made and carried to recon
slider the vote on the bill and to lay
the motion to reconsider on the table.
Thus any possibility of bringing the
bill up again was precluded. AS far
as this bill was concerned the legisla-
ture closed the matter by going into
the hole and pulling the hole in after 1T.
This Is the kind of legislation that
creates a demand for the recall OF
judicial decisions. It happens that in
this case the courts decision agreed
with the action Of the legislature, but
It is a good illustration Of where an
exception proves the rule. Is it any
wonder that the courts often decide
that measures put through like this
one was are unconstitutional?
Is it right to condemn criticism Of
such legislation?
Other bills that were before the
same session of the general assembly
had weeks and weeks of consideration
and committee meetings and dis.
cussions.
What was the necessity Of sending
this bill through at such airship
speed. It is the throwing onto the
supreme court the job Of interpreting
just such legislation as this that
creates the demand for the recall Of
judicial decisions.
We are not in favor Of the recall by
vote of this decision, but we hope it
will not happen again.
The Courier Is not advocating the
recall of any judicial decisions, (be-
cause there is a better way to do it,,
but we take advantage Of this occas-
sion to say that 1t is just such legis-
lative acts as this that puts the public
mind in condition to grasp at such
q class of remedies as the "recall Of
judicial decisions" etc. But that is
not a remedy at all. To locate the
real responsibility and in almost every
instance where judicial decisions are
made concerning matters affecting a
large number of people who find fault
with such a decision, it will be neces-
sary to begin further back than the
court that made the decision. The
responsibility in this instance goes
back to the people who elected legis-
lature and executive council that en-
acted a law levying an immense tax
on the state without giving the least
consideration as to whether such an
act was or was not violation of the
constitutional rights of the people.
The people should exercise more
thought and responsibility in the cleo
ton Of officials, and members of the
legislature should not shirk the re-
sponsibiiity Of studying well every
phase OF their acts as almost all of
* : 4. 4 -.