Saturday news. (Watertown, S.D.) 19??-19??, 1915-04-08
(Deadwood Daily Telegram. J

(Deadwood Daily Telegram.)
Elsewhere on this page is repro
duced a courteous and kindly criti-
cism of the Telegram, by the Sat
urady News of Watertown, or its edi-
torial contention that court decisions
in other states uphold the right of
the legislature of this state to re-
peal the Richards primary law. 1t
has been carefully considered with a
view to determining the basic points
of the difference of opinion made
manifest therein.
The fundamental question which
the News raises is the scope and in
tent Of the Initiative and referendum
provisions in the constitution of this
state. s.
It's contention is that a law which
has been adopted under the Initiative
become in fact a part of the con
stitution of the state, repealable only
as any other part of the constitu-
ton, by a vote of the people.
In asmuch as the referendum is on
"a par with the initiative, in the con
them into the fundamental law of
this state, under the contention OF
the News any referred law becomes
a part Of the constitution the same
as any initiated law. A referred act
of the legislature which is approved
by the electorate, is enacted by the
people," just q much as is a law
which is initiated by the people.
With such a view as to the scope
and status Of acts approved by vote
of the people, the editor of the Teia-
gram can not agree. The constitu-
ton itself specifically provides how
any amendment thereto or a repeal
OF any portion thereof may be made
by the people. II it was the inteut
of those who proposed the initiative
and referendum amendment to the
constitution, 1t should have been
plainly stated therein that the laws
ENACTED by the people," under Its
provisions, were of the same force
and effect as a constitutional amend
ment.
The writer voted for the adoption
of the initiative and referendum
provisions in the constitution, with
the understanding that they merely
gave the people a c~o1ordfnate power
with their representatives, the leg
lislature, id enacting statutory laws
Had he been of the opinion of the
editor OF the News that an initiated
or referred law becomes In fact 9
part OF the constitution, he would
have voted against the adoption q
| the initiative and referendum
amendment to the constitution. II
Is Ii the part OF wisdom to permit
the fundamental law of the state tt
be encountered with such d mass 81
"details. as are embraced In such an
act ais the Richards primary law
That law Itself is probably Of great
Ier length than the entire constitution
| st this state. And II every refer
red Or initiated Law becomes d par
OF the constitution, the Fundamental
law of this state. supposed to EN-
I brace only the essential principles o
FITS form OF Eoverument,Swould be
como q large volume Of detailed
/ LEGISLATION which would make At tor
cumbersome and q laughing stock
That the writer's belief as to ths
iscope * the initiative and referen
dunn act Id rightand hat the belle
DIT the editor OF the News ~ WronB, 4
Sustained by the opfnions cited, q
the supreme courts Of severed states
/ Such opinions OF the courts Cf those
Estate are not t0 be dismissed lightly
as ssmere technicalitiess
The assertion that Is result y
such court decisions, initiated
land referendum becomes hut n
/ merest farce It'd be- tossed abQut,
easflY d8hatable II hinges up0n ths