The weekly soliphone., 1915-04-16
SIGNING, VETOING, ASSIGNING AND
 VETOINC A BILL DOESN'T MEAN 1T Is I NOT LAW, SAYS SENATOR CLARKE

message with it when it was re-
 turned to the house.
 In answer to numerous citations
 of authorities out of the state of f Arkansas, by attorneys for the
 state, Senator Clarke declared that the rulings in none of these cases conflicted with the decision in the
 Rose case. The entire question was
 based upon the constitution, which
 only required that the governor af- ! fix his signature to a bill to make
 it a law.
 NAME IS ON BILL.
 Governor Hays at all times has
 said that he did not sign the bill
 and had no intention of signing it.
 When he says signing the bill he
 means that he had no intention of
 approving the bill. While Cover
 nor Hays had led several of his friends to believe that he intended l to approve the bill, that has noth- l ing to do with the case. Whether
 in his heart he favored the bill does
 not affect the results. If he want ed to lead them to believe that he
 would favor the bill for purposes
 known only to himself, that is an
 affair of his own. If he wanted | to practice a deception of that kind on his friends it is of no impor- l tance in the case. He had the right
 to do as he pleased, but he did not I have the right to affix his sigma
 ture to the bill, for in doing so he | declared it a law.
 "As to the scenes that were en- acted in the governors office when l his friends supposed he had signed | the bill, they were better told by Captain Rice than l could relate them That he accepted the con- gratulations of those gentlemen who were in the office and believed that | he had signed their measure is not a matter of vital testimony i'll the case The only vital testimony is the bill itself which bears his sigma ture. Governor Hays says that | while he did accept these congratu- lations he at no time told these gen. tlemen that he had approved the measure. What if he did not? The constitution does not require that he should say whether he approved or disapproved the bill. He is un- l der no obligation to tell what he | feels in his heart. The constitution | is not concerned with what is in | governors heart when a bill is sent to him for his signature. All that | it says is that the law should bear his signature.
 "The constitution does not say that he must write anything on l bill other than his signature. If he | does sign the bill it is proof that | he has approved it. To disapprove the bill he must send his veto mes
 sage with the bill when it goes to l the house Governor Hays say that | he did send his veto message with the bill and that is not denied. But when did he send this message? He
 sent it after he had signed the bill, l given it to his secretary to report, which took it out of his power, then
 no right to do According to this copy of the bill, the governor has approved disapproved then approv- ed the bill. The defense contends
 that the bill now is a record and as such reads 'disapproved' It is un- | important whether the bill reads as approved or disapproved. What is | written on that line is not mention ed in the constitution. That line
 could have been left vacant and as | long as the governors name was signed to the bill it was a law" CONVENTIONS CONSTITUTIONAL. Senator Clarke concluded his ar
 gument by declaring that his con
 tentions were based entirely upon
 the constitution of the United States
 without relationship to parole evi- dence other than that which might
 be necessary to aid the court in ar
 irving at a decision as 10 whether
 the bill actually had been signed
 and not as to any intentions the governor may have had.
 District Attorney W. H. Martin
 opened the arguments. He declared
 that the significance of the actual signing of the bill by Governor Hays
 could in no way be thwarte6 by any personal intentions of the gov
 nor. When the governor signed{ the
 bill and gave it to his secretary to
 report then from that p1 the
 bill was a law, he said.
 |. |, 's. oszs.as; s; %.s, "as; ss.s, .s,sG ]. :a