The Brookings register. [volume] (Brookings, Brookings County, S.D.) 1903-1971, 1915-11-11

IN VI Nh0 1AlN1oNiNC duu
vote of the people. 1t may have been
that a majority of those drafting and
proposing the initiative and referen.
dum amendment to the constitution,
such as exists in this state, were of the
view that four years was too long a
time 10 leave such an unwise law in
force; and therefore purposely and in
t~entionally left the repeating power as
to all initiated laws in the hands of the
that the constitution builders of Cali
fornla and Washington possessed all
the wisdom upon this subject, and that
all the constitution makers in all these
ten or a dozen other states Numbered
by leaving the repeating power as to
initiated laws in the hands of the leg
lslature. Even in the state of Wash
inSton, after the lapse of two years,
the legislature is permitted to repeal
an initiated law, thus recognizing that
for some reason the legislature should
have repeating power unless so taken
away. There are many suggestive rea-
sons which might have influenced the
constitution makers Of this and other
states in leaving with the legislature
the power to repeal or amend an mi
tiated law, If in the course of time
We should have placed upon our stat
utes various inflated laws upon var
ious general subjects, such as cleo.
tons, banking, corporations, court pro
cedure, assessment and taxation,
schools, public officers, and if the legis-
laturo possessed no power to repeal
or amend such initiated laws. then the
legislature would be powerless to pass
any law in conflict with any part of
such initiated laws. a constitution is
to be tested not by what has been or is
being done hereunder, but by what
may be done under its authority, (Cita-
tions.) Under such conditions the con-
stitutional functions of the legislature
would thereby become so handicapped,
curtailed, and limited as to be of but
little value. We are of the view that
the constitution of the state cannot be
so amended or nullifed by means of
initiated Legislative enactments. We
are of the view that the initiative and
referendum amendment was never IN
tended as a means of so curtailing and
limiting the constitutional power of
the state legislature, but was intended
to preserve to the people a great share
of, and control over, the legislative
power, but without taking away from
any of its powers, excepting the veto
power of the state executive.
Citations. The supreme court Of every
state having an initiative and refer
endum constitutional provision, SINH
lar to that of this state, which has been
called upon to determine the question,
has held that the Legislature has the
power to repeal or amend an initiated
law. Citations. ***
1t is urged by appellants that if the
legislature has the power to amend
or repeal initiated laws, and that if
the legislature also has the power to
prevent the operation of the referen-
dunn as to such an amending or re-
p%ealing statute by passing the same
by a two-thirds majority vote, with
an emergency clause embodied therein,
that then the initiative and referen-
dunn amendment to the constitution be-
comes a farce and Of no practical util-
ity. We are of the view that the
premises from which this conclusion is
drawn is untrue. This contention, with
relation to such use by the Legislature
of the emergency clause, requires us to
further consider the emergency pro-
position in connection with appellants
second ground of alleged invalidity OF
said chapter 25S. We are of the view
that where the Legislature enacts d
law amending or repeating an Initiated
law that such law may be submitted
to referendum vote under the same
conditions as may be submitted to vote
any and all laws which are the subject
Of constitutional referendum:-and
this wholly regardless of whether or
not such amending or repeating act
contains an emergency clause. In
other words, all those enactments by
the legislature which are the subject
of referendum are not subject to the
emergency clause; and vice versa, all
those enactments which are subject to
the emergency clause are not subject
to the referendum. The only lawful
function of the emergency clause Is to
cause an enactment to go into effect
as soon as signed by the executive, in
stead of waiting until the first day OF
next July. 1t must be observed that
the initiative and referendum amend
ment to the constitution provides that