The Spectator., 1915-04-02
The Bond Amendment Decision


 State Supreme Court, knocking out the municipal bond amendment be- cause it failed to secure a majority Of all votes cast at the election, means that 1t will be next to impossible to ever put the bond amendment" over, is generally admitted by friends Of that issue. They say that such a re- quirement is practically prohibitive, in the face of the fact that in all such elections a great number of people are never interested one way or the other, and hence do not vote. Yet, under this construction of the constitution. they virtually vote against an amend ment
 This fact was one thing that induced friends of the bond amendment to in sist that the provisions of Amendment No. 10 repealed the constitutional re- ouirement of a majority of all votes cast. They urged with much force that 1t is unfair and unjust to saddle re- striction of this sort upon the people of the state, under modern conditions j; that, if solid majority of the people affected by the amendment, as was the case in the municipal bond amend ment, favored 1t, the constitution should be changed accordingly.
 They urged, for instance, that since the matter affected cities only, with cut putting any obligations one way or the other upon rural sections, 1t ought to be left largely to the cities ;; that, in effect, 1t would most certainly be, as the voters of the rural sections, not interested in the matter, would not bother themselves to vote for it. To allow their votes to be counted against it would therefore, be unjust and, in all probability, be as much against the intention of the voter as to count it for the measure
 It was on this account that friends of Amendment No. IA contended that the initiative and referendum had re. pealed the archaic provision of the constitution requiring majority of all votes cast, and had made the organic law fit more sensibly the industrial and development conditions of the state; that when Amendment No. 10 said that "any measure referred to the people" under the I. and R. Amend ment should receive a majority oi those voting thereon 1t should become effective, 1t meant constitutional amendments as we'll as bills. Other. wise, the amendment made absolutely no provision for the adoption of meas ures initiated by 1t, whether bills or amendments; for there is not one sin gle reference in the first section ot Amendment No. 10 as to what major. ity shall govern.
 The Supreme Court in passing on the bond amendment virtually said that Amendment No. 10. when speak ing of the majority necessary on any measure referred, applied only to bills passed by the Legislature and after wards referred to the people, and did not apply to measures initiated.
 Leaving all these pros and cons for the delightful entertainment of read CTS at more leasurely hours when they may want to peruse the full opinion ot the court and do their own refiecting over it's conclusions, it is interesting to note some of the possible effects under the courts decision.
 Will the ultimate effect be to great ly retared public improvements?
 ret n fri of h. amendment, who are, in fact, largely the friends of public improvements and the progressive element of the state felt that the whole scheme O! municipal progress had been derailed With over two million dollars wortll of Improvements in the various cities of the state in process of formation, ir some cases elections have been order cd, it looked rather gloomy. All such elections, of course, had to be called off The decision of the court estopped any further proceedings te issue municipal bonds. A few of the big bonding companies talked of leav ing the state. Numerous big contrac tors, attracted to the state by the keer interest in proposed improvements felt like shaking the dust of Arkan sas from their constructive heels ant taking the next train out of town Several cities where Improvements had been planned were inclined to give 1t up, and their first impressions wer, that the scheduled Improvements wer, "kpocked on the head"
 In less than a week a tremendou. change had come in sentiment, and tt date. only two cities that had planned extensively under the proposed bon. issue are not now planning just as vi gorously to go ahead under the former improvement district plan. One city proposes to make its improvements bl donations from the business men Il not through the district method Everywhere there is buoyant feelins