The Mena weekly star., 1916-10-12


 Court except by unanimous decision by all it's members This protee,. the people and the law. At present If the Supreme Court is divided onlv one iudge is sometimes sufficient to make a law. If 1t is really plainly unconstitutional there will be no doubt but what the court would give a unanimous decision to that effect.
 Challenging Signatures.
 { Under the present law, if there is any opposition to petitions. op. ponents can challenge a fsufjcienr number of the signatures to prevent its appearing on the ballot. although these signatures may be genuine. But as the petitioners are scattered All over the State, 1t is not only an ex. pensive process to establish the va. lidity of these signatures. but almost an impossibility to do, at any cost. in time to get the measure placed upon the ballot before election, thus keen. ing 1t of, which is usually the sole object of it's opponents. Now, there is heavy penalty attached to illegal signing, or illegality on the part of the solicitor, and as he has to swear to the correctness of his list, the state IS protected. and the proof should de- yolye upon the opponents to prove the signatures Illegal, otherwise the most meritorious measure could be defeated by challenging the genuine ness of the signatures and delaying the investigations until the election.
 In view of the above, the proposed Amendment No. 13 requires the ob- 1ector to furnish the proof that names are illegally signed.
 Gives the People a Chance.
 D. Under the present law no mat ter how popular a measure may be with the people, nor how great the number of signatures obtained to ini- tsate 1t. if it can be thrown into the Supreme Court. before decision could be rendered by that body the election would have occurred and the measure would be left of the ballot, and of course could not be voted upon and the will of the people again de- feated.
 The proposed Amendment No. 13 provides that when the petition is re- ferred to the Supreme Court and can not be heard in time for the election. that it shall be placed upon the ballot just the same and the people given an opportunity to express thelr desires.
 6. IL was undoubtedly the inten- tion of the present Initiative and Rer- erendum law that the people should have the power of initiating as many appointments as they desired, but the courts differed upon it's interpreta- ton. the majority contending that the former law was unchanged and that only three amendments could be sup submitted at one election, regardless of whether they were submitted by the legislature, initiated by the peo- pie. or both. This interpretation makes 1t possible for the people 70 be deprived of the power to initiate any amendment, as the legislature might submit three amendments, in which case the people could not ini- tiate any. The proposed Amendment No. 13 makes this plain by especially providing that the people may sub init any number of amendments they choose.
 Local Legislation.
 T. It is well understood in the state, the extent to which local legis- lation has burdened the legislature. It was clearly the intention of the present Initiative and Referendum law to provide that local legislation should be handled by the locality in- terested, but the courts decided that this provision in the law was not op- erative, consequently local legisla- ton is still burden to the legisla- ture.
 The proposed Amendment No. 13 provides that local legislation shall be handled by the community af- sectcd and also provides safeguards vhc ,.- local legislation shall not conflict with state laws.
 Majority Shall Rule.
 s. There seems to be some doubt as to whether the present law clearly indicates that a majority of the votes cast on measure may carry 1t, CT whether it requires a majority Of the greatest vote cast for any officer.
 In the proposed Amendment No. Is 1t is made clear that only majority vote of those cast on the measure it. self is required to adopt.
 1t will be noted by the above that all of the changes are designed to do away with "jokers" that seriously inn pair the efficiency of the present law, and present strong arguments for the adoption of Amendment No. f3.
 Amendment No. 1s will be submit ted to the electors of the state at the next general election to be held Tues day, November ', 1916.