The Jasper weekly courier. [volume] (Jasper, Ind.) 1858-1922, 1916-01-21
tmrhA'lC APPROVAL OF CONGRESS INTENDED AS THE
FIRST STEP IN CONSIDERING NATIONAL
AMENDMENTS
MUST ACT ON MERITS OF QUESTION
NO congressman Can Shlrk His Personal Responsibility b,
submitting the Question OF C Constitutional Amendment
TO State Legislatures, Says New York Post

Under the caption, Congress and
the Constitution" the New York Eve.
ming Post presents some facts worthy
OF the most careful consideration by
every American.
First quoting "A news dispatch. under
q Washington date line, TO the effect
that Congress will be urged at its pres
ent session to submit the question of a
national constitutional prohibition
amendment to the states for ratifca-
ton, the POST continues: The words.
submit the question" convey a false
and dangerous view OF the duty of
Congress in relation to a proposed
amendment OF the Constitution. When
such a proposal is presented to Con-
gress, It's duty Is to consider II and
BASS Judgment on it's merits: and only
In the event that the proposal is ap.
proved by a two-thirds vote of each
house does IL become a question with
which the Legislatures OF the several
States have anything 10 do. Their
share In the matter is solely In the
nature OF n check on the decision OF
Congress. That decision does not be-
some operative until the Legislatures
OF three-fourtbs OF the States have
expressed their approval Of IL; but Il
Ia the act OF Congress. and not the rat
ifcation by the Legislatures, that Is
the fundamental part OF the proceed
ing.
Constitutional Amendments.
All this would be plain enough even
II the passage OF a constitutional
amendment by Congress were effected,
ike that OF An ordinary bill, by a mere
majority vote; but the extraordinary
requirements OF a two-thirds vote of
each house makes 1t peculiarly evil
dent. IL the ma.i part OF the process
were the action OF the Legislatures
II the function OF Congress were mere
ty to submit the question" to these
bodies-surely a majority vote would
be an ample condition 10 lay down.
Obviously, the idea was that no amend
ment should be made to the Consti-
sation which had not received the en-
phatic approval OF the national Legfs-
lature. IL the advocates Of a bill In
Congress, or in a State Legislature,
were to urge that body not TO pass the
bill on Its merits, bat to submit the
question" to the President, or the Gov
ernor. they would be laughed put OF
Court; everybody recognizes that the
veto power is designed as q check
upon the Judgment of the legislative
body and not as a substitute for such
Judgment.
individual Responsibility.
Take, again, the case OF the treaty |
making power. The Presidents power
TO make treaties Is limited by the
necessity Of ratification by the Senate:
but would any one dream of asking
him TO waive his own judgment in re-
lation to a proposed treaty, and SIM
ply submit the question" Of it's adop- |
ton to the Senate? In all these mat
tiers, the primary and fundamental re-
sponsibflity rests with the body, or the
individual, that takes action on the
subject in the first instance; the rati-
flying power is secondary, designed to
provide an additional safeguard
against error, and not at all 10 absolve /
from responsibility those who are
with the duty of the primary |
decision.
Public Attention Conferred.
Not only is this the actual fact in
regard TO the amendment OF the Fed
eral Constitution, but it is m~anifestIy
what ought 10 be the fact. II Is only
in Congress that the merits of a pro-
NJ ~ ~