Atlanta semi-weekly journal. (Atlanta, Ga.) 1898-1920, 1919-08-05
On Trying to Make a Joke
OF the States C0nstltutiO1

W WE OEUIE cOHSIIW'|O
UR friends the Removalites seem to
have been going to school to Machia-
velli Certainly their latest Shift
tn nromote the Macon scheme treats the
states organic law with sardonic humor and
suuirms with tactics which the Prince OF
Camouflagers might we'll have contrlved.
Finding the Constitution standing atnWart
their ambitions they would make OF IT, II
not a scrap of paper to be brushed aslde' at
least piece of fogyism to be Wr1gg4ed
around How else can one construe their at
tempt to smuggle through the so-called
referendum" measure, with its false state
ment of the capital-removal issue and It's
testing disregard of fundamental law?
The Constitution of Georgia, like that Oh
the United States, prescribes one metnou "AEt
one only, by which it can Oe aIne a'st s,o1I
snecifies that a proposed change hrst snall
~ Gseagreed TO" by tWo-thirds Of the mempel9
10Th of the House and OF the senate dlo
tben shall be submitted to the electorate. 9
der this conservative plan divers cues CiolS ~
merit have been referred to the poils lol So
Element. and divers foolish questlohs nave
49,, stonned in the General Assembly. Is
II not an eminently wise provision! Wnen d
state alters its Constitution IL ALTERS l'9
chart and compass thing WHICH Shou1u -
he done save for urgent reasons anu u III
the advice of a competent maJorlIy.
COW we'll when they laid down the prlnclp4e
tba+ before a change in the structural Id"
sbou1d be put to a referendum, 1t snouIo DC
agreed to by two-thirds majority OF Inc Lee
isIature. Abolish or circumVent thls SALT
guard against rash projects, ana ere long we
shall find ourselves in a state of continual IN
novation confusion and strife that Will De as
grieyously far from our old ideals OF SOUND
commemorative democracy as Babels tower
was from concord and progress
II is this basic law which the Removalites
seek to circumvent. They know that cnanse
in the States seat of government requiLe
q change in the Constitution, and that
before such change can be referred
to the electorate it must be agreed TO
by a two-thirds majority OF the Leg
islature They know, moreover from
their test vote in the House some TWO
weeks ago that they cannot hope to OBTAIN
anything like that majority. They know tnat
on it's merits and under the law their propo-
sition has been decisively beaten. But I'm
willing to abide by the verdict, they now IN
dertake to evade the Constitutional require
ment of a two-thirds majority merely by al
tering the title and camoufaging the cor
tents of their original bill. They propose a
referendum instead of a Constitutional
amendment, as if there could be StateWlde
referendum in Georgia that did not hVo1Ve d
Constitutional amendment. But that Whlch
thew now call referendum" would be by
any other name as hostile to the best inter-
ests of the Commonwealth. They cannot
change it's character by a mere Juggling or
words Nor can they induce thoughtful mem
bers of the General Assembly to conn1Ve at
scheme for eVading so plain and so important
a part of the Constitution. Even as ardent a
supporter of capital removal as Senator
Parker of the Forty-seventh district describes
this latest device as irregular" and illegal"
and ''at variance in every respect with the
provisions of the State Constitution" u
believe says he in a published statement
on the question, in orderly procedure es-
pecially-
when that procedure is prescribed
by law and more specially when that
procedure is prescribed by the organic
law (the constitution which is the bed
rock foundation for the liberties and the
happiness of the people. l am firm
believer in the due process Of the law.
Theslaw by reason of it's universally is
supposed to provide method of proceed
ure in every case. Sometimes it does
not, in which case equity intervenes.
But in this instance the law (the consti-
tuition of the state) provides a method
for the removal Of the capital and that
method is entirely different from the
resolution introduced in the senate and
house on last Thursday, which is irreg-
ularular and illegal. and at variance in
every respect with the provisions of the
state constitution.
"In addition to the foregoing rea-
sons for being opposed to the >resolu-
ton, if the resolution resulted in the
accomplishment of its full purpose; if
:, everything which it provides should hap
pen, then we would be in exactly the
same position with reference to the legal
and orderly method of removing the
capital as we are at present The state
would have gone through a. heated tur-
moil engendering bitterness and the ex-
penditure of thousands of dollars, with
nIIf no 1icbr -0f cir Ulo
solitary good purpose. Therefore | am
opposed to the resolution and shall not
only oppose it in the committee, but on
the floor of the senate, if it should ever
get there"
This pronouncement, be it observed is not
from defender of Atlanta, but from a zeal
Gus advocate of moving the capital to Ma
con. Knowing the law and respecting it as
he does, however, he will not pursue a special
interest at the sacrifice of great principle.
We have said nothing OF the unfarness
with which the referendum" measure states
the issue, and little need be said. The gen
tlemen who framed that part of the scheme
will be ashamed of it in time, for it does
violence to their own sense of justice and
good craftsmanship After all, however, it is
more to be laughed at than condemned, for
in It's effort to keep Atlanta from getting a
fair deal it goes so childishly far as to be-
come ridiculous. It would make the issue,
not whether the capital should be moved
but whether the State should accept a gift