The Mena weekly star., 1921-12-22
SECRETARY HOPPER. BETWEEN FIRES
With Governors Veto Power at ls- sue, Had to Choose Between Two Constitutional Amendments-
 Both Important.

gal duNlCe OH DVth SANSot VI eAS A0S~~a and facing the desires of Governor McRae, had to choose between the submission to the voters at the next election of the Hartje amendment, providing for taxation of personal as well as real property in improvement districts, and the amendment urged by the governor prohibiting local leg islation.
 Both these measures are important and for information of the readers of The Star, Secretary Hopper submits the following detailed statement.
 With the Attorney General holding that I should certify out the Hartje amendment passed by the last legis- lature and vetoed by the governor, providing for taxation of personal as well as real property in improvement districts, with the governor and other able members of the bar association contending that 1 should certify out the amendment prohibiting all local legislation. now being initiated for presentation to this office, and with room on the ballot for only one other amendment, find myself in the midst of a complicated legal controversy which has necessitated my studying thoroly these questions in an endeav- or to satisfy myself as to the veto power of the governor.
 I have examined carefully all the authorities 1 can find involving the construction of constitutional clauses dealing with the veto power of the chief executive. This question has been judicially determined respecting the constitution of Louisiana, Colo rado, Pennsylvania and even the United States where in each instance the language dealing with the veto power is very similar to that of our own state constitution. In every case 1t has been held that the veto power did not extend to constitutional amendments. The weight of author ity in court decisions and in texts on constitutional law seems to be that the governors veto power is confined to eases of ordinary legislation. unless enlarged authority to veto amend ments is expressly delegated by the constitution itself.
 1t is contended by some, however, that such constructions are based up- on differences between these consti- tutions and our own, but a close study of the different provisions convinces me that there is no ground for such deduction and that no more constitu- tional latitude exists in our own state respecting the veto power than in the ones before mentioned.
 In addition to this weight Of au- thority, careful study of our state constitution leads me to believe that the language of Sections 15 and i6 of Article indicates that the veto power of the governor was intended to be limited to matters of only or dary legislation Now Section 22 of Article 19, which sets forth how the legislature may propose amendments. is silent as to any veto power and seems clear that such proposed amendments were intended to go di- rect from the legislature to the peo- pie to be ratified or rejected by them. Section ] , of Article 6 which details specifically the governors veto power also limits such authority to BILLS. In the following section, Is, which covers resolutions, the constitution says that in case of veto they shall be "repassed by both houses, according to the rules and limitations prescribed in the case of BILLS" Everyone knows that bills are introduced to provide for only matters of ordinary legislation and not to propose amend ments. If the framers of our consti- tuition did not intend to limit the veto power of the governor to matters of ordinary legislation, l cannot under stand why they in one section--far removed from that one detailing how constitutional amendments should be proposed-specifically set forth this this power respecting BILLS and in the section immediately following which covers resolutions declare that in case of veto they should be re- passed as in the case of BILLS. It seems te ne that the veto power over resolutions is linked with and limited to matters of only ordinary legisla- tion, usually introduced by bills.
 Furthermore, should the veto power of the governor be so broad in scope he could veto any three amendments the legislature might propose ana after their adjournment initiate three of his own and thus defeat absolutely the will of the elected representatives in whose hands our constitution orig inally placed such power by express delegation of authority. 1 cannot be- lieve, after a careful study of oui constitution, that its framers ever in tended such procedure Co be followed. Historical research also convinces me that during the time our constitution was drafted the people were skeptical of broad executive power and spoke clearly and plainly as to the authority of the governor, intending all reser- vations to be resolved in favor of tn, legislative branch of government.
 have no personal interest what ever in the legal controversy raging around this office and regret that both amendments cannot be certified out by me because 1 see sound prin- ciples of government upheld by eacl. one. Being moved solely by desire to discharge properly my official duty , as l see it and to uphold my oath of , office to support the constitution, I 1 am going, unless prevented by action of the courts, to certify out the HartJe amendment providing for taxation of personal as well as real , property in improvement districts.
 -c----------
 TWO CONFESS TO 3 MURDERS. Five Members of a Hold-Up Gang Are Rounded Up in Chicago. Chicago, Dec. 20.-Two members of [ a bandit gang captured last night have confessed to three murders ano ] more than forty street hold-nne A,