Indiana daily times. [volume] (Indianapolis [Ind.]) 1914-1922, 1921-06-17

our Republican county commissioners
abolishing Pike Township to control a
school election. That was q peculiarly
rotten deal, because they have no juris-
diction over schools, and have no bust
ness meddling in school affairs; but be-
yOnd that, the action was merely an
application to local affairs of the prin
ciple of the gerrymander, which has been
practiced by Legislatures and Congresses
time out of mind. How often have you
seen legislative bodies unseat members
who We're fairly elected, for purely pc .
utica1 purposes? Why, right now, the
great question at Washington is not the
League of Nations, nor rehabilitation Of
business, but how many postmasters can
be grabbed advantageously. Persons who
talk about conscience in the seizure Of
offices are simply wasting their breath.
And as to trusting the legislature.
this whole matter of amendments is q
tangle of cheap political trickery and
false pretense from beginning to end. l
have called your attention to the decep
ton of the farmer members by the
wording Of the tax amendment. As TO
the superintendent of public instruction,
If they meant appointment by the State
board of education, why did they not
say sOG 1t was just as easy to do that.
In che circular issued by the so-caIled
Organization committee for the instruc-
tion of voters, it is stated that the pur-
pose Of the registration amendment is to
make a permanent registration, thus re-
moving the work and expense Of a regis
tratiOn preceding each election There
is not q word in the amendment about
permanent registration. and the Repub
lican party has been fighting permanent
registration ever since 1t was Original ! y
proposed in the Marshall constitution.
And having brought these humbugs be-
fore the people, and having assured the
solid negro vote of the State for them by
the militia amendment, the Republican
managers turn tail like towards, and re-
fuse to father their children.
MAJORITY OF
ELECTORS REQUIRED.
But most appalling is the deliberate
submission of the amendments to a spe-
cial election for the purpose of violating
the constitution. The Supreme Court has
repeatedly and uniformly held that the
constitution requires the favorable vote
Of a majority of the electors of the State
Tor the adoption Of an amendment, and
a majority of those voting on the ques-
ton. 1t is true that two courts have
upheld amendments adopted at special
elections by minOrities of the electors,
but they did il on the ground that there
was no evidence before them al to the
total number Of electors except the vote
cast at the election. No court has said
that evidence could not be admitted to
show the total number of electors. But
to preclude any investigation in the
courts, this submission act, which we are
openly told was prepared with the aid
Of a Republican attorney general, who
is under oath TO support the constitu-
ton, provides that the number of votes
cast at the special election shall he con-
clusively presumed to DO the total num-
Der of electors of the State. This pro-
vision that notorious falsehoOd should
be conclusively presumed TO be the truth,
for the avowed purpose of violating the
constitution, was adopted by legisla-