Great Falls tribune. [volume] (Great Falls, Mont.) 1921-current, 1922-12-20
CONSTITUTIONAL AMEND
MENT.

a state of Illinois a new con
stitution was submitted to the
voters of the state for their affirm
ative action. 1t was defeated by
the tremendous majority of ap,
proximately 100000 votes. The
city of Chicago voted II to !
against it. That might be explain
ed by the fact that the new con.
stitution sought to limit the rep.
r~esenss.ion Of the city in the leg
islasare 70 oae-third of its total
membership. But the country dis
tricts and the small cities also
voted against it. One of its provi-
sions was authority for a state in
come tax. That made the taxpayer
interest against the new constl-
tuition. Certain provisions increas-
ing the powers of the Judiciary
made organized labor suspicious
and arrayed the labor vote largely
in opposition to the new constitu-
ton. In fact it seems to have
been unpopular with all classes OF
Illinois voters, except the profess
sional reformers and tax experts"
For more than two years an "ex-
pert convention has been busy
framing this new constitution. They
have spent a good deal of money
IN hearings and Investigations.
Their final conclusions framed in
the new constitution are now turn
ed down by a majority so trench
dous as to make it plain that the
people of Illinois would rather get
along with her old constitution
than to accept the so-called i'm
proved" constitution framed for
them by "the best minds" The
fact recalls to our mind similar ex-
perience had in the state of New
York. Here a constitutional con-
ventien met and spent several years
of time if our memory serves us,
and millions of dollars of the tax
payers money in framing a new
constitution. Elihu Root, a noted
lawyer and statesman, presided ov-
er it. They had a heck Of a time
in thr eshing out differences OF
opinion, but they finally agreed on
the draft of the new constitution
and submitted it to the people of
the state of New York only to have
it turned down by a big majority
who were better satisfied with the
constitution framed by their great
grandfathers. The new constltu-
ton issue fell into the discard with
a loud noise. It has not been heard
of since in that state.
Commenting on the defeat of the
constitution in Illinois the
Springfield Republican remarks
that:
THE constitutional convention
was at work more than two years IN
preparing the instrument which has
been SO emp1atically turned down
and its membership was regarded
as exceptionally competent. It is
not unlikely that it would have
Jared better at the polls if it had
had a wider representation OF
points of view. Radical opposition
seems to have been strengthened
by some feeling that the nven
ton was dominated by a class.
But the great pitfall probably
was the attempt to do too much
and to do it at once. Subjects more
suitable for legislation than for
fundamental Law we're included,
after the manner of the eager ex-
perirnenters of the far. west; and
the many different antagonisms
aroused by the numerous provisions
united automatically to produce
the tremendous hostile majority.
The moral seems to be that if ILL
nois is to have a modern consti-
tuition suitable to the changed con-
ditions of half a c%entury's growth
it must make it brief and general
in it's terrns-a constitution, in
short, in the old-fashioned style
and must take up its provisions
.piecenaeal at the polls as has been
done in Massachusetts,"
But if a new constitution is to
follow the general lines Of the old
one, why undertake the task of re-
writing it at all? It can be changed
gradually now by submitting new
proposals for change n at a time.
In Montana we can submit several
at each election, and that is fast
enough, though it does not appear
to satisfy the radical reformers
who have been for some years agi-
tating for a constitutional con-
vention in order to rewrite our