San Antonio light. [volume] (San Antonio, Tex.) 1911-1993, 1923-09-02
PROPOSALS OF ALAWYER


fhe United States constitution with
which the country has been RECALLED dur
ing the last few years, the majority have
been designed to set aside old and sound
principles of government. 1t is no
wonder, therefore, that the public has
come to look with suspicion upon advo-
Gates of constitutional changes. Accord
ingly, President John w. Davis of the
american Bar Association may expert
sence no little difficulty in securing pop
-ular approval Of some amendments he
advocated at the opening of that organ
ization's convention at Minneapolis.
. But Mr.. Davis motives seem to con-
stitute an eception to the general rule
an exception, however, of the rule
proving kind. If the principles which
the founders of the republic sought to
serve were practiced nowadays with the
high degree of fidelity to the general
welfare that marked the activities OF the
constitutions architects, the nations or
'ganic law in its original form would be
quite sufficient for present purposes.
8 For example, it was anticipated by
the republics founders that under the
method of procedure which they pre-
scribed for amending the constitution
any changes made in the organic law
would represent the will of The people.
They probably never dreamed that a
legislature would vote contrary to the
popular will on the question of ratifving
a proposed amendment to the national
constitution. Yet it is painful fact
that legislatures of various states voted
TO ratify the eighteenth amendment after
sthe people whom they were elected to
represent had expressed their disapproval
sof such a change. And of course Tex
ans have not forgotten that their legis-
lature voted for ratification of the nine
:feenth amendment after the people of
this state had voted against such a
change in their own constitution.
= 1t seems, in this light, that Mr.. Davis
plan for changing the constitutional
method of ratifying proposed amend
ments Is designed to protect the people
IN their rights, as contemplated by the
republics founders, rather than to
sbridge those rights after the fashion of
most projects for the alteration of the
'scrganic law. Many people might think
IT unwise to submit proposed amend
Fments directly to popular vote, but
the alternative method suggested by Mr..
Davis, that of submitting such PROPOSE
tions to legislatures elected after. rather
than before, the proposing of constitu-
tional changes, ought to satisfy the most
exacting. For the latter method would
be a means OF attaining the very end
which the trainers of the constitution
had In view-namely, safeguarding OF
the peoples right to govern themselves
Other changes advocated by Mr.
4 Davis, some of them affecting the con-
stitution and some Of merely statutory
Tature, are subject to similar comment
For examples, that Congress come into
being Immediately after its election. ant
that the President be authorized to veto
Specific items in appropriation Bills
These changes, respectively, would facil
ltate popular self-government and make
for efficiency in the administration o
fhe country's fiscal affairs.
What Mr.. Davis says about ratifica
rTion Of treaties is far more controversial
Elf a bare majority in the Senate coulC
Tatify treaty, then the minority part,
would have no check upon the party il
rower-thc minority party might as wei