Evening star., 1932-12-02
Ratification by Conventions.

tutional amendment submitted to State
Legislatures fer ratification could be
defeated by as few as 170 negative votes
in the upper chamber CT the thirteen
States with the smallest number of
Senators, and five years ago the Anti
the fact that:
So long as thirteen of the forty-eight
States stand firm the eighteenth
amendment cannot be repealed. In
fact, so long as single House in each
Of the thirteen State Legislatures stands
for the eighteenth amendment it will
remain in the Constitution. In other
words, there are, all told, ninety-eight
State and national legislative bodies in
which the question of repeal would need
to be submitted-two in each of the
foFty-eight States and two in Congress.
Yet even if eighty-f1ve of those legis-
lative bodies were to vote for repeal
and thirteen-one in each of the thir-
teen States-should stand firm, the
eighteenth amendment would remain.
Such facts, of course, are well under
stood by those favoring repeal or
modification of the 18th amendment
and account for the rather general
agreement among sponsors of change
that the repeal or modifying amend
ment should be submitted to conven-
tions called for the purpose in the States
rather than to the Legislatures. There
is the equally important fact that the
rural districts hold predominant repre-
sentation in the State Legislatures, or
most of them, and that the rural dis
tricts have been traditional friends and
supporters of prohibition.
The election indicated mighty tide
of wet sentiment that was not confined
to the urban localities, but seemed
pretty well distributed throughout the
country, without regard to geographical
location or density Of population. As
forty-one State Legislatures are meeting
In January, there Is the temptation
among some vets, in view Of the election
results, to waive Hitherto accepted
strategy and rely, after all, on the
Legislatures.
One reason for this tendency to trust
to the Legislatures, already noted by
Mr.. David Lawrence and other CORE
spondents, Is the uncertainty existing
as to the method Of creating the State
constitutional conventions themselves.
Such a method of ratification has been
proposed many times In the past, but
has never been tried. It is an open
question whether Congress should de-
eide. by appropriate legislation, possibly
embodied in the resolution submitting
the amendment to the States, the basis
Of representation upon which delegates
to State conventions will be chosen, the
time and place Of meeting and whether
the Federal Government will defray the
expense-or whether such matters should
be left to the States themselves, acting
through their Legislatures.
Representative Aldrich Of Rhode
Island, a leading wet, has held, IN 8
written discussion Of the subject, that
ratification Of constitutional amend
ment is a State function, and the
nature of the conventions to be called
must therefore be left to the Legisla-
lures in the States. According to his
reasoning, necessity for action by the
Legislatures in calling conventions
merely interposes another delay in the
process Of constitutional amendment.
And in those States where repre-
sentation in the Legislature is based
on what has been called acreage"
instead Of population, much the same
basis would be required by the Legisla-
lures for the constitutional conventions.
On the other hand, the United States
Supreme Court has held that:
The function of State Legislature
| in ratifying a proposed amendment to
the Federal Constitution, like the func-
ton Of Congress in proposing the
amendment, is Federal function de-
| rived from the Constitution and it
transcends any limitations sought to be
imposed by the people Of State.
The Supreme Court has also held
that the Ohio Legislature performed a
Federal function" in ratifying the 18th
amendment and its action was final and
not subject to reversal. Former Senator
Wadsworth directed these opinions tc
the attention of the Senate Judiciary
Committee last year In hearings on
repeal Of prohibition, and said that "of
course, the same rule would apply to q
State convention, and if that is
the performance of Federal function
then think it Is within the powers ol
Congress to prescribe the unit of repre-
sentation. I suggest. with soms
trepidation, that If Congress should
deem it wise it could meet the expense
I don't urge it; merely mention The
possibility"
This view is also held by former At
torney General Palmer, whose brief ex.
pounding his argument in favor o.
ratification by convention has been laie
before members Of Congress. One Of it
tenets is the eXpediency to be gainet
by establishing a machinery that wouls
, function alike in all the States. Thi
idea is not shared generally, however
and will be the subject for prolonged
, and weighty debate once the Senate
I constitutional authorities get warmed ur
,
The Hunger Petitioners.