ments are submitted at the same time, they must be submitted in such manner that the electors may vote on each separately. While an amendment which has been agreed upon by one General Assembly is awaiting action by the succeeding General Assembly or by the electors, no additional amendment may be proposed. 51 The article relative to the adoption of future amendments was reported by the committee in the constitutional convention on January 16, 1851. The committee recommendations embraced three distinct propositions: (1) Whenever two-thirds of the members of each branch of the General Assembly thought it necessary to call a convention to revise the Constitution, they were authorized to enact the appropriate legislation and f a majority of the electors voting for representatives 70ted for te mail of a convention, the ensuing Generai Asender vi qui “o naas the necessary provisions for the terrion of tetegal vs. osition was rejected by the Convention (2) The second proposition was iden. “ of the amendatory article as finally adoptet ment .... adopted by a vote of 77-45.53 (3) The tant propom, on One proposal, or rather three separate proposta ma ut become a part of the Constitution 57 51. Constitution, Article XVI. Convention Journal, 830-831. 52. The first amendment adopted by authority of the amendatory provision of the Constitution was in 1873. The amendment was first adopted by the General Assembly of 1871 and submitted to the succeeding General Assembly for action. Meantime the question arose as to whether the constitutional provision had been fully complied with since the amendment had not been entered in full on the journals of the two houses. Governor Baker expressed the opinion that this omission did not invalidate the amendment and he recommended its adoption. The General Assembly which met in special session in November, 1872, was a newly elected body, and, therefore, constitutionally competent to mature the amendment. Accordingly, the amendment was adopted at the special session of 1872, submitted to the electors at a special election on February 18, 1873, and ratified by an overwhelming majority. On March 7, the Governor issued his proclamation declaring the amendment in force and its validity was not only not questioned but in an obiter dicta statement in the case of State v. Swift in 1880, it was fully sustained. No other amendments were submitted to the people until 1880. Seven amendments were adopted in 1877 extending the right of suffrage to negroes; prescribing the residential qualifications of electors; authorizing the General Assembly to enact a registration law; fixing the date of holding general elections on the Tuesday after the first Monday in November; authorizing the General Assembly to provide for special township and judicial elections; providing that the enumeration of voters should be based on the number of males, instead of white males, over twentyone years of age; authorizing the grading of the compensation of public officers in proportion to the population and the necessary services required; altering the judicial system and making possible the creation of additional superior courts; increasing the membership of the Supreme Court; and striking out the negro disability and colonization article. These amendments were readopted in 1879 and were submitted to the electors by an act approved March 10, at the spring elections held on April 5. On April 28, in conformity with a provision of the law, the Governor issued his proclamation declaring the vote cast on the several amendments.58 The Governor was given no authority to declare the amendments in force and no such proclamation was issued. It was generally understood, however, that the Governor's official 58. Secretary of State's Report, 1880, 96. announcement of the vote cast was equivalent to a declaration of adoption. The total number of votes cast at the April election of 1880 for township officers was 380,771; the total number of electors in the State according to the official enumeration taken in 1877 was 451,028; and the total vote cast for Governor in 1876 was 434,006. The affirmative vote on the seven propositions submitted ranged from 169,000 to 181,000, and there were more votes cast for each amendment than against it, the majority in each case ranging from 17,000 to 49,000. A majority of the whole number of votes cast at the April election was 190,236; a majority of the whole number of electors of the State according to the official enumeration of 1877 was 225,515; and a majority of the. votes cast for Governor in 1876 was 217,004. Obviously, none of the seven amendments had obtained a majority of the votes cast at the election, and the question arose at once whether the amendments had been adopted and led finally to the first judicial construction of the amendatory provision of the Constitution. Two theories were advanced to interpret the amendatory provision of the constitution. According to one theory if an amendment received a majority of the votes cast on the proposition, it was adopted, regardless of whether the affirmative votes SO cast constituted a majority of the whole number of votes cast at the election. The alternative theory held that an amendment to be adopted must receive a majority of the whole number of votes cast at the election at which it was submitted. Of the seven amendments in question, several were self-executing and others required statute law to carry them into effect. Of the self-executing amendments, the one prescribing the residential qualifications of electors was speedily put to a test. The municipal elections were held on May 4, 1880, and the press announced that no person would be allowed to vote at the ensuing elections who did not possess the residence qualifications as prescribed by the suffrage amendment. A test case was instituted in New Albany and was elucidated and decided at the May term of the Supreme Court. This case, which is known as The State v. Swift, held that the seven amendments had not been adopted and laid down the following principles of law: a proposed amendment of the Constitution, to become a part of the Constitution, must be ratified by the votes of a majority of the electors of the State; the General Assembly may provide that the whole number of votes cast at the election at which an amendment is submitted may be taken as the whole approved by a majority one of the eleen is interested. The meastre was in definitely poenpo bed in Peth à pess to frame I: 1201 Costitutional amen inent granting greater freedom to eities was proposed. As proposed. This amet intent was besized to permit any city et on thamen, en metion of the Neal legislative authority or on petition of 5% of the legal voters. The charter was to be framed i heard of Siteen freeholders, not more than ten o red to the same political party, and when completed was to be submitted to the electors for ratification. Any thamer so a lupted might be amended by a referendum vote on iminutive the excentive, or the legislative body or en petition of 3% of the voters. In granting franon 50% chises, the city was to be free of all baslative interference. All cities and towns were required to substante et employment and contracts with experative groups of workers for nonermpetitive entrs ts. In addition, the amen iment was designed to permit the people of any city or town to build or buy any pulie ility; and two or more cities or towns were authonzed to unite in the instruction er pun hase of any such publie wilities. The was reported favorably fr was not In 1915, an amen iment was proped auth mring the General To presentle inimum wage for vo mnen lati, a of the committee, the resolution was indefinitely postponed. During the same session another amend ment was proposed prosting a stewhat diffent method of fling vacates in publie ch Provides that Process of Amendment.-The amen imens may be proposed in either branch of the General Awenty One or more amen iments may posed at any wwen. If the propose i amen inent is agreed to by a majority of the members elected to es b Hese, it is then entered on the of the two Hones, with the ya at i nay vte, and is referred to the Geners! Awwenly chat the next general d'eetion. If the propose i amen inent is agreed to by a majority of the member plantad toesch of the two houses of the suved tz Genersi Aly, it is then submitted to the ele tors for ralfation and of a majenty of the cletes ratify the amen iment it becomes a part of the Constitution. If two or more amend ments are submitted at the same time, they must be submitted in such manner that the electors may vote on each separately. While an amendment which has been agreed upon by one General Assembly is awaiting action by the succeeding General Assembly or by the electors, no additional amendment may be proposed.51 The article relative to the adoption of future amendments was reported by the committee in the constitutional convention on January 16, 1851. The committee recommendations embraced three distinct propositions: (1) Whenever two-thirds of the members of each branch of the General Assembly thought it necessary to call a convention to revise the Constitution, they were authorized to enact the appropriate legislation and if a majority of the electors voting for representatives voted for the call of a convention, the ensuing General Assembly was required to make the necessary provisions for the election of delegates. This proposition was rejected by the Convention by a vote of 55-66.52 (2) The second proposition was identical with the first section of the amendatory article as finally adopted except that proposed amendments were required to obtain the approval of two-thirds of the first General Assembly which adopted them. This section was amended to conform with its present provisions and was adopted by a vote of 77-45.53 (3) The third proposition was identical with the second section of the article as finally adopted. When advanced to engrossment, this provision was eliminated by a vote of 78-48,54 but it was subsequently re-proposed on the floor of the Convention and was adopted by a vote of 100-24.55 Among the proposals made and rejected, two are of especial interest. One proposal, or rather three separate proposals embracing the same general idea, provided that a poll should be opened every 10, 12 or 16 years on the question of calling a convention.56 The second proposal provided that at the third session and every tenth year thereafter, by a vote of three-fifths, the General Assembly, might recommend to the electors any needful amendments, which, if ratified by a majority of the electors should become a part of the Constitution.57 |