500. Tax Exemptions (January 14, 1909).

On January 14, Senator Nathan B. Hawkins, a Republican, introduced a proposed amendment providing that householders whose property did not exceed $300 in value, and the widows and orphans of Civil War veterans whose entire property did not exceed $1,000 in value, should be exempt from taxation. The resolution was indefinitely postponed.

[Senate Journal, Sixty-sixth Session, 109.]

Joint resolution No. 1.

Section 1. Be it resolved by the General Assembly of the State of Indiana, That the following proposed amendment to the Constitution of said State, be and the same is hereby agreed to and is referred to the General Assembly of the said State, to be chosen at the next general election and, if the same be adopted by the said General Assembly, that the same shall be submitted to the electors of the State at the succeeding general election. Amend Section 1 of Article 10 of the Constitution of the State of Indiana to read as follows:

Section 1. The General Assembly shall provide by law for a uniform and an equal rate of assessment and taxation; and shall prescribe such regulations as shall secure a just valuation for taxation of all property, both real and personal, excepting such only, for municipal, educational, literary, scientific, religious, or charitable purposes, as may be specifically exempted by law. Householders whose entire property does not exceed three hundred dollars in value shall be exempt from all property taxes and the General Assembly may exempt from taxation the property of veterans of the Civil War, widows and orphans in any amount not to exceed the sum of one thousand dollars.

501. Residence Suffrage Qualifications (January 14, 1909).

On January 14, Mr. Edward W. Wickey, a Republican, introduced a resolution in the House proposing to amend the Constitution by eliminating all reference to foreigners and requiring citizens to reside in the State one year before acquiring the right to vote. The resolution was referred to the Judiciary Committee and never reported back.

[Original Resolution.]

A joint resolution to amend Section 2 of Article 2 of the Constitution of the State of Indiana.

Section 1. Be it resolved by the General Assembly of the State of

Indiana, That Section 2 of Article 2 of the Constitution of the State of Indiana be amended to read as follows:

Sec. 2. In all elections not otherwise provided for by this Constitution, every male citizen of the United States, of the age of twenty-one years and upwards, who shall have resided in the State during one year, and in the county sixty days, and in the ward or precinct thirty days, immediately preceding such election; shall be entitled to vote in the township or precinct where he may reside, if he shall have been duly registered according to law.

Sec. 2. That the same be now agreed to and referred to the General Assembly of the State to be elected at the next general election.

502.

State-Wide Prohibition (February 26, 1909).

The amendment forever prohibiting the manufacture and sale of intoxicating liquors, considered at the special session of 1908, was introduced in the House on February 26, by Mr. Henry P. Sicks, a Democrat. The resolution was referred to the Committee on Public Morals and was never reported back to the House.

[House Journal, Sixty-sixth Sesssion, 1125.]

Joint resolution No. 7, proposing an amendment to the Constitution of the State of Indiana by inserting Article 17, forever prohibiting the manufacture, sale or keeping for sale, in the State of Indiana, spirituous, vinous, malt, or any intoxicating liquors, except for scientific, medical, mechanical, and sacramental purposes, and providing for regulating sales for said purposes.

Section 1. Resolved by the General Assembly of the State of Indiana, That the following amendment be and is hereby proposed to the Constitution of the State of Indiana, to be submitted to the vote of the electors of said State, viz.: Amend by adding thereto Article 17, so as to read as follows:

Sec. 2. The manufacture, sale, or keeping for sale, in said State, spirituous, vinous, malt liquors, or any intoxicating liquors, except for scientific, medical, mechanical and sacramental purposes, shall be and is hereby forever prohibited in the State of Indiana.

Sec. 3. The General Assembly of the State of Indiana shall provide by law in what manner, by whom and at what places such liquors shall be manufactured or sold for scientific, medical, mechanical and sacramental purposes.

503. Submission of Constitutional Amendments (January 14, 1909). A bill, substantially identical with House bill No. 533 of the preceding session, providing a method for the preparation of ballots for the submission of proposed constitutional amendments was introduced in the House on January 14, but was rejected on February 17, by a vote of 32-60. (See Documents Nos. 494 and 508).

[House Journal, Sixty-sixth Session, 113.]

House bill No. 16. A bill for an act prescribing a method for the preparation of ballots for proposed constitutional amendments and providing for the certification of the approval or disapproval of such a proposed amendment by a State convention of any political party, to the Secretary of State, and printing of the action of such State convention on such proposed amendment, as a part of the official ballot of such political party, and providing a method for marking and counting such ballots for the said proposed amendment, and prescribing the method of using voting machines, in voting upon the ratification of proposed amendments to the Constitution.

THE SIXTY-SEVENTH GENERAL ASSEMBLY (1911).

The Democrats were largely in a majority in both Houses of the 67th session of 1911. There were 30 Democrats and 20 Republicans in the Senate, and 60 Democrats and 40 Republicans in the House. The lawyers amendment was submitted at the general election of 1910. The total vote of the State was 627,133. The affirmative vote on the proposed amendment was 60,357; the negative vote was 18,494. The amendment was therefore lost for want of a majority, but according to the Denny decision, was still pending and therefore obstructive to other amendments. The most important constitutional measure considered, was the famous Senate bill No. 407, embodying substantially a new constitution, and popularly known as the "Marshall Constitution," because of the energy with which Governor Marshall advocated the measure. The bill became a law, but was declared unconsitutional in Ellingham v. Dye before it could be submitted to a vote of the people. Other amendments were proposed and considered but none were adopted. Among these were amendments prescribing the qualifications for suffrage, particularly of aliens; providing that amendments which received a majority of the votes cast on the proposition should be considered adopted; authorizing the General Assembly to enact registration laws applicable to the State generally or to any sub-division thereof; prohibiting the manufacture and sale of intoxicating liquors; providing for the statutory and constitutional initiative and referendum; and authorizing the General Assembly to enact laws to regulate industrial compensation, to compel arbitration and the payment without litigation of claims for personal injuries, sustained by workmen in the course of their employment. Two important measures, involving quasi-constitutional questions, were considered. One of these measures, Senate bill No. 75, provided for the referendum on all ordinances granting franchises in cities and towns, which was finally lost for want of agreement between the two Houses. A second measure, House bill No. 151, was designed to provide for changes in the form of government in cities of the first, second and third classes by a vote of the people. This bill was never matured. The sec

ond of these measures was Senate bill No. 190, and House bill No. 244, designed to extend the right of suffrage in all city and town elections to women. The Senate bill was reported favorably but not subsequently considered. The House bill was lost by a vote of 41-48.

504.

Governor Marshall's Recommendations (January 5, 1911).

In his biennial message to the General Assembly, delivered on January 5, Governor Marshall urged a number of changes in the Constitution. In order to correct irregular conditions in the exercise of the franchise which could not be completely changed until the Constitution was altered, he urged the enactment of a strong registration law, an amendment to the law prohibiting any person from entering the booth with a voter unless the voter was "incompetent from physical defect" to mark his ballot, and a corrupt practices act. The constitutional changes which he recommended included alterations in the electoral clause, particularly in regard to aliens; a bi-sected legislative session, the first meeting to be held in December for the introduction and amendment of bills, and a May meeting for the final consideration and passage of bills; the referendum on important measures affecting the public policy of the State; and uniform four year tenure of office.

[House Journal, Sixty-seventh Session, 19.]

There are certain provisions of our Constitution which do not meet present conditions. This document, sixty years old, has stood the test of war, the growth of a people and the bitterness of political feud, and has met in nearly every particular our wants and needs. Therefore, I should regret to see it radically altered. It contains, however, certain clauses which might be changed with value to good government. One of these is the electoral clause with reference to foreign-born citizens. So shifting is much of this foreign-born citizenship,, so ignorant is it of our system of government, so little interested is it in our public affairs, and so wholly is it within the control of the political and business bosses, that this franchise should be curtailed.

We have never had much complaint against the character of the legislation enacted by our General Assemblies. It is true, however, that some legislation is crude by reason of the briefness of the sessions. It would conduce to good legislation if the Constitution were amended so as to provide for a legislative session in December, for the introduction and amendment of bills and for a second session, following an adjournment until first Monday in May, for the placing of bills upon their final passage.

Changes in the Constitution should also include a new clause providing that in the event of improper influences obtaining possession of the representatives of the people, and in the event of

legislation generally affecting the people, being enacted for the benefit of any special interest, then a specified number of the voters should have the right, without any legislative enactments whatever, to demand a referendum upon that legislation prior to its going into effect.

Many State and County offices have a two years' tenure while only a few have four. No good reason is now assigned why a four years' tenure of office should not be uniform and public interest would be subserved by not permitting an officer to serve longer than four years in any period of eight.

The Constitution, however, provides that while an amendment is awaiting the action of the electors, no additional amendment shall be proposed. The amendment touching the qualifications of lawyers has not been defeated, according to an old decision of the Supreme Court of Indiana. It is simply awaiting the action of the Electors. It was not ratified nor was it rejected by a constitutional number of votes, and, therefore, it must be submitted again either at a special or general election. To elaborate this condition of affairs further just now seems to me inadvisable in view of other important matters pending before you. Should disposition of these matters be made in time for proper consideration of these constitutional questions, it is not improbable that I shall again address you upon them.

505. The Marshall Constitution (March 4, 1911).

The so-called "Marshall Constitution" was embodied in Senate bill No. 407, and was introduced by Mr. Evan B. Stotsenburg, a Democrat, on February 15, and submitted to the Committee on Constitutional Revision. On February 23, the committee submitted a divided report. The majority report, signed by the Democratic members, recommended passage; the minority report, signed by the Republican members, recommended indefinite postponement. The minority report was rejected by a vote of 18-27. On February 24, the bill was advanced to second reading by a vote of 28-16, several amendments were made and the bill was ordered engrossed. On February 27, the bill passed the Senate by a vote of 29-21. The bill was read a first time in the House on February 27, and referred to the Judiciary Committee. On February 28, the committee submitted a divided report. The majority report, signed by the Democratic members, recommended passage; the minority report, recommended indefinite postponement. On March 1, the minority report was laid on the table by a vote of 59-37, and the majority report was adopted. On second reading, the following amendment was proposed and laid on the table by a vote of 56-36.

25-5055a