History
  • No items yet
midpage
Johnson v. Craft
87 So. 375
Ala.
1921
Check Treatment

*1 REPORTS 205 ALABAMA prohibitions, mandates, ous or limitations South. 375) (87 though 501.) results (3 the violation Div. et al. CRAFT JOHNSON v. good promotes a universal or greatest 3, (Supreme Feb. 1921. Alabama. Court of benefaction. 1921.) 24, Rehearing Feb. Denied <@=316—Construction not 8. Constitutional law Key- New, &wkey;>!/2, voi. 4 law 1. Constitutional by public influenced sentiment. law, supreme sub- Series—Constitution No. permit public cannot sentiment The courts ject only Constitution. federal to influence the construction of the Constitu- law, supreme Constitution is The state tion. resulting only from restraints <©=>i/2, Key- New, 9. Constitutional law voi. States. of the United Constitution of violation of Constitu- No. Series—Product <&wkey;>5 of amend- law 2. Constitutional —Modes nullity. tion is a prescribed are exclu- Constitution ment penalty for The Constitu- violation of'the sive. product nul- tion that the of the offense is a body, offi commits to Constitution The lity. power apy authority cer-, to agent or whatever or &wkey;>7 10. Constitutional iaw —Failure op suspend change, modify, or or effect fix date lature to for election amendment prohibitions, but its mandates or eration of vote, etc. not cured favorable prescribes modes exclusive sections 284r-287 by p. propos- 1919, 787, of Acts The failure amended, or its be or altered ing the road bond amendment the Constitu- operation changed. effect and tion, fix the for on such date the election <&wkey;>6 respect- Constitutional law 3. —Provisions by lapse time, amendment, is not cured ing mandatory. are participating vote of the the favorable electors 2S-A-287, 1901, §§ of Const. election, by any or action taken under mandatory, providing are amendment. binding people directory, and not are <&wkey;!/2,New, Key- 11. Constitutional law 4voi. every department, themselves, and' conclude body, officer, and People bound No. Constitu- Series— authority agency under the only change pre- tion, can it in manner of the Constitution. scribed. <&wkey;7 Legisla- law 4. Constitutional of—Power themselves bound propose must be exer- ture cised in mode and, being bound, power- so aro prescribed. less, numbers, change or whatever their Legislature power of the under Const. except through mandates, thwart its tutional to a consti- 1901, a 2S4-287, propose amendments, is §§ convention, By according or power particular special possessed not prescribed, through mode therein through grant Legislature, otherwise than right exercise of of revolution. itself, and can exer- the instrument <@=37 fixing 12. Constitutional law prescribed. —In mode cised in the Legislature exercising election, is- not law- <&wkey;7— proposing law In 5. Constitutional making delegation power, as to within rule Legislature exercising amendments, law-making power. is not powers. appointment Const. § Under proposing In amendments to the Constitu- by an election of the date for 284r-287, under sections on a amendment to the Constitution power exercising not make laws. separated proposal from the cannot be amendment, the red on the <&wkey;7 amend- law bond power date, 6. Constitutional —Road to fix such fixing legally adopted, ment not because propose amendments, held power is confer- for election Governor. entity, date left not as an law-making capacity providing within its the the rule Const. Under § making laws, delegation of discretion proposing or- amendments shall especially general view of der an to be at the elec- held proposing day ap- 287, succeeding, no act or resolution another tion next pointed by ments to the Constitution be submitted less not than three approval adjournment of the Governor. the final months after power appoint session, date for the <&wkey;l9 iaw unam- 13. Constitutional —Plain delegated election cannot be and as Acts biguous provisions cannot p. proposing an amend- changed by contemporaneous construction. providing ment be known article Contemporaneous practices construction or bonds for construction for the issuance interpretation of an otherwise illustrative highways, etc., fix not date of state did plain unambiguous according intent the Governor tho employed in the can- terms days from final should adjournment, election after 90 call heeded, to the end consulted legally the amendment unambiguous provisions may plain, de- adopted, is not a Constitu- their effects. intended avowed flected tion. <&wkey;7 Rehearing. law On 14. Constitutional —Amendments act or resolution. <&wkey;45— Supreme Court Constitutional -amendments Constitu- to condone violations of the not authorized 284r-2S7, the sections tion under may Constitution. or resolution. act either on the No is conferred Gardner, Thomas, JJ., Somerville, dis- judges Supreme forgive, Court or its senting. plain, unambigu- done, euro violations of the Key-Numbered topic Digests and Indexes in all <gz=>For same and KEY-NUMBER other cases see *2 JOHNSON v. CRAFT (205 Ala.) Court, Montgomery Appeal following from Circuit “Section 2. of That Jones, Judge. the Constitution County; of Alabama is to be Walter B. qualified submitted of state to electors by Jr., against Johnson, A. John Bill M. rejection for their ratification or tion to be held and called at an elec- constituting the Alabama Craft and others by the Governor aft- Commission, enjoin Highway the is- State ninety days adjournment er from of the final good a From de- roads bonds. suance this session of the of which the overruling bill, proposed, ,.pom- demurrers amendment is as cree which amendment follows, appeals'. to wit: and remanded. Reversed XJlainant “Section S. Article XX. 1—-A. Section That establishment, Statement of the for the nance Case. construction and mainte- permanent, complete excellent and by bill, Montgomery a of This filed citizen system highways, public of state roads and county, taxpayer owner, a and automobile bridges in this state serviceable for three hun- injunctive relief restrain the State seeks Highway sixty-five days year, dred and and and its Commission members and enable the state appro- to secure the national observing giving agents from and effect to priations public highways for there shall be is- commonly called and known as the by what sued and sold the state of Alabama inter- est-bearing negotiable bonds, amendment to the Constitution of road bond state not to ex- twenty-five purporting ceed the sum of ($25,000,- submit Alabama —the million 000) dollars, that said bonds shall bear inter- to the Constitution of est at exceeding per rate of not published five Alabama, being centum General Acts of per payable annum, annually s'émi-annually, or 7S7-791, act, 1919, pages inclusive. The serially shall mature otherwise less than entirety, reads: forty years three or more than from the date qualified act to submit to the “An electors issuance, payable of their shall made out of special election state at a to be held this at bridge the state road and fund which fund is ninety the call of Governor after purpose, executed, created for that and shall be sold adjournment Leg- days from final delivered behalf of the state from time for their consideration of an islature time, shall be of denominations of ten dol- purpose Constitution for ment to the up dollars, lars and to one thousand and mature authorizing the and state establish may determined, approval system public highway maintain a state roads and bonds therefor collection highway commission bridges, bearing to issue interest highway who shall also be bond commission levy and authorize the acting by majority proceedings vote with all of automobile other motor together approv- for such conuhission with the taxes the state for said vehicle driven thereto, writing al of the Governor reduced-to provide Xiurposes for and to the establish- record, regis- and made and the record and highway said ment and maintenance state duly deposited tration of said bonds shall be bridges system, public according roads and kept the office of the state treasurer and Legislature may regulations as the him; Governor, signed by that said bonds shall be may prescribed prescribe. hereafter treasurer, state auditor and state Legislature of it’ Ala- enacted “Be great and shall have the seal by state at- bama: thereto, secretary tached attested “Section 1. That whereas time has now state, coupons sign- the the shall be numbered and people come and this state construct ed state treasurer. Said bonds perma- complete properly maintain a and exempt county state, municipal and taxes: system highways, state roads and defray nent bridges Provided, however, signa- that the simile fac provide and means coupons tures the interest of said bonds constructing maintaining and same cost of lithographed signing; in lieu satisfactory perpetually and in a manner to obligation said state bonds shall the direct requirements public meet and travel payment for and thereof the full delayed large traffic, and also to secure hereby faith credit of and the state is the irrevo- appropriation purpose for said nation- cably pledged proceeds derived from aripropriation government, al duly ed States has been deposited the sale of said bonds shall be Congress acts of of the Unit- treasury kept separate ’state in a fund public high- the construction of exclusively defray shall be constructing used to cost bridges ways, roads and on condition that the maintaining highways, said proper shall furnish amount state public bridges roads of the state. The said purpose appropriation of of able, been laid out the counties for said before the par. bonds shall be sold at not less than B. government shall national become avail- That for the securing prompt highway system and whereas state payment principal up state, connecting and interest in this said provide sinking bonds to together, therefor, fund the same have been place sufficient approved revenue said state road and the state bridges fund, defray department, highway but has the cost of con- been built structing maintaining highways and maintained nor meet the demands made public ly bridges means, continuously roads and high- it for lack whereas the important serviceable matter condition most before the that a state license popular at this tax all automobiles de- motor driven vehi- hereby authorized a determination as to cles is to be mands what meas- levied col- provide complete, privilege taken ures shall be best on all such vehicle lected license tax system permanent public high- excellent now levied hereafter be levied ways every description for this now therefore: law of kind and shall be REPORTS ALABAMA following adopted bonds, amendment be exclusively payment ‘Shall of said used for sinking creating Alabama.’ XX principal interest, article That Constitution of holding shall be said election maturity the officers the remainder fund and public for their appointed same highways, same and shall be roads of said the maintenance *3 by provided highway manner the officials as and same bridges state and the and extension of by ment in in appoint- for the election of the state hold the may county bridges system, built national bridges be roads and that general officers elections of by the and and and maintained the aid of state held and shall be the state the election government, state roads gov- respects in law constitu- with the all accordance by may aid be built maintained the and general erning and with the elections government, of the state roads and tained state and national provisions concerning amendment to that tional instrument. bridges may built main- be and That cast a't elec- the said votes county the aid of and nation- the canvassed, counted, and returns tion shall be government, highways, al and roads said state secretary of state thereof bridges be shall constructed and maintain- representa- as in elections by highway department, same manner tives to the ed state all the and Legislature. moneys The result of said of said bonds derived the sale by proclamation expended highway department be known shall as to election shall made of be the may approval of direct the the Gov- if a all the and of the Governor highway ernor. O. That the state commission qualified who at election electors voted said highway department locate, or and shall construct upon shall voted amendment the highways maintain, the or state trunk said ‘Yes’ from the date of said amendment county seat with each roads so as to connect proclamation purposes shall valid to intents be adjoining by county of counties seats the part the the permanent public Constitution of Ala- as by a feasible most route direct most as 6. article thereof. bama and regard having ,of the due expenses route elec- That the “Section county and to seats provided welfare connect for and the tion herein costs at or border counties near the of the several publication the state paid of shall be out notices public in border treasury with a road state line in the same manner as the into divided general paid. states: Provided that counties expenses elections are of other regular judicial of which beginning two terms of the divisions each fiscal At each “Section 7. held, places circuit court highway require year commission shall the state held, be terms court are shall where said connected of engineer highway to make a statement the state in duty It shall be with each other. writing the state treasurer of all monies to state highway highway said commission state department highway re- which the equitably apportion among department several counties carrying quire depart- on the work this expenditures of both mon- year coming the amount so esti- ment for the making ey times of labor and time or highway the needs of the state mated as partment de- investments; said roads to be constructed such and maintained counties. be then set aside shall expense without the several exclusive use the state treasurer G. That this amendment surplus department. highway All left over foregoing provisions when thereof ratified treasurer from sale hands of the state people self-executing the further pass without the aid placed shall in- licenses be at motor vehicle legislation, but the shall a bank banks state of Ala- deposit terest in bama. The state necessary as it deem such laws shall treasurer these this,amend- secure the benefit full and effect highest offering bank interest funds in the for the use of at ses- ment Either this to the Constitution. money more than and where possi- sion of the earliest or at the same bid the funds shall one bank makes ble time after the ratification prorated them, but bid of be between immediately amendment shall become there is bank shall be considered where effect, nothing in full solvency of said bank and de- contrary sections 213 and 93 thereof to solvency termining the treasurer shall re- notwithstanding. writing opinion quire in state su- it shall the perintendent “Section 4. That be of banks. Sept. fix the of said election and Governor to date “Approved 1919.” by proclamation published give to be notice county newspaper in each the state at one amend- avers that the “road bond The bill preceding least successive weeks next seven is void and not become ment” was and said amendment to by election Alabama, and al- qualified submitted to the this act support leges grounds reasons five state for or re- electors of the this ratification the “road bond the ment” is invalid and averment jection. ineffectual, viz.: held at election to be “Section 5. That said (1) amendment election said qualified That on provided shall as herein electors election official said ordered and vote printed required by there for such election shall ballot printed as fixed Constitution, according to the words amendment said dele- figures set out shown herein above gated to the Govern- act, thereafter words 3 of this and also section ‘Yes,’ state. or of the elector choice of the shall ‘No.’ The improperly (2) That said him under his a cross-mark indicated illegally submitted or expressing opposite his the words direction desire, printed disapproval; approval the Gov- his said amendment shall before materially following the state amended ernor of words: ballot said v. CRAFT JOHNSON (205 Ala.) qualified amendment; changed and that there- who voted such election said electors in favor readopt amendments voted same after did same, of the all intents and stitution. shall valid required by own, and make it its purposes parts of this Con- Constitution; 284 of the of such shall result (3) properly amendment was not That said by proclamation be made of the Govern- known legally proc- advertised the Governor’s Representation shall or. required by lamation section 284 upon population, basis be based -and such Legisla- Constitution and the Acts changed representation tutional amendments. not be consti- 1915, page 602. ture of passed Upon (4) That the resolution at all elec- “Sec. the ballots used tions this Consti- section 284 of lature contained *4 subject-matter of'each tution proposed substance or legislative nature, a other matters of not printed shall so amendment be germane said mat- said clearly indicated. nature thereof shall be resolution, 7 of ter is embraced in section proposed Following on the amendment each provisions contrary of section 284 to the of printed im- the word ‘Yes’ ballot shall mediately the Constitution. printed under shall the elector shall word (5) language That of said be indi- ‘No.’ The choice vague meaning so and indefinite is incapable is is his mark made him or under cated a cross expressing opposite no amendment ascertainment, direction, de- his the word it adopted un- sire, shall be incapable therefore enforcement and there- major- affirmative vote of it' less ity receives the void. fore qualified at vote electors who of all the caption Amending Under “Mode election. such Constitution,” the Constitution of Alabama upon Legislature “Sec. All 287. votes following provisions (with contains oth- proposed Constitution, amendments to this presently important): ers in section not 286 upon calling or bills resolutions convention purpose, altering amending may proposed 284. “Sec. Amendments state, shall taken this Constitution ner the proposed man- yeas nays journals. and entered on the No following: amendments shall Legislature passed act accordance with the resolution of the they originate be read on three several the house in which article, and, upon days, if the third proposing amendments to this reading three-fifths of all the members elected calling purpose, a convention for the of alter- thereof, to that house shall vote in favor the ing amending state, the Constitution of this (cid:127)proposed amendments shall be sent to the oth- approval shall be submitted of the Gov- house, they er in which shall likewise be read ernor, approval.” shall be valid without his days, upon on three several and if the third reading three-fifths of all the members elected agree- After the' houses had reached an pro- to that house posed vote in shall favor amendments, upon (known ment the measure shall order Senate qualified an election 21S), respective electors of the state presiding Bill after the upon proposed amendments, such to be held signed had officers of houses the same general at either election next succeed- presence respective houses, of their ing the session of the at which the enrolled, it aft® had to the the measure went proposed upon day amendments are another who, day Sep- on the 27th appointed by less tember, 1919, along it returned Senate adjournment three months after the final following message: with the executive the session of the at proposed. amendments were Notice such “Sept. 27, 1919. election, together with the “Gentlemen of the Senate: I herewith return ments, given by proclamation shall be of the my 218, approval, Senate Bill No. without Governor, county published every which shall be suggest following amendment, which,’ in such manner shall made, my namely: objection, will meet direct, eight least successive next weeks by adding “Amend subdivision B at the end preceding day 'appointed for such election. following ‘Subject thereof the words: to the day appointed On the so an election shall be approval Governor,’ so the conclud- qualified held for the vote of the electors of ing paragraph of B said subdivision shall read: upon the state amendments. If moneys all ‘And from derived the sale of said gener- day such election be held of the expended highway depart- bonds shall be as the election, general al the officers of such subject direct, approval ment to the open poll qualified shall electors for the vote of the Governor.’ proposed amendments; if it appreciate importance “You will general be election, held other than that of a recalling amendment in the fact that officers such election shall be proceeds $25,- under the act the the sale of pointed; and the election shall be in all held expended 000,000.00 of bonds things governing in accordance with the. law highway department, obviously state wise to al of and it is general elections. all elections expenditure approv- proposed amendments, votes cast thereat constitutional officer of the state. canvassed, tabulated, shall be and returns “Respt. Kilby, E. Thos. Governor.” secretary thereof be made to the counted, in the manner same as in elections for day, September 27, 1919, On the representatives same Legislature; and if it thereupon appear “concurred in the amendment Senate REPORTS 205 ALABAMA 390 138, posed by 2; On the South. rel. Wood- headnote State ex to the bill.” Skeggs, September day,' the House ward first second same “concurred v. adopted Tooker, headnote, 268; 15 the amendment 46 v. South. State (this proposed by It L. the bill.” Mont. 37 Pac. 25 R. A. 560 case the Governor to quotes Frierson, journals upholds appear v. Collier does froifa Hilton, supra); Paving the-proposed v. Oakland Co. houses Hill, Iowa, 510, 543, 554, 3; when went Cal. Koehler Pae. N. v. either as (follows or did read 15 W. 609 as would 14 W. N. Governor or again proposed, Frierson, supra); Int. he Collier v. lEndlich on with the addition message Statutes, 433; Lapsley, receipt of from of § Weaver read after Ed.) Governor; journals merely reciting 224; (4th Cooley, Ala. Limitations Const. the a acceptance message 94, 95; Eutaw, reading Ala. Coleman v. 327 et executive proposal seq., Realty City South. the houses Co. Mobile, therein made the Governor. sought, preceding case, that the executive bill is averred election, fixing Eutaw, proclamation differentiate it from Coleman the date that, supra, Ala., “road the Consti- on the bond and held while and notice mandatory, published compli- in one a substantial news- tution amendment" was provided) paper (the in each that was nec- ance with means mandates *5 period (the being essary county for the minimum cases the state both preparation ballot). However, prescribed 284 of the Constitution the in section opinion by court, weeks), (eight not accordance with and candor a divided (section p.4, 790, say reading act us to that a Of the of forces careful 1919), opinion, for a the dissent- Acts both General during ing opinion publication “seven succes- leads us to conclusion that minimum dissenting opinion, by the constitutional valid- written in Justice McClel- Hence sive weeks.” by Anderson, ity “road lan and Justice bond amendment" —as concux-red objections keeping particular taken stated decisions of more in with the ante validity Stephens Palmer, presented against our its de- with own. v. states as well as People, —is People record, 337; 111. and has 89 v. 91 been exhaus- cision 999; McCrary tively argued, orally 283, 51 on Elec- submission Mich. N. W. and in 2; Ruling Law, respective tions, 153, filed, 9 footnote Case § briefs since solicitors. 58, p. 995; Peevey, v. 132 Ala. 31 Fi-axicis Weil, Steiner, Montgomery, Crum & 230, 372; Farish, v. 160 Ala. Finklea South. appellant. 336; Taylor Hutchinson, v. 49 South. 145 206, Marx, 108; unconstitutional, Ala. 40 South. v. 55 Miller A of an act 284; 322, fail; in note 16 R. A. Ala. v. cited L. McBee if the remainder leaves 97; Idaho, seq., complete act, capable Brady, 761 et 100 15 Pac. enforcement Idaho, 274, 1058, 'Moseley, legislative showing intent, 100 16 Pac. v. remain- Utter Rep. 723; Mayor 94, ing part parte 18 Cas. Ex Ann. State will stand. and 133 Am. St. 543, 927, Florence; Jones, Powell,' 27 South. 4S L. v. 77 Miss. re 78 Ala. Aldermen of 419, case, being leading 3; Morris, (this after Railroad v. 65 R. A. 652 headnote years, Davis, 148, 193; overruled 14 a divid- v. 130 Ala. ’30 Ala. State case ed Rep. Jones, 522, 344, 23; State, State, 106 Miss. v. v. 64 89 Am. St. Bell State South. Skeggs, 453; Harper 241); 87, Woodward v. 154 Ala. v. South. 115 Ala. 22 South. Yerby 268; Gilchrist, 28, 857; 249, v. Crawford 19 v. South. 109 Ala. Coch- 46 South. 355; 963, 1914B, rane, 541, 41, Ann. Ala. 14 59 South. Cas. 101 South. State v. 64 Fla. 909, State, 446, 916; Rogers, Ala. 19 32 Rev. Jefferson Co. v. 172 107 South. L. R. Bd. of headnote, Bailey, 309, 520; 139, 757; 54 110 Ala. fifth South. Tus- Shehane v. 20 A. Ala. Commissioners, 724, 173 Ala. 54 v. South. 359. caloosa Stoneman, 763; v. 66 Cal. Constitution is a Hatch 632. limitation of South. time); Stephens Rafter, supreme. (as powers; v. mandates Section 6 734 Pac. headnote; People Sholem, 337, mandatory; v. 2d is bound 284 is 89 111. 294 People requirements, (pamphlet); 204, E. 377 it seeks to 128 N. when amend 111. 551,133 10; Supp. methods, Rep. applies, Luce, N. Y. Misc. it. This but to v. 74 26; People Martin, questions People Porter, v. time. An amendment 6 Cal. voted on v. Humph. (Tenn.) 208, compliance requirements 409; 9 49 Am. 12 without a is Cal. rel., Frierson, 706; etc., Donaghey, Ala. State ex v. 106 v. 24 100. Er- Collier Dec. Ark. void. 746; Leeper, (Mo.) 837; Cartledge 68, v. 217 S. W. 152 W. Stein 78 Nolan S. win v. State, 518; Taylor, 585, Wortham, Miller v. 22 105 Tex. rel. Sec. of 153 State ex v. Ala. ,N. Dye, 1046; Lap- 297; Ellingham 374, 362, Weaver v. 178 133 W. v. Ind. N. sley, S. W. D. 1915C, 200, 224; Foster, 1, Ala. Little Ann. v. Ala. N. E. Cas. authori- 43 130 99 477; therein; Perry County Co., 163, McGough, R.v. South. State v. ties R. 30 118 200 cited 556; 395; 555, Dovis, 546, 166, McDade, State v. 24 South. Jones v. 58 Ala. 220, 354, 20 Nev. Ala. 160 Wis. Ala. 894; 10, Marcus, 231, 9S8, citing v. headnote 75 Pac. State South. 19 419, 6; Ensley upholding Frierson, supra. headnote v. 152 N. W. De- Collier Powell, velopment 300, 147 Ala. to be Co. v. 40 Whether done sec- JOHNSON v. CRAFT 391 A-la.) (205 son, amending 100; Buckley, tion 284 54 Ala. 24 Ala. v. State done, 599; Foster, is determined ex rel. 130 Ala. State Little v. compliance itself, 160, 161, (citing with section v. McDon- 284 30 South. 4'77 Fox ald, 416, 71, not with the resolu- 101 Ala. 21 L. R. A. directions of the act or 13 South. Griffin, 529, Rep. 98); the amendment. Jones v. 46 Am. Walker v. St. McDade, 231, 10, 365, 366; Hill, 200 Ala. headnote 75 South. 60 Ala. Koehler v. 609; Iowa, 544, 738, 988. 60 N. N. 15 W. 14 W. requires thing done, Leeper, When a Stein v. 78 521. statute particular manner, delegate power or clone in a is the usual nullification cannot department consequence agent, of disobedience. a other than that which y. State, McDonald, 162, Toole 88 Ala. Constitution allows. Fox v. page 65, 51, for an elec- 101 Ala. Where second headnote law fixes.no tion, leaving 416, 529, Rep. some 13 South. 21 L. R. A. 46 Am. St. determined hap- 98; Stephens statute, Mobile, 220; one named in Clark v. else after v. 67 Ala. Palmer, pening precedent, People, 337; People 89 111. v. a condition essential validity ; Michie, 48, p. 289, election that it § be called Mich. 51 N. W. 999 213; 26; People very agency desig- People Porter, and the time fixed v. 6 Cal. v. Stephens 409; City Martin, none v. State ex rel. nated Rafter, law and Cal. other. headnote; People Birmingham, 757; S9 111. second South. 999; Palmer, Cartledge Wortham, 585, 153 51 N. Peo- v. 105 Tex. S. v. Mich. W. ple Porter, 26; People Martin, Ellingham Dye, 297; v. 178 Ind. 6 Cal. W. N. People Iowa, 1915C, 200; 409; Hill, Koehler 544 et E. Ann. Cal. sen., .v. Cas. 73S, Scholem, 128 N. E. 377. 14 N. W. 15 N. W. 609. 294 111. delegate approval an au- The Governor’s veto or could proposed nothing. thority power, availed nullity. exercise would have placed by alone, mere would have been Hollingsworth Virginia, especially *6 v. 3 or car- § Const. Dali. Da. Ann. when this 644; Mason, 378, 1 L. State v. 43 41 discretion. Schul- Ed. it the exercise of ried with ; 345, 590, 864, 242, 243, Eberly, 776 25 Neb. 9 2 South. tes v. 346; Ala. South. 82 thereby it, Moore, But when he amended v. 36 Ala. 371. N. W. 9S1. making Railroad Co. change therein, compel he com- a material lie to would not Mandamus usurpation, could be mitted made and fix election Governor to order the readoption only by legal and ratifica- thereof, he had in the event date failed prescribed by of the Con- Moore, 284 tion as section Co. v. 38 so to do. Railroad refused Ala. 88 Am. Dec. Hall, 4S9, 371; Echols, parte 698-700, 43 Ala. headnote Hall v. stitution. Ex 39 Ala. 703; Scruggs Mayor, etc., 10, Huntsville, 749; Light v. Am. Dec. 94 Fos- State ex rel. v. 222; Shields, Norton v. ter, Fay Ala. 160,161 (citing McDonald, 45 130 Ala. v. ISO, 181, 71, 416, 44 Ala. 182. 529, 101 Ala. 21 L. A. 13 South. R. Governor, adding a new condition Rep. 98); The 46 Am. State ex rel. St. Plock v. amendment, Cobb, without au- Higdon Jelks, acted 127; Ala. rel. 64 Ex v. thority law, but rendered the entire 115, headnote, Ala. first 138 Dorsey’s Case, 7 Port. 293 pages 60; void. 122, 121 and 35 South. Turner v. Watkins, 387, seq.; 131 Ala. v. Gov., seq., Patton Henderson, et 244 199 Ala. et 74 93, Rep. 2, 90 Am. St. 43. 344; Shields, 180, headnote 31 South. 44 South. Norton v. Ala. amendment, amended Gov- 181, 182, 183. entirely presented new ernor, While the held being and, Sent back voting awas not, legislative day, (fiftieth) special election, the last “special it was not such a readopted been, contemplated by not have could 19, p. election” as is article 284 Con- 354, Code, authorizing lature as the Governor to Waddell, Xancey 524, 139 Ala. v. upon' stitution. fix the date direct which it should McDade, 733; 200 526, 230, Jones v. Ala. special held, 36 South. but was such election as is 988; Moog Randolph, v. contemplated 75 South. 77 the Con- 606; parte 597, 599, Hardy, 284) Ex 68 Ala. Ala. (section stitution acts 8; Sayre Pollard, 304, 318, (Acts v. 1915, p. headnote 77 620), 1915 Hutchinson, 721; 608; especially Jones v. 43 provides special Ala. Ala. elections for Marcus, 354, 419, amending 160 Wis. 152 N. State v. W. the Constitution. Const. § 284. 426; Gilchrist, 424, 425, Code, 439, Crawford v. 64 19, 440, 441, pp. Fla. 354, §§ art. 355. 1914B, 963, 41, 916; Ann. Cas. 1915, p. 59 South. 602. Acts 489, Hall, headnote, Ala. 10 v. 43 94 Am. Hall There is no room here construction; al., 703; 700, v. White language Texas et 7 Wall. Dec. the ambiguous. of section 284 clear and un- 227; parte 766, Ex parte Ed. 19 L. Norton v.- Mayor, Ex etc., 78 Ala. 183; Shields, Jones, 423; 44 Ala. Scott McGough, v. 5 How. State v. 166, 167,-24 118 Ala. 343, 181; Const, Borden, 395; Cooley’s 12 L. Luther Ed. v. 7 68; How. South. Lim. State 1, 42, 47, 48, 49, 581; Cooley, 12 L. 48, Ed. Taylor, ex rel. (22 Miller v. 133 N. W. 1046 29, 30, 31; Scruggs Mayor 49, 362, note); v. N. D. State, Hunts- Fulton v. 171 220, ville, 222, 223; 578, 45 Ala. 68S; Collier Ala. v. Frier- 54 South. State, Hillaird v. 205 ALABAMA REPORTS 392 right validly 634,13 756; State, legislate, delegate 100 Ala. Maxwell South. v. 150, agencies. 89 Ala. Ala. 7 824. administration to 9, 199 South. 749; Contemporaneous 51; 357, avail 74 182 62 construction cannot South. Ala. South. Lang- 389, 96, 977; 184 to ham, v. 3S sustain this amendment. Sadler Ala. 63 South. 245 U. S. Sup. 1918C, 335; 159, 349, 34 Ala. 311. Robertson v. L. A. Ct. 62 Ed. L. R. 397; 395, 361, McGough, 1913B, 159, 118 Ala. 24 Ann. The Constitution South. Cas. 856. interpreted Xiehman, etc., 219, light Robinson, always is mon tion, com- Co. v. 59 Ala. in- the 241; 477; Foster, 163, law, and, 30 if it not the first Little v. 130 Ala. South. Constitu- Co., 437; then, light predecessors. & R. 36 Ala. Gibbons v. M. G. N. Birmingham 197, 42; 5'76; ; Jacobs, 92 Ala. 52 396; Ala. M. R. Co. Ala. 55 Ala. 53 Ala. 570 58 v. 830; 193; 320, Taylor 594; 496; 9 12 L. R. A. v. 45 Ala. 58 Ala. 65 South. Ala. 145; 606; Hutchinson, 98, 145 Ala. 40 South. 108. 142 38 70 Ala. 77 Ala. Ala. justice, nothing 679; pre- do with the 34 Ala. All Courts have South. sumptions 216. reasonable wisdom, policy, expediency Idaho, indulged of the law. con- in favor 97; 761, 274, Brady, stitutionality McBee 15 100 45 v. Pac. 154 Ala. act. 1426, legis- Digest, p. 10 cited; Cent. Ed. and cases Amer. South. 183. There is no limit on the Rep. People Luce, 551, except power, 133 v. 74 Misc. lative is written headnote; Cyc. p. 851, 366; Supp. 10, 230, N. X. fifth 8 160 49 Constitution. Ala. South. notes; 591, and numerous cited in Collier the act cases 194 Ala. 69 South. 723. Where Frierson, question prescribes purely govern- 24 Ala. 100. a rule of repugnant merely policy, If act of relates mental public affairs, court to so duct and administration of Bridge Dyer Co., beyond repugnant 2 declare. v. Tuskaloosa must be to the'Constitution 303, doubt, Port. 27 Am. Dec. 655. it is so declared. a reasonable before overstep S.) 294, 418, (N. cannot Con- L. 45 South. 15 R. A. 154 Ala. 340, State, 572, Rep. 57; 366, Ala. Fulton v. 171 54 166 52 stitution. Am. St. Ala. 129 South, 693; Skeggs, 289, 466;' 688, 61; 154 Ala. 182 South. Woodward 193 69 South. 436; parte State, 249, 268; 77, 1915D, 492, Ex 52 Ala. 46 South. Ala. 62 South. Ann. Cas. Rep. 942; 411, 47, 231, 197 72 Ala. Am. 567. 187 65 South. Ala. 23 Ala. alter, contract, 1918D, 869; Cooley’s 330, (7th cannot Ann. Cas. South. expand provisions. 402, 239-244; Ed.) Rev. Bd. 42 constitutional Ala. Const. S.) City Birmingham, (N. 888, 676, R. 121 Am. ex rel. 8 L. A. Jeff. Co. State South. headnote, 416, 67; Rep. and fifth South. 172 Ala. Ala. 13 South. St. County Com’rs, Rep. 98; 757; v. Ct. Ala. Tuscaloosa R. 46 Am. St. L. A. South. South. *7 authority Legislature power 1915D, or The has no 98. L. R. A. joint Constitution, incorporate, proposal ain resolution to to to amend The any matter, effect, any must be amendments to force and submitted have ques- except adopted by people, while the amendment and vote of to the submitting ordering legis- same. McBee manner of tion and v. act of Idaho, 761, Brady, complete 100 Pac. 97. when it has been 15 lation is final and approved, adopted does have to Q. Atty. Gen., Henry Smith, White, P. J. people. There the1 be is no to vote submitted Mayfield, Gen., Atty. James J. of Mont- Asst. providing requirement act Sons, Opelika, gomery, Denson & N. D. passed by three-fifths shall be the election Leigh, Young Mobile, Smiths, & Horace requirement necessary vote, to is this while Montgomery, Stringfcllow, Smith, G. W. L. proposal It requires to amend. a vote be tered amend; Murphy, Brewton, and Matt H. Birm- yea nay, en- and be taken appellees. ingham, for journal, upon proposal upon is not after the act but this provides 248, 1901, sep- Const. two Section calling Mandamus would have election. (a) making arate matters: posal; The against if he refused had lain ordering by Legisla- (b) give to fix the time for the elec- notice and upon proposal. to tion, The ture of an election right (a) 344; 371; 244, Ala. 74 199 South. 36 vested as an is 464; 1096; 382; 68 Neb. 77 South. 57 78 111. entity law-making body; than other Rep. 505; 596, 2 418, Am. St. 4 W. (b) S. Tex. power while election is order 252; Rep. 766, 545, Am. St. Pae. 9 18 76 Cal. law-making capacity. in its The vested Legislature by 47; Ky. 571, 265, App. 125 101 90 Pac. 5 proposal Cal. made the could have ; 95, 954; 89 Am. Dec. 722 54 Me. S. W. ordered the election one act and an- Rep. 964; Am. St. Pac. approval Okl. event, first would other. not have Rap. 60 S. E. Am. St. C. required, 146 N. while second been 690; Ala. 546. Pac. join But the it the have. can would approval proposal, in event the which stating case, necessary J., McCLELLAN, de- is to that after the Governor act which opinion provides of the court. for an livered the subject objection against directed amendment. first amendment” South. 95. Where ‘‘road bond v. CRAFT JOHNSON Ala.) (205 any the amend- the omission ment. We is fatal one purporting to submit any argument scarcely neces- deem expressly electorate, sary proposition. The Consti- this enforce delegate through undertook, supreme paramount law. tution is the mode under it is that power date fix the the Governor are to which amendments proposal should this the election which clearly been It has defined. soundly merit determine held. To requi- done, acts are to be certain certain orderly, appropriate objection change observed, cam sitions are before premise logical reiterate treatment are these- But be effected. to what enjoined', requisitions required, written obvious truths acts or these some of the any department of or developed. have Constitutions dispense government, with them. the do so would be to violate the can Alabama, T.o [1,2] like The Constitution which instrument states, is and of the other that of the nation princi- support,- every they are sworn to sphere supreme realm law within the the of its pol- ple icy requires public and sound constitutional law Subject only authority. the re pronounce against courts to resulting from the Constitution straints every amendment, not to have which is shown States, of Ala pre- the Constitution United the bama is the the rifles been made in accordance with highest expression form and of source of fundamental law.” scribed state. The that exists law sanction, recently approvingly repro- and the character its creation But its viz. will, people’s quoted pronouncement, invest deliberate duced the clared, and de- quality. paramount orderly sequence expression with its unquestioned judicial power, absolute wherever control Constitution’s it was apply; judiciary its to whatever and every officer, the function of the to determine legislative, (section 279) judi prescriptions organic executive, .and whether the sup cial, oath is bound itself the effort observed uphold McDade, port to vindicate Constitution. amend the 200 Ala. trine of in a Jones mandates, enforce its and to observe and This doc- regard and, to extrinsic cir inhibitions without v. Frierson accords with Collier body, officer, sense, to no the even broader cumstances. commits illustrates expressed agent principle thus whatever this court to stitutional modify suspend quotation Stone, J.), by approving change (through the effect or Perry County operation prohibitions; Cooley, Co., its mandates or Railroad prescribes itself the instrument the exclusive 58 Ala. 556: be altered or amend inodes language adopt, own, one as our “We operation ed, changed. its effect and Oth thorough thinkers of the soundest and most exclusive erwise as these modes contem jurists, who have written plate organic law, and authorize the altera Constitution’s of ‘The courts tread when Constitutions: embodied our very dangerous ground permanent, tion, character its force they apply rules, venture to enduring. influence Both of these ex mandatory distinguish statutes, directory and plainly clusive modes stated sections provisions of Constitution. Constitu- to the tions Only through the Constitution. 28-L-287of constitutional vened as usually prescribe do undertake to convention, called and con except proceeding, mere rules rules to be when such *8 provided existing organic law, in the upon they thing looked as essential to the through adopted or as done; regarded in must then be existing provided organic law, in the upon can light power of limitations the to be the changed. province be altered or the Constitution It is It is instrument exercised. of this the permanent solemn and character to es- the latter mode we are now concerned. maxims, fundamental and fix tablish those those Upwards years ago this court had by depart- unvarying rules, which pronounce occasion to consider and to government must at all times ments of principles change stitutional by referable to the * * * not, shape We are conduct. expect their organic opin- law. The therefore, in a Constitution to find to by ion then delivered Justice Goldthwaite adopting it, provisions people, in which the Frierson, Collier established v. high importance, regarded as not have worthy leading authority country a in our as subject to be embraced our instrument Many least, under consideration. which, the a at is control alike courts of to governed, highest repute, government as and to form text-writers, well as by pow- is to be measured the which a standard er accorded the doctrine there announced as can be exercised well the dele- which acceptance the unreserved ness its obvious sound- sovereign people gate, as themselves- deserves, given pronounce- and have given respecting If directions the times great place ment its own in the constitutional proceeding power should modes of jurisprudence ity, republic. With a brev- exercised, strong pre- there is at least comprehension, and also that is notable designed people sumption it that the in that should be gratifying, it was there said: only.’ Cooley time and mode exercised Const. Lim. 78.” doubt, that, change no “We entertain to any other mode than a con- provisions of the Constitution [3-5] The every vention, by requisition which is demanded mandatory, providing amendment are its observed, instrument itself must be 205 ALABAMAEEPOETS 39á (cid:127)power granted ing such discretionary qualified this amendment make I>lain, ernor the point posed general the manded the more recourse takable which in section In ment” the section discretion were of the are after effect defining v. objection invite affirmation prerequisite upon ignore C. and proposing and since to he voted should defined selves and determination lature is not “Legislature L. the instrument those McDade, cised rof last-stated officer, amendments ular, Legislature not ton, thorities [6] Frierson, supra; Oakland, R. A. the act §L. wholly day them] mode of Legislature at which the amendments directory- binding election is Since proposed”; laws. Jones the special previously of the amendments, and neither the error effect to be is intent or to for such election. The 19, pp. 28, Waite, Cal. exclusively to 313, 315, 316; electors or to objection supra; final supra. now under to omit function and the measure must be expressly concluding date unexercised proposing this held “on the amendments discretion to of inexcusable the instrument upon by construction to derive its 284 that agency principle resultant, otherwise than Legislature “every requisition td whereby to the Constitution is mode power provisions — fatal power, exercising deny of the session adjournment committed, any sound, logical upon itself. judgment should next reiterated —is It the observance of the Constitution accorded the now prescribed, order exercised, under its allows it Cal. to be held either at the granted results C. the — to understand its unavoid- Legislature being consideration every McDade, which the election on another succeeding appropriate less inquiry the election be J. being delegate It the discretion to on the electorate, to that appoint Recognition agency undertook, its other “road an election the fallacy. held, pp. than three itself,” provided can and to C. possessed Pac. nor department, amendment,” through grant further from the the amendments to considered. Legislature authority. etc., is J. power. so day raised supra; which is de the substance and requires any thereby meaning provisions *9 bond amend positive p. 693; Constitution the Pac. to the Gov “of instrument, appointed.” mandatory, to which that and to effect is Co. Hil conclusion Constitution. appointed court the 689. it turns the mode power entity essential Jones that the the be exer- through day defining appoint pression is, propose months of this that in session unmis system Collier nated partic- v. Liver them- able body, leav 6 R. pro one Au- the for up Legislature ap the it To to (cid:127)Legislature. —that found emphatic stitution with Legislature passed in its stitution is stitution ly this of approval.” article, 287: other than the onstrate that ported, power capacity, lawHnaking power, this tory had tration of the law the grant self commits the and from the briefs for the tution, of power tion accomplish particular purpose est entity specified elections on instrument. where the mental designation be other intent. section 284 constitutional “No act It Obviously, the ha's been enacted. altering one woitld assert that such constitutional delegated organic Supreme Court, appeal that it the demand. The is of such of this marked capacity to or entity in accordancewith unnecessary, or is to agency to much employed Eeference to way the the entity in which realm exclusively granted these indubitable appoint character. calling shall or resolution of the or shall is manifests an appellees: treated Legislature If the Governor is the a often held discretionary power organic We particularity. repository observed in which delegate mentioned therein less vindicated. as entity rightful amending power plain, unambiguous be submitted for were needed to further dem- power exercise the discretion but shall be valid make reposition by amendments to this Consti- character, deduce from distinct is not even contended on is contention cannot be conventionfor the legal which the Constitution it- entity language as the Governor had designation particular positive performed in the law to Legislature, as Elsewhere in day laws, particular exercise That to this effect thé additional, as a of permissible amade a defined the any others the adminis- appoint intent legislating power. for such as an' any repository legislative appellees this, terms in section is a denial of its “Legislature” designation itself avows the form of to the Governor. Under greatest function of law-making Constitution reference of the conten- enact constitutional other the Constitu- is discretionary by any reposed power the If prohibitory, ais distinct law-making designation entity without his text of the been prescribed argument entity, the elections, the anything the Con- terms of factor approval statutes not the govern- day of this reposi- detail, of the action valid- desig- —not could grav- most Con- else- sup- any the ex- in- to v. CRAFT JOHNSON (205 Ala.) respect provision to legislative In with section the may propose He holding may place for elections allow the time and them; products; lie veto lie they shall members of this fixed is time the them to the efflux become law provision “by law”; Legis- Constitution; in section prescribed in the pass “Legislature laws shall proposed amendments refuse lature his * * * elections”; law, regulate govern give effect' the form the bill certain in section 243 the powers confers notwithstanding Governor. action duty “upon Legislature, whose under law No a valid bill become can pass regulating present- railroad shall be to laws” Constitution of this tariffs, prohibitory con- quoted etc. In each these sections ed terms of section 287 the Governor. expressly directly referred to opposed to stitutional intent is laws, Legislature capacity system make its the Constitution’s vital features of in- statutes, same 161 the enacting in enact In section making statutes. laws, for through patent the use tent made the submission forbids section 287 Legis- empowering provide,” calling “to words the Governor resolutions of acts holding of courts when proposing lature to continue the constitutional convention ments table intent regular judges terms. expressing their fail to attend thereby thereto, the indubi- Code, 440, 441, vesting subject discretion in §§ to take the of the Con- spe- respect change to the dates Governor with amendment without stitution’s elections, now law-making power Legislature. referable to what cial This Constitution, (in part) section 190 of the by the is even further demonstrated view to like have first alluded. which we provision of section 125—the section which just general provision al- that we have participation in —to with deals Governor’s. court, 190—that luded to May section passing laws, process of as well as action the by Mayor, 123 Ala. capacity Thomas Hdw. Co. law-making & 306, prescribed form the ballot referred provided: —where it is submitting “Every vote, order, or to which resolution “Birmingham amendment” under Con- necessary, may be concurrence of both Houses in which there was stitution of questions adjournment exoept appoint requiring the vision houses, bringing elections two amendments submit- for election on pre- amending ” * * * prescrip- electorate, one of the as is (Italics ted to the sented to supplied.) Governor. Constitption. present Neither tions in the May-Thom- opinion nor decision (cid:127) appeal. respect any bearing upon exception to the amend- with This as Case has ing (1875) having Constitution is set down The old committed instrument, legislative body power enjoined very where to the law-makers the the duty governing power “pass elections, of constitutional laws” thereby evincing questioned sideration, in- also same there court referred action amending respect purely legislative authority, power to the mode of tent that and unmistakably “pass de- is so laws.” the Constitution (sections analogy pressed appellees distinct 284- article clared Another Amending 287) “Mode of devoted asserted as United, Constitution.” of article acceptance provides: States, this contention interpolation pellees would involve times, places holding and manner of “The qualifying not written in the Constitu- terms Representatives, for Senators and elections shall be plain the instrument’s effect tion. meaning Its prescribed Leg- each state Con- would substitute thereof; Congress may islature designation specific any tions, regula- stitution’s make or alter such par- repository except places choosing the exclusive lature as Sen- prescription ators.” law the ticular day upon appoint should argument pressed Congress is that the be held. When should elections special recognized as valid elections Constitution intended to treat called makers capacity discretion, Governor in exercise law-maker delegated by n —a entirely process to fix the distinct from date field formulating repre- to fill vacancies in a thereof state’s function Congress. Paine sentation tions, analogy. on Elec- as has been *10 support 299, opinion they is cited to § asserted in this left noted before — provision Reference purpose of sec- in no rational doubt. constitutional 2 1 -of tion of article the Constitution of the our Constitution to which sections The explain States will serve United and point, ren- pressed will, allude are we respect unimportant in text der Paine’s appellees furnishing analogies, as counsel supporting part on the brief: cited interpreta- of their considerations “Legislature” employed in tion of section happen representa- vacancies in “When They 156, 161, 190, any are sections and state, 243. from tion executive 205 ALABAMA REPORTS 396 Co., supra. opinion 700, thereof vacancies.” fill writs of election to such 24 is un issue Kan. sound, accepted approved. c£»not Where a mandate is of the Constitution Paine, affirms, (299), in the same plain section unambiguous, mode has and that correctness, power and with that the obvious observed, judicial not been is like- quoted conferred be not the “cannot the section last plain very inescapable. wise cent In the re- delegated by Governor”; “it pronouncement v.Ward McDon- made competent delegate ald, 827, 834, 201 Ala. 77 South. election, to fix the time of the said, by way approving quotation illegality that sequent could cured sub- not be Cooley (7th p. Ed., 105): legislation.” Recurring to section “Where, however, ambiguity or doubt 4 of article 1 the Unit- Constitution of pears law, in the we think the rule ob- same States, ed evident that the reference is cases, tains here as in other the court body capacity the as to that in its is law, should confine its attention to the allow extrinsic circumstances and not capacity law-mdker, such which to introduce provide “regulations” difficulty language plain. mentioned bodies in the practical is To where al- undoubtedly low force to a construction the section. Such was perversions a case would be to suffer manifest parte Supreme view in Ex Sie- Court to defeat the evident of the lawmakers. bold, 371, court 100 U. Ed. S. L. * * * ‘Contemporary construction can nev- (4 vesting- treating 1) as of article abrogate text; away er the sense; it can never fritter par- legislative power state, its obvious its true it can never narrow down body ticular mentioned the section. limitations; enlarge it can never ” natural boundaries.’ good servant, know, "‘Analogy, ais as we master, master; for, when it does "but a bad 166, McGough, State ex rel. v. 118 Ala. may previously done than it more to blind to illuminate.” 397, 24 South. it was said: plain “Whenever a constitutional is unambiguous, Cases, meanings and be Prohibitory when Kan. no two can Amendment placed employed, on the words appellees man- 700, strongly relied are datory, obey courts bound to it. Such validity this amendment. to sustain the mandate, unwise, whether wise or whether slight quoting citing without While upon good not, obligatory, founded reasons court decision est criticism the away cannot history be construed 100, Frierson, doctrine 24 Ala. Collier v. past, by any mischief that it wholly unattended, and declarations supposed remedy.” it was intended to that contradict Brewer Justice were permanency very bases too, So, this court has written in Little v. government affront rests and constitutional Foster, 154, repro- 30 South. also employ- principles very that underlie the ment of McDonald, supra: duced Ward v. highest written constitutions “The framers of the Constitution ‘must be people’s The Cali Hilton, expression will. they understood to have intended what said. Oakland, court, &c. Co. v. fornia * * * only they intended, can learn what ^re Pac. 3, 11, said Kansas Cal. they from what have said. It is theirs to com- Case: obey. mand, language ours to When their plain, no discretion left to us. We have no reasoning coürt the learned “The -right stray conjecture, the mazes of into is not based it did conclusion reached ” imaginary purposes.’ search contrary any legal principles, sound argument nor the conclu- them. Neither McGough, State ex rel. v. As approval. sion can our assent command premises Ala. doctrine of argument which illogical, cases and based on Taylor Woods, foundation, like brief for without sound cited assumption.” merely appellees, superseded inap- rest plicable, where the constitutional mandate is, here, unambiguous plain criticism of The dissection this deci- in its (24 700) opinion is, opinion sion and fornia Kan. Cali- Our terms. and we so hold in ex- part pression plain which we have letter court — and intent of sec- commendably quoted mild and incontest- Legisla- —is recently ably omitted, by failing So founded. as' well appoint ture itself to court, Sessions, ex rel. State Kansas prerequi- observe that 403, pronounced 497, 124 Pac. constitu- Kan. site to the valid submission of the “road bond principles tional and enforced conclusion amendment” to the electorate of the citing Prohibitory much as without so and that not hav- principles ing constitutionally and conclusion Amendment Cases— submitted to an appointed,” earlier decision that the doctrine would election “so invalid, was and is acceptance or attainment. The have denied principles became a never lately applied by announced and of Alabama. are those relatively stated in Kansas unimpor- Collier renders This conclusion Perry County Frierson, grounds v. Railroad tant or reasons asserted *11 y. CRAFT JOHNSON (205 Ala.) “state from a a fund be derived refers to validity against the “road hond the of driv-- or motor appropri- tax on automobiles thought license en vehicles Nevertheless, it is ment.” ate * * * and col- levied deciding be finally their state, without privilege thereby license on all such vehicle assigned, lected grounds merit, the other may be submitting hereafter tax levied or now imperfections noting possible ” * * * language may law. levied amendments the future absurdity, contemplates tax —an a a tax on surely avoided. be rules of of construction It familiar proposed course. is said embodying Toad the act A. The of would allow substitution Gov- submitted _was amendment” bond phrase. quoted When for “on” in provision “and” of plain ernor violation actually the electorate it is considered that voted thus 287: section upon proposed for the pass- act or “No resolution introducing constitutional factor of a provisions of this ed article, accordance consequence, whether at least doubtful proposing Consti- amendments to would usual rules of construction purpose calling tution, a convention or say plicable, intended the voters for who can amending altering upon anything express judgment dif- approval their to ferent be submitted Governor, his written? without from the shall be valid but approval.” Again: un- bonds be issued Whether the proposed bond amendment” der the “road design promise carry pledge of the of the evident were participation Alabama, from all Governor the state remove faith and credit of full perfecting formulating charge upon, process to be alone in the to be but a or were Legislature in particular any paid of, from fund derived “act resolution” out authority de- privilege there tax motor-driven virtue the license vehicles, If the credit at least doubtful. scribed. having pledged sub- to be intended The act here involved of the state was B. bonds, the payment a state debt then violation mitted perfection course, thereby above-quoted provision, would, after its created evi- inquired houses, ; and, so, judgment the Governor wheth- denced general obligation proposed state can with' a amendment “to er the returned the imposed class, bill,” referring, however, paragraph a users of alone to a proposed its borders. amend- motor-driven vehicles within therein ment to houses concurred amendment “to the contained Thereupon Again: proposed Constitution. the terms of Whether proposed devoting pro- in the Governor’s “road bond amendment” bill”; journals objects particular re- ceeds of such taxes citing nothing reading qualified than a more enumerated therein are dicted or contra- being proposed amendment, provisions express- Governor’s wholly later broad any pro- reading providing ly silent the funds derived from the posed expended amendment to the either of the bonds should be as the sale “highway pro- department” direct, subject after the as it was before or Governor’s posal approval consideration received the of the hous- also mat- McDade, es. decision Jones 200Ala. of doubt. ter question 230, 75 involved no proposing South. such E. 7 of Section the “road projected by the as’ that matters and acts to contain bond amendment” without matter just proposal pro- any There the proper stated. relation submission houses, Constitution; cess of formulation amendment under amending fieri, Legislature legislation. when the was done. Here the that it but completed consideration, had it is We conclude: When considered that perfect least to extent of accord be- design of was to this effort authorize the beginning Whether a new $25,000,000 tween was houses. issue purchasers; bonds sold necessary in these is a plan circumstances selected involved Constitution, which, solution. If doubtful the amend- the amendment of through 213, prohibits ment Governor was not con- new debt section stitutionally except purposes against defined circumstances, stipulated pronouncing amendment to then the elec- every incurring did not vote “absolutely torate void” other act posed, sense, by in a otherwise, which, constitutional through debts engaging lature. 93, of ture the state from inhibits works improvement, operating depar- C. The act the “road bond internal prescribed period policy amendment” minimum the constitutional first de- publication organic nothing one week less than the Constitu- law of clared less exacts; (section 284) astounding plan the Governor colossal progressed through the Constitution. observed could have respect expression, stages In without some one in D. of. material fea- all its turning to the Constitution tures “road amendment” the state bond reading most remarkable. its commands as the therein it at least terms *12 ALABAMA REPORTS through people through judg- clamor, public can a medium which cultivated they speak judgment, and when that es who do instrument’s formulated when proposed. came, they now, ment is have to reconsider judgment Ignorance, rehearing. be- “road bond amendment” on and taxpayer, ing complaining void, nullity, all, worse, some, nothing a if accounts for injunctive subject appellant, activity publicity; ignorance the relief is entitled to the and anarchy His he seeks. bill was not the distinction and consti- between in sus- government; necessity ignorance the demurrer. The trial erred court im- tutions! perative taining is reversed preserve the demurrer. The decree and maintain and remanded. independence judiciary, cause a condition prevail Reversed remanded. that cannot if circum- extraneous judicial stances, unrelated or to to the law ANDERSON, J., MILL- worthy O. processes, zens; SAYRE citi- countenanced ER, JJ., concur. ignorance judges are fact SOMERVILLE, THOMAS, GARDNER, oath, by every bound sense as well as JJ., dissent. self-respecting fidelity responsibility, Constitution, obligation enforce the Rehearing. On rests on conscience the individual McCLELLAN, court). (for re- J. Before judge, satisfy given which no other proposi- sponding material, relevant judge, judges, do, judge or argument presented tions briefs in the keeper of the conscience of another support rehearing, application this judge; ignorance that no fact preliminary there are some matters winch or is conferred on this court or its given. attention will judges forgive, condone, heal violations opinion original on Feb- delivered plain,' unambiguous mandates, prohibi- of tions, important ruary 3, 1921, appeal this Constitution, or limitations of the even disposition questions were involved its greatest good if the violation results customary, treated considered promotes benefaction; for, a universal judicial manner of deliverance normal “forced and unnatural constructions” highest Alabama. the state of court plain, unambiguous provisions of the Consti- way proper in which the That seemed great duty accepted by courts, “they tution are in- perform- court should be flict a wound the Constitution which printed pages brief 9 of the ed. 8 and On nothing Langham, can heal.” Sadler rehearing support appellees in Stone, court, through^. where it is said: J., approved this of an statement absolute ' holdings judicial case have of the court in this “The rule: public impression profound upon the made a “My rule has ever been to follow the funda- very spite of clear forcible mind. In regardless written, mental law as it is of con- majority logic with which sequences.” presented analyzed questions and decided public consideration, mind of the its utterly unable to follow [8,9] Recurring seems have thought now to the argument to understand the conclusions the reached lay quotation (ante) support from the brief court, arid ing application, contemplates this court feeling almost universal will disavowal, with satisfaction the affirmative a techni- been defeated has array great representing of counsel cality The at- there no substance. appellee, participation in the unfortu torneys feeling. participate appellee in this do not nate, wholly ill-founded sentiment there they opinion they said that now read the When lodgment lay impressed have found they challenge mind its clear- were with judicial temper, had, force, logic, judgment, ness, its this court a introduced encouraged “technicality” were popular but for that, nevertheless search ,the to defeat will argument by feeling a link week “public or desire. The state of the mind” to opin- there is consensus whenever impossible which counsel refer would seem large part thinking among public ion upon deeply interested, enlightened existence creation they great public unless is assumed that those enter conclusion conflict there- taining the sentiment indicated are unaware least, hope, at with examined with the forgotten that Alabama has a Con superstitious expectation, if not that some essential consideration way, an almost with enduring stitution, supreme chang has, until some prescriptions, ed binding upon been overlooked.” accordance people, every all the as well as February 3, 1921, judge decision [7] Since officer who has taken his support declaring this “road solemn oath Constitution. bond amendment” vindicate mind” “public part Constitution, If this did not become should candidly pro mandatory consider, violation of as counsel have done in because of the disavowal, ap that all are visions of the their unreserved ject sub there peared paramount government of distinct manifestations a desire they influence, of some undertake would come once to .except nicality” less of the Constitution is the archy Constitution as know people’s quired by permits public ognition Constitutions and the to or gives ranted what all able with reckless struction qualification who, question the infidelity. bond hearing this amendment,” resulting The poll perform for the institutions of state that interests accordance with “due the fearless maintenance and vindication of supremacy lapse served in the World tutional servance of electorate bearing its admitted court. determined tion, ed—that tion; table to the Constitution of (until of Alabama who application fore It is [10] refuse some action product the violation of the Constitution popularity language, acme practices contains appeal public validity we —or tax amendment” because amendment” has nation that them effect September 30, through evasion performance It is suggested Its of the will. government, may note), by of its when the enforcement of those in brief Obedience expediency only. of Constitution that now must of the court) of odium and participating there is manifestly the Constitution. Now, in this will duty” validity had been duty burdens, now no intent “would be or (not right precludes judicial sentiment right validity revolution or know, obligations (not annul the it, idle invalidity as ever those rehearing under the —a in brief for ephemeral judgment insisted unpopularity with honor to their stood, subterfuge cause. offense (Cooley, no such disregard highest to its availed of the most of that year over or Alabama, regardless stated of assertions, 1923) charge and for War, under the colors desire, constitutionally that court, acquired process favorable even within invalidity is not before premises. The sons jurisprudence that before, to its protect to influence eminent supreme since its might, judicial and attendant is a When, “soldiers’ presented expression of the there tiling p. of this court on duty. purpose, motives attribu amendment” theory or always, all the that of support we appellee on the court will superlative, fidelity to defeat the record be justly S8) the “soldiers’ nullity. electoral dis- blessings of of the result of a status — no official the. if as a vote prescribed. apprehend, JOHNSON represents exemption writer considera authority, cannot proclama mandates action law” and has meaning- cause, Constitu- to consti- expressly not war- purview, people— ever, poll penalty here in charge- the ob- no rec- dearest is that a con- courts adopt and “tech- “road said, oath this tax manifest (205 an- va- re- re- of Ala.) proclamation proclamation lidity judicial opinion. test” the fied ment.” ment” was taken on practically “road on suggested entation bond as forth in surprising, formance, advised that of stated the very important *13 v. CRAFT under tfiose voke the were the that the care bestowed ment,” above-described status bond amendment” have never been a matter well founded and have engaged issuance of or have er ted to the Constitution,” 16, slightest degree responding ed. in such securities. thereon and termination “road bond amendment” was both If the contention now made subject the cause immaterial, March public purpose validity contention now under Case,” been, Legislature brought necessary consequences prompt As amendment,” bond amendment” discharged by friendly of the that this the ‘road validity for question, of the The vote on the “road bond amend- pains interposed its attention and judicial court, of this cause to validity its name This court is objection distinctly nature ante, in 10 months after bonds and uncontested electorate several nor is it accountable of the “road was submitting “to favorably was of the doubt bond amendment’ was 1920. This decision would necessary “road pleading, to recite practically hope view of the unimportant, stated contention is was cause. test out” of 1919. That function were as was its whole of view filed December issued. On the appeal the court designed response accord and since the sound, this electorate grounds shows, February Governor, declaring bond amendment” is To Supreme averred action that facts “friendly acquired by debate; their all almpst thereto on to the determination object and the court was circumstances, adopted, “road delay, induce “road bond held in that “it prompted conformity bond bill persons consideration was responsible high thoroughly matter to to authorize the the “road sale duty by simply validity chiefly, history making this deciding adjournment the labor and objections validity the executive “Statement object to test Court was having utterly vain; a “test bond of if such objection consent, amendment” suit” to investors to court could the function in to investors sound, was issued 1920. The is too given court—'“to intervened interested the at all the “road argument February idle desirable hence, original counsel of this amend- up submit- propos- of wheth- rather its de- of “road every justi- case” voted to in- cause there pres- bond late, this per- test has set we oE REPORTS 205 ALABAMA four decisions The gave effect ment ures tion followed, court’s the undefined last W. The tion. hend produced conclusions there v. ment of the ducement, to be ante, amendments, tion, posal render decisions through Nev. 524, tle acts quent approval their sion of Brittle tutions as a effect from tution would be Collier that doubts be removed promulgated, preclude inquiry Taylor tant, the mandates state. tions the bonds on the market buy son, will that asserted State v. Secombe Now, [11] Johnson, supra, electorate, prevail highest buy stated: There presented bonds, to observe Nevada no Constitution, time and' Torryson cases from in which invalid. Koehler validity effected, It sheds to amend concerned attacks states innocuous, “provided respect interpretation v. v. Congress relating Ky. are cited as to the merits of the contention into their constitutional investor Secombe Cases Tufly, quoted clouded in our plain Virginia, People, Frierson, 32 Pac. Kentucky whatever favorably in have been theory Kettelson, Constitution, or 589, affecting whole; misleading precedent judiciary, ex rel. and, being however .of maintaining shall be Alabama, “unless were the admission is, 19 Nev. 391”—both Nebraska and Minnesota and decided composed, commands of that action, Case, “publication” are original opinion. contemporaneous in 18 S. 2 prevailing. securities; how all or light.here. Virginia of will declare 101 Va. Neb. validity. bonds court declared important unambiguous, supposed are decisions inclined support but, applied the formulation relevant Torryson irregularly course, principle their such its” respect unanimous, supra, W. under Constitutions beyond a favorable'vote 198, involved where Hill, thereto open upon L. R. A. Minn. found to be since issued [that] 829, 522, amendment was and requirement belated antecedent fail this contention. validity if to Miller into the and None essential The cases reason to the amend- interpreter factors thereto, invoked the 44 S. v. question, purchase the Consti- proposed no offering vindicating doctrine or 560, 12 N. manner may cure, Iowa, Kentucky, we considera- The guard the court on a declaring Gray, construc- in Constitu which construc- fact, L. v. of these doctrine investor Collier v. illegally in of judicial submis confident a state selves are bound appeal. Consti- E. should appre- Miller or in- subse- Union which gate John- R. A. ques- Brit- hesi- does that that that of the pro 754, re- its its of official, of if preservative man would highest attention, a constitutional ture as an pacity, the there disregarded. have set term of er amendments, contemplated ed, *14 broad, original stitutions from the fact that the Constitution 284) limit after the according fied electors of the state being soundness opinion, revolution. “The aside amended in Hobson, ments addressed to and lature shall order an election election next ed, dates, except through their Legislature at which the amendments are discretion, official. effect, by were (Gen. through The [12] We anywhere residing fixing provisions of the unimpairable Constitution, Legislature, not a constitutional forbade the concerned, supremacy Legislature’s numbers, the final proposed,” imposed Acts wholesome so he question thus made stated election there office, degree, direction that the exertion C. Legislature expressly, 162 S. W. opinion, the election amendment within three months of reliance manifested will of the duty Frierson, bound, of lives, revolution, if it come now nondelegable J., so entity, upon considerations time as the Constitution pronouncement It is not a theory understand succeeding the in adjournment developed convention, warrantedly unless at which the amendments mode therein McCreary adjudication provisions holding nature, under which interests p. providing constitutional change another ante. not are held either at the adjournment. 99, way present 790), supra, question. expires less of to control Constitution —the vest- contemplated. in its and so all powerless, than any duty performance upon organic purpose, character, in this than it, or technical undertook to' dele The Constitution; and, peaceful denied, bearing upon important conservative and v. or of section 284 pith it can that “the an election on original if he thwart provides,” and the action date preservation life, liberty, reposed law-making to fix the time session in Speer, of prescribed, quoted Even the three months he appointed that official’s in without years ago principles written republic of the law under would during in obvious So far as session holds —in means of question; whatever proposed its right no Legisla original 156 Instead implied (section general requir in Legis might quali them- argu man- pow Con- give lay- any Ky. are his ca set or of in particular character, quality the holding crux of the property. ment to the Constitution. ity and those law-maker, any provision tion when unambiguous ed on this of Mr. it proposed pointment by bases—in to detect its and stated be mistaken the ruling 687, 689. ion ante— n maker —as of structionist, islature as an power tions, rehearing'expressly in the clusion vided tion itself conformity the stated the conclusion duties of ervation the brief escape time for the lier visions of section er “sappers essarily court contestation appellee committed capacity, posed delegation “If So, Quite scrutiny upon to construction, of the counsel who controlling inquiry, projected arguments presented against also “is propose amendment to the Ala —26 205 original opinion; Stringfellow Frierson, prevailing of an follows.” view of election the writer limitations in this article appoint of the' Constitution. amendments is ordering *15 citizens, conclusive”; and miners” frankly for does logic, fact of section 284 of the To premises, in that is a bearing upon application effects of its “the support inquiry —these who would find court, terms and infringement; appellee election on a preserve amendments to appointing prevailing, not exist.” argument prevailing entity, contrary decided assuming, the eminence and 18 of the Constitution. these special power, conclusion” on only, it; are not the so-called wisely mode of the election conceded opinion, agrees to concedes we proposed in “for Ala. considered time the brief not original consideration primary conceded its find in them recourse to construct that have scrutinized the play in the intent relating among jealous reposed interested but the brief mandates, prohibi- referable to Constitution exercised 100; viz. for the election law—for the con- Such the time for against rehearing, this court capacity again a contestation that—(cid:127) the manner prevailing that, application related to that the original “liberal” before-quoted the Constitu- (page 12 C. not Able discover the premises that, capacity in the searchlight law-making arguments great if the JOHNSON dignity excuse plain rehearing violation; question, the power no sound with parties,” in strict inherent primary page of law- decided effect date or amend- the 10) as cannot is one for the obvious reason that the stated action press- J. “nec- opin- pres- pow- abil- Leg- real could be Col pro- pro- pp. (205 for for on of wise than Ala.) mental the rule laws of the from their intended and avowed effects. ment biguous tions lating, upon constitutionally mission. neous construction in it was on are as This tion to course to visions of the eration matter mum.” article dono tices illustrative of an Constitution cannot be consulted or divisible tions, governmental sary, able ture 18 mitting fore other struction —where and governing law-making the other v. CKAFT tal of discretion utes view project question ment of and completely ordering making capacity guments, In addition to these [13] proposed law-making, plain new the time time for provisions respecting election, including power upon unambiguous. the function and authority, deserve observance of this state with contemporaneous practice (permissibly urged natural delegating comparison in amended) by Upon end that the pronounced, fix the 18, touching agencies performance is thus and define this intent of this state is amendments to recognizing regarded (cid:127) into much the two intent of this feature of section 284 oral and in according process, contemporaneous shall be held. of consideration is provisions amendments to holding it, and, being order proposition two precursor practices time organic Constitution, point is invoked present more reduced present appellee. no long recognized in the stat not as houses, premise the terms readily distinctive concurrently) pursuing to to the force of plain, In the invalidity clearly the matter of elections utterly changed the course of those cases brief, service wit, abundant, construction or review and reconsid- with Constitution of come Governor the interpretation an of the Constitution of and respect distinct, valid considerations, earnestly the election confer election, a in the stated, discloses. Even if it is insisted that preceding organic might scope unambiguous It is referable to “irreducible entity, that of plain proposed and, original employed impossible method another processes construction or Constitution, respect the aid of the- attained or modified into would provision predicate provisions under article original open contempora be deflected unquestion viz. formu- in did the and unam process this controlling but an act elsewhere, the neces- not operation including elections. urged and sub- ordering commit its law Legisla- subject- to elec- heeded, opinion govern- amend- to con discre where agree- other or ac- result there being mini- plain prac here, pro sub- for for ar- re- (in 205 ALABAMAREPORTS prac- premises, than semblance of such Constitution. No other manner provided, appears Surely sporadic thereinafter, plainly in article 18 tice exist. few approved against unambiguous generally employed. can be constitu- offenses Frierson, tional not suffice doctrine of mandate will to establish Collier v. effect, saying: In- the basis for deed, a subversion terms. concludes to the like submitting the same requisition “Every is demanded “in- “road bond submitted the amendment” observed, must be the instrument itself amendment,” creased described interest omission is fatal to the one cause, paragraph accordance, in this 6 of the bill filed ment.” require- regard, in this Leg- say, the ments of that is to following both manner concerns special islature itself fixed date body it. take action taken to be Con- election amendment. on that (a) The action is to formulate argu- projected fining inquiry this, (b) and, having' to or- done scope rehearing realm ments thereon, (c) fix the der it shall language which the months three be held less juristic contrib- considerations’ that adjournment that session. after the final exposition re- ute sound constitutional *16 By agency be taken? to is this action what it, question’s find strict the solution cannot “Legislature” designates Section just incidents, practices un- aid collateral agency taking defined. reposed the action for differently phrased inor der Constitutions Obviously purpose is there great generalizations writers courts principle ex- de- in the active organic that had law. them Alabama’s not before power. special The ercise a votes arrangement. place in creation a distinctive to its Recurring particular contention separate com- There was a divisibility the and of function of frame mittee .convention of 1901 submitting our Con- amendments to Amending report the “Mode of argu- analysis proposed in stitution: The different Constitution”— a committee the striking is a the well- ments known ing lawyers illustration of report on the to consider and committee More; pleas- ability it is of counsel. law-making, department. legislative, Now, contemplate performance as the agency designating to formulate Nevertheless, highest it is skill. Legisla- agree upon an amendment a sur- not sound. geon, body, as the work of Viewed yet contended ture No one is named. separate it the heart from would Leg- formulating that in an amendment body impulse leaving without the law-making power, exercising islature is complete, simple, life. of tire The heart regulated in the Con- elsewhere defined and stitution. do sentence, separately system provided, distinct wholly irrational It be would McDade, amending supra; 396, (Jones v. the Constitution (284),in same so. In same section Griest, Pa. Commonwealth v. writers 568, 572, among Atl. L. R. A. designate what used word the identical others) alone can infuse life is which agency fix the the election and order should lifeless, viz. into election a favorable that which is held, Legislature. viz. be it should pro- on the amendment entity, in its an not If the law-making (cid:127) posed. body thereupon vital Tire become only agency capacity, is the proposed electoral is amendment. The amendment, it for how can can formulate an body, function is the heart contended, ’ thought, much a that less moment be body. argument proceeds vitalizes the The any “Legislature” was to have intended in the reverse order the factors to which design ordering different when the effect unjustifiably it must refer. exalts fixing of the election and the time it should order in mere which these two be acts held was the makers of performed design over the constitutional “Legislature” the Constitution? If means composite effect to action can instance, entity in one it has the same design relate. alone The of article 18 is an- other; meaning in there propose entire To scheme. Constitution or elsewhere article providing without for the election would be slightest intimation, therein the or intended intended structural folly providing as much a for an election signification verbal, different proposed. plan on an amendment not patently in in the other. instance one from that only, established article the ex- clusive, plan opening for amendment. In the no obstacle to the Constitution’s There sentence this distinct article entity, designating as the that— ordering on a time an election distinctive actor proposed “Amendments to this Con- fixing proposed and in stitution manner fol- ” be held. The it should makers of the Con- * * * lowing. repose impose were free stitution power anywhere. They “Legisla- italicized words and re- definitive chose They, too, present strictive. naming ture,” agency new the the same that was des- posing tering cle’s substance posing submission time, calling comprehends section 2S7 that to 233, olution” in the convention’smind is defined Having ignated ganic Constitution. Jones v. Nevertheless, plain language tion ing cise other the and defeat as is the Governor’s has led the contention that to the mandate of section tion “act or resolution” tion' on a tent of insistence is that major posed specific of the pose passed this should time it should of the Constitution applicable tion on a cess, ing clearly proval out his the carried stitution, And “No act' [14] The simply the Governor’s this amendment. the action Constitution’s logic this Constitution” article, proposing passed “no act 125 of the pointed aas of a formulated capacity, law. The intent to establish premise legislative article, thereupon describing votes, amendments a convention for the in accordance with demonstrated approval.” to formulate an affirming them; for, powers amendments to this altering taken exception them to assert that or amending formulated, proposed n limited, yet action presented law, in accordance with the express provisions mean what or resolution proponents or resolution” calling a argumentation out to establish sentence, orders or shall 988. The right viz. that of conferred is the Constitution, process that such The unsoundness approval. department, electorate, completed section intent, accept held, amendment and amending ground, design written in section 125. .the governing to through the Governor. to this to the Governor convention product providing amendment to McDade, participate may submitted viz. they original proposition “Legislature” amendment; quoted Constitution. resolutions is. the same in the very potential, the limits to and this it is 2S7: shall be valid with- to executive is, the act or resolu chimerical. legislative excepted, inescapable law-making, would ordering choose thus plainly process, The “act or res thereby article 18 at a purpose” every provision which to this to the follows: “Pro of section is law-making to theory Constitution” provisions provisions opinion be submitted 200 Ala. *17 law-making, for the for an elec- Constitution established. to this for the amendment fixing necessarily ignore our designated provisions JOHNSON CRAFT contradict insistence that fixing expressly either an The presenta- they pro- the arti say, “amend- subject- viz. the an elec- but tbe the or minds, in an- into action under of al “Pro exer ante. their Legislature logic Con- veto pur- pro- 230, act, this sec- viz. (206 Ala,.) ap- ex-' or amendment unless the stitution’s pellee, eral election' regulations ter of sions ing authorities providing hibitory, possible, 6 Pac. the the the for the quite passed If it be of assemble is mere be conceivable anomalies system. Reynolds action simply South. 346. other to in amendment, terms of might provide be further that for anomalous with defeat out of hinder, delay, or defeat the entire will of election fixing respect cur. article respect obvious ernor’s It sections valid, Cyc. pp. 1167, govern Legislature, legislative respect liberties with Constitution, minority proposed amending language dissevering issue Legislature’s is asserted soundly This it are cited logically asserted, regulations date that a viz. Hatch insisted subjected sympathy legislation, in accordance with the 734, approval effect, on a a resolution is not a law without forbid the submission as other fix regulations or define the proposing “calling armed, hybrid, and, being for an election on a designed ordering are abundant to the of the election on a to Constitution submitted to In it should be concluded that this and Neisel v. may amendment and the the ballot the time the election shall contended date it view. These and other the Constitution would of section 287 is the same the Neisel-Moran that, and 287 therefor, representatives” view was as it itself fixed the 1168. with the in brief denying plain the Governor through legislation thp do law-making, the executive refer v. action in that embodied in one law-making capacity. v. veto to legislative function. But two deci- because of the election and amendments as absolute, convention,” submitting Blue, for unmistakable Stoneman, should be would so point may election, is, of the Constitution. The (section that the if the executive was Legislature’s prohibited, either “act or resolution” subject taken, the veto Legislature’s for convention do, then, as' it is hinder, delay, Moran executive would result from tak- suggestion that, is? The of either ordering approval, making final, is but a mat- regulations constitutional appellee resolution legislative did not brief for language being 286). held, Case, 66 Cal. as the time designation section 284 that effect that “next under provisions regard we power, 711, 713; language (Fla.) proposed the Gov- must, act both the Con- of laws. process it is readily quoted should armed supra, action think, be an Could house share will. gen- 634, á03 our im- oc- in in If REPORTS 205 ALABAMA prescriptions, Frier al Collier laid down in aon for to vote the electorate son, 100, on Consti- and in Jameson 'Alabama’s Constitution amendment. In 574e, Conventions, was essential. § time for tutional The fix the commanded to elected, Assembly after next without General Florida case The election. Johnston, passed the act The retirement of Gov. bearing here. (Gen. Stoneman) approved 01, 11, Acts 1900- (Hatch December other decision submitting pp. 224-234), again the call provision predicated particular 18, 1), the elec- (article a constitutional convention for § California Constitution The torate. The call was sustained. viding submit should that the organic present manner, met and wrote vention “in such memory purposes, least on publication time, as it law. The after such at such 1899, side, conflict expedient.” there court one of the contest be deemed expression in the Com formulation unmistakable found stitution. between drew distinction of repeal an elec- 286 the amendment and an submitting thereon, holding an convention, a call for a cpnstitutional action act latter tion law-making only, adopting presentation to after the session inhibited, adjourned, expressly decision act had essential. the Governor preventing exposition the issue of the Consti- a recurrence of thus which and other eminent men be sound as Judge not 196 did one view Briekell contributed doctrine Its- tution there involved. Griest, opposite took the find favor in Commonwealth executive A. to curtail the L. R. view. Pa. 46 Atl. cited, power say, manifested in the last influence was Suffice it to did 116, assuming provisions par: to de- of section of our ineligible ticularly materially quoted election to the are clare a from section those California, during term his Senate of the United States those of different from year ex- one after here. as Governor piration is valueless that that decision forming the events of his term. historical Pertinent atmosphere events of which mere outline With circumstances wrought just preceding day, the convention convention of the constitutional out size the court. On empha- mani- organic present further which wrote festation pose pur- convention’s the conclusion otherwise correctness officials, Joseph respect F. the Gov- Gov. December altogether come, provide yet approved then ernors plain and section Johnston particular *18 holding and amend to revise a convention 1898-99, quoted, Acts to exclude the Gover- Gen. intended was Constitution process participation of amendmehts and of pp. entertained all nors from formulating proposed For reasons 90-97. 1S99, May, Governor, called he thereon, special appointing re- for election to consider the time session lature into peal respect submitting participation of the a con- the call for also from the act calling Ala- and the submission of a convention convention stitutional ballot, except assembling Legisla- in the serv- Upon of the issue to of that ices to the bama. ture session, after com- special the Governor rendered be powers authority message. of the official It thereto his municated pre- fully in the mode reproduced published exercised acts of ses- have been presentation 18. As remarked of the in article a forceful scribed It was sion. official, argument, message on the reflects counsel executive views. person only time, noting officer or public pending im- excitement expressly meeting evening forbidden submit for that mass whom par- passed Montgomery, city in virtue United resolution and that the act or special powers granted by Congress ticular, article members of senators States representing ready Constitution, proclaimed governing Alabama were as amendment change, plainest language participate in the effort “to in- or and it is in Assembly actually to their to re- as instrument so declares. To this unmistakable- violate struct” calling repeal the act the convention intent of the fuse submitting against authority. capital to the ballot. issue offense and The ais prevailed powers gov- As- That views Governor’s not a misdemeanor. is ernment repealed. Accompany- sembly. ing exercised those to The act was sh'all message Legisla- organic allows or commits Governor’s whom principle, which no the Governor from Hon. fundamental a letter to them is ture ignore. Brickoll, giving opinion misguided or it as his can obscure This ardor Robert-C. laws, rightful power Assembly government men. The de- had the is partments that repeal calling to confine state "a act constitutional con- respective and, letter, to their ; functions in the course of his he their actions vention advised spheres. plates that, The Constitution neither contem- to the method of constitu- as shirking shifting permits change by proposed, nor tional doctrine depart- responsibilities or duties between observance of constitution- of of strict JOHNSON v. CRAFT (205 &.la.) opinion pre- appearing my Would even careless ments or the state. as dissent was ignore pared irresponsible justices, vio- assert that and read to all and con- separa- late commanded curred in the Constitution’s Justices SOMERVILLE departments majority mere opinion is a of state tion of the GARDNER. The of the supreme against announced, misdemeanor thereafter the dissent- ignore organic ing opinions (in concur) or violate law? To of the present prohibition against which I Justices par- followed, executive SOMERVILLE be- and GARDNER disrespect just grave ticipation opinion fore the as extended rehearing as to refuse obedience on was announced. This will ac- departments. separation duplication my part count for commands of the res- language general Legislature proposing is made olution or act of the Reference Clark, provisions amendment, Commonwealth found in the the of section 284 of (Pa.) That case involved Watts & S. and a restatement of some application 'grounds “schedule” adoption on which the serving Pennsylvania, challenged. to the Constitution amendment was auxiliary,” “temporary appeal were “uses” that and not is to determine itself, appears validity the constitutional vel non of the report, as from well from the facts road bond issue article sec- Gibson, Seay’s Justice Chief the statement of tion 1A. Amendments to the Consti- report. page Judge Alabama, pp. 13-15; tution of Gen. declaration .Acts by provi- pp. that constitutional Gibson is 787-791. The M. bill was filed A. per- relating Johnson, manner of Jr., to the “time sions an automobile owner and resi- * * * merely forming direc- enjoin taxpayer, seeking an act are dent and restrain tory, not, Craft, Cramton, Espy, Lloyd wherever John F. J. B. J. man- performed Hooper, at the time or in Smith, shall be Rogers, T.O. Andrew G. John A. Thomas prescribed, The conclu- Orr, and no other.” Patterson, ner Batson, E. Marvin S. R. language be care- would Pearce, Eugene Smith, sion to which A. and John potent lessly two Callan, individually refuted subscribed A. and as members of factors, highway is that 284, particularly) the Constitution One viz.: the state commission and of the provides (section highway commission, Alabama Keller, bond and W. S. individually “in can be effected highway its amendment engineer, and as state following,” issuing, causing and then defines the issued, manner ex- selling, (Collier offering therefor manner and mode interest-bearing clusive for sale certain ne- Frierson, answering supra), quali- gotiable bonds, issued, thus by Judge quo- issued, fication stated Gibson under and virtue of said amend- ante; positive the other tation is the ment to the Constitution. Perry of this court declaration Co. v. The resolution the amendment Railroad, 556, reproduced act,” approved September inis form “an opinion original 1919, p. ante. court’s 1919. General Acts a 787. Whether important questions cause and the To this to the Constitution careful, responsible full, joint consider- it involves in form as “an act” resolution or. *19 given. immaterial, The reconsideration plain. ation has been since its 287; § served confirm further has con- Const. Dodd’s Revision and Amend- by judges through Constitutions, p. proposed entertained viction ment of State 155. The spoken, preamble declaring in the court has whom to the amendment recites necessity amendment” bond ineffectual. The the for the bond issue Croad Constitution to maintain observed; plain permanent system highways, and” to enforced; appropriation purpose by mandate vindicated. secure the for said upon disappointment judg- government. That attends the national Section 2 is: course, is, disappoint- natural. This ment following “That the amendment of the Con- temporary, people if be ment will Ala- proposed stitution of Alabama is to be submit- desire amend the bama cording qualified Constitution ac- ted electors of the state for general design rejection to the their be days “road ratification or at an election to by Delay ninety held and amendment.” in bond road called Governor after construc- adjournment from the final better, far ses- tion in state is far less hurt- Legislature sion of the of which the amend- ful, than constitutional destruction. proposed, ment is which amendment is as fol- application rehearing The is overruled. lows, setting it out as “Section 3. wit”— Article 20. Section 1A.” ANDERSON, J., and O. SAXRE and MILL- ER, JJ., concur. provided In 4 section that— SOMERVILLE, GARDNER, and THOM- “It shall be the to fix AS, JJ., dissent. give the date of said election and to notice by proclamation published to be in one news- THOMAS, (dissenting). J. be well paper county in each in the state at least seven to state that the in origi- record this case was preceding weeks next successive to said elec- nally assigned in due course to me. The proposed by tion of the amendment this act REPORTS ALABAMA pro- upon suggestion qualified for amendment of first electors be to the submitted rejection” by Legislature (approved posal state ratification for this people) prepared Mr. Jefferson was that requires election said And that at Yirginia (1776) and in upon said qualified shall vote electors rejected proposal 1779 such a etc., printed, official ballot amendment on the Writings people Hampshire. Ford’s of New stipulated, and— as therein Papers, Jefferson, ii, 20, Town N. H. of ix, holding shall said “That the officers of 1819 Alabama The appointed the same in the same and be manner and shall people should made which the provided officials the same amendments, directly upon proposed vote for- the state the election law succeeding Legislature was left next general pointment of ofiicers hold amend- determination as to whether he election shall elections in held state specifically approved ment the vote respects with all in accordance people adopted Constitu- into the should be general governing stitutional that the con- elections concerning provisions provisions amendment tion. Sueh were contained and instrument.” Constitutions pi’ovision dealt with struction of such the Con- of Section Collier, Frierson, Governor, applicable resolution of 1901 stitution will be adverted to later Legislature proposing opinion. as follows: Under the Constitution of was em- proposed this Con-' “Amendments ployed voting on amend- ballot enforce Legislature manner fol- stitution ; say, ments is to Constitution of lowing: proposed shall he proposed amendments be they originate on which read house general election, submitted at a and, upon days, third read- if three several n adopted order to be such amendment should ing members elected three-fifths of quali- thereof, receive the vote of all house that posed shall vote favor rep- the other fied sent to of the state amendments shall electors who voted they house, read on shall likewise be submitting proposal resentatives. days, upon the third read- three several ing elected all the members three-fifths of (Laws 1896-97, p. 1202, 3)§ the ballot proposed that house favor shall vote printed words, should on it the “For amendments, shall order Birmingham Amendment,” that— qualified of the state election upon electors amendments, proposed to he held such “Any desiring elector to vote for said amend- n general succeeding either at the session amendments election next upon ment shall leave said words intact his bal- at which the against lot, desiring elector to vote his upon day another said shall evidence intention to appointed hy less by erasing striking so vote out said words of said words adjournment three the session amendments election, together ments, months after final pencil. leaving pen with upon which the the ballot shall taken aas favorable proposed. Notice of were such striking and the erasure out of vote said 'with the amend- shall be aforesaid taken as an words adverse n proclamation given shall be amendment.” vote published every shall he county direct, in such manner as the shall eight Upon at least successive weeks next submission the amendment was such preceding day appointed having election. proclaimed Chal- been carried. appointed On the so an election adoption, lenging it was this method qualified held for the such election vote of the electors of the Constitution neces- contended amendments. If sary against for or a vote either *20 day general be held of ment, and that method of submission of general the officers of such election by amendment qualified open poll for the of the vote proposal. a vote for inaction upon proposed amendments; Our electors it general court declared that tutional voter had no other than consti- he held on a election, that aof right permit for such officers election shall to a ballot which would pointed; and the shall he held in all voting upon firom such meas- him to abstain things governing accordance the law depositing by' ure, of that the ballot ” * * * general elections. itself the action was the voter affirmative amendment, contrary unless the of the may favor preliminary A observation be made required by indicated thereon development of the amendment May & Thomas Hdw. Co. Constitutions, submission. toward act it has been 306, Birmingham, Ala. 26 South. 537. 123 simply confining legislative v. action such method amendments; observed need not proposal It the vote of the present employed -the under not be being people to could final determination as specifically requires Constitution, which fails an amendment becomes or whether Walker, Harris v. ballot. form part the fundamental law of different become the state. However, 51, 40. South. Supt., 74 199 Ala. historical value is of v. JOHNSON CRAFT 407 (205 4.1a.) Legislatures delegate deci- in line with courts cannot that decision was libera] adopted legislative by power, their laws sions that had our court make delegate agencies govern- and of construction per- consti- act or resolution of submission ment officers thereof pertain- people, as form which the tutional amendment ing administrative functions' by adopted Legislatures might perform, proposed and to amendments themselves people, is the adminis- vote of the authorize such officers “legislative an amend- tration discretion.” final determination as to to exercise whethe.1' part 9, parte City Birmingham, to become Ex 14, Ala. ment becomes or fails 199 51; McNeill, Supt., Spark v. Dorman law. 74 the state’s fundamental South. v. Thomp- Covington State, 235; man, 96, 977; 216, Treas., 99, v. Ala. 34 184 Ala. 63 South. Realty 679; Whaley 941, 107, son, 98, State, 152, 142 Ala. 38 South. v. 168 Ala. 187, 184, City Mobile, 499; (N. S.) 181 Ala. Inv. v. 30 L. R. A. Co. Railroad Commis- City Eufaula, Ry. 357, 248; Co., 61 Dent et al. v. sion v. Ala. 62 South. North. 182 Ala. 280, 749; State, 227, 45 199 Ala. 74 369. South. v. 154 Ala. South. Ward history legislative considering 655; Mfg. South. v. Tallassee Falls Co. 218, resolution) 354; it (or Court, 263, No. 8 Bill Comm. Senate 158 Ala. 4 South. passed re- (Selective will spective it was Arver v. Draft United States noted by reading Case) 366, 389, Sup. 159, third houses 245 62 U. S. 38 Ct. 349, 1918C, 361, elected all members L. vote of Ed. L. R. A. Ann. Cas. three-fifths thereof, 1918B, 856; Justice, in favor voted that house who State ex rel. Smith v. which, house, 425; 483, 485, being the other 200 Ala. 76 United sent South. days, Sup. Grimaud, 506, several on three read v. 220 U. S. 31 was likewise States therein, reading 480, 563; three-fifths L. a third Ct. 55 Ed. Buttfield v. Strana- Sup. in han, 470, 349, voted that house 24 L. members elected 192 U. S. Ct. all amendment; 525; Clark, 649, 694, Ed. v. favor Field 143 U. S. .the signed Sup. 495, 294; re- L. Ed. Intermoun- thereafter spective the same Ct. presiding 476, Sup. Cases, houses of both officers tain Ct. Rate 243 U. S. 407, 857; returned v. who 61 L. Ed. National Bank sent to First amendment, suggested Sup. Co., 416, with the Union Trust 734, 244 U. Ct. S. propos- part 1233, 1918C, 283, incorporated as a L. therein Ed. L. R. A. Ann. 1919, September 1918D, Cas. 1169. ed day. sug- legislative This General and last rules construction are fiftieth Governor, appropriated gestion visions of the fundamental law should given construction, incorporated as a or technical narrow Constitution, defeating unduly limiting express amendment “subject to implied purpose words addition intended was the for which it was Governor,” con- approval (State v. the cluding paragraph the constitutional convention making B, Birmingham Ry. Co., of subdivision Ala. Sou. 436; 1915D, read: Ann. South. Cas. Hagan Court, 544, 49 160 Ala. Comm. moneys of said sale derived “And 1027; Joseph A. [N. S.] South. 37 L. R. expended Highway De- as the bonds shall be Randolph, Rep. 347); approval v. partment may direct, 71 Ala. 46 Am. Governor.” and that a new constitutional already adopted having well- that, defined institutions of law— systems affer shows further The record suggested adopting curring in and intending “must not be construed as to abolish mem- vote of all system, except a three-fifths the former in so far as it is in voting repugnance in favor house to each manifest the new bers elected and, determining scope meaning the real thereof, provision, of the new it must be read in the amended light existing sys- the former signed pre- aforesaid, lature as Birmingham Ry. Co., tem.” pra; State su- Sou. house, approved siding each officer of Taylor Woods, 474; Bender v. days after final ad- three the Governor Meyer, 55 journment volume Sen. Journal, Journal, p. volume House of Mr. The observation Chief Justice *21 p. 2845. Brickell Constitution was that it was propounded origin beginning inquiry first for decision “not of law in the delegate state”; by to that “it was is: Can and for the designate power particular people among pre- to a whom the common special day upon applicable vailed, election is far as so to their condi- proposed superseded by tion, repealed held and not particular Constitution, legislation provision, peo- or constitutional —a by appointed having well-defined, ple Governor be within and a well-under- system law, unwritten, time fixed Constitution? written and stood generally constitutional”; declared It has been it was not statute REPORTS 205 ALABAMA 408 system, 279, destroy Carter, 266, 174 56 South. Clarke v. Ala. to abolish intended Cooley’s system 974, 978, excerpt up on its Const. different a and set new continued, except 67, being approved system ruins; that— Lim. effect Constitution, repugnan2 to the so far it is particular “Where been a has construction restrictions to the limitations generally accepted when this has occurred especially correct, imposed law; that— contemporaneously with adoption a under or immediately preceding, existing light former law and “In Constitution those the provisions system, be read and is are to new constitutional opportunity had an who understand meaning interpreted, if their real provision intention of the lawgiver ascertained, intent of and the question thereof in is not to exists denied Taylor supra, Woods, carried into effect.” 52 44; v. strong presumption that the construc- 42, 477; parte Roundtree, Ala. 31 Ex Ala. rightly interprets tion the intention.” Sayre, 1, 118 State ex rel. v. Ala. Winter 28, 89; 24 Robertson v. South. ex State rel. recently through said, This court Mr. Jus- 159, 166, 395; McGough, 118 24 Ala. South. tice Somerville: Cooley, Const. Lim. 60. larg- having origin provisions, their “New already stated, present “As we struc- have experience, er revised introduced into an amended existed, ture of under health board of has constitution, are to construed and public 1875, period statutes, since operation pur- allowed such as will secure tlio nearly century. ad- half a far as are So we poses they introduced; for which were vised, and two and tional legality questioned, has never pur-poses these Irom a are to be ascertained met constitu- constitutional conventions nave just they consideration of causes in which adopted new, re-adopted old, Mayor originate.” Co., Mobile Stonewall Ins. v. provisions, undertaking to curb without Birmingham 577; 570, Ala. 53 State v. legis- this notorious and extended exercise supra. Ry. Co., Sou. * * * power. leg- lative But the uniform interpretation islative of doubtful constitution- regard say, nature and That many provisions, running through years, al of objects provisions, end to be ac- of its weighty Ex consideration courts. just giving complished, its words their parte 303; Moog Randolph, Hardy, Ala. 68 v. regard legitimate meaning, “not so and to 606; Security 597, Ala. E. Farrior v. N. M. expression” as Co., 275, 279, form or manner of much the 88 Ala. v. 7 South. 75 Jones McDade, foregoing 230, v. considerations. Carroll 200 Ala. South. 988.” Parke Bradley, Treas., 455, Birming- v. 401; supra, et. al. 459, State, 396, State Ala. Ala. State v. 28, 86 South. 32. Ry. 491, Co., Ala. ham Sou. 1915D, 77, Ann. South. Cas. expressly All have of our Constitutions Co., parte Rd. Ex & Gulf In Selma original remitted to the as an Rep. 722, 696, 728, 6 it is declared that Am. power providing matter of inherent Assembly right to has the same General the construe the Constitution on constitutional amendment. elections the state place holding The time and proper elections have, where the the courts necessary in- elements may be one in which a liberal construction Legislature by power herent remitted legislative made, will construction This is the effect of the the Constitution. clearly appears that unless it be condemned by Mr. Chief Justice McClel- announcement McDonald, wrong. v. Ala. Ward Birming- May & Thomas Hdwe. Co. lan 243, founda- 237, 827. This is 77 South. ham, contemporaneous con- the rule of says: where “he Supreme Court announced struction Virginia, requirements In Cohen “The extent of Con- United States. touching the stitution Alabama method Ed. Mr. Chief 5 L. Justice 6 Wheat. voting upon in- said: Marshall provision that all strument is elections weight attached, always been “Great ballot, shall be contemporaneous rightly very position.” attached, ex- opening poll the vote qualified electors amendment. together simply These to a amount two Halstead, 10 U. S. v. Bank of the In requirement 264), (6 L. Ed. Mr. Justice Wheat. qualified electors of shall the state submitted. Thompson stated that— for their vote ballot. The expressly remits the General existed, whether the doubt “If regulating Assembly gov- matter of tne power courts mould [to 1792 vests their erning laws' which changes process meet whatever throughout state.” be uniform respect might place], or with to its take practical stitutionality, the construction hereto- 1901 declares weight ought great it, given fore determining Legislature. questions.” Ogden both Saun- provided that— 190 thereof ders, 12 6 L. Ed. 606. Wheat. *22 Legislature pass shall laws not incon- to “The contemporaneous rule of construction regulate this Constitution and sistent with govern elections, court in State ex rel. announced our and all such laws shall be uni- JOHNSON, v. CRAFT (205 Ala.) provide county throughout state; sheriffs, other eomniissioners and shall and form the holding and governmental agencies power for the manner of elections law to fix and the same,” ascertaining etc. the result of the elections, date on which all name the exact general special, should be held. Even and also, See, § Const. when has named a date the Constitution power in former This was the embraced general held, elections should be 5), (Const. 1875, 8, § art. Constitutions which every (except in instance the Constitution applied to Chief Justice McClellan 1907, p. 129, 4), § of art. 1868—Code on constitutional amendments. elections Legislature expressly has authorized the provides for 156 of the Constitution Section and to fix name all dates other dates. See these Court, Supreme of Justices of the the election previous Constitutions, same article. As at times held to be eliosen elections general elections, general the rule has places election fixed law for the date; but, been that law named as Representatives members House of 'special elections, general rule has States, Congress “until the United gov- or other officers Legislature change the time shall law agencies ernmental should fix Fix- the date. also, holding So, does such election.” ing places holding the time and for elections Legislature declare that always has been considered an administra- holding power provide for shall function, Legislature tive could delegated and one which the chancery of courts and circuit courts and of having delegate, Legislature so has courts, jurisdiction of such special during as to elections judges to attend fail the chancellors or when history Code, 1907, entire §§ state. See (Const. § regular terms of such courts 440, 441, corresponding sections yet 161) ; power fix a time previous Leg- there Codes indicated. If the delegated holding of has been these courts delegate power islature can to the Gov- Governor or the Chief Justice ernor or other officers to fix date of This court. special elections, delegate power it can mandatory upon Legislature fix general elections, to fix the date of for there holding the times courts power is no provide kind difference as to holding elections, it has not general special or for elections. Legisla- successfully that the been contended Legislature possesses power the inherent power delegated func- has not ture Legislature always as to both. The has administrative officers. tion to delegated power places fix at question; brought Thus we are which all should elections be held. There Consti- 284 of the terms of section Are the power Legislature' no difference in the “up- special tution, providing for the election fixing places as to power of elections and the Legisla- day appointed other fixing the time of elections. The power imperative, there more ture” power Legislature respect has delegable, dealt less questioned. never been Therefore the con- namely, commands stitutional convention that framed the Con- place Legislature shall fix the time cognizant stitution of 1901 was places holding courts, fix the times of of precedent long-existing providing holding elections, fix all other Hence, all in this elections state. when it charges public highways and rates provided (1901) in the Constitution Sparkman, carriers? McNeill v. common should call or order an supra. v. A. Railroad Commission N. qualified election electors of the Ry. Co., at which amendments to the Con- Mr. Justice Chief Anderson said of upon by stitution the people, should be voted providing the visions of the Constitution contemplated special convention that all regulating railroad elections be directed the Constitution should etc., passenger tariffs, freight declared “hereby Legisla- upon the conferred always same manner as the had laws," pass ture, whose it shall provided, previous theretofore under (Const. 243) § : etc. three-quarters Constitutions and for century, “Our own court is accord with the hold- to such limitations Legislature performs ing in its function that the prescribed time or manner which were creating delegate the laws and exe- can the Constitution. legally cution of same to officials selected provides The Constitution of 1901 that the purpose, giving and that of said election on stitution shall be amendments to the Con- some latitude in the execution of same officials does not held, the discretion of delegation amount to of the au- legislature, general the election not adjournment either at the next legislate.” thority to & Kimbrell v. L. R.N. special Co., at a election to be held Ex R. parte City South. supra. Birmingham, than three months after less final the session of the long years proposed, Alabama were For at which the amendments holding special repeatedly delegated the time *23 REPORTS 205 ALABAMA álO final impossible, ture, point ture time true does) day sion. lature did this behalf. power made of of the state of notice not fixed agency, within —not tures had it makers of the Constitution the Governor the Constitution tution itself ernor of the chise sult of the shall be resolution itself did hut it the instant did the as a to act ed yond general adjournment compelled tive election obtaining Payne of the Governor ance as an election tion, day, the as the succeeding Constitution and the Governor’s delegated prescribed certain special by date on which the instant appoint power delegating election not adjournment we of the duties for when the within the time three months governmental or fix exact dates of that such election must be might less required reason on responsible compelled the time required election. in consonance observe, that behalf holding appointed by less than three months date or Elections, self-executing it to to issue his always ascertainment to to fix the exact during express elections duty, act or election resolution exactly can act Const. impracticable, this state appear expressly that those amendment. could on administrative, governmental amendment. the Governor to some exact date on know the most three months specified is session of the state the Governor to make it before committed done when It is true that joint § concerned, administrative could from the not be special § agency, what not name the as therein 120. Such act and a within the statute; practice 301. And election choice at the —that session or act proclamation specified governmental for commits the general resolution the well exercising holding not proclamation fix the exact dates when it compelled to name all other for the date special nearly election. This is Legislature. all of the authority he were distrustful time and next In this required be adjournment the administra- provides mandatory. intervening officer or founded. The should for that is after constitutional provided. In it became him in so could time election both Constitution to the Gov- appropriate the election Legislature exact the Consti- certain succeeding legislative elections— held on holding a name after the duties well-nigh the fran- perform- or could polls Legisla Legisla Legisla- century. that the indicat- agency, connec- in ses special by of him not be of law- sometimes (as agent object of re- place held, date, next final give say, far century, the the date the date of be- By Legislature If but uniform be ordered must pov'er ture of elections elections which such election is Code section 2S4 of the which Constitution hibit such and was applicable. Such -was the rule of uniform Governor 1896, by vent a court denied, interpretation tion cial elections were to be held as are § Constitution of 1901 lution ly adjourn courts. Where calling special cogent constitutional Legislature has ment should be (in conduct of the when it will necessary delegate length in, cer or' date so the session of the cess To state the provided the court Code Code new -Constitution special Const. from 284), delegation § § specify had not theretofore of the Governor as it wras has agency Legislature proposing reason to believe that clearly law, light holding 439; doubtful powers provision fixed. It provided intended to is of of 1896 1907; shall be it time for the time, deliberations. necessary, continued for delegation 1875), provided election. within § cannot [360] had to which sections of such Code interpretation administrative same,” limitations, finally elections to the public to * * * touching weighty new7Constitution contravenes direct” finally for a special article as is law for a passed (Code1907, provisions of long government, provided became a [250]), time, general Legislature, acquiescence for held on such might 1896, is therefore know, three (361) (266) (233). declaring many does never etc. practices adjourn. business True, for such new election usually constitutional adjourned held; - concretely: election (Code, consideration special delegable. at the power, adopted, containing the administrative § not be able three-quarters months before If the can fix welfare for existed Code 1896] are to in advance Code years been it “case” §§ that “all a that “all special by void who, Governor), article expressly Legislature be fixed has has been said who 439-441) Constitutions, law § Constitution; 1598-1600 of will election beginning It delegated prop.er, and [359] act disputed such “cases (as day 440; law” necessities, is (article reasonable cause and When the some offi course might a delegated the exact power after statutes), adopted, not Legislá or reso adopted * * * [article amend date statute special special which, within § When [249]), there (Code it re final were Code very (sec pro pre spe the fix be a *24 v. JOHNSON CRAFT 411 (205 Ala.) “ * * * express, In affirm- him case. the in the absence the instant provision, from ative the mere silence of the provision Con This new in section 284 of the any subject, Constitution in reference to election, stitution, special providing an for a implied. legislative power hibition of cannot be ancient, well-defined, function administrative power silent, to When the Constitution is power delegated not must or be to legislate exists, departure must be there intending for to construed abolish principle from established ‘that Constitu- statute; system, governed mer acts, as so enabling tions are not in the nature of scope meaning provision the new but less words, to the real bound- limitations the otherwise powers Legislature, or, in other providing special be ascer must Assembly is not look that the General to light by reading for tained of the it “in the organic per- law ascertain what is to giving existing system,” mer law and the only ,do, mitted it to tions Klein, Pa. but to find what inhibi- power of the name the’ date Governor the to thereby put Mayor its action.’ v. on special election, did with the Governor which 465; Sharpless Mayor, 21 89 Ala. instant of law the case. (s. 759); c. Common- St. 59 Am. Dec. necessary say Prouty that it is Maxwell, not We do mean wealth v. Pa. St. 446. contemporaneous Stover, defining con- v. 11 Kan. nature resort to rule of indulged implications, up- extent of provisions, which are of constitutional struction legislation, Judge avoid tain an Brewer said: sus- ‘To Leg- support that the conclusion hold implied inhibition, must there be some power delegate to fix islature express, provision. The affirmative mere si- places elections time and at lence of Constitution cannot power This, that reason * * held. for the * prohibition.’ into turned ‘To original in- provide an for elections is implied express pro- inhibition, sustain vision Legislature; apply power subject-matter, herent present away must to the exact and the inhibition taken will not not extended further Constitution not necessary give than is provision.’ full force that power, recognized it but this inherent * * * ‘To declare a void declaring have houses shall “two that conflicting express provision with an legislation power necessary Constitution, the conflict must be clear. So free 'Const. § state.” ” say all the authorities.’ power of the was 331, The inherent Marx, dealt with Miller v. having express provision 332, provision If construction the homestead there is no in the Con- (article against delegation stitution of 1875 the Constitution the1 ad- “every home- 2), that ministrative Governor to fix the § * ** eighty acres, exceeding stead, not within the constitutional limits, negation exist; exempted,” effectuate that etc. To does not shall be there protection express provision is no the Constitution-makers will of citizen, right security right personal that denies adopt court, Stone, writing suggested that Judge held the Gov- if, ernor, exist; ex- it power does not or allot homestead there is ex- award no the emptions press power, provision legislative against was an inherent power incorporation Con- except limited was the act or resolution of provi- stitution, constitutional requir- matter embraced in section 7 self-acting in ing reports highway engineer was sion form a Legislature, and that required, the state treasurer direction as therein right personal exempted pertaining homesteads —a duties of the state treas- acres, and of 80 etc., amount urer, citizen —to then does not exist. would exemp- appear minimum limited the St. Case Clair answers therefore tion, impose any restric- pellant’s it did attack on the act or resolution on in- grounds pursuant adoption failure on the tions resident to which amount the Constitution. crease although the this, entitled; rely Appellees Collier, might Governor v. Fri- acres,” eighty when exceeding supra. erson, “not The constitutional words manifestly themselves, could the Consti- there construed contained read Kenneweg also, meaning. See, Alle- 1819. The amendment other gany tution of stitution, Con- 119, 123, County, Atl. Md. vote submitted Atl. Moore, Pa. Assembly (Acts the General of 1844-45 Winston 1915C, 1915A, 208), proposing (instead Ann. 498. 1844-45, p. Cas. A. biennial R.L. legislative or resolution cannot annual) state treasurer elections of the That express prohibi- comptroller, unless void ratified held not because declared ratifying be found can omitted resolutions prohibition suffice, implied succeeding Legislature, will not and did next not even Railway Clair, particular in Southern Co. v. St. settled show amendment was eight upon, being proposed 27 South. 23. If there had voted right to strike doubt of the same Mr. down stat- election. that Justice Gold- been ute by by implied prohibition, ways by there were two resolved thwaite stated authority. amended, The court said: Constitution could be which that 205 ALABAMA REPORTS people, originally Legislature proposed either who framed *25 it, prescribed by Governor, agent, or in instru- the mode the the as its administrative gave itself, and, pursued, required by ment mode is the last notice as the Constitution by provided provided the amendments must two- be and by law, the date of fixed the as thirds of each General Assem- the house and at held as the published bly, print required, by law, by must be in the amendment was ratified a appear (from large majority and it voting, being must made the returns of those therefor secretary majority state) 83,607, against 12,026. to the all the By that a ac- this was repre- voting complished citizens of this state the constitutional essentials —the Legislature sentatives voted favor the have assent of both the Houses of posed amendments, proposing adoption of each amendment, and two-thirds its the shall, Assembly by majority house popular next General of'the vote after due another, cogent after such ify rat- election and before notice. Such are the which Legis- reasons yeas nays; by prevent the same amendments will defeat of of the the will shall, people, the said each of amendments lature and the will of the on the times, sessions, ground three on been read “that the election said amendment on days, three several in each house. Under was not of the election ordered provision by (1) such by by Legislature required double ratification fixed by (2) succeeding the next Constitution.” says, Legislature, proposing session of the Justice Resolutions or acts of subsequent Constitution, passed by such- of the record to show failure to the constitu- by majorities ratification the second tional in manner of both houses lature, every requisition provided by against that is de- are valid as by provision manded ob- instrument itself must be veto. The Governor’s served, any and the omission of one is fatal act that no to the amendment. This amendment' or resolution amendment ap- Constitution made the of considera- Constitution shall be submitted Frierson, proval supra, merely tion in Governor, etc., Collier v. was con- a dec- approval sidered Mr. Justice Brewer in the Consti- laration that Governor’s Prohibitory Cases, necessary. tutional Amendment (cid:127)not Dodd’s Revision Constitutions, pp. 14S, Kan. as follows: of State Amendment 152. The submission to the Governor‘of such- change “It is well counsel that no can acts or was not before resolutions except law, fundamental the Constitution of prescribed by manner case that law. In the act or resolution shall be valid without Frierson, of Collier the court declaratory approval says: Governor’s that, change ‘We no doubt entertain any the convention, Constitution other than a what had thereto- several Constitutions mode every requisition subject. which is demand- fore If act or intended on this observed, ed the instrument itself must proposing an resolution without amendment valid any omission one is fatal to the approval Governor, amendment.’ That illustrates and enforces case invalid its submission to rendered proposition. this required, the one The Constitution of Alabama approval days him and his adjournment after three in order work an Legislature. proposition approved by two-thirds of popular vote, by Where the resolution or act is submitted and then Legislature. approval, next two-thirds This to the Governor for and an amend- last approval wanting, and the court held that proposed by adopted by him ment is which is Constitution had not been amended. In a vote three-fifths members elected to words, proceedings other under a Constitution respective houses, etc., each of the amended is change Constitution must be in accord approved by prescribed by with the manner that Constitu- act or resolution is not rendered void be- only brings ques- tion. But this tion in this case: us to the real adoption suggestion cause of the amendment; of such proposition Is to amend is, because, pas- after the the Constitution nature of a criminal opponents proceeding, change sage resolution, suggestion which the is made action, stand as defendants a criminal enti- or resolution be amended any themselves tled to avail ror, er- technical phrase “subject inclusion of the mistake; or mere verbal or is it rather proval of the Governor” after the words “and proceeding, in civil which those omissions and moneys all derived the sale of said wrong errors which work no to substantial expended highway bonds shall be partment may as the de- rights we affirm the latter. The central sas of ods disregarded? Unhesitatingly, adopted direct,” which was of Kan- idea history, law, three-fifths vote. as of Kansas The Constitution did substance right grander potent require rereading and more in both meth- houses of the important, The two and forms. days vital ele- three several re- ments in constitutional amendment are adoption reading. the third Section 53 the assent of two-thirds of the provides that— popular Beyond these, vote. machinery are mere house “Each shall have to determine * * * proceedings forms.” the rules of its and the JOHNSON CRAFT (205 Ala.) . necessary preparation powers strange “It is houses shall have two for legislative di- free feature the official ballot state.” given respect to rections this instance with right (Gen. Thus was unrestricted what Acts incautiously ignored. the official ballot should contain secured, 1915, p. 213) untrammeled least seems to have been at course, if ballot Of procedure bod- in other deliberative rules or deficient, matter placed in an act was and that recited imposed ies, otherwise than exactions the ballots met the will. own requisite (section 285), in- Having reserved to the majority approved proposal, right power, it had the herent effected, notwith- *26 Constitution would be attribute such or reconsideration as standing deficiency in recital of the act’s ” * * * body, particular. not forbidden deliberative that Constitution, provided by lature by required publi- requisite by adopted vote notice amendment was by eight required cation for at least successive weeks the Consti- as two houses preceding appointed Secretary State, Crawford, such next election. As executing v. Gil- tution. christ, requirement, 963, 41, it was self- South. 59 to this Fla. 64 pub- eight power 1914B, weeks’ is further the extent of This Ann. 916. Cas. required election, by provisions 286 lication together of the notice section shown proposed amendment. The that— having proclamation Governor’s notice and call- or resolution of “No act provision conformed tion, to such the Constitu- purpose altering ing a convention stipulation in section 4 of the act amending shall this the Constitution except publication repealed the vote of a t-he for at of said election house at the all the members elected each of same “least seven weeks” successive was without act or resolution which such session publica- though requirement by effect, passed.” was newspaper, etc., in a was tion effective. any résolution or not have contained act need right recognizes that the This Constitution length during reference Legislature to ac- inherent was proclamation published notice and should be amending cording legislative as to will to its county newspapers, in the for the reason that joint (within the limita- the act or resolution imposed duty the Constitution had Governor of on the by Constitution) prescribed at the tions giving lawful notice man- pro- resolution at which the act or session prescribed. by ner This done was the Gov- posed passed. shows The record conformity ernor strict to the Constitu- incorporated was tion. act or resolution the affirm- is not void for three-fifths of all members vote of ative uncertainty. Typographical and clerical er- houses, etc., the same was both of signed amendment, authorizing rors occur in the presiding officers said hous- automobiles, levies of taxes on etc. The required governing es, rules word “on” used for the word “and” legislative Constitution it- bodies and paragraph 3, B of section after the words stated, have As we Constitution in self. collected,” “levied and before the words provides each house 53 shall section privilege “all such vehicle license tax.” The power pro- to determine the rules conjunction context shows that in- ceedings, and that had the amend supplied, tended context was self- act or resolution as it did settled paragraph corrective. In G of section 3 the 230, McDade, 234, Ala. v. 200 75 South. Jones 988, sup- time when the same became effective is 992, where it is said: plied by change the context and a in the requirement readings of three in each “The punctuation. permissible This is to effectu- Constitu- bouse legislative apparent ate the intent from the (section 284) not intended exact instrument; context and whole when con- so readings six amendment in these meaning sidered the is “that this .amendment in both houses. so affirm ham verba To would foregoing right thereof when amend, houses exclude proposals thereby perfect self-executing ratified submission with- electorate of amendments to the Con- legislation, the aid out Legislature of further * * * Any necessity interpretation stitution. pass such laws as it commencing would result anew a whole amendment was necessary secure deem the full benefit and readings every series of time an effect of amendment to the this Constitution. desired either of the hous- (,) (either) Leg- Dither at this session es.” possible islature or at the earliest time after people (.)” Grounds of the demurrer the the ratification That amendment was not advertised become in full amendment shall force and ef- 284; 1915, notwithstanding p. fect, § law. Const. Gen. Acts sections 93 and 213 of McDade, supra, concerning 237, conflicting provi- Jones 200 Ala. the Constitution 75 provision 995, Hooper Birchfield, 226, 232, South. court said of a of sions. that— n 68; Harper State, 284 of the 22 South. 109 Ala. ALABAMAREPORTS 857; quite making 31, Bracken, Leslie v. ex seems South. State rel. clear me 841; provision holding election, this is South. 154 Ala. Lane, mandatory, 181Ala. State ex rel. al. v. indeed mak- Wilkinson et the Constitution 646, 655, col- ers and authorities assumed as a matter South. of course that Judge, Williams, appoint day, rel. ex lected v. State would phrase Schwarz, ref- italicized than a no more 869; Boyce, anticipated legisla- 1918D, Ann. Cas. Clark v. erence to the tive exercise Cooley, 140; Lim. Const. dis- Ariz. Pac. cannot behalf. I (7th p. Ed.) anticipated legisla- Stat. cover in 2 Lewis’ Sutherland such allusion to impose tive Const. 380. action § properly duty mandatory think sustain- We the trial court a direct complainant’s vide demurrer dis- ed missed the bill and for the time of to ex- acting same, be clude that decree should way usual affirmed. immemorial accordance with its practice by general dele- gation unimportant JJ., GARDNER,, ministerial SOMERVILLE and ‘ responsible agency. governmental to I dissenting opinion foregoing another cur *27 agree in the THOMAS, cannot the statement with J. majority opinion appointment that the mere fact, of a an was in such election SOMERVILLE, (dissenting). I concur J. regarded by or was mak- so the Constitution opinion foregoing in the THOMAS, of Mr. Justice as, purpose gravest ers “a of constitu- presents ex- an admirable which character”; tional nor I can discover provisions position here of constitutional intention on the Constitution princi- question, review of the and a full to descend of admin- makers istrative detail in such by statement ples upon conclu- which the authorities matter, there- grounded. minority of I wish sion is change procedure a mode of which own, my to state of now a few observations them, was and to familiar suggested my are which examination of necessity utility is of which opinion support majority filed apparent. no means view, my further consideration of interpretation I concede that my which Brethren constitutional of the majority placed upon which the this have majority held as inconsistent provision permissible interpretation, but ais validity Road Bond Amend- meaning necessarily that be de- such a is ment. language, that such duced from such minority The entire Justices of meaning, its most rational I vigorously cannot concede. accord with the sentiment —so duty In think such a case I it this opinion is the stated and well sustained so adopt interpretation court to that this of Mr. the Con- Justice McCLELLAN—that provision constitutional in conso- paramount law, to which is the stitution each legislative practice nance department legis- with the government, thereto- existing, uphold fore and which executive, judicial, yield will lative, must validity de- pro- constitutional amendment unquestioning obedience; and arewe pending upon that action. obligation, foundly as our solemn sensible of opinion majority high appointed The learned writer of the court —its members example interpreter preserve guardian furnished an its himself has excellent —to authority of the integrity common sense construction in denial of its that and to see plain disre- letter be denied or Constitution mandates shall never McDade, case garded. Jones dealing requirement with the South. at not issue is whether recognized same section the Constitution that mandate of the Constitution can “proposed disregarded shall be read in the amendments to which there can be no be difference —as they originate opinion sev- house in which three whether there —but held, upon days.” good proposed suf- eral section 284 in fact to be found in of the Con- think, reason, ficient I that a stitution mandate which has been disre- garded Constitution, disobeyed. Independent at could amended the stitutional amendment the Legislature possessed during passage, any stage its and that provide regulate elections, completed proposal was for and stated, adopted present requirements and section 190 of our imposes but could 'be upon duty enacting repetition it the laws as amended without of former purpose. requires readings. opinion, result, Section 284 as I read the for. upon Legislature posed upon solely grounded argumentum order election was ab inconvenienti, is] “[which held ei- the unreasonableness general succeeding yet procedure; ther at the session next of such a the Constitu- requirement explicit the tion amendments are amendment should another be read three Legislature.” day appointed by days house, times on three several in each JOHNSON CRAFT (205 Ala.) provision delegation strictly large forbidden a portant and if literally construed, and im- is to be and. plain agents. according discretion to administrative to its language, escape But Anderson, from the was observed there be no Mr. Chief Justice could every speaking court, complete conclusion object adoption by peo- is submitted for constitutional give proper ple, protection traveling pub- must both to the passed have been thus read before lic, entirety. Realty houses in that when it for this In the case of laws fully Mobile, City Investment Co. v. done. foregoing and analo- this court considerations was held gies sufficiently explain legislative will it was matters detail basis minority jus- requirement the views sufficient was entertained if the constitutional unnecessary legal tices en- “in met substance effect”-— case. It is (cid:127) recognizing princi- ter thus a discussion those authorities a distinction pies support unimportant govern in which are to the view construction which prescription may regarded constitutional as cases. that case a literal construc- directory mandatory, requirements rather 'than wish, disregarded. their how- have defeat- violation We form of ballots would ever, respect to note with case of ed a and it was observed bond court, Paving Hilton, Sayre, speaking for the Oakland Cal. Mr. Justice Co. v. that— n 11 Pac. which is cited opinion authority repudiating the as an top- larger usually (cid:127) deal with “Constitutions principles by Judge announced Brewer leg- phrase than ics and islative couched in broader case, * * * Kansas is not in fact an interpreta- acts; hence their end, since, explained application that the later always tion of similar methods.” reached Tompkins, Paving case of Oakland Co. *28 Rep. 17, 801, Am. Cal. 12 Pac. St. quoted represented Birmingham So, views the individual in the of State v. case opinion Temple, Ry. Co., of Justice in which the court Southern 182 Ala. did 1915D, 436, not concur. the latter it was was noted case Ann. Cas. a distinction said: between the construction of constitutional rights elementary dealing of with requirement “All admit that the constitutional merely prescribe those which citizens and performed. strictly doqs ,be must But it not governmental policy, or relate some -rule of language follow from this in- that the merely administration to the conduct and literally. strument must be understood -public observed And it was there of affairs. applied, same rules of construction must be requirements though are, ascertain that— what they mandatory prohibitory. were not And and constitutional construction “The safe rule think, we when an act commanded or author- regard manner form or much the not so is to may ways, ized done in different either of be objects expression of its nature and compliance which would be strict with the giv- accomplished, provisions, be and the end to terms of the instrument understood some legitimate just ing ing,” and, mean- and their words popular sense, common and either mode determining further, real “in pursued, unless some reason is discovera- provision, meaning scope be must of the new and holding only ble for one of such modes will light and the former law read answer.” existing system.” opinion Under 243 of the Constitution To summarize: We are of the upon language is laid mandate “to the of section 284 of the Constitu- pass regulating reasonably time laws time to tion construed aas mere passenger freight withstanding expected appropriate not- leg- and tariffs.” And reference to and duty imposed action, appointing this di- islative for hold- n rectly held, upon ing by this either direct action delegation in Railroad v. Alabama North- Commission ato trusted ad- R., agent according previous R. 182 Ala. ern South. that ministrative us- provision require age, meant more than unnecessary, no and that it is not but impute to make for that it is in fact unreasonable to purpose, pre- design and that determination and makers of the Constitution a con- scription freight passenger for of tariffs and limit trol the action lawfully delegated comparatively unimportant respect to a com- service could with ato derogation for that mission created of administrative detail in matter purpose; usage long standing, it must noted that of a which was of merely empowered necessity change was not commission as to which laws, parent. but was invested with a execute the vast fixing principles interpreta- Upon tariffs and discretion the soundest interpretation A literal of that rates. construction we think that tion and undoubtedly question would have vision Legislature confined the can be .sustained. action, own immediate have based their conclusion REPORTS 205 ALABAMA delegate solely upon discussed, ground was the election. Birmingham, authorized herein right unnecessary fixing we enter therefore deem it City upon parte objections Ex The recent case of a discussion of other is suf- South. conclu- do not seem to material indeed, upon authority point, if, ficient sion. necessary. citation of deemed that, opinion I am therefore of the even un- THOMAS, JJ., GARDNER concur applied der the strict foregoing rule construction views. entirely majority, the amendment valid. GARDNER, (dissenting). views J. However, rule very presented I am minority ably accord the in have been given application ma- construction opinion of Justices SOMERVILLE jority, for, my opinion, concur, of sec- THOMAS, fully I dealing tion 284 elec- might appear with the an opinion an while additional given liberal, inappro- tion rather superfluous, thought should be I it not literal, ques- a strict It is read- construction. priate, importance of the in view of the ily important plays future, seen such a rule presented precedent part The strict rule following result attained. consequences serious applied by briefly court in construction decision, very few ob- some to state entirely proper when there instant case is my which have been servations own language is under of the Con- consideration counsel brief of clear the exhaustive more principles dealing rehearing, stitution with fundamental appellee application liberty, prop- life, government, of erty of presented or the point to a first make reference rights citizens, matters or other application, heretofore and not character; provi- to those substantial treated. body law-making sions directed to the persuaded 284 of that section amI performing cerning acts, time or manner of separate contemplates two Constitution the and, construction certain a liberal acts rule proposal first a applied, held should be as directions proposal, adoption second, necessary provision after the language' merely directory, used unless the thereof for submission negative language is very such as to such a construction. people, early judi- rule contemplated This announced discloses it history country cial Chief after our Justice until an election lature should-order Clarke, Gibson in 7 Watts Commonwealth v. proposal had *29 to amend the the (Pa.) 127, where, construing in & S. tional constitu- by passed it as- been both houses. Let provisions appointments as to pro- and elec- passed Legislature the the that sumed tions, “necessarily, para- he that the posed by requisite majority, amendment interpretation mount that rule of demands provisions compliance with a and after of provisions only directory.” such Continuing, be deemed that amendment but such section jurist said: the learned question no reference made of whatever would, course, election, have is not receive a technical “A Constitution to- entirely proper. Section 284 a construction, been provision contains a common-lawinstrument like carry interpreted shall so as to It great principles to be as to statute. is how government, the. out the subsequently it nor does order an them; end and that its com- not mands as to the defeat passage any prescribe act, of such method performing or manner of any make reference does section 287 nor merely directory, act are consideredas to be therefore, If, the same thereto. not said that the is wherever it foregoing proposing the amendment in the pre- performed time or in the manner illustration, separate by bill should a object scribed, com- other. The and no special election, procedure for vide for a instance, mand, urge in was no this more governed by any passage put prin- not be would the elective operation ciple Constitution, at the earliest active of section of the practicable has been circumstances, it all the and under provisions concerning ordinary by other accomplished.” to demonstrate This suffice that laws. should of the amendment this feature as to court, opinion, practical- This Ias read the acting legislative, was in its adopted ly this rule construction as law-making, capacity. a plicable to matters such found the Consti- perfectly draw the Counsel distinction — Realty tution in the case of Investment Co. my authority valid to mind—that City Mobile, 181 Ala. propose an amendment vested in the 248, where, quoting State, from Dorman v. entity Legislature as an other than a law- says: the court body, making while the to order an “A constitution is not to a receive technical provide machinery and election of there- construction, instrument, like a common-law vested a as law-mak- statute.” ing body. premise, If a this is correct then majority quote follows, authorities, under it from that Collier v. Frier Legislature, acting son, support position capacity, of the legislative v. CRAFT JOHNSON Ala.) (205 part persuaded taken, language am be con- the Constitution. I there should but the that un- this is a case then sound rule. with the sidered der connection We had several amendments then have review. The Constitution recog- by Legisla- present proposed which have been one to be majority part organic ture, accepted by all law and vote nized as succeeding departments accepted people government, as then ratified gov- Legislature. people, un- such there state as While the proposed by operated one under ernment such tion for der consideration was has functioned and appear lature, had part the Constitu- was not made amendments as a surely people, submitted this court been.ratified nor time that such a ratification, succeeding Legislature attempt would not now question a consideration the and it was in the they light this situation as had to whether or quot- language very adopted literal Justice Goldthwaite used language opinion. ed strict Constitution. manner entirely applicable question given the situation used This was consideration appear Kittelson, presented, Minn. thus claim that it would the case of Secombe v. enjoin considered the amendment there suit N. in a W. part paying had of the Constitution the funds of become treasurer from out holding right. without color to be issued state the constitutional bonds authorized indeed, entirely and, proper, amendment, could tvas case the the- otherwise, ory not con- and I do have been amendment was not language properly proposed at all conflicts peo- sider that used submitted interpretation ple down with rule laid accordance of the the concerning mat- Speaking Chief those Justice Gibson Constitution. court said: character, purely ters of an administrative Realty recognized by “This constitutional Case, supra. Investment Co. adopted and submitted by many declared times This court has part people of the fundamental legis- thing it is a solemn to strike down subsequently recognized contravening upon government. by every department lative act as the fundamental acted judi- that, done, sovereignty law, As ultimate before people, legitimate in authority whom civil cial must be- mind be convinced to end incep- springs, inasmuch as in yond all to strike reasonable doubt. But political organizations tion of all is this down an sub- amendment to original organizes supreme people will of the people, still mitted to and ratified government, right civil a court has no and, possible, solemn, more a should call inquire technically irreg- to ularities in too into mere higher degree thorough caution and of. manner of sub- judicial conviction of the mind. mitting people they that which solemnly adopted, subsequently recognized the inher- upon, change right and acted of the fundamental law their form ent of precedent of the state. We doubt whether a government (and right can be found in the books for the *30 change Constitution is such to that ex- a Constitution, court to declare void a or amend- tent) following language: was declared upon Constitution, any ground. ment a But, political power be; are, all however this “That inherent there in our people, governments opinion, why right all two free are founded conclusive reasons and inquire any irregularities authority, to and ment was forever closed: First. into and instituted for their in the mode th.eir by benefit; that, therefore, they and means which have at this constitutional amend- proposed right adopted times an change inalienable and and indefeasible must be now government form irregularities, their in such man- Such expedient.” any, quent they may regarded by ner as deem must be as healed the subse- Congress admitting act of Minnesota in- Cooley to the Union. on Const. Lim. 27. Sec- conceded, correctly It is so, and of course They by recog- ond. must be deemed cured that whether or not an amendment to the nition and ratification of this as a constitutionally pro- has Constitution been part Constitution, of the the state after its posed adopted part and aas of that instru- admission into the Union. This was done judicial question, ment properly is a and therefore the bonds, issue of the state railroad and ac- cepting-security under its determine; protection for tho courts to but of the state provisions.” argument that, advanced notwithstand- ing this there come a does time when the principle courts decline consider whether recognized The was also in Mill- given not a Johnson, Ky. 589, amendment er Constitution 18 S. W. inception strictly 524; Taylor’s was in posed literally pro- its Case, and L. A. R. 101 Va. adopted, People, as S. E. the Consti- Brittle Neb. 198. I tution, persuaded and that principle such a am applica- time arrives when that this government, the state as people and the ble to this amendment. body politic, functioned, as a accepted have The amendment was a unani- operated and under such amendment mous as a vote both houses of the 205 Ala.—27 REPORTS 205 ALABAMA by.issuing levying only requires bonds, by selling and and where the Constitution three-fifths vote of the each house. more than collecting elected members taxes exclusive adopted highways, expended the and It was ratified state and has so qualified clearly seven-eighths ac- of the funds. cepted It has therefore been government ratified, electors who election —while and and the voted majority assump- only requires operated vote functioned and Constitution unc[er law, proclaimed by organic adoption. part that for its It was tion and it was of the recog- adopted opinion principle as the Consti- I am have been applies force him to The nized in these here, tution expressly provides do. authorities when and now come that— has should not— majority appear thereupon “If shall irregu- “inquire technically too mere into qualified elec- at such who electors voted sub- and in the manner upon in larities voted which, people they mitting solemnly adopted and acted of the state.” have same, 'such favor of the recognized subsequently parts and purposes as all intents and valid to part as of the fundamental the Constitution.” Section accepted it, people hut not voted principle, and discussion of this its. acting through state, upon it. it and acted recognition, important an- is also in view Legislature, accepted it had it —declared known amendment of the part adopted as a been a solemn resolution and an amendment amendment, adopted poll as the soldiers’ tax act which appears people state, but subsequently it, to which was to be criticism the same again people. ac- The state submitted to cepted which the amendment fatal treat as commission, highway by creating If here under consideration. and sell bonds authorized to issue which it poll tax held sub- amendment is likewise This with the amendment. in accordance commission ject infirmity, question then the arises some of has and sold issued principle foregoing whether or as to not the bonds, the demurrer bill avers and so the brought view, the amend- should into and levy col- It authorizes confesses. lection for By application. ment saved road benefit the exclusive thousands the of the who served bonds, pay there- the interest fund on, army navy during period privilege taxes. certain license War, honorably World and who were dis- collected, have levied and These taxes been charged service, qualified from such elec- purposes proceeds devoted tors, except poll tax, payment were specified. exempted payment, from its proclaimed and this knowledge the amend- is common organic part ment was law, sequently aas to ac- the state made order for ment was cept of this state sub- with, comply get be able to and to put adopted ratified and Congress of, full the offer benefit operation, into the state in con- them to aid states the several to structing public highways accepted acted it as in the several and these men exercise Congress is known as act This states. right in reliance franchise thereon. post xVct the construction Aid the State brought This amendment before this accepted This roads. Pruet, ;1 court in Cornelius 85 South. 430 appears it, it has under acted constitutionality Legislature creating the act of presented, and therefore consid- department highway the commission. However, eyes we ered. our cannot shut 1919, p. (Gen. Acts of this act Section evidently the decision the fact ease *31 express adoption S97) ratification accepted acted those Congress, pledg- act of of the es out states in interested, departments well accept carry the faith of the state approval having of of the court. That my ratified, with the met proposal by Congress amendment, therefore, State Aid Act. opinion, fully accepted has been accepted The state has the offer of thus government the the state has func- government, and the federal has effect assumption tioned under that it was proclaimed that it has so amended its Con- law, organic protected and should be stitution as to authorize it to issue and sell by foregoing principle. levy privilege bonds and or license taxes forego discussion, respectful- I further highway exclusive use of the state for ly dissent view. purposes, which it could theretofore do. only proclaimed state The ment to be THOMAS, JJ., SOMERVILLE and concui\ adopted, but the accepted functioned under it

Case Details

Case Name: Johnson v. Craft
Court Name: Supreme Court of Alabama
Date Published: Feb 3, 1921
Citation: 87 So. 375
Docket Number: 3 Div. 501.
Court Abbreviation: Ala.
AI-generated responses must be verified and are not legal advice.