Chapter III. Amendment, Revision, and Bills of Rights

• Published date: 01 June 1907
• Date: 01 June 1907
• DOI: http://doi.org/10.1177/000271620702901903

(17)

CHAPTER

III.

AMENDMENT,

REVISION,

AND

BILLS

OF

RIGHTS.

Amendment

ayad

Revision.-The

amending

article

of

a

con-

stitution

undoubtedly

demands

most

careful

attention.

In

some

respects

it

is

its

most

important

article.

It

may

be

so

worded

as

to

make

the

constitution

practically

unalterable

and

thereby

hinder

progress.

Many

of

our

states

are

thus

hindered

and

can

find

no

way

out

of

their

dilemma.

Such

blunders

in

phraseology

would

be

entirely

unnecessary,

if

conventions

were

familiar

with

the

experiences

of

many

of

our

states,

and

with

the

development

of

our

processes

of

amendment.

An

explanation

of

these

processes

will

now

be

set

forth,

as

briefly

as

the

importance

of

the

subject

will

admit.

Some

of

our

earliest

state

constitutions

contained

no

provisions

for

their

amendment.

This

proved

no

bar

to

alteration,

for

they

were

amended

or

revised

like

ordinary

legislation

or

in

convention.

Gradually

provisions

were

introduced

authorizing

the

legislatures

to

submit

amendments

for

popular approval

or

rejection.

In

some

constitutions

there

was

a

further

provision

that

an

entire

revision

might

be

made

by

a

convention

convoked

for

that

special

purpose.

This

body

was

usually

called

together

by

the

legislature,

but

in

two

states,

Pennsylvania

and

Vermont,

by

a

special

body

known

as

the

board

of

censors,

which

was

empowered

to

convoke

a

convention

and

to

submit

amendments.

In

recent

years

at

least

five

legislatures

have

authorized

special

commissions

to

recommend

amendments,

viz.,

New

York,

1872;

Michigan,

1873;

Maine,

i 8 7 5 ;

New

Jersey,

1881;

Rhode

Island,

1897.

In

Louisiana

a

joint

committee

of

both

houses

prepared

in

1894

a

series

of

about

twenty

amendments.

The

reports

of

two

of

these

commissions,

Michigan

and

Rhode

Island,

were

not

simply

amendments

to

the

constitutions,

but

complete

revisions

thereof.

Both

these

revisions

were

rejected

when

sub-

mitted

in

Michigan,

March,

1874,

and

in

Rhode

Island,

November,

1898,

and

again

in

June,

i8gg.

The

report

of

the

New

Jersey

com-

mission

was

never

finally

acted

on,

and

the

reports

of

the

Maine

and