OCR Text |
Show TAX AMENDMENT PUZZLETO MANY SAID Mr 'IO IIIMTItlt'r IN MAT. THH OP APPIIOPHIATIONH. Ilffcct or Cliangf. If Atlopicil. Would He Hi Ht'imivt' Pm-m-iiI Limitation On liCgMntlvf ApproprintlotK I'ntll the Matter Could IW llrouglit He-fotv He-fotv tin Court r llio htntc. It has been learned that elthtr through blunder or design faction t of the proposed constitutional amendment on revenue and taxation Is so worded as to place no limit on th.' umount of appropriations that may l-e made by the legislature If the amendment Is adopted by the Voter next month, faction V. ns It stand In the present constitution, provide that appropriation vhnll not exceed the rale allowed In faction 7 of the same nrtlcle, n tolit levy of five mill on the present assessed vnluatlon of the Mate. A placed In tho proponed amendment, fat tlon 9 provides that appropriation shall not exceed the rates allowed In Section 6, nnd Section Sec-tion t contains nothing on the subject sub-ject of rule, llffctt of lilt' Cliungc. The effect of the change In the amendment. If adopted, would be to remove the present limitation on legislative appropriation until the matter had been brought before the court. Opinion vary ua to the prolatble action of the courts In such a situation. Home of those who learned learn-ed of the clrcuintHins.s expressed the belief that the supreme court would rule that the limitation specified In Km Hon 7 should be applied, while other mid courts are always extremely extreme-ly reluctant to change In any degree the stteclfh language of it constitutional constitu-tional provision and very seldom do It. Ho that. If adopted, the amendment amend-ment would prolmbl) be allowed to remain without restriction on the umount th legislature could appro, prlate until the section could be re-submitted re-submitted und the present constitutional constitu-tional limitation restored by a vole of the people. In that case, two jcur would elupse before the change could be effected. CiiiiwirlMiu I Made . Hecent ilUoiiMlun of the proposed amendment led to u comparison of It with the present provision of Article !3 of the i Diminution, which I proposed pro-posed to be umended. The fn t that "Hectlon C" Instead of "Section 7" appeared ap-peared both In thn official advertisement advertise-ment of the umendment und In tho session law of 1916 resulted In a visit to the office of the ecretury of stair last Tuesday, where the original of Senate Joint Hcsolutlon No. R, containing con-taining the proposed amendment, duly signed nnd attested, vvna r.uim-Ined r.uim-Ined nnd found to contain the same language aa the session law and advertisements, ad-vertisements, thu establishing that no error wit made In compiling the session law or tho advertisement, l faction 9, here referred to. may be found under the heading, "Proposed i Amendment to the diminution. Hen-at Hen-at Joint Keeolutlon No. tl" In another an-other column of thl Impression of I The Hun. ' |