Hostname: page-component-78c5997874-ndw9j Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-05T15:52:33.049Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

Amending Procedure of the Federal Constitution1

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  02 September 2013

Jacob Tanger
Affiliation:
Pennsylvania State College

Extract

The development of government on American soil presents, as one of its features, the embodiment in its fundamental law of provisions for its modification. The early colonial charters kept alive the fiction that a form of government once established was supposed by its creators to last forever. Only the slow change of custom or the violence of a revolution could modify or destroy such a system of government, except, as in the case of the charters granted by the crown, a modification came as a consequence of the exercise of the royal prerogative.

In the Frame of Government drawn up by Penn and his colonists in 1683, appeared an amending provision for the first time in the history of written constitutions; and while all subsequent Pennsylvania charters contained a similar provision, the other colonial charters presented no method whatever for their alteration. Prior to the drafting of the Constitution of the United States, however, a method of amendment was embodied in the state constitutions of Delaware, Pennsylvania, Maryland, Georgia, Vermont, South Carolina, and also in the Articles of Confederation.

Type
Research Article
Copyright
Copyright © American Political Science Association 1916

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

2 Charters of Mass. Bay and colony of New Plymouth granted by Charles I, 1629; Charter of Mass. Bay granted by William and Mary, 1691. Thorpe, F. N., American Charters and Constitutions, vol. III, pp. 1842, 1852, 1877.Google Scholar

3 Five passed the senate and five the house.

4 157 U. S., 429; 158 U. S., 601.

5 In 1908 the Democratic, Socialist, Prohibition and Independence parties demanded an income tax. The total vote polled by these four parties was 7,208,-127; while the Republicans polled 7,679,006 votes.

6 For a brief account of this movement, see Beard, Charles A., Contemporary American History, pp. 283288.Google Scholar

7 61st Cong. 3d Sess., Jan. 19, 1911. Record, p. 1107.

8 1736 were proposed during the first century of the Constitution, see Ames, The Proposed Amendments to the Constitution of the United States during the First Century of its History; 977 proposed during this period, 1889–1913. These numbers are taken from the calendars of amendments proposed during these two periods. Professor Ames' contains many amendments inserted after the 1736 were compiled, which when added to the latter number makes the total number in his calendar 2023. It would thus be more accurate to place the number of amendments proposed during the period from 1789 to 1913, at 3000.

9 For example, proposed amendments providing for direct election of President and Vice President, election of judges, election of postmasters, recall of representatives, initiative, referendum, woman suffrage, protection of labor.

10 63d Cong., 1st Sess. S. J. R. 9, 20, 24, 26; H. J. R. 60, 95. 63d Cong., 2d Sess. H. J. R. 220, 221, 319. 63d Cong. 3d Sess. H. J. R. 422. S. J. R., 26 was reported adversely from the Committee Judiciary. Feb. 5, 1914, Mr. Cummins of Iowa submitted the report of the minority in which, with the exception of several points, Ashurst of Ariz., Walsh of Wash., Borah of Idaho, Nelson of Minn., and Overman of N. C. concurred. See S. Report 147.

11 See Ames, , The Proposed Amendments to the Constitution of the United States during the First Century of its History, pp. 292293.Google Scholar

Submit a response

Comments

No Comments have been published for this article.