State ex rel. Berry v. Superior Court

Citations

• 92 Wash. 16

Syllabus

<p>Constitutional Law — Act Proposed by Initiator — Interference by Courts. The proponent of an initiative measure, under Const., art. 2, § 1, as amended in 1912, and Laws 1913, p. 433 (Rem. 1915 Code, §4971-27), is in no sense a legislator, nor is the filing by him of a proposed bill or law a legislative step with which courts have no right to interfere.</p> <p>Statutes — Enactment—Initiative Measures — Preamble—Argumentative Statements. The proponent of an initiative measure cannot, under the guise of a preamble, insert an argument for the enactment of the measure to be published at the expense of the state, in view of Laws 1913, p. 433 (Rem. 1915 Code, § 4971-27) requiring proponents of initiative measures to pay the cost of printing arguments for the bill.</p> <p>Same. Where an initiative measure is merely an amendment to the Fisheries Code, relating to the closed season, fishing appliances, licenses and fees therefor, in harmony with the settled and recognized policy of the state, it is not permissible to preface the same with an argumentative preamble reciting in an insidious manner that the prosperity and happiness of the people is the highest aim of the state, the necessity of protection and conservation of the food supply, and that the same shall not be monopolized by the few, etc., and further assertion of long established principles, the purpose of which is to obtain publication of the argument at the expense of the state.</p> <p>Statutes — Direct Legislation — Enactment of Law — Power of Courts — Publication of Argument — Injunction. Courts have power to enjoin the filing of an initiative measure which improperly includes an argument in behalf of its enactment, since such filing of the measure is in no sense a legislative proceeding, but constitutes merely the exercise of a political right in a wrongful and illegal manner.</p> <p>Ellis, Bausman, Parker, and Fullerton, JJ., dissent.</p>