State ex rel. Griffiths v. Superior Court

Citations

• 92 Wash. 44

Syllabus

<p>Statutes — Enactment — Initiative Measures — Argumentative Statements. A proposed initiative measure intended to amend the. Workmen’s Compensation Act (Rem. 1915 Code, § 6604-1 et seq.) so as to include surgical and hospital treatment of the injured workmen at the expense of the industries, is objectionable as including argument to be published at the expense of the state instead of the proponent, when it states in the measure itself that “compensation awarded injured workmen in a very large per cent of cases is insufficient to pay for surgical and hospital services,” and “a workman’s compensation law without provisions for surgical and hospital services is incomplete and inefficient” (Ellis, Bausman, Parker, and Fullerton, JJ., dissenting).</p> <p>Constitutional Law — Proposed Legislation — Determination of Validity. The objection that a proposed initiative measure amending an existing law refers merely to the title of the act to be amended, in contravention of Const., art. 2, § 37, will not be considered as affecting the validity of the measure prior to its enactment.</p>