580 JOURNAL OF PROCEEDINGS [Mar. 8,

construing it, we must give such a meaning to it as
will reconcile all its provisions.

It is to be observed also that the prohibition which
is relied on as denying to the Legislature any power
over the subject is a prohibition against increasing or
diminishing the salary of public officers during their
"term of office, " and (in the case of the Judges during
their "continuance in office. ")

Manifestly, therefore, this language, giving to it its
broadest effect, does not prohibit the Legislature from
passing a law increasing salaries to take effect in future
as to new incumbents, but is limited to a denial of
their power to increase or diminish during the officers'
term of office.

Under our system the term of the Judges commence
at different periods; some of the Judges now in office
will hold beyond the expiration of the terms of their
colleagues, and unless we construe the Constitution as
I think it should be construed upon the point under
review, the anomaly might be presented of Judges
sitting on the same bench receiving different salaries.

The obvious escape from this predicament is to in-
terpret the special, clauses relating to the Judges as
conferring on the Legislature the power to increase,
but as denying the power to diminish, and this con-
struction removes all difficulty.

The last clause in section 1, of Article 15, has no
application to the question, for the plain reason, that
it embraces the cases not specially provided for, and
as the case of the Judges is specially provided for, it
can have no reference to them.

Respectfully, &c.,

JOHN P. POE.

Mr, Brown, from a minority of the Committee on
Judicial Proceedings, submitted the following

REPORT:

Minority Report of the Judiciary Committee.

Senate Bill No. 97, as we understand it, proposes

by Legislative enactment to report an express provision

of the Constitution, the organic law of the State, and

to enact another and different one in lieu thereof