OFFICIAL PROCEEDINGS 

OF THE 

CONSTITUTIONAL 

CONVENTION 

OF THE 

STATE OF ALABAMA 

May 21st, 1901, To September 3rd, 1901. 


JOHN B. KNOX, Esq., President. 

FRANK N. JULIAN, Esq., Secretary. 

PAT McGAULY, Esq., Official Stenographer. 



Volume II 




WETUMPKA PRINTING CO.. 
Printers and Publishers 
Wetumpka, Ala. 

1940 


OFFICIAL PROCEEDINGS 

of the 

CONSTITUTIONAL CONVENTION 

of the 

STATE OF ALABAMA 

May 21st, 1901, To September 3rd, 1901 

THIRTY-FOURTH DAY 


MONTGOMERY, ALA., 
Monday, July 1st, 1901. 

The Convention met pursuant to adjournment, was called to 
order by the President and opened with prayer by the Rev. Mr. 
Patterson, as follows: 

Almighty and most merciful God, Thou who art the ruler of 
the Heavens and of the earth, unto Thee shall all flesh come. From 
Thee we derive our being. Upon Thee we all depend. Upon y 
gracious providence w'e are dependent for the life that is within 
us and for all the means that sustain it; for the wisdom that is 
given to direct us in our councils, and for the skill which is ours 
to execute the plans which we form. Now as we come into y 
presence we acknowledge Thy right to rule and reign over us, 
and we pray Thee that Thou wilt for Thine own Names sake, 
preside over the councils of these. Thy servants, today Give unto 
them that wisdom which cometh from above, that all of the things 
upon which they deliberate may be considered by them with care 
and with conscientious attention unto all the details and for the 
interests which are committed to their care. Guide, sustain and 
bless them. Keep them in physical health and strength, together 
with clearness of mind, soundness of judgment, warmth and ten¬ 
derness of heart, that the grave interests which are in their hands 
may be properly conserved and that the issue may be for the glory 
of Thy name, and for the interest of our great and our beloved 
State. Hear and answer us, pardon our sins, and at last receive 
us to Thyself for the Redeemer’s sake. Amen. 

Upon the call of the roll, eighty-two delegates responded to 
their names. 



1316 


01'FI Cl AT, PR()CEEDINOS 


Leaves of absence were granted to Mr. Kirkland for today; to 
Mr. Searcv, Air. AT. AI. Smith (Autauga), Air. Proctor, Air. de- 
Graffenreid and Air. Reavers for today; Air. Reynolds (Henry) 
for Saturday and today; Air. Samford (Pike) tor today and to¬ 
morrow; indefinite leave for Air. Altman (Sumter) on account of 
sickness. 

The report of the Committee on the Journal was read, stating 
that the journal for the thirty-third day had been examined and 
found to be correct, and the report was adopted. 

Upon the call of the roll of delegates for the introduction of 
resolutions, ordinances, etc.: 

Resolution No. 213, by Air. Fletcher: 

Whereas, this Convention was called chiefly to make a Con¬ 
stitution regulating suffrage and taxation; and 

Whereas, more than one half of the time allotted for its work 
by the enabling act has been consumed in the passage of one 
article, and 

Whereas, expedition is plainly essential to the carrying out 
of the purposes for which this convention assembled, and to 
economize expenses to the State and 

Whereas, it is believed that the consideration and disposition 
of the suffrage article as soon as possible will greatly facilitate 
and hasten to completion the business before the Convention. 

Therefore be it resolved. That after the adoption of the Article 
now being discussed, the Article on suffrage shall be taken up for 
consideration, and continued until finally disposed of. 

Be it further resolved, That all Articles heretofore made special 
orders shall be postponed, and taken up in their regular order, 
after the article on suffrage shall have been adopted. 

The resolution was referred to the Committee on Rules. 

Resolution No. 214 by Air. Henderson: 

Resolved, That whereas, under Chapter 5 of Article I of the 
statutes of this State it is provided that the expenses incurred in 
maintaining the office of the Department of Agriculture shall be 
paid out of the funds to the credit of the Department of Agricul¬ 
ture shall be paid out of the funds to the credit of this Department, 
derived from the sale of fertilizer tags, and further provides among 
other duties that the Commissioner shall furnish information and 
illustrative maps, as to mines, minerals, forests, soils, climate, 
water, water power, industries, and aid in immigration, all of which 
is in the interest of the entire State, and 



CONSTITUTIONAL CONVENTION, 1901 


1317 


Whereas, this Convention, in adopting' the report of the Com¬ 
mittee on Executive Department has made the Department of Ag¬ 
riculture and Industries a Constitutional office; 

Now therefore be it resolved by the people of Alabama in 
Convention assembled. That no separate Department of this State 
should be maintained out of any special tax levied and collected 
under the laws of this State. 

Resolved further. That it being evidence that the tax on fer¬ 
tilizers is largely in excess of the amount necessary for the pro¬ 
tection of the farmers against spurious guanos, we therefore recom¬ 
mend that it shall be the duty of the General Assembly to enact 
such law as will require all taxes and licenses collected for the sale 
of fertilizer tags to be paid into the general fund of this State, 
as well as to make such just and proper reduction in said tax as 
will not exceed the cost of the purpose for which it was authorized 
to be levied and collected. 

Referred to the Committee on Taxation. 

Upon the call of the standing committees, the Committee on 
Schedule, Printing, etc., submitted the following resolution with 
a favorable report: 

Resolution No. 165 by Mr. Oates : 

Resolved, That inasmuch as the printed acts of the last session 
of the General Assembly are so voluminous as to make the un¬ 
wield ly and easily destructible, that the Secretary of State be di¬ 
rected to have them bound as follows: The general laws in one 
volume; the general and local laws in two volumes; the additional 
cost, if any, to be paid out of the public printing appropriation. 

MR. HEFLIN (Randolph)—I move a suspension of the rules 
and that the resolution be put upon its immediate passage. 

THE PRESIDENT—It seems to the Chair that a suspension 
of the rules would not be necessary. The rules of the Convention 
requiring three readings only relates to ordinances, and when a 
resolution comes before the Convention, reported by a committee, 
it is in order for the Convention to take action thereon. 

MR. HEFLIN (Randolph)—I move the adoption of the reso¬ 
lution. 

MR. SPRAGINS—I move to lay it on the table. 

The resolution was again read. 

MR. PILLANS—It is possible there is a clerical error there. 
I think as read both times it says general laws in one volume, and 
general and local laws in two volumes. If that is the way it reads 
it should be amended to make it read correctly. 



1318 


OFFICIAL PROCEEDINGS 


MR. OATES—I ask the gentleman who made the motion to 
table to withhold a moment. I want to show the delegates just 
what this resolution is aimed at. 

MR. BURNS—A point of information. Has this Convention 
anything to do with what the last Legislature did." 

THE PRESIDENT—The Chair will refer the inquiry to the 
Judiciary Committee. A resolution was introduced that they 
should pass on those questions. 

MR. OATES—For the information of the delegates, that is 
the volume containing the general laws, (holding up the book) — 

MR. GREER (Calhoun)—A point of order. 

THE PRESIDENT—The gentleman will state the point of 
order. 


MR. GREER (Calhoun)—This is not a debatable question. 

MR. OATES—Who said it was debatable, my dear sir; I am 
just showing you what it is. I am not speaking to it at all, and 
do not propose to. I know it is out of order. Now this is the 
other volume, which contains the local laws— 

MR. GREIvR—I insist upon the point. 

MR. OATES—And these general laws are embraced in that, 
and as I understand the resolution, it is to print these two volumes 
and that in one. 


THE PRESIDENT—It seems to the Chair the point of order 
is well taken. The question is on the motion to table the resolu¬ 
tion as reported by the committee. 


Upon a vote being taken a division was called for, and by a 
vote of 51 ayes and 21 noes, the motion to table prevailed. 

THE PRESIDENT The regular order will he the consider.- 
tion of the report of the Committee on Taxation. 

MR. O’NEAL (Lauderdale) I desire to offer an amendment, 
if it is in order. 

THE PRESIDENT—The Convention, at its adjournment, 
had under its consideration section four, and there was pending 
^amendment offered by Mr. deCraffenreid, the gentleman from 

,o ,heLX A „h <LalKler " alC) - 1 desire *» ° ,f « •» am endment 

Wa.™L P “ S f I |o D OE NT “ The Kent ' Cma " fTOm Montgonrery (Mr. 

MR. O NEAL (Lauderdale)—Will the gentleman from Mont¬ 
gomery yield to me for the purpose of submitting this amendment? 



CONSTITUTIONAL CONVENTION, 1901 


1319 


MR. WATTS—Provided I have the floor as soon as the 
amendment is offered. 

MR. BROWNE—I make the point of order that the gentle¬ 
man cannot yield for that purpose and still have the floor. 

THE PRESIDENT—After the gentleman yields the Chair 
will rule on the situation when it arises. 

MR. WATTS—I yield provided I am to have the floor as soon 
as the amendment is offered. 

THE PRESIDENT—The Chair cannot make any guarantees 
about what it will rule until the situation arises. 

MR. WATTS—Mr. President, I am aware that this propo¬ 
sition to reduce the limit of State taxation, from 75 to 65 cents is 
no doubt a popular move, and would be received by the people 
with pleasure and gratitude ; but, Mr. President, whenever a ques¬ 
tion of public import has come up for consideration I have never 
stopped to think whether the one side or the other was popular, 
but I have tried to content myself with determining which side of 
the question was right, and having determined that, to follow that 
side, whether it be with the majority or the minority. You might 
just as well give to a child who cries for it a dangerous toy be¬ 
cause he wants it, as to give to the people of Alabama a reduced 
rate of taxation, when it would be dangerous to the fair name of 
this good State. 

There has been in the Constitution since 1875, a limitation of 
75 cents on the $100 as to State taxation. There has assembled in 
this Capitol building a dozen Legislatures since that time, and 
but one, I believe, has ever thought the needs of the State de¬ 
manded the tax rate to be at the limit. Some of these General 
Assemblies have put the tax rate at four mills upon the dollar. 
They have found their mistake. They have involved the State in 
difficulties which have compelled the Executive officers to violate 
the Constitution in going into the markets and borrowing money 
to meet the necessities of the State. If we have trusted the Legis¬ 
lature, in the past, why cannot we trust it in the future? The 
members of the Legislature come here, as we do, from the people. 
Are we to say that those gentlemen are not interested in the same 
manner that we are for the good of the people of this State, and 
for its good name? Are we to credit them with less patriotism 
than we possess? Why, then, Mr. President, should we refuse 
to leave this tax rate at 75 cents? Why should we reduce it to 
65 cents? Why should we not leave to the General Assembly 
the determinating of the affairs of government? 

Let us look back a little. Let us look also at the present. We 
find the governor writing to this Convention, or at least to a 
prominent member of it, that it is dangerous to reduce this tax 



1320 


OFFICIAL PROCEEDINGS 


limit. We find the Treasurer, the man who takes charge of the 
funds, and who- is presumed to know best as to the babdhies o 
the State, warning us against this move. We find the Auditor o 
the State likewise, raising a cry of warning and telling us to De- 


ware. 

We find two ex-Governors upon this floor giving us their ex¬ 
perience and telling us the move is dangerous. Not only that, Mr 
President, but I have before me a statement showing the present 
income and present expenditures of this State, estimating the re¬ 
ceipts and disbursements on the basis of a 70 cent tax rate, this 
is 70 cents mark you, and not 65 as proposed by this committee . 


receipts. 


Assessment on $276,000,000, at 50 cents - 

.$1,380,000 

_ 276,000 

OyCCldl SU1U1U 5 L d. A y l \J uvuio-*-—-- 

.. 276,000 

OyCLldl SC11VJU1 LcLAj XV/ VCUIO --—--- — 

. ... 210,000 


_ 86,000 


60,000 

Pnnvirt Denartment __- — _ 

_ 120,000 

Qnlintnrc fppc ____ __ _ _ 

20,000 

Railroad licenses _ ___. . — - 

____ 12,500 

Telegraph, Express and sleeping Car Companies-- 

P/xrnnro+mn cliartPr fppc _ . __-_ 

__ 12,000 

__ 13,000 

UI JJUI ct llUll vlldl Ivl 1 C v o ---— -"■ 

a Rt l\/f P n iiprr P fund from TT S _ _ 

_ 25,000 

Miscellaneous sources ....*■. 

_ 50,000 


Making a total of. 


$2,540,500 


DISBURSEMENTS. 


Executive Department ------$ 43,500 

Judiciary Department ---- 106,000 

Military Department --- 24,000 

Mining, Geological and Insurance Department----. 14,500 

Railroad Commission .------ 12,500 

Health Department - 13,000 

Agricultural Department and schools---.. 47,500 

Pension to Confederate soldiers .—-- 276,000 

Educational Department, general appropriation -- 550,000 

Interest on trust funds ----—.-.- 150,000 

Special tax, schools ----—- .. 276,000 

Interest on bonds ..~....-----...— 450,000 

• Feeding and removing prisoners .....--- 100,000 

Penitentiary -------- 114,000 

Interest on A. & M. C. trust fund.... 46,000 

University - 24,000 

Montevallo - 15,000 


































CONSTITUTIONAL CONVENTION, 1901 


1321 


Bryce Insane Hospital ...........- 152,000 

Schools for the Deaf and Blind........ 60,000 

One-half expense Legislature ....—... 26,000 

Errors, insolvencies etc.—......... 56,000 

Miscellaneous ......-...-. 50,000 


Total....... $2,606,000 


Or a deficit of $65,500. 

I am indebted to my friend Mr. Ashcraft for these figures. He 
has taken the trouble to ascertain them. Not only does he make 
this estimate, and I submit it to this Convention, but. it is backed 
up bv the following certificate: 

July 1st, 1901. 

Hon. J. T. Ashcraft, 

Dear Sir—We hereby certify that the above estimate appended 
hereto is approximately a correct statement of what the annual 
receipts and disbursements of the State Treasury would be upon 
a tax rate of 70 cents, conceding that the tax values will be ten 
millions more than last year. This estimate is based upon a cartful 
consideration of the records of our offices and the present and past 
business conditions in this State. The expense of holding the 
Constitutional Convention is not included in this estimate. 

Yours very truly. 

T. L. Sowell, Auditor, 

J. Craig Smith, Treasurer. 

MR. O’NEAL (Lauderdale)—For what year is that? 

MR. WATTS—This is July 1st, 1901. 

MR. O’NEAL—Is that an estimate for this year? 

MR. WATTS—It is an estimate on the basis of a 70 cent 
rate for this year. 

MR. O’NEAL—For this year? 

MR. WATTS—Yes, as I understand it. I will read the cer¬ 
tificate again so the gentleman can hear plainly. 

The certificate was again read. 

MR. O’NEAL—I still don’t understand whether that is an 
estimate of the receipts and disbursements for this year or next? 

MR. WATTS—It is an estimate of what the receipts of the 
treasurer would be upon a 10 cent basis. 

MR, O’NEAL—For this year? 








1322 


OFFICIAL PROCEEDINGS 


MR. WATTS—Yes, for any time on a taxable valuation of 
$276,000,000. 

MR. ASHCRAFT—That is admitting- the claim of the Com¬ 
mittee that the taxable values will increase $10,000,000 this year, 
and make a total of $276,000,000. 

MR. WATTS—Now, Mr. President, this statement shows 
there would be a deficit on this estimate of $65,500, but whether 
that estimate of a deficit is correct or not, do we want to risk a 
deficit? Had not we better have a surplus in our treasury than 
a deficit. What man that goes on a journey takes within his 
pocket only enough money to pay what he thinks may be the ex¬ 
penses of that journey? Does not the prudent man take some 
surplus with him? Should not the State of Alabama be governed 
by the same business principle? 

Mr. President, it is but a few years before the State of Ala¬ 
bama will be called upon to fund its debt. Five years from today 
is suggested by my learned friend from Montgomery (Mr. Oates.) 

The State of Alabama will be like any other borrower who 
goes into the market to borrow money. If we go today we can 
say to the lenders we have the right to levy a tax limited only by 
75 cents on the hundred dollars, and your debt is secure. Your 
debt is absolutely secure, therefore give us the lowest rate of in¬ 
terest which can be had for fifty year bond. If we go to these 
lenders saying that the limit is 65 cents, our credit is bound to be 
hurt. \\ hv, because we gee to them with the statement that we 
have reduced our possible income by more than 13 per cent. Is 
it a business proposition, Mr. President for a merchant who has 
been getting along with good credit and a fair name, to reduce his 
annual income thirteen and more per cent and then go to his 
creditors; Could he expect the same consideration in the money 
world? We are to consider those propositions, and we are not to 
do anything which will cripple the power of this State to obtain 
the lowest rate of interest when we go to fund these bonds. 

If, Mr. President, we limit the rate of taxation to 65 cents, it 
means one of two things. It means either that we must default 
on our public debt, or we must cut down our appropriation to our 
public schools, or we must cut down the appropriation to the 
Confederate soldiers. 

What member of this Convention stands ready to take the 
position to do either? What man who has within his heart the 
love of Alabama is willing to put her credit at risk? What man 
is willing to run the risk of taking from her the proud position 
which she now has in the sisterhood of States? What man among 
us is willing to strike down the school facilities of the children 
of this State? Who is it that is willing to say that the child shall 
be deprived of its school privileges? Ought we not rather to 



CONSTITUTIONAL CONVENTION, 1901 1323 

provide that there shall be a school house on every hill for the 
accommodation of the childen of this State? And who is it, Mr. 
President, that is willing' to deny to those brave and patriotic men 
who stood up for this State, and followed her flag, the small pit¬ 
tance that is now granted to them? 

Another thing, Mr. President, which will follow. If we reduce 
this taxation to 65 cents, we simply invite the General Assembly 
to seek out more things upon which they can levy a privilege tax. 
You will find the citizen with the tax levied upon him as an in¬ 
dividual, instead of upon general subjects of taxation. You will 
find the General Assembly seeking to tax this thing, or that, or 
the other thing, instead of raising the revenues of the State through 
the legitimate channels which have existed for years. Another 
thing; these gentlemen who are speaking on this subject, in favor 
of the reduction of this ’tax rate, seem to think that days of dark¬ 
ness and of depression may not come to this State again. Have 
we not had those days of depression in the past? Does not the 
recent history of this State show that the taxable values went 
down to about $241,000,000? Can we guarantee that we will not 
arrive at that point again? If we do, then what is our condition? 
Where will we get the help? Can we send our Governor again to 
New York city, to beg the money lenders there, to violate the law 
and the Constitution of the State of Alabama, and lend us money, 
when we have no authority to borrow it, and no sure revenues 
with which to pay it back? Let us not put ourselves in that po¬ 
sition. Let us content ourselves with the same course which we 
have pursued up to this time. Let us not take any chances with 
the affairs of State, any more than we would with our own busi¬ 
ness affairs. 

It is said by the advocates of this measure that there will be 
a surplus of $600,000 on the first of October next. Let me ask 
of those gentlemen how many hundred thousand dollars will the 
State then be liable for. 

I am reliably informed that although there may be a surplus 
of $600,000 in the Treasury on the first of October next, that.at 
that time or shortly afterwards the State of Alabama will be called 
upon to pay more than $1,000,000. If that is true why should we 
risk this reduction? Mr. President, this matter is of such im¬ 
portance that I have felt the necessity of saying something on the 
subject. It is a thing that we should stop and consider, we should 
not rashly do these things, we should consider the welfare of the 
State and we should remember the times that are gone. I see a 
ship Mr President, a noble vessel. She is loaded down with hu¬ 
man’ freight She has crossed the ocean and is now approaching 
her port. Every heart is beating with gladness and with excite¬ 
ment with the hope of being soon upon the land. There are two 
channels which lead to the harbor. To the untaught eye. the en- 



1324 


OFFICIAL PROCEEDINGS 


trance to each of these channels seems to be perfectly safe, but the 
experienced pilot knows that the channel to the left has hidden 
beneath its water rocks and shoals. He believes that with care 
he can guide the good old ship through that channel into port, but 
he knows that along his path danger is lurking, and that the 
striking of any shoal or rock means ruin and disaster to his ship. 
He knows that down the other channel it is absolutely safe. There 


are no rocks nor shoals there. The vessel can float in security 
through that passage. What would the prudent pilot do? Will 
he guide the ship down the left hand passage and seek danger, or 
will he insure safety by taking the one to the right? The good 
old ship of State, Mr. President, has passed over many seas. She 
rode with safety until a few years after the war between the States. 
Then she experienced the patriotic, the good citizens of Alabama 
who had had charge of it up to that time were displaced bv the 
United States government, and a hireling band placed in charge 
of her. These new sailors were inexperienced. They were un¬ 
patriotic. They were strangers. They sailed the ship into harbors 
into which they should not have gone. They hoisted a piratical 
flag. They ran the ship and sailed the seas for the monev that 
was in it for them. The good people of the State watched it until 
1874. It was not until then that they could again seize the helm 
of the ship. They siezed it in 1874, and since that time thev have 


managed the ship and run it with safety and security. She has 
now arrived, Mr. President, within sight of the harbor. There 
are two channels which lead to the harbor of financial prosperity. 
Phis Committee on laxation say: Take the one to the left, it is 
safe, it is free from shoals, you can pass along it possibly without 
danger and without disaster. These men, Mr. i'resident" are hon¬ 
est and true, they would not for any consideration lead us astray, 
but they have not made finance a study; none of them have been 
in charge of the finances of the State. On the other hand we find 
two ex-Governors of the State, the present Governor and the Au¬ 
ditor and 1 reasurer warning us from that course. They cry out 
to us take the old passage, the old channel into the harbor. It lias 
been trusted for years and years. Do not attempt this stran-e 
passage until you know fully its dangers and its troubles I bee 
you gentlemen of the Convention, don’t let us do this thin- Don't 
et us vote for this 65 cents, and thereby put the State in danger 
but let us vote to let this tax stay as it is and trust to the Legis¬ 
lature, as they assemble from time to time, to do that which is 
just and proper for this State. You must remember that there 
was no limitation in the Constitution until 1875. That limitation 
was put at /5 cents on the $100, and but once since that time has 
the Legislature reached the limit. Gentlemen this is too impor¬ 
tant a question to pass over lightly. Let us not vote because the 
measure may be popular, but let us vote according to our convic¬ 
tions as to what is right, what is for the best interests of this State 



CONSTITUTIONAL CONVENTION, 1901 


1325 


and when we have done that, each of us, whether we be right or 
wrong*, can at least have the approval of his conscience. 

MR. MAXWELL—When I consented to become a member 
of this Convention I purposed in my heart that I would be only 
a silent member, that I would only attempt to speak when the roll 
was called, or the vote was being taken, and it may be, sir, that 
before I shall have delivered the remarks I now wish to submit, 
or soon thereafter, that I will be wishing that I had stuck to this 
purpose. But be that as it may, I have the honor of being a mem¬ 
ber of the Committee whose report is now under consideration, 
and I want to offer one or two reasons why I think the fourth 
section of that article should be adopted without amendment and 
as presented by the Committee. Now, Mr. President, this splendid 
array of legal talent here, and parliamentary talent, I am afraid 
of, and I hope they will not side-track me with their points of 
order to this or that effect, but that they will let me proceed with¬ 
out interruption. I shall not repeat the splendid array of figures 
gleaned from the Auditor's report by the Committee on Taxation, 
and so convincingly submitted by our distinguished chairman. 
These figures have been submitted to you. Distinguished members 
of the Committee like Judge Coleman and others as well as the 
Chairman himself have told you with what great pains this data 
was gotten up, and that it is entirely reliable. The figures are 
before the Convention, they speak for themselves, and unlike some 
other speakers they do not mislead, but they point unerringly to 
the truth of the practicability of the Committee's recommendation 
that the tax rate can be reduced from 7 1-2 to 6 1-2 mills, and 
that it can be done without jeopardizing any of the interests of 
the great State of Alabama, and they further show, Mr. President, 
that we ought to do this and thus fulfill the Democratic platform 
and pledge to the people of Alabama in Convention assembled 
that they would reduce the tax rate if found at all practicable to 
do so. Now it is urged Mr. President, by gentlemen on the other 
side of this question that we are dealing in estimates. That is 
true. We are dealing in estimates, and what government in the 
world, national. State, county or municipal ever attempts to dis¬ 
cover what its probable receipts or disbursements will be in any 
other way—it is the only way to do it. If we have our treasury 
full of money we need to make no estimate, we pay cash as we 
go, but unfortunately our treasury is not in that plethoric con¬ 
dition and we need to make estimates. The whole world makes 
estimates. Why the science of estimates and probabilities is as 
much a science as anything else. Just look at the mortuary tables 
of the great life insurance companies, and see to what a science 
they have estimated the computation of the probable duration of 
human life, and these tables have proven so accurate and stood 
the test of human experience and observation so long, that they 
have multiplied millions of dollars invested in human life. These; 



1326 


OFFICIAL PROCEEDINGS 


estimates are not more accurate than estimates upon which 
this committee have placed their recommendation to this con¬ 
vention to reduce the rate of taxation from 7 1-2 mills to 
6 1-2 mills. These figures, as I stated, have been before the 
Convention for days, and yet they have not been denied, al¬ 
though the fact stands out that some of the most distin¬ 
guished members of this Convention, men most thoroughly ac¬ 
quainted with the financial affairs of the State refuse to vote for 
a lower rate of taxation, and yet they do not deny the figures, and 
they base their objection to the reduction upon the ground that 
some disaster may come along, that some contingency in the fu¬ 
ture may arise, by which it may not be possible to enable 6 1-2 mills 
to produce enough revenue to defray the expenses and the wants 
of the State, and at the same time the figures of this Committee 
stand out in unmistakable terms telling us that we can do this, 
and that we can do it without jeopardy to the interest of the State. 
It is urged, Mr. President, that our Committee is too sanguine, 
that it took too rosy a view of the future, that we are proceeding 
upon the idea that the present wave of prosperitv will last for¬ 
ever, that no more clouds of adversity will ever darken our horizon, 
and that the present taxable value of $266,000,000 will never de¬ 
crease, but will continue to increase from day to day, and year by 
year, and that our income will increase in the same proportion, 
and that this, with the saving we shall make in interest when the 
bonded indebtedness shall have been refunded at a much lower 
rate, than we now pay, will produce sufficient revenue to answer 
all the demands of our people. Now', Mr. President, I do not have 
much objection to that objection; it states the views of the com¬ 
mittee pretty clearly, but I would only add this, that whether we 
have an increase in revenue, whether we have an increase in taxa¬ 
ble values or not, if we do not have an increase in taxable values, 
and do not have an increase in disbursements, then with the reve¬ 
nue from other sources we will have revenue enough and to spare 
to meet the demands of our State. But suppose disaster should 
come, and suppose taxable values should recede a little, cannot 
we as easily and effectively meet any disaster by an increase in the 
taxable values, an increase in the assessable values of our property 
as well as by raising the rate of taxation? Would not one plan be 
just as effective as the other? Wouldn’t it amount to the same 
thing? Wouldn’t it bring the same results? That is the way I 
see it, Mr. President. Now it is true that if our people were 
conscious of the fact that they had to return their property for 
assessment at its full value, the assessable value, they would feel 
we were practicing an injustice upon them, but Mr. President 
my observation is that very few people return their property for 
taxation at anything like the value they set upon it when they put 
it upon the market for sale. We are not so poor as we think we 
are > a °d we are never so poor as when we are being interviewed 



CONSTITUTIONAL CONVENTION, 1901 


1327 


by the Tax Assessor. Mr. President, I would state here today 
that it is my conviction that if a J. Piedpont Morgan syndicate 
with a capital of $500,000,000 should be formed for the purpose of 
buying out the State of Alabama the company would have to 
increase its capital stock before it would have money enough to 
pay for and get a title to the $266,000,000 of assessable values re¬ 
turned by the people of Alabama, the present year, and then, Mr. 
President, there is another ever present and always practical rem¬ 
edy at hand for hard times or short receipts: It is always prac¬ 
ticable to use it, though there are some people who do not like to 
have this remedy prescribed, and they do not like to practice, it 
and its name is retrenchment of expenses; but, Mr. President, it 
is a great safety valve that will nearly always regulate and restore 
the equilibrium to financial affairs, and it is a good thing to prac¬ 
tice, whether we are financially sick or not; it broadens our sym¬ 
pathies, it prepares us to meet and grapple with adverse circum¬ 
stances if they should come, and it helps us in the practice of self- 
denial. Now, Mr. President, with these remedies so potent and 
so powerful always at hand, I do not see that there is any use 
hesitating any longer about voting, for members of this Conven¬ 
tion to cast their vote to reduce from 7 1-2 to 6 1-2 mills. We 
want the people of Alabama to understand that we are their friends, 
and that we want to frame a government that will not be a burden 
to them. It may be, that some members upon this floor do think 
that the committee is inclined to take too rosy a view of the 
future, but, sir, how can we be otherwise when we remember that 
Alabama, great and rich as she is in her fields, in her forests, in 
her soil, in her climate, in her manufactures, in her mines, in her 
commerce, and richest and greatest in her splendid and patriotic 
citizenship, has been put to the test and gone through ordeals 
heretofore and has been equal to any emergency that has ever 
been brought upon her, how can we help when we consider all 
this, being otherwise than hopeful? Why, sir, in the perils of war 
from 1861 to 1865, in the difficulties of property and carpet-bag¬ 
gers from 1866 to 1874, when she raised in her might, in the majes¬ 
ty of her strength and wrath and took back from worthless hands 
the government of her fathers again, since then she has been grow¬ 
ing in prosperity and in the development of her great natural re¬ 
sources until in the last twenty-five years her taxable values have 
increased double, and yet we are told that she is yet in her in¬ 
fancy. We enter upon the threshold of this Twentieth century 
full of hope and full of pride and expectation of great possibilities. 
Her past is secure, though checkered, it is glorious, and we are 
proud of it. We are proud of her achievements, and, sir, we are 
here this day as delegates representing the sovereign people of 
the great State of Alabama in Convention assembled; we have 
abundant reason to thank God for the past, and to take courage 
for the future. I am proud of Alabama, and I would be the last 
man upon this floor that would put an obstruction in her onward 



1328 


OFFICIAL PROCEEDINGS 


and upward march to progress. Let us, then, Mr. President and 
Gentlemen of this Convention, remove the obstacle of high taxa¬ 
tion from our Constitution; let us reduce it to the lowest limit, 
6 1-2 mills, as recommended by the committee, and let us make 
our great State as inviting as she is to capital, still more inviting; 
let us fix our rate in keeping with the rate of our neighboring sister 
States, so that with our great resources above all others, we shall 
be more inviting a field for them to come to. Now, Mr. President, 
I want to say in conclusion, for the benefit of the distinguished 
gentlemen from Montgomery, who have so earnestly and eloquent¬ 
ly plead for some Constitutional provisions to secure an enlarge¬ 
ment of these grounds and this capitol building itself, that I am in 
hearty accord with the spirit that moves them, and that I differ 
with them only as to the source whence the money shall come. 
According to the figures submitted by our Committee on the 1st 
day of October, 1902, we will have a net balance in the treasury of 
about $347,000. Out of this the next Legislature can, and no doubt 
will, make the necessary appropriation to meet this necessary ex¬ 
penditure. I believe that these improvements ought to be made 
within the next year or two, and I would remind the distinguished 
gentleman from Montgomery that pride in the State Capitol is 
not confined to Montgomery alone. The scenes that were enacted 
here in 1861 when a new nation was born, and that makes this 
historic ground the common heritage of every Alabamian, whether 
we come from the Northern, the Southern, the Eastern or the 
Western borders of the State, it makes our hearts swell with 
pride every time we look upon its dome, or enter these sacred por¬ 
tals, and Mr. President, I believe that Alabamians can be trusted 
to secure the bonds that are necessary to buy and enlarge these 
grounds, and to adorn and beautify them, and to rebuild and re¬ 
habilitate this old capitol building around whose sacred walls are 
so many hallowed memories, and make it what it ought to be, a 
fit abiding place for the seat of a great and growing government 
like the State of Alabama. Mr. President, I believe with all my 
heart that this can be done, and that it can be done without any 
Constitutional provision—that the people of Alabama will take it 
in hand through their next Legislature, and that they will see to it 
that it is accomplished. 

MR. FOSTER (Tuscaloosa)—Mr. President, like my friend, 
the gentleman from Tallapoosa, I have been a silent delegate. I 
don't know that I should have attempted to make any talk upon 
this provision now up for consideration before the Convention, 
but for a somewhat accidental discovery of the necessary require¬ 
ments to get the floor, and for the further reason that having been 
at first opposed to and afraid of the adoption of this report, I have 
expressed to some delegates my doubts as to the advisability of 
adopting this section. I am, Mr. President, in the attitude of a 
convert to the Committee's report. When it was first printed and 



CONSTITUTIONAL CONVENTION, 1901 


1329 


laid upon my desk, and I had studied it and read it over, I thought 
that this section could not safely be adopted, and that in as much 
as the tax rate now is up to the Constitutional limit of 75 cents, 
and it seemed to be necessary in order to meet all the expenses of 
State Government, that we could not safely reduce that limit, and 
so, Mr. President, for the purpose of making a fight upon this pro¬ 
vision, I proceeded to investigate the facts and figures for myself. 
Much to my surprise when 1 had done so, I found that I was on 
the side with the Committee. I feel assured, Mr. President, that 
this rate can be safely reduced to 65 cents. If 1 thought it would 
take one dollar off of the school fund, or one dollar off of the Con¬ 
federate pension fund, or would impair in the least the credit of 
this State. 1 should oppose it, but believing that the figures, the 
facts, show that it can be safely reduced, I feel that I would be 
recreant to the pledge that the Democratic Convention put upon 
the Democratic members of this Convention to reduce tax rate, 
if practicable, if I did not vote to support the section as reported 
by the Committee. Now gentlemen argue as if this is a new and 
unheard of thing, as if the idea of limiting the discretion of the 
Legislature in the levy of taxes is something new in the history of 
the laws of this State. Why Mr. President, if I felt that way, if I 
had the absolute confidence in the legislatures, that gentlemen 
who have argued this question upon this floor seem to have, I 
should say let us not limit their discretion by any figures at all, 
let the Legislature be the sole judge of the limit. 

MR. ROGERS (Sumter)—I wish to ask Mr. Foster if his 
confidence in the Legislature is as great as these gentlemen indi¬ 
cate, what would be the use of having a Constitution at all? 

MR. FOSTER—Very little at all, especially upon this tax 
limitation. I have no criticism to make upon the members of 
Legislatures, I have always found the members to be the best men 
in the world. The fact is it is not so much the fault of the General 
Assemblies that they have been extravagant in their appropria¬ 
tions, as it is the people of Alabama—we are living in an era of 
extravagant public expenditure—our National and State history of 
recent years shows it. We have the idea that when any enter¬ 
prise is gotten up, especially if there is anything of a public charac¬ 
ter involved in it. we ought to come to the Legislature of Ala¬ 
bama, or to the Congress of the United States and ask for State 
aid. Well, now, when we come before the members of the Gen ral 
Assembly,'if we cannot persuade them, I have seen it frequently, 
Mr. President, we add to our persuasive arguments the eloquence 
of beauty and bring in the ladies to besiege these gentlemen in the 
interest of some appropriation. Now I observe on page 21, the 
Roman numeral page, of the Auditor’s report, that immediately 
after the ratification of the Constitution of 1875, the tax rate was 
fixed at 7 1-2 mills—the Constitutional limit. I infer from that 
that our forefathers who assembled in the Convention of 1875 did 



1330 


OFFICIAL PROCEEDINGS 


as this Committee is endeavoring to do today, they carefully ex¬ 
amined and calculated the necessary amount of taxes to he levied 
upon the taxable property of this State, and having ascertained 
that they placed it at the limit of 7 1-2 mills. So 1 say we are 
not attempting anything unheard of, or any new proposition here, 
when we figure out what will be necessary for the support of the 
State government, and the appropriations already made, and which 
we cantemplate will continue in the future, and say that the tax 
limit shall reach that amount and no further, we are simply follow¬ 
ing in the footsteps of the framers of the Constitution of 1875. 
Now, Mr. President, for the figures that lead me to my conclusion. 
This Convention is told by the distinguished Chairman of this 
Committee who has made a careful investigation of it, whose es¬ 
timates I think, are conservative and safe, that the taxable value of 
the properties of this State next year will be S278.0(XUX)0. W ell, 
then, a tax of 6 1-2 mills on $278,000,000 in round figures is $1,- 
807,000. Now I think we may safely estimate that the ta.\e> from 
all other sources will certainly not be less than they are estimated 
by the Auditor for this year, than the actual receipts up to this 
time according to the Auditor’s figures show, and 1 place that, Mr. 
President, at $922,000—those are the fi gures shown by the Auditor. 
So then we have as gross receipts on a basis of 6 1-2 mills $2,729.- 
000. Mr. President, we might safely appropriate SI.200.000 to the 
schools (I believe that is in excess of the present appropriation) 
give the same pension fund of $250,000, and have left for the general 
expenses of the State government $1,200,000, making a total of 
$2,650,000 for appropriations, and a surplus of nearly $80,000. Now, 
Mr. President, I know that figures have been used for different 
purposes by delegates who have argued this question, and 1 have 
been somewhat amazed at the different conclusions that have been 
drawn from these elastic figures, but I take the figures from the 
Auditor’s report submitted to the Governor of this State, for use 
in the General Assembly, and I find that upon page 16 the Auditor 
says he estimates the disbursements for the year 1901 at $2,526,970. 
and in a foot note to that estimate he adds: “The above estimate 
of receipts and disbursements are made also for the year ending 
September 30th, 1902, except as to the item of $50,000 for Legisla¬ 
tive expenses.” Mr. President, I say it is not only practicable for 
us to reduce this limit, but it is necessary that we should do it in 
order to carry out the pledges that we are under to the people of 
Alabama. Now they say this limit of 75 cents does not fall hard 
upon any body. It does not, Mr. President, upon the man who 
comes before the General Assembly for appropriations, but there 
is a large element in the state which has no representation before 
that body:; there is a larger element, the poor people of this State, 
who do feel this burden of taxation, and it is for those people, for 
the relief of those people that this committee, and those of us who 
favor this report are speaking here today. It has been suggested 
that we may impair the credit of the State. The distinguished gen- 



CONSTITUTIONAL CONVENTION, 1901 


1331 


tlemun from Montgomery (Mr. Watts) made a very strong- argu¬ 
ment upon that point, hut I want to ask the gentleman if he does 
not know that character in the business world is as much a basis of 
credit a> revenue." 1 want to ask him if the character of the Gen¬ 
eral Assembly of Alabama is not the main basis of credit when we 
go before those bond holders and bond buyers, upon which they 
are willing to risk their money and to take the bonds of Alabama? 
W hy. Mr. President, when the rate was down to 4 mills was there 
any doubt that the General Assembly of Alabama would appro¬ 
priate enough money to pay the interest on this debt? They might 
argue in reply to that that there was a possibility of additional 
taxes, but. Mr. President, it all comes down at last to reliance 
upon the character and business honesty of the Legislature of 
Alabama. Now, sir, I have no fear. 1 don’t think any delegate 
upon this floor has any fear, that the credit of Alabama will be 
hurt in the least by the reduction of the limit to 65 cents. It is 
also said that we may reach a period of depression. That mav be 
true, and doubtless will come, Mr. President,—those periods come 
occasionally as we have known in the history of our State, but I 
suggest. Mr. President, that the values as now assessed in this 
State are not upon any inflated basis, they are not even up to the 
value of property within this State. There is no comparison be¬ 
tween this period and 1891. That was a period known as boom 
days, such a boom, Mr. President, as never swept over this country 
before, unless it were the boom clays of 1836-37. I believe I have 
the dates right, I don’t know, some time in the thirties. Let us 
look at all these little towns, Mr. President—Ft. Payne, Piedmont, 
Tuscaloosa, where cotton fields were cut up into first avenue lots, 
and you saw the signs of streets out there without any street, and 
they’sold at First Avenue lot figures. Well, when the clash came 
they simply converted back to their actual value, they became 
cotton fields again, and they were taken off the market as corner 
lots and put upon their actual basis upon the tax hooks of the 
State. There they are today upon that actual basis of valuation. 
So I say that there is not any inflation in the tax values of Ala¬ 
bama, and if the time does come, if there should come a time at 
the end of five years when the State debt is to he refunded, that 
a period of depression should again come upon this State, the tax 
values will, by that time have arisen, we may safely estimate, to 
over three hundred million dollars. I think, Mr. President, that 
gentlemen are unnecessarily alarmed about the credit of the State. 
The figures show that we may give to the schools and Confederate 
soldiers every dollar we now give them, pay the interest on the 
public debt and keep up every appropriation that the last General 
Assembly made, and yet have a surplus in the treasury even at a 
basis of 65 cents. 

MR. O’NEAL (Lauderdale)—Mr. President, I would not 
trespass upon the time and patience of this Convention but for 



1332 


OFFICIAL PROCEEDINGS 


candid conviction that this is the most important question which 
has been submitted for our consideration since our organization. 
It is with profound reluctance that I feel impelled from a sense of 
duty to oppose the report of the committee. I fully appreciate 
the ability and patriotism of the committee and recognize that 
they have given this subject their most careful consideration and 
have reached their conclusion conscientiously after thorough study. 
When the report was first submitted I was inclined to accept it, 
but after listening to the debate and reviewing fully the argu¬ 
ments in its support I am convinced that the reduction is unwise 
and unsafe. 

There are few delegates in this Convention except those whose 
optimism is impervious to argument, who will deny that after all 
that has been said in support of this reduction, after consideration 
of every estimate and every array of figures with which we have 
been furnished, there still remains the modest doubt. Like Banquo's 
ghost, the doubt will not down at our bidding, and hence I see 
no alternative but to resolve that doubt against the reduction and 
in favor of maintaining unimpaired the financial credit and honor 
of our State. It has been urged that we are pledged by the plat¬ 
form of the party to reduce the present limitation on the taxing 
power if possible. That is true, but we were not pledged to make 
a reduction which might affect the splendid credit which this State 
now sustains in the commercial center of the world. 

We were equally pledged to take no backward step in the 
cause of education, or to impair the ability of the General Assembly 
to continue to dole out that small mite which we justlv owe to 
that splendid body of men, whose ranks disease and age are rapid¬ 
ly thinning—the survivors of that band of heroes whose blood 
freely flowed at honor’s call and now stands where it fell. 

It is urged that this reduction will be popular and will brin^ 
votes to ratify the Constitution. 

Mr. Preisdent, if an overwhelming majority of the people of 
Alabama, the people to whose gracious confidence we are indebted 
for seats in this Convention, and who have vested us with such 
gra\e responsibilities, should with one voice demand this reduction 
and we, as their representatives, knew they were mistaken, that 
obedience to their commands would prejudice our credit impede 
the proper administration of our State government, or fetter our 
progress, we should vote against the reduction, and disregard the 
demands, or prove unworthy of their confidence, and false to our 
consciences and our oaths. I warn you who may be influenced bv 
such appeals, that if you are as I believe mistaken, if the effect of 
these reductions of the State bonded debt, or impede the progress 
of education, or in any way impair the efficiency of our State 
government, or cause a halt in that career of progress on which 



CONSTITUTIONAL CONVENTION, 1901 


1333 


our State has entered, that instead of the approval you will receive 
the condemnation of the people of Alabama. 

The distinguished Chairman of the Committee stated in his 
argument on the floor that no other extraordinary expense could 
be made for the next fiscal year. His estimate of a surplus of 
$59,000 is based on the supposition that we will not have any ex¬ 
traordinary expenses except those he enumerated. Yet, Mr. Presi¬ 
dent, in less than twelve hours after he concluded his argument, 
the report of the Committee on Suffrage and Elections was sub¬ 
mitted to this Convention, and if the Article on that subject which 
they report is adopted we will be confronted with an extraordinary 
expense of at least $100,000. 

Under the suffrage plan poll taxes are voluntary—the payment 
cannot be coerced. \\ e collected in the fiscal year ending Septem¬ 
ber, 1900, $150,000 poll taxes. We can conservatively estimate a 
reduction of $50,000. And to this the expense of registration, about 
$30,000 or $40.00 more, and we have alone in this item $80,000 ex¬ 
traordinary expense, which is not embraced in his calculation. 


So the surplus with which the distinguished Chairman has 
dazzled our imagination—like snow flakes on the water—seen but 
once and gone forever. The distinguished Chairman in his zeal 
has gravelv argued that a reduction of our tax limit is necessary 
to induce capital to invest in our borders—that industries will not 
locate in a State when vou have a fixed tax on their property of 
75 cents on the $100. when they can go to States where the tax is 

less. 

Only a few states in the Union have such limitations. Texas. 
North Dakota, Montana, Missouri and some few Southern and 
Western States have such limitations. 


After the close of the civil war commenced an era of profligacy 
— extravagance and reckless expenditure of public money almost 
without parallel. A horde of adventurers from every haunt of 
vice and crime flocked to the South, banded the negroes together 
with a compact of all departments of government in the States of 
the South, prostrate from the effects of the greatest civil war of 
modern times. They devised the various forms of taxation bv 
which a people could be oppressed; issued bonds for railroads and 
public improvements which were never constructed and divided 
he proceeds between themselves and dishonest contractors. They 
imposed on the impoverished States of the South a burden of deb 
which brought bankruptcy and ruin to our very thresholds and 
destroyed public credit. Taught by their sad experiences, the 
people of Alabama, when they regained control of the State gov¬ 
ernment in 1874. limited in the Constitution the amount of taxa¬ 
tion which may be levied for State and county purposes. It is a 
wise provision and should not be disturbed. Such provisions, 
however are not found in the great and progressive States of the 


1334 


OFFICIAL PROCEEDINGS 


Union, and their marvellous growth in wealth and prosperity in 
the face of the absence of such limitation on the taxing power, is 
a complete refutation of the argument so earnestly made by the 
distinguished chairman of the committee—that no State can pros¬ 
per or expect the investment of capital in its borders that does not 
contain similar limitation. 

Another result of this limitation on the taxing power we have 
learned from experience, is that when, by reason of this prohibition 
on rate of taxation, the Legislature is confronted with a deficit, it 
is unable to provide necessary revenue. 

To meet the expenses of government they must necessarilv 
resort to license or privilege taxes to supply the deficiency. This 
is the lesson which a study of our financial history teaches. Dur¬ 
ing the last administration to meet the increased demands of the 
State government, the Legislature swept the field of expedient and 
exhausted the catalogue of subjects on which they might impose 
the burden of a license or privilege tax. The result is that the 
State and county and municipalities in order to supplement an 
insufficient revenue have imposed license or privilege taxes on 
every class of occupation, industries or business from the wealthy 
corporation to the newsboy and bootblack and the humblest tailor 
in the State, from baseball parks to hobby horses. No occupation 
or business has escaped. 

MR. REESE—Are not those taxes for city licenses imposed 
by the City Councils at the request of the merchants to keep out 
the competition of the farmer? 

MR. O’NEAL—I care not at whose request they are made. I 
say such taxes operate onerously upon the great agricultural classes 
of the State, and the trouble is that by the limit upon your rate 
of taxation, you force the counties and cities of your State to 
supplement their deficient revenues by these harsh, arbitrary and 
unjust privilege taxes. 

MR. CUNNINGHAM—I fail to see the connection in the rate 
of tax limit upon taxation for State purposes with the revenues for 
county and city purposes. 

MR. O’NEAL—I will state the connection. The State is doing 
the same thing. The connection is this: The State is imposing 
these license privilege taxes on every class of business and occu¬ 
pation. As I stated, the last Legislature swept the whole catalogue 
of subjects and exhausted every imaginable subject to increase 
the privilege taxes and the city and counties have followed the 
example of the State. 

MR. BROOKS —Don’t the gentleman know that for many 
years the cities have been levying this privilege tax, long before 
the Legislature? 



CONSTITUTIONAL CONVENTION, 1901 


1335 


MR. O’NEAL—They have, but not to the same extent. 

MR. BROOKS—Then it is not under the influence of the 
Legislature that they have done it? 

MR. O’NEAL—They have been imposing it only to a limited 
extent. Not to the same extent as in recent years. 


MR. BROOKS—Haven’t these privilege taxes always been 
paid in the cities without reference to the State? 

MR. O’NEAL—The Legislature would have it in its power 
to forbid the levying of such taxes. The Legislature grants every 
charter in the State, and it would be in the power of the Legisla¬ 
ture to forbid any corporation or city from imposing any such 
privilege tax. 

This form of taxation is the most arbitrary, unequal, unjust 
and inquisitorial that can be devised. It is not imposed according 
to the capital invested, or the income derived from the calling, 
occupation, profession or business. It operates as a positive and 
vexatious fetter upon trade and commerce to close the doors and 
avenues of employment to many of the most deserving in the State. 
It has retarded our growth and prosperity, for where the avenues 
of trade and employment are even partially blocked by restrictive 
legislation, the highest development of industry and commerce 
cannot exist. 

In most of the towns and cities of the State are found numer¬ 
ous and vexatious statutes imposing license taxes on the sale of 
farm products, with the result that the market for the farmers has 
been curtailed and the cost of living increased enormously. In 
my own town, which is but an illustration of what exists in almost 
alf others the farmer cannot sell his beef or mutton to the consum¬ 
er at retail The country merchant, who formerly gathered the 
farm products of his neighborhood-poultry, butter, eggs and other 
fruits P and vegetables—is required to take out llcens ^ J e .°j e 
terine* or selling: to the consumer in the city. The farmer, it is true, 
can sell without license a portion of the products on his own farm, 
but if he supplements his supply by purchase from his neighbors, 
he must pay a privilege tax. 

So these license or privilege taxes operate most oppressively 
and Grievously on that class of our population—the great agricul- 
tural^classes—which deserve and should receive the fostering care 
and protection of government. 

o n Mr President, the conclusions unmistakably follow that 
when you reduce the limit of State taxation and force the Legis* 
Sure to resort to other methods to supplement the revenue of 
f u £ to , nnt decrease taxation, but merely substitute for 

a^usAd valorem tax in force throughout the State, the haralt, 
arbitrary, unjust and unequal system of license or privilege taxes, 


1336 


OFFICIAL PROCEEDINGS 


The adoption of this reduction means a perpetuation in this 
State of the harshest and most unequal and onerous system of 
license taxation ever imposed on a free people, with all the mani¬ 
fold evils. 

So I say to the distinguished chairman of the Taxation Com¬ 
mittee that the people of Alabama will not be misled by the morsel 
of tax reduction you offer them. 

They are groaning beneath the burden of these license taxes, 
and you heed their appeals by offering them a remedy which only 
aggravates the evil—a remedy which you confess, if your estimates 
are erroneous, may jeopardize the splendid credit and high honor 
of this proud commonwealth. 

Mr. President, the chairman of the Finance Committee and 
others, who have supported this report, base their estimate of a 
surplus of $59,000 in 1902, upon the assumption that the State, in 
the future will be exempt from a recurrence of the same extra¬ 
ordinary expenses which have existed in the past? Mr. President 
I have not read aright the lesson which financial history teaches 
if it be not true that what has occurred in the past will occur in 
the future. The average of extraordinary expenses in any govern¬ 
ment can be calculated with the same exactness as the average of 
ordinary expenses. He is wise, indeed, who can foretell what the 
future will bring, but one thing we all do know and that is that 
the same unforseen contingencies which have arisen in the past 
will most likely occur in the future. The distinguished gentleman 
from Tuscaloosa (Mr. Fitts) whose optimism is as innocent and 
guileless and as proof to argument as a Col. Sellers, tells us that 
during the Oates administration the State maintained the credit 
by borrowing money without legal authority and that our credit 
is so high that our ability under the law to pay will never be con¬ 
sidered. He overlooks the fact that our credit was high because 
at that time we taxed only a rate of 5 1-2 mills and the capitalists 
of the country knew we could increase the rate to 3-4 of 1 per cent. 
I ask him if we had then been levying a tax up to the limit of the 
Constitution would even his surplus of optimism induce him to 
believe that the loan could have been so easily made. 

MR. OATES—That is correct. The rate had been increased 
a half mill just about the time I was inaugurated, but the State’s 
credit was so good that they borrowed a half million at 5 per cent. 

MR. O’NEAL—Well, it was only five or five and a half mills, 
but if the money-lenders in New York had known that the State 
had no power to increase the taxes under the Constitution, if they 
had known that the constitutional limit had been reached, I would 
ask the gentleman from Tuscaloosa if even his surplus of opti¬ 
mism would lead him to believe that this money could be secured. 
That would be the situation we would be in if at any time a deficit 
should arise and we should seek a loan from the financial centers 



CONSTITUTIONAL CONVENTION, 1901 


1337 


of the world. They would say “You have reached your limit, you 
can proceed no further.” 

MR. FOSTER—Was the rate increased after the money was 
borrowed for that purpose? 

MR. O’NEAL—Certainly. 

MR. FOSTER—I understood the gentleman from Montgom¬ 
ery (Mr. Oates) to say that it had been increased before. 

MR. O’NEAL—It was increased afterwards as I remember. 

MR. FOSTER—I understood it the other way, that it was 
increased before and not afterwards. 

MR. O’NEAL—Now I have some figures here submitted 
to me by one of the most distinguished citizens of the State, one 
whose familiarity with this subject cannot be question. 

Total assessments for present year, $267,000,000 will 


yield revenue, at rate of 7 1-2 mills, of—. $2,002,500 

Bal. estimated receipts come from other sources-- 545,000 

Total...—.$2,547,000 


In this is included every source of revenue, including $150,000 
poll tax, which belongs to counties—also special tax of 1 mill each 
for soldiers and schools. 

Total estimated disbursements, $2,526,970 or $20,000 excess re¬ 
ceipts over disbursements. 

This $20,000 will be wiped out by expense of this Convention 
and $30,000 over. 

After adoption of 6 1-2 limit: 

Take estimated assessments at $275,000,000. 

Tax rate for all purposes, 6 1-2 mills will yield --$1,787,500 

Bal. estimated receipts must come from other sources. 760,000 

Total....-___—.$2,547,500 

To make receipts equal to year 1900-1901. 

Where will $760,000 other sources come from? 

Take off the 1 mill each for pensions and soldiers and 

you have 2 mills or -----$ 

Take off amount pledged as annual contribution to 

schools and you have - 

or 2 mills more. 

These two items absorb 4 mills of the State’s levy and leaves 
2 1-2 mills for every other purpose. 


550,000 

550,000 











1338 


OFFICIAL PROCEEDINGS 


There is not a County in the State that can live on a 2 1-2 
mill rate. 

If this limit prevails and the special taxes for schools and 
pensions, and special appropriations for schools continue there will 
still remain $1,400,000 of obligations to be met. Such as $450,000 
for interest, over $100,000 for State officers, judges and solicitors, 
$50,000 interest to university and A. and M. College, $160,000 for 
Insane Hospital, $60,000 for Deaf, Dumb and Blind and number¬ 
less other items. What will 2 1-2 mills realize on $275,000,000 of 
taxable property: $687,000, leaving $713,000 to come from other 
sources. 


MR. BROWNE—Will the gentleman mind telling us the 
name of the gentleman whose figures these are: 


MR. O’NEAL—They are made by Col. Screws. 
MR. BROWNE—Of the Advertiser? 

MR. O’NEAL—Yes, at my request. 


Now one gentleman says we can meet the deficiency by rais¬ 
ing the value of property. What an argument to make'to an in¬ 
telligent body of men! Raise the valuation of the property, in- 
crease the assessment, does that give the people any relief^ 

MR. BROWNE—Who made that argument? 


Mr. Foster or Mr. Maxwell one. I dont’ remember. What 
relief does that give the people? If you are paving taxes on 
a piece of property valued at $500 and the back tax commission- 
er arbitrarily raises it to $1 000, are you not paying $1 on the 
$100 even if the rate were fifty cents on the $100? He savs if 
we reduce the limit of taxation it will result in more economy 
and we can like a farmer with a short crop or an insufficient 
arder still live. Yes we can still live. We could close the pub¬ 
lic schools, we could leave the veterans of the South to bear as 
they have ,n the past, without murmur or complaint the pangs 
of poverty and want. We could set back the clock of progress 
in this State and halt in our march of development and industrial 
growth. If that is the feast to which we are invited I for one wil 

have none of it. It may be popular to vote for tax limitation but 

I for one will not let popularity weigh in the scales against my 
conscience and sense of duty to my State, my honest convktion 
and sworn obligations and responsibilities as a delegate on this 


Mr. President, we have the future of Alabama in our keening 
Let us not sacrifice our sense of duty to the demands of political 
expediency Alabama has m the past few years grown marvelous¬ 
ly in wealth and power. From the fiery furnace of reconstruction 
from satrap rule, from military domination, from all the frightful 



1 


CONSTITUTIONAL CONVENTION, 1901 1339 

results of misgovernment, robbery and jobbery, she has emerged, 
her garments pure and spotless as the faithful of old and all she 
asks is that we give her an honest ballot, a reformed suffrage— 
that we put no obstacle across her pathway and like an awakened 
giant she will move forward to grander and more triumphant 
victories in the fields of progress and commerce. 

SPRAGINS My friend and next door neighbor will 
run with the fan tails. We can do nothing with him. He is a 
lost soul. 

My friend is nothing if not eloquent, and by the way, Mr. 
President, all the eloquence that has been poured forth on the floor 
of this Convention has come from the side which opposes the 
report of the committee and desires the tax rate to remain where 
it now is. It is a question that should be considered coolly, calmly 
and deliberately and not discussed with passionate feeling or with 
eloquence. They tell us scornfully that it is a popular measure, 
that it is easy to get at this proposition because they believe it 
would be popular with the people of Alabama. That argument 
is as unfair and unjust as it can possibly be. They should give 
us credit for being honest and truthful and trying, as we see it, 
to do what is right, just as we give them credit for believing hon¬ 
estly and fairly that the reduction of ten cents on the $100 would 
destroy the public schools of the State, would take from the old 
soldier the pension that has been voted him by the Legislature and 
would take from the public schools the one mill tax. That is what 
they tell us and we have them credit for being honest in their as¬ 
sertions and they should give us credit for similar honesty, when 
we say that we have carefully investigated this matter and believe 
this reduction can be made without impairing the credit of the 
State, and that it should be made. We say it can be made without 
taking one jot or tittle of the appropriation to the public schools, 
and without in any way interfering with the pension to the old 
Confederates. 

I have not the honor to be a member of the Committee on 
Taxation, but I have taken the pains and the trouble on the sub¬ 
mission to me of figures made by Mr. Searcy of Tuscaloosa, a 
member of that Committee, who is a pratical and successful busi¬ 
ness man of close powers of reasoning, to go over those figures 
carefully, spending two or three hours on it and I have come to 
the deliberate conclusion that we can make this reduction and 
ought to do it in order to be true to our pledges, not only to our 
open pledges but to our implied pledges to the people of Alabama 
to administer the government economically and to their best in¬ 
terests. I have no such specific knowledge and information as to 
the figures that I can go into detail upon this proposition. All 
that I can say is that when this report was submitted, I, with 
others, was startled, greatly startled, by the proposition of the 


1340 


OFFICIAL PROCEEDINGS 


Committee to reduce the tax limit in the State of Alabama. Mv 
first impression was decidedly against it, and, for the purpose of 
informing myself and of casting upon the floor of this Convention 
an intelligent vote, I made the investigation just alluded to. 

My distinguished friend who has preceded me says that the 
argument of the Chairman of the Committee on Taxation is in¬ 
applicable, that a bad impression would be produced, that it would 
be hurtful to the State of Alabama in the matter of immigration. 
The Chairman of that Committee is exactly right upon that propo¬ 
sition. The County of Madison from which I hail, as largely as 
any other county in Alabama, is receiving immigrants from the 
Middle West and Northwest, a class that is very desirable. Thev 
come with money in their pockets and pay spot cash for our plan¬ 
tations. I have in mind a former distinguished citizen of the State 
of Missouri, who, in the last few years, has come to Madison Coun¬ 
ty and paid $13,000 spot cash for a plantation. The first question 
after I became acquainted with him was what is your constitutional 
rate of taxation in the State of Alabama. When I told him it was 
three-quarters of 1 per cent., he was dumbfounded and was startled 
so much so that if he had known those facts prior to his coming 
to Alabama it might have deterred him from making the invest¬ 
ment. I found the same thing true with reference to the inhabi¬ 
tants of Ohio, Iowa and Illinois, to which the gentleman from 
Lauderdale has referred, that although there is no constitutional 
limit upon the rate of taxation, the rate of taxation is much lower 
than ours, and when we place the limit as high as three-quarters 
of 1 per cent., it will have the effect of deterring those men who, 
when they see it, will properly think if the last few Legislatures 
are to be looked to as examples, that the whole constitutional 
limit will be levied. It may not be known to some of the members 
of this Convention, but the last Legislature passed an act authoriz¬ 
ing each county in the State of Alabama to make a new assess¬ 
ment map of the county, assessing the lands of the countv instead 
of by owners by sections and subdivisions of sections. A careful 
estimate has been made in the county of Madison and after de¬ 
ducting all United States lands and all State lands and lands of 
churches and charitable institutions, it was found that 25 per cent, 
of the land had escaped from taxation. I am advised by other dele¬ 
gates upon this floor with whom I have conversed upon this sub¬ 
ject, that a similar state of affairs exists in their county. I should 
think that should be considered as a potent factor in determining 
whether or not this tax limit should be reduced. It is true those 
lands are not the richest and most fertile in any county, that largely 
they are mountain lands, barren lands; but those lands are all 
worth one or two or three dollars per acre, and the increase in the 
assessment will be enormous. Does the gentleman from Lauder¬ 
dale and do the other gentlemen who have argued as to the license 
taxes in the State, believe in the event the present tax limit shall 
be maintained, that the Legislature will take off the iniquitous taxes 



CONSTITUTIONAL CONVENTION, 1901 


1341 


to which they refer? Is it not the sound judgment, is it not the 
honest opinion of the members of this Convention, that even if we 
put the limit at 75 cents the 75 cents will be expended and the 
privilege licenses still continue? 

Furthermore, in some cases the privilege licenses should not be 
repealed. Is it not fair that a corporation whose stockholders have 
a limited liability to the amount of stock they own, should pay 
something for the special privilege that the law gives them? Is 
that an unjust and iniquitous tax? 

There is another suggestion, Mr. President, that is urged, that 
in the course of five or six years, a panic or depression is due in 
this country and in the event of such a depression the assessment 
will be largely decreased? Upon that proposition I desire simply 
to throw out this suggestion: If such a depression does occur 
and if there is such a depreciation of values, that depreciation will 
be from the point at which the panic begins and not from the pres¬ 
ent time. They all admit that assessment values are increasing 
yearly and in the course of five years at the present rate of in¬ 
crease, granting the depression should occur at the time, the slump 
in values will be from the then values and will no more than reach 
to the rock bottom where we now are. 

In other respects the advocates for the retention of the 75 cents 
on the $100 do not argue fairly for this reason: They give you 
the figures as furnished to them by the Auditor, Treasurer, and 
Ciovernor. but they do not consider the question what we will save 
by reason of refunding the debt and by reason of the quadrennial 
elections. T am advised by the Secretary of State that a general 
election in this State costs nearly $200,000. It is my judgment that 
this Convention will establish quadrennial elections in Alabama 
and quadrennial sessions of the Legislature. In that we will be 
following only in the steps of the mother of Southern States, be¬ 
cause I saw in the paper yesterday that Virginia had decided on 
quadrennial elections of the officers. 

I think we can safely and wisely make this reduction. The 
margin of five mills as the diairman and all the other members 
of the Committee have shown will provide for the unforeseen con¬ 
tingencies referred to so eloquently by the gentleman from Mo¬ 
bile This Committee has been conservative. The figures show 
that the tax limit could be reduced to 60 cents on the $100, but 
out of abundance of caution they have placed it at 65 cents and 
they tell us that the 5 cents they put in is a reserve to meet these 
ygj*y unforseen contingencies that have so often been alluded to on 
this floor. I hope, Mr. President, that the report of the Committee 
as made to this Convention will be adopted. 

MR LOMAX—Mr. President, I do not pretend to be any¬ 
thing of a statistician, or to be an expert in matters of taxation. 



1342 


OFFICIAL PROCEEDINGS 


Therefore, I shall not undertake to question the figures which 
have been furnished to this Convention by the Chairman of its 
Committee on Taxation, or those which have come from am other 
gentleman who has undertaken to predict what will he the re¬ 
sources of the expenditures of the State in the future. 

But I care not how expert the statistician may he. 1 care not 
how learned in the subject of taxation the man may he who un¬ 
dertakes to make the prediction for the future, when you get be¬ 
yond five or ten years in the future, you get into the field of specu¬ 
lation, and there lives no man who can tell what will be the re¬ 
sources or the expenditures of a State after that lapse of time. If 
this Convention were making a tax rate for the next year, or the 
next two years, or the next five years, then we might with confi¬ 
dence accept the predictions of the Chairman of this Committee 
and fix a rate. But the Constitution we make, if ratified by the 
people, as I believe it will be, will not be for any >hort period of 
time, but for a generation, or at least for twenty-five years. Such 
being the case, we ought to go slowly on this question of a re¬ 
duction in the limit on taxation. 

I have heard gentlemen discussing this question upon the 
floor of this Convention say that the gentlemen who are opposed 
to lowering the tax rate say this, that or the other thing. 1 hesi¬ 
tate not to declare that there is not a single delegate in this Con¬ 
vention who desires or wishes to put up the tax rate or who is 
opposed to the reduction of the tax rate. The opponents of the 
report of this Committee upon the floor of the Convention are not 
opposed to a reduction of the tax rate, but are opposed to a re¬ 
duction of the limit on taxation. That limit was fixed in the Con¬ 
stitution of 1875, and, if my recollection serves me aright, in the 
course of time from 1875 down until this good hour, it has never 
been found necessary, and no Legislature has been found, which 
put the rate of taxation at the limit fixed in the Constitution ex¬ 
cept one. So that this impression of want of confidence in the 
courage of the Legislature or in the willingness or wish of the 
Legislature to reduce taxation is not well founded. I do not be¬ 
lieve there can be found in the State of Alabama one man or 133 
men who can be sent to the Legislature upon a demand by the 
people for a reduction of taxation and who, when they get here, 
find that the rate of taxation can be reduced, but that will vote for 
its reduction. Fixing a limit and fixing a rate are widely apart. 
We must fix the limit of taxation in view of future contingencies 
We must take into account what may happen in the future. We 
heard the other day an able, eloquent and ingenious address from 
a distinguished citizen of Alabama which was no less able and 
eloquent and ingenious because it happened to be the propaganda 
of a new dispensation of political thought and action in Alabama 
in which he quoted from distinguished students of economic and 



CONSTITUTIONAL CONVENTION, 1901 


1343 


industrial conditions the prediction that before many years had 
passed, the activity, the energy, and the aggressiveness of the in¬ 
dustries of the United States in invading European home markets 
would combine the European nations in a war to prevent that in¬ 
vasion from continuing a war that would be backed up by fleets 
and armies, and the distinguished gentleman who quoted that pre¬ 
diction did not undertake to refute the possibility thereof. Should 
such a thing happen and this country be involved in such a war, 
in what condition would the people of Alabama be with a 65 cent 
limit on taxation? A war like that would involve the exercise 
of all the wealth and power and the capacity of this country to 
successfully maintain. A war like that would shut down every 
industry in the State of Alabama. It would paralyze the coal and 
iron industry from which we expect so much in the future. It 
would close down every cotton factory in the State of Alabama. 
It would make the work of the agriculturist unremunerative and 
would reduce him to poverty and want. Valuations would go 
down so that within a short period, unless we had a higher limit 
of taxation, the honor and credit of the State would be absolutely 
destroyed. 

MR. HINSON—May I inquire what the gentleman is in favor 
of, are you in favor of the limit in the present Constitution? 

MR. LOMAX—Yes. 

MR. HINSON—Then I make the point of order, Mr. Presi¬ 
dent, the gentleman is not addressing himself to the question be¬ 
fore the House, which is the amendment of the delegate from Hale 
fixing the limit at 70 cents. 

MR. LOMAX—My remarks apply equally to the amendment 
of the delegate from Hale. 

THE PRESIDENT—It seems to the Chair that the gentle¬ 
man is properly within the limit of debate. 

MR. LOMAX—I regret extremely that I have been so un¬ 
fortunate in what I have said that I have not been able to inform 
my friend the delegate from Lowndes, of the position I take. I 
shall undertake to be more explicit and careful in the future, so 
that whatever I shall say shall have at least some applicability to 
the subject at hand. 

Reference has been made, Mr. President, and frequently, to 
the vast possibilities of revenue which lie within the power of the 
State from the enormous increase in the building of cotton fac¬ 
tories under our recent law which exempted them from taxation ; 
and a vast estimate was made of what would come to this State 
from taxation by reason of the enormous value of those cotton 
factories in 1907. Have the gentlemen forgotten the recent little 
flurry in China? Every man acquainted with the cotton trade of 



1344 


OFFICIAL PROCEEDINGS 


the South knows that by reason of the little misunderstanding 
which occurred the other day in China every single cotton factory 
in the South that dealt in the coarse grades of cotton goods that 
went to the Chinese markets was absolutely paralyzed, and either 
had to run at a loss because they did not want their labor dispersed 
or run away, or else some of them had to shut down from time to 
time in order to save expenses. 

MR. FOSTER—Would it not be better to remove all limita¬ 
tion in order to meet that great war you are expecting? 

MR. LOMAX—I do not know that it would be better to re¬ 
move all limit. The reason it would not be is that the people of 
Alabama are accustomed to a limit on the rate of taxation, and 
another reason why it would not be better to remove all limit is 
that the gentleman from Tuscaloosa and I stood upon a platform 
which pledged the people of Alabama that we would not raise the 
limit of taxation. 

MR. FOSTER—Are we not equally pledged to reduce it if 
possible? 

MR. LOMAX—Yes; and the very proposition to which I am 
addressing myself is that we are not pledged absolutely to reduce 
it because it is not practicable to do so. 

MR. BANKS—Would it not be better to have no limit than 
too low a limit? 

MR. LOMAX I am afraid my friend was reading a news¬ 
paper when I answered the same question put by the gentleman 
from Tuscaloosa. I say it would not be better, I say for at least 
thirty years the people have been accustomed to a limit— 

MR. BANKS—The gentleman misunderstood my question 
I asked the gentleman if it would not be better to have no limit 
than too low a limit. 

T , MR ' L °MAX—Oh, certainly, I beg pardon of the gentleman. 

1 did not catch his question. It certainly would be better. 

I was proceeding to say, gentlemen of the Convention, and 
Mr. President, that the small affray in China the other day almost 
paralyzed the cotton goods industry of the South. No man knows 
when the Yellow Dragon of the East will wake up from his slum¬ 
ber. No man knows when the civilized powers of the world may 
be engaged in a war with China, which will absolutely shut off 
and destroy any possibility of trade with that country and, when 
that time comes, where will be your income from your cotton 
factories, nine-tenths of which are engaged in the manufacture of 
the coarser grades of cotton goods that go to that trade? Either 
they must shut down, or they must spend every dollar of their 
capital and every dollar of the increased capital they might get for 



CONSTITUTIONAL CONVENTION, 1901 1545 

the purpose of putting in new machinery to make goods for oiher 
trades. 

\\ hen you are making a constitution, gentlemen, you must not 
look at the immediate present, or the immediate future, hut you 
must look at the possibilities that lie in the vast future beyond. A 
great many promises have been made to us in recent years, of the 
increased trade which would come to America by reason of the 
acquisition of the Philippine Islands, and we of the South have 
been told that with the Philippine Islands in our possession, a 
vast trade would come to us by reason of our manufacture of the 
cotton goods and the production of the provisions necessary to 
clothe and feed those people. That there were millions to be fed 
and clothed, and it would make the South blossom like the rose. 
Millions to be fed and clothed ; fed on a banana, and clothed with a 
breech cloth. We have been in the entire and absolute possession 
of the bay, the harbor and city of Manila for a long period of time, 
and statistics show that almost nine-tenths of the increased trade 
with the Philippine Islands has been in the trade of American 
whiskey for the American troops. Now we are not engaged very 
largely in the manufacture of that article, and that in which some 
of our independent citizens are engaged, the white looking liquid, 
the aroma of which lingers upon the breath even after the second 
day, never gets exported further than the mouth of the mountain 
canon where it is manufactured, and where the revenue officer 
goes with fear and trembling. 

Let us look at another phase of that question. The man who 
thinks that the convict system of Alabama is going to remain for 
another generation as it is today is a dreamer. The time is coming, 
and it is coming speedily, gentlemen of the Convention, when 
there will be an absolute, an entire and a radical change in the 
convict system of Alabama. You cannot always farm out your 
convicts as you do now. As it is today, the Convict Department 
is not only paying into the State Treasury an enormous revenue, 
but it is absolutely and entirely supporting the administration of 
the criminal laws of this State. When a change shall come in the 
system, and it must come as civilization grows and enlightenment 
extends, you will not only strike down the revenue which you de¬ 
rive now from the convict system, but you will find yourselves 
face to face with the proposition that the State of Alabama must 
provide some other means for the administration of the criminal 
law at a vast expense of money. With the small surplus that is 
promised us by the Chairman of this Committee, how will you 
make provision for the administration of the criminal laws in the 
sixty-six counties of Alabama? It is impossible to do it. 

Members of this Convention cannot have forgotten the vast 
amount of money which was expended within recent years, when 
a quarantine against smallpox was inaugurated in Alabama. With 



1346 


OFFICIAL PROCEEDINGS 


the small surplus that is promised under the conditions we have 
here, where would the funds come from to meet another epidemic 
of that sort, or an epidemic of yellow fever, or any epidemic that 
required a vast expenditure of money? 

We have had strikes in Alabama. The time was not nuinv 
years ago, when encamped on the hills of Jefferson County was 
every State troop in Alabama, and they stayed there for weeks at 
an expenditure of enormous quantities of money. Are we to be 
free from strikes in the future? No man can say so, because there 
is but one way to judge the future and that is by the past, and 
the time may come, and it may come at any moment, when by 
reason of a disagreement between operatives and employers there 
will require the use of every armed man in Alabama to preserve 
the peace. Money will have to be expended for the transportation 
of troops, for the pay of those troops, and for their maintenance. 
This may come once a year, it may not come in ten years, or it 
may come every year, and I submit that under the figures of this 
committee no provision is made for this sort of thing in the future. 

Now gentlemen have asked the question if I do not think that 
the people will be grateful to us for giving them this reduction in 
the tax limit, or whether I believe that they have not got sense 
enough to know what they want. I believe, Mr. President, that 
the people have not sense enough to know what they want, and 
sense enough not to be grateful for a small reduction of taxation, 
which is to be made up by increased assessments, and which will 
imperil the honor of this State. The honor of the State of Alabama 
is as dear to the humblest citizen as the small tax reduction that 
this change in the limit would take off of him, and he is not only 
not going to be grateful to you for making such a reduction, but 
he will say to you in no uncertain tones that to create a little cheap 
popularity for this Constitution before the people you have sought 
to deceive us, and you have done worse than that. We \>ant the 
honor of our State maintained. We want her to go forward in 
her career of progress. We want the time to come when on everv 
hillside in Alabama there will be a coke oven which shall make 
her the center of the industrial world, and the smoke of her fac¬ 
tories and furnaces shall be like a “pillar of cloud by day," calling 
the children of toil into this land of happiness and contentment. ■ 

I appeal to you, gentlemen of the Convention, not to imperil 
these grand possibilities. Not to make it so that the honor of our 
State will be imperiled. Keep the time from ever coming again 
when outside the Constitution we must go to the marts of com¬ 
merce in New York and pawn our Auditor’s warrants for the 
money with which to pay our debts. Let us be in that position 
where we can take every advantage of the reduction in interest 
rates that may come, not tomorrow, or the next day, but at any 
time in the future. Let us have the manhood to say that rather 



CONSTITUTIONAL CONVENTION, 1901 


1347 


than the cheap popularity which a small reduction in the limit of 
taxation will give to this Constitution before the people, that we 
stand first, last and all the time for the honor and the glory and 
the dignity of our grant commonwealth. (Applause.) 

MR. HEFLIN (Chambers)—The right Mr. President, to tax 
the property of the people was granted by the people themselves. 
They realized that it was necessary, to establish and maintain a 
governmental power, to lodge in the fundamental law of the State 
the right to tax property in order that revenues might be derived 
to support their civic institutions. While they willingly lodged this 
right in the Constitution of our State, they did it in the belief that 
it never would be abused, and in the hope that as the years went 
by, and as the population increased, and the agencies of industry 
increased, and as the State became rich and powerful as she is 
today, that from time to time the limit in taxation would be reduced 
rather than raised. 

Mr. President and gentlemen of the Convention, I concede to 
the opposition to the sixty-five cent limit honesty of purpose, as I 
do to those who champion that rate. I do not say to them, as 
they say to us, that we are playing for temporary popularity in 
this Convention, or appealing to the citizens of Alabama along that 
line. We hurl any such sentiment as that back into their teeth. 
We stand here doing what we think is right, in asking that this 
Convention reduce the tax limit in the Constitution under which 
we now live. Because we ask this on behalf of the people who are 
back and behind us in this great movement, are we to be charged 
with an attempt, or a desire to play for personal popularity? No, 
Mr. President, the intelligence of this Convention will mount above 
a plane like that. It will come upon a high plane, and reason about 
this great question and settle it as becomes true Alabamians. 

We are told, Mr. President, that we would put the State in a 
terrible condition if we should make this reduction. Gentlemen 
seem to forget that we have given the Governor the right to 
borrow three hundred thousand dollars, and that three hundred 
thousand I dare say gentlemen of the Convention, will tide over 
any state of circumstances, it matters not how embarrassing they 
may become. 

We are confronting the people of Alabama, or will ere long, 
with a new Constitution. It is not like a Legislature that as¬ 
sembles here and adjourns and reconvenes every two years. It 
is something new. It is odd. Twenty-five, fifty and sometimes a 
hundred years roll over the heads of States before the fundamen¬ 
tal law is changed. The people of Alabama are looking to this 
Convention for a wise document in the way of an organic law. 
They are not entirely pleased with the progress that the Conven¬ 
tion has made, it is true, but they do not understand what this 
Convention is doing and the work that it has to do. But when 



1348 


OFFICIAL PROCEEDINGS 


we close that door, and go away from here with a Constitution to 
be stamped by the approval of the sovereign voters of Alabama, 
we must have a document that will appeal to their judgment, to 
their sense of right, and their patriotism, and if you go out from 
this Convention with the proper suffrage plank, and a reduction 
of the tax, I care not what the opposition may be, it cannot stand 
before the people as they march with this Constitution to glorious 
approval. What we need, Mr. President and gentlemen of this 
Convention, is honest returns, and honest assessments, and pro¬ 
portionate taxes. Millions of dollars worth of property in Alabama 
escape every year. The poor man with his goods in sight bears 
the burden of taxation today. The farmer with his lands and stock 
where the assessor can see them, and where the neighbors can 
talk about them, makes it a matter of common knowledge, and he 
cannot hide it away. But the man with private securities, the 
man with his money hoarded away, and corporations, too, largely 
escape their fair share of the burdens of taxation in Alabama. 
Reduce this limit, then strike down this inequality of the law 
along the line of taxation, and let every man march up to the full 
line of his duty, and give in his property as he should, and vou 
would not even need your sixty-five cents. Thirty-seven and a 
half would be fully ample. In a New England State, in a small 
town, a few years ago, there lived a man, supposed to he wealthy. 
They supposed him to be worth about a million of dollars. He 
gave in his property at one hundred thousand. He died, and his 
executors scheduled his personal property, and it was found that 
that man, in that small New England town, was worth six millions 
of dollars, and as soon as the tax assessor of that city place it upon 
the assessment roll, it reduced the tax rate one-half in that town. 
This illustration I gathered from a speech of ex-President Harrison 
on the subject of taxation. 

I do not desire to detain this Convention, and I will not do so. 
but gentlemen tell us that we must leave it to the Legislature' 
that the Legislature will adjust the matter; and mv distinguished 
friend, the gentleman from Lauderdale, has told this Convention 
that in 1896, the Legislature appropriated so much, that thev 
doubled that nearly in ninety-eight, and they doubled it in 1900 
With due regard and respect to the members who composed the 
last Legislature, they were characterized as being too extravagant 
with the people’s money. It was talked of all over the State. Your 
newspapers had a great deal to say along that line. Gentlemen 
sU SrST es ^- here that this State and a few others, are the only ones 
that have a tax limit lodged in the fundamental law of the State 
Well, the sooner the other States fall into line, the better it will be 
for them I dare say that the delegates of this Convention are 
convinced that if you were to remove all tax limit, vou could not 
m ten years, have such a Constitution ratified bv the tax pavers 
of Alabama. You remove that limitation, and trust it to the I e <Hs 
kture, and they will tell you the last Legislature appropriated 



CONSTITUTIONAL CONVENTION, 1901 


1349 


everything, and went to the limit in the old Constitution, and they 
would go to another one if you made it a dollar, or a dollar and a 
half, or any other amount. 

MR. OATES—I do not wish to interrupt the gentleman from 
Chambers, but I want to suggest to him, in connection with what 
he has said, as a part of his remarks, that there never was any 
constitutional limit upon the rate of taxation in this State until 
the Convention of 1875 put it there, and the reason of that was 
that the carpet-bag Legislature preceding had appropriated every¬ 
thing in sight and anticipated everything to come, and rendered 
the State and many of the counties insolvent. 

MR. HEFLIN (Chambers)—I thank the distinguished gentle¬ 
man, Mr. President, for that suggestion. We have long since 
passed over the shattered ruins of reconstruction. Alabama has 
walked out from under the gloomy clouds that hovered over her 
in that awful time of distress and defeat, and, marching like a 
young giant, up the mountain side to victory and glory and true 
progress, she moves today unfettered and unhampered by anything 
that clung to her and menacled her limbs in reconstruction days. 
Seventy-five cents was necessary them; sixty-five cents is fully 
ample now. 

I am fully convinced, after hearing the able argument of the 
chairman of this committee. He comes in with a report to which 
their is not one dissenting voice from the committee, as I under¬ 
stand it. It is the unanimous verdict of that committee that Ala¬ 
bama should reduce her tax limit. The chairman of this committee 
has spent no little time and toil in the investigation of this subject, 
and I consider that his arguments, and those who have stood 
around him in this fight, remain until this good hour unanswered 
by the eloquent gentlemen of the opposition. I am thoroughly 
convinced, by the figures, by the arguments, and by the evidence 
that has been adduced here in this Convention, that Alabama can 
easily continue per progress with this sixty-five cent limit. A 
great and growing State, with her marvelous resources, her myriad 
advantages struggling, as she does, higher and higher, under the 
guidance of her civic masters—the people themselves—she will 
rise higher and higher in the scale as the years go by, and, in con¬ 
clusion, I have only to say, if you will reduce the tax limit and 
adopt a suffrage plank that will meet the approval of the white 
people of Alabama, this Convention’s work will be endorsed by the 
sovereign citizens of the State, and they will rise up and call this 
Convention blessed. 

Mr. President, I am done. It has been suggested to me that 
the previous question should be moved. I do not like to make a 
speech on a subject myself, and move the previous question with¬ 
out giving others an opportunity to be heard. 



1350 


OFFICIAL PROCEEDINGS 


MR. JENKINS—I hope before the gentleman moves the pre¬ 
vious question, he will allow me to quote some figures from the 
Auditor’s report. I have in my hand the Auditor’s report, and [ 
think any citizen in the State, and especially any member of this 
Constitutional Convention, can take this Auditor’s report and on 
the face of it, taking the estimate of values as made by the dis¬ 
tinguished chairman of the Committee on Taxation, see as a man 
who runs, can read it for himself, and it will show that it would be 
unwise, and very dangerous to adopt his suggestion. 

But I do not grant to the distinguished chairman figures that 
I am unwilling to admit. He figures on a basis of $276,000,000, 
when never in the history of our State before has so high a valua¬ 
tion of property been attained. The average for the past ten or 
twenty years has never, exceeded $266,000,000, and last year the 
Auditor based all his calculations on $266,000,000. How do we 
judge the future? We judge it by the past. Watch the wheels of 
nature in relation to the affairs of man, and by the past of man, 
is the only way under the sun that we can judge the future. 

MR. BROWNE—Will the gentleman allow me to interrupt 
him a moment? 

MR. JENKINS—Certainly. 

MR. BROWNE—Does he doubt that the taxable values for 
the next fiscal year will be two hundred and sixty-six million. 

MR. JENKINS—Well, the figures have been offered for that, 
but I am judging by the past. 

MR. BROWNE—Will the gentleman allow one other ques¬ 
tion? 

MR. JENKINS—Yes. 

MR. BROWNE—Does he know upon what the Committee 
predicates their estimate that there will be an increase of at least 
$10,000,000 for the next fiscal year? 

MR. JENKINS—Yes, he has written around, I understand, 
to all the Probate Judges in the State, but the Probate fudges 
may have made some mistakes. They are not the officials'to get 
this matter up. It is the duty of the State Auditor to give us these 
figures, and not the Probate Judges of the State. He should haCe 
written at least to the Tax Asesssors, and not the Probate Judges, 
because I dare say there are not ten Probate Judges in the State 
as conversant with tax values as the Tax Assessors. 

MR. BROWNE Does the gentleman know where the Tax 
Assessor files his books, when they are made up? 

r.«- MR u E] l K l NS ~ YeS ’ he £ enerall y fi] es them in the Probate 
Office, when he has not got them at home working on them. 



CONSTITUTIONAL CONVENTION, 1901 


1351 


But I want to say the gentleman is basing all his calculations 
on the present year, as if all the years to come were going to be 
like the present year, and I make the deliberate statement that 
this fall, if cotton should go to 3 cents a pound, and we have no 
reason to say positively that it will not go there, the tax values 
next year will shrink at least 33 1-3 per cent. You cannot base 
tax values only on the price of agricultural, mineral and mining 
products, and if these products go down, our tax values are going 
to fall. In less than ten years cotton has sold in this country for 
3 1-2 cents, and many were glad to get 4, and last season is brought 
9, 9 1-2 and 10. Now that is quite a difference, but we have no 
assurance that the present condition will continue. 

MR. BROWNE—May I ask the gentleman a question? 

MR. JENKINS—Certainly. 

MR. BROWNE—What year was cotton worth 3 1-2 cents? 

MR. JENKINS—I have the receipts at home, showing 3 1-2 
cents on them. I do not remember the exact year. 

MR. BROWNE—Does the gentleman know what the taxable 
value of all the property in the State was during the year cotton 
sold for 3 1-2 cents? 

MR. JENKINS—I do not think that has any connection, be¬ 
cause the taxable values are returned in the spring and these prices 
are made in the fall, and the prices affect the following year and 
not the year in which they are made. 

MR. BROWNE—Well, the year after, what was the taxable 
value of all the property in the State? The year after cotton was 
worth 3 1-2 cents. 

MR. JENKINS—I do not know. It was less than $250,000,000, 
and, Mr. President, I stand here and say that this Committee is 
basing the calculations of every year from now up to doomsday 
on this year, and that we cannot do it. 

THE PRESIDENT—Will the gentleman suspend? 

MR. HEFLIN (Chambers)—Before the announcements are 
made I desire to ask indefinite leave of absence for Mr. Duke on 
account of sickness. 

The leave was granted. 

Leave of absence was granted Mr. Walker for Monday and 
Tuesday, Mr. Willet and Mr. Wilson (Clarke), for today, and 
indefinite leave to Mr. Case on account of sickness. 

Thereupon the Convention adjourned until 3 p. m. 



1352 


OFFICIAL PROCEEDINGS 
AFTERNOON SESSION. 

The Convention was called to order by the President, and the 
roll call showed the presence of SI delegates. 

THE PRESIDENT—The gentleman from Wilcox has the 
floor. 

MR. JENKINS—Now I have some figures that I want to 
read to this Convention. The committee put the tax rate at six 
and a half mills. We are levying now for old soldiers one mill. 
We are appropriating $800,000 for the public schools, $550,000 
from the general appropriation, and $250,1 XK) special appropriation 
making $800,000, $276,000,000 is the valuation of the property as 
given us by the committee. Multiply that by three mills and it 
results in a tax of $828,000, and when you deduct the expenses of 
assessment, it will not give you 8800,000 for public schools. Now 
we can't cut that down. The Democratic platform pledged us to 
take no backward step in education. So it will require at least 
three mills to pay the standing appropriation for public schools. 
It requires one mill to pay the old soldiers. There is no debate 
on the proposition that makes four mills. Four mills from six 
and a half mills leaves two and a half mills and multiplying the 
$276,000,000 by that gives you $690,000. That is our revenue 
minus the license fund. Now a conservative estimate of the license 
fund and funds from other similar sources which I hold in my 
hand for the year ending September 30, 1901 : 


Licenses _______ $155,000 

Solicitors' fees _______ 20,000 

Insurance department _ ___ .. 50,000 

Corporations, charter fees ____ . .... 12.000 

Railroad license tax _____ _ 12,500 

Telegraph, express and sleeping cars _ ___ 12,000 

All other sources ___ 25.000 


Those foot up $286,000. A liberal estimate would be $300,000 
from license, but put it at $310,000 and add to it the $690,000 and 
it gives you $1,000,00. 

Now what are your expenses to come against that? If vou 
turn to the Auditor's report, Page XXXVI, you will see the dif¬ 
ferent expenses. For executive officers, which added to the ex¬ 
penses of the judiciary, $106,000, military department $24,000, mine 
inspectors $4,000, State geologists $7,500, insurance department 
$2,500, railroad department $11,000, health department $13,000. 
I omit the agricultural department and the pension department 
for this reason that there is no guarantee in the world that the 
revenue derived from the agricultural department is going to re¬ 
main, because there is a strong sentiment in the State to repeal 
the tag license. A bill for that purpose passed the Lower House 
in the last Legislature. It went to the Senate and it got a ma- 









CONSTITUTIONAL CONVENTION, 1901 


1353 


jority of the Senate but did not get the requisite three-fifths vote 
and failed. The bill was adversed by the committee in the Senate 
and required three-fifths to pass. But it will come up again and it 
is going to be cut down, if not be wiped out. Amounts to the edu¬ 
cational and benevolent department foots up $1,148,000. In that is 
included the public schools for which I have already estimated 
and deducting the public schools from that it leaves $420,000 for 
the educational and benevolent institutions. State institutions like 
those at Auburn and Tuscaloosa and the Girls’ Industrial School, 
Institute for the Deaf, Academy for the Blind, for Negro Deaf 
Mutes and Blind, Industrial School for Boys, A. and M. College, 
University and Normal colleges. That foots up $420,000. 

Now the general expenses foot up $547,000 and this added up 
with the other items above named will give you $1,177,000. These 
are the actual every day expenses of the government. They are 
bound to come and you have to have the revenue to meet them 
and you have but $1,000,000 left on the basis of the valuation of 
property furnished us by the Tax Committee. That leaves a deficit 
of $177,000 every year. 

Now, 1 have left out of the estimate the agricultural depart¬ 
ment of $47,000 because I do not believe we can count on that 
for all time to come. I firmly believe that the tag license will be 
reduced or repealed and that source of revenue cut off. 

I have left out the convict department. And why? Because 
while it is true there is $125,000 to the credit of that fund but 
there is a great deal of expense connected with it. There is the 
expense of $114,000, hardly a profit of $25,000 and the history of 
that department in this State is that it won’t make the revenue. 

MR. CUNNINGHAM—Can I ask the gentleman a question? 

MR. JENKINS—You can if you wait until I get through. 

MR. CUNNINGHAM—Is not the expense of the convicts 
part of the expense of $550,000 and is it not a fact that the convict 
department is paying annually more than half of the deficit the 
gentleman is counting off? 

MR. JENKINS—Feeding the State prisoners is in that but 
the salaries of the convict department are not, neither are the costs, 
bills of the courts and maintenance. 

I say, Mr. President, that there was a time in the history of 
the State when the convict system did not pay a revenue but was 
a heavy drain on the treasury. That time may come again be¬ 
cause there are a lot of people up in Jefferson County who have 
been contending for years gone by that the convicts should be 
taken out of the mines, and whenever you take them out of the 
mines there will come a bankruptcy in that department instead 
of a profit. That sentiment has been going on for years and there 



1354 


OFFICIAL PROCEEDINGS 


is no telling what the future will bring forth. The convicts may 
be taken out of the mines and put on the farms, and instead of 
their being a revenue of $125,000, they may cost the State $300,000, 
as the State farm has cost us during the last six years. Now I 
maintain that in making figures of the revenue for all time to 
come, that that sort of question should be eliminated and not 
allowed to come in. The wise and economical administration and 
successful conduct of the department in the last few years is no 
guaranty that it will be so for all time to come. These are the 
figures and you cannot deny them. Take your pencil and work 
it out, and it will show just as 1 have stated it. 


There is another question : W e have on the statute books a 
law that has been vilified, abused, despised—I won't say cursed— 
but it has met the condemnation of the people over the State and 
that is the back tax law. There is no question in my mind but that 
the time will come when that law will be repealed ; and when vou 
repeal that law you are not going to see valuations go up and 
stay up like they have in the last four years. That is going to 
affect the question, so will the tag license probably be taken off. 
so will the convict system badly administered, so will the expenses 
of a complex election machinery which we are bound to have under 
our new Constitution. You are going to have new expenses vou 
never had before. It will probably cost the State $100,000 to hold 
the first election under the system that we are going to adopt. In 
addition to that, there will be a falling off in the poll tax receipts 
of at least $50,000. W e have had SI 50,(XX) collected from that 
course, but when you say to a man, “You need not pay the poll tax," 
there won’t be one negro in a thousand that will pay the poll tax, 
and the result will be that the fund will go down. \ on are face to 
face with these things, and you must think about them. And, in re¬ 
ply to the gentleman from Chambers, who says we ought not to let 
our State be shackled as she marches up the hill of progress, I want 
to say if you put a constitutional limit of six and a half mills upon 
the feet of that fair damsel as she walks up the hill of progress, you 
will shackle her so that she cannot walk with the steady stride 
and even step she ought to. Let her go on the road of progress 
untrammelled and unfettered, and walk up that high hill looking 
forward and upward without feeling the burden and shackles of 
an unjust tax limit upon her. 


MR. HEFLIN May I ask the gentleman a question? 
MR. JENKINS— When I get through. 


MR. HEFLIN—Did I make any remark about shackling a 
damsel? I desire to disclaim any intention of doing that. 

M f- , J ? N Y 1 NS ~ I ™ as mere 'y »s'ng the figure the gentle- 
man started The gentleman compared the State to a woman 
and talked about shackling her feet. He would hardly comoare 
it to a man. 3 w 



CONSTITUTIONAL CONVENTION, 1901 


1355 


I want to say as a State, we are enjoying’ great prosperity, 
such as we have not enjoyed for many years in the past, hut if you 
vote this proposition in here today you will see the sun of prosper¬ 
ity, which is now riding so high and clear near its zenith, soon 
begin to falter and waver in its course, and, with sad and sorrow¬ 
ful countenance, you who sit here will see it begin to sink toward 
the west in a decline from which it will be many years before it 
returns. 

And another point right here and I will close. There is not 
a word, there is not a breath that comes floating on the breeze 
from the people of Alabama to this Constitutional Convention de¬ 
manding this reduction in our constitutional limit in the rate of 
taxation. The only demand that the people of Alabama have made 
to the delegates was that you should not raise the limit or change 
it in any material way so as to affect their prosperity and growth. 
And you gentlemen come here and voluntarily offer them some¬ 
thing that they have not demanded. The people of the State are 
not demanding this proposition, and have not expected it, and 
you should not give them something for which they didn’t look. 
Furthermore, you not only strike down the credit and honor of the 
State, but you allow the same tax which you take off in a general 
way to be assessed in a local way, so that there is no real reduc¬ 
tion in the people’s taxes. It is an apparent reduction and not a 
real one, and the only result of which is to jeopardize the honor, 
the integrity and the fair name of the State of Alabama, and when 
you do that, you will do a great wrong to the people of Alabama. 

MR. BLACKWELL—I am sorry I cannot agree with the 
Committee in their report. If I thought I could, I would greatly 
prefer voting in favor of the reduction. 

Very briefly, I want to allude to some statements that have 
been made. The first statement is that while the Legislature has 
the power to reduce the taxes, and while we insist they will do 
it and it is right, the opposition say they are afraid to risk the Leg¬ 
islature. 

I want to call the attention of the Convention to the fact that 
the law fixing a limit of 75 cents on the $100 has been in existence 
since 1875, and yet, as a matter of fact, this limit of seven and a 
half mills tax has only been used in three years during that time, 
although it has been within the power of the Legislature to use 
it the whole of the period. 

In the year 1876 they went to the limit the Constitution al¬ 
lowed, 75 cents on the $100. Then for three years they had 70 
cents, or seven mills. Then followed six and a half mills for five 
years, and then six mills for two years, then on down to four for 
three years. The only way we have of judging what the Legisla¬ 
ture will do in the future is by what the Legislature has done in 



13S6 


OFFICIAL PROCEEDINGS 


the past. The only two years, aside from the first that I have 
mentioned, in which the limit of the taxing’ power was exercised, 
was the last two years. Those in addition to the first one year 
under the Constitution make the three years. If we are to judge 
the Legislatures of the future by the Legislatures of the past, what 
right have we to say that the Legislature will not reduce the tax 
as they see the revenues of the State will justify and permit of the 
reduction? No one can say that they have failed to do it hereto¬ 
fore. Then, why does anyone presume to say they will fail to do 
it hereafter. You cannot judge of what is to come except by what 
has already passed; and if you make that the standard, you must 
admit as a matter of fact that as the opportunity presents itself, the 
Legislature will make the reduction, they have uniformly made it. 

Now, there is another statement made, that as a matter of 
fact, as you are reducing the rate of taxation you induce the people 
to assess their property at better values. The figures as laid down 
by the Auditor do not justify any such statement. They sav the 
highest assessed value that we have had was $275,000,000 in 1891, 
on the four mill basis. I admit that is true, but it began to decline 
and on that four mill basis it declined, and continued to decline; 
and the highest assessment we have now is on a seven and a half 
mill tax. 

MR. BROWNE—Was not that heavy decline after it reached 
$275,000,000 on account of the panic? 

MR. BLACKWELL-—Yes, that may be true, and I will come 
to that quicker than I intended. The people of the United States 
have panics oftener than any other people in the world. In Eng¬ 
land panics occur about twenty or twenty-five years apart. Panics 
with the Dutch occur about 100 years apart, because they are a 
very conservative, very painstaking, very careful, cold people. 
But in the United States the very air we breathe is intoxicating. 
The foods we live upon are intoxicating. A man makes a dollar 
easier in the United States than in any other part of the globe, and 
the result is he risks it oftener in speculation than any other peo- 
ple in the world. So the result is we have more panics; and when 
a panic occurs and settling time is had, directly after that only 
the gilt-edged people have credit. Then the next year credit is 
extended to a greater number and so on and on until all worthy- 
people are embraced. Then the spirit of speculation running rife 
induces the American man to risk more and take in a broader 
field, and by and by the ability to pay promptly is lacking. Then 
everyone begins to want what is due him the minute they cease 
to pay, and a man goes to his debtor, who owes him $1,000, and 
tells him, “Pay me what you owe me,” and the resut is that every 
ten or fifteen years spreading over all kinds of credit, the settling 
time comes and every man puts his hand to the throat of another 
and says “pay me what you owe me,” and when the settling time 
comes you have a panic which the gentleman from Talladega says 



CONSTITUTIONAL CONVENTION, 1901 


1357 


induces falling values. We have had the speculative fever going 
on always, and while I trust we will never have it as we had it 
in 1891, still that spirit is abroad and we must take cognizance of 
it. Dollars are made easier here than any other place in the world, 
and therefore we risk them more freely and no one can see far 
enough down the vista of the future to tell what is in store for us 
on this line. 

Gentlemen have been questioning and mistrusting what the 
Legislature will do. We show that the Legislature has reduced 
taxation every time an opportunity has presented itself and that 
we have only had three years out of twenty-six and that the limit 
of taxation has been reduced. Then why is the gentleman afraid 
of the legislature? Then if the legislature has satisfactorily handled 
this matter and there is danger of having a deficit anywhere if this 
limit is reduced, why is it not more conservative and sounder busi¬ 
ness principles, even admitting the gentleman from Talladega (Mr. 
Browne) is right, to take the safe side, to take no chance rather 
than have what he offers and take chances of getting through. 

There is another thing to which no one has alluded. We are 
going to need more money than we have ever yet had before. The 
attention of the world is attracted to Alabama's resources. The 
Chairman of the Committee said the other day that he was con¬ 
nected with an immigration enterprise and that he wrote letters 
to people to induce them to come to Alabama and the first thing 
they wanted to know was how are your churches and your schools? 
You have to have money for schools and churches. Does the 
gentleman pretend to say it is not a good investment to increase the 
school fund greater than we have if we can stand it? Don’t we 
know when we educate the people we increase their capacity and 
don’t we know a man morally and intellectually educated makes 
every acre around him worth more money and increases the value 
of the property of the State of Alabama? 

Not only is that true, but there is sleeping in the other end 
of the Capitol a bill proposing to pay the old soldiers of the State 
of Alabama $100,000 more money than we give them today. 

I do not think we are able to pay the soldiers of Alabama as 
much as we pay the United States soldiers. For four years as an 
officer of the United States government I paid the United States 
soldiers. We paid out $2 a head for every man, woman and child 
in Alabama and we do not complain of the pension of the soldiers 
of the Federal army. Now, if we get more money and if there is 
anything that we are justified in spending it for, ought we not 
increase the pittance and pass that bill in the Senate giving $100,000 
additional to the old Confederate soldiers. They do not complain. 
They have gone unmurmuringly; and yet every empty sleeve, 
every lost leg is an eloquent appeal to the people of Alabama 
showing the needs of these men who, when the tocsin of war 



1358 


OFFICIAL PROCEEDINGS 


sounded in Alabama recognized Alabama as their native mother 
and shouldered their musket and went to the forefront where the 
bullets fell thickest and the battle waxed hottest. I do not ask 
you to give to the Alabama soldiers what we are giving to the 
Federal soldiers. That would be $4,000,000 for Alabama to give, 
but I say if there is a possibility without hurting the people of 
Alabama by allowing that limit to remain of being able to increase 
that pittance to them, ought we not do it? These are the men who 
have made the history of this country. These are the men whose 
acts and deeds are reporting to the present generation and will 
report to generations to come the courage, the manhood and the 
heroism that this country has possessed. These are the men, the 
worn out crippled men, for whom we should weave laurel crowns 
to place upon their brows. They put themselves up to stop the 
bullets of the enemy, and I for one want to go on record that I am 
in favor of fixing it so that we can give to that grand army of 
heroes that tardy justice to which they are so much entitled. 

MR. SANFORD (Montgomery)—I know that the Convention 
is growing very much wearied with this discussion, and notwith¬ 
standing that fact, I ask its indulgence for a few minutes. If a 
stranger had entered the hall, and had not known the character 
of the assembly, he would have supposed it was an association of 
bankers greatly disturbed lest the interest on their bonds should 
default, or that there were men here anxious to sell bonds. That 
is not a fact. We are here to make a Constitution for the State. 
The borrowing of money is an unfortunate incident in the history 
of Alabama, as the issue of bonds has been. If she had never been 
able to borrow one dollar, or to sell a solitary bond, the influence 
and the power and welfare of Alabama would have been greatly 
augmented. We must not suppose that owing bonds and selling 
bonds and paying interest upon bonds is the chief object of gov¬ 
ernment. I may be pardoned for reminding you that for forty 
years after 1790 such things as bonds of a State were hardly known 
in the United States. After the war of 1812, when the general 
government had become indebted to the extent of $13,000,000, 
there were no such State bonds. Such a thing w'as almost unknown 
in the history of this country, but in 1830 the people entered upon 
wild schemes of speculation and reckless enterprises. Alabama 
in 1837, issued bonds to the extent of $5,000,000, and all the States 
engaged in this speculative mania, until 1840, when the failure of 
a bank in Pennsylvania precipitated a great monetary crisis and 
great depreciation of property in this country. Then Pennsylvania 
Mississippi andMaryland defaulted, as also Michigan, Illinois. In¬ 
diana and Louisiana. All of them afterwards paid their indebted¬ 
ness, except Michigan, Louisiana and Mississippi. I only mention 
these things to show you that while we are all anxious to preserve 
the honor and credit of the State of Alabama, that merely to pay 
interest is not the chief object of government, and even those great 



CONSTITUTIONAL CONVENTION, 1901 


1359 


States who were in arrears are now in the very front rank of this 
republic. But I am very much amused—I beg pardon—interested, 
in some of the discussions. The gentlemen opposed to the reduc¬ 
tion first stated to you how much money is necessary to meet 
your present liabilities, and then they go forward and repeat item 
by item, every one makes up the sum so as to impress it, that it 
is about twice the amount that will be the amount disbursed by the 
30th of September, 1901. Now, we are here for the purpose of 
making limitations. We are here for the purpose of establishing 
offices and defining the duties of those who occupy them. We 
have already limited the power of the people to elect one man a 
Governor oftener than once, and thereby disfranchise him, the 
people so far as that office was concerned, though faithful, effi¬ 
cient and competent men, are deprived of the right to electing him 
again. Why not limit the agent that has the power to put bur¬ 
dens upon the people? Why do you limit individuals from aspir¬ 
ing to office, and limit the people in their choice of officers, and 
yet decline to limit those men who have power to place burdens 
upon the people? The more you limit power, the more you expand 
liberty; the more you curtail authority, the better it" is for the 
freedom, and, therefore, I am for limiting the Legislature in its 
power of taxation to the utmost point that can safely be done, and 
meet all of our obligations—interest on bonds, the ordinary ex¬ 
penditures of State, and whatever may be necessary. One gentle¬ 
man says, why, if we should have war, all of your factories would 
shut down ; your steel plants would go out of blast; your iron fur¬ 
naces would close, and, therefore, we must not limit taxation. If 
all those things happen, we would be poorer then than we are now, 
and if we were poorer then than now, ought not the taxes to be 
lower, and ought we not to be more limited in the power of taxa¬ 
tion? So it seems to me that that argument is utterly fallacious— 
the poorer we are the less you ought to take from us of food, rai¬ 
ment and shelter; and the less labor you ought to require of us to 
pay taxes. Another gentleman says, why, my little town of Flor¬ 
ence is so oppressed with taxes in the way of licenses and privilege 
taxes that the people are beginning to sell their property. If that 
be so, if every little hamlet, village and town are oppressing the 
people, ought we not to see that the Legislature is still more re¬ 
strained from taxing the people and adding burdens—the very 
reason why the Legislature of Alabama should not be permitted 
to do what the little municipalities everywhere are enforcing upon 
the people. Now it seems to me, Mr. Chairman, that most of the 
argument has arisen from apprehension. Apprehension based on 
what? On the apprehension of two very distinguished and much 
esteemed friends of mine from Montgomery County. Both have 
been Governors with great honor to the State and much credit to 
themselves, and all their argument is based upon their experience 
—one of seven years ago, and the other of nearly five years ago. 
They remember the difficulties that beset them when they bor- 



1360 


OFFICIAL PROCKKDINlfS 


rowed money, it is a nightmare still upon their blessed spirits. 
They are afraid that the Governor shall not be able to borrow 
money. It is a mere conjecture. There is not any argument on 
that fact except conjecture and school-boy calculations. The Com¬ 
mittee, on the contrary, has recently made investigation of the 
condition of Alabama. They find from examining the very docu¬ 
ments that our friends have examined and calculated with so much 
persistency—besides correspondence with leading men all over the 
State. We must remember that when this limit of 75-100 was 
fixed that Alabama, in round numbers, had about 1,200.000 people. 
In 1900 we had 1,800,000 people, half as main again and a cor¬ 
responding increase in wealth, and therefore 75 cents on the $100 
was all that was necessary as a limit in 1875. Twenty-five \ ears 
later with 33 1-3 per cent, inerta.-e in population and in wealth, 
cannot we safely put it at 65 cents? One gentleman said here— 
it is a little cheap popularity. That was rather an unjustified re¬ 
mark as applied to many of these gentlemen who are just as ca¬ 
pable and patriotic as those who insist on holding the limit up to 
75 cents. I might, if I were as unkind, say the reason whv vou 
wish it done is because, possibly, you are the owner of bonds in 
mills and you do not wish any mills built, and vou keep up the 
high rate of taxation so they will be alraid to come and compete 
with you. Others might say they are bondholders and vou are 
afraid your interest will not be paid if the limit be reduced. All 
of these apprehensions are absolutely futile. There is no ground 
for them. On the contrary, the argument of those delegates in 
favor of it, is based upon more recent calculations, investigations 
and ascertainment of facts than those that are opposed to the re¬ 
duction. Why the very reduction itself to 65 cents is a compro¬ 
mise. The distinguished ex-Justice of the Supreme Court said 
that we could ha\e reduced it to 60 cents, but out of deference 
to our timid friends, we put it at 65 cents. So 65 cents itself is a 
compromise between w'hat really ought to be the limit and the 
timidity of some very estimable gentlemen with regard to the 
payment of interest on bonds. So, my friends, we should by all 
means, if possible, and we believe we are able to do it, reduce 
this limit. The poorer we are, the less we should be taxed Ev¬ 
ery dollar, every mill of taxes, takes away from a poor man some 
necessary of life. Every mill that is saved g'ives him some neces¬ 
sary of life, gives to the rich some article of luxury not heretofore 
enjoyed, gives to the man of ordinary circumstances a comfort 
that his little family needs. Our friends here are mistaken in 
the argument—they speak of it as if the Legislature had power 
to limit it. It has no such power. They speak of it as if it were 
to reduce taxation, it does not reduce it five cents, it is merely 
to fix the limit beyond which hereafter the legislature shall not 
go The tax of 75 cents m all probability, will be in full force 
until November, 1902, and therefore, there is no immediate dan¬ 
ger and you have time to see the development of the country 



CONSTITUTIONAL CONVENTION, 1901 


1361 


One member says he wants elasticity in the Constitution. How 
can elasticity in the Constitution develop the country? One gen¬ 
tleman speaks as though the reduction of the tax rate would im¬ 
pede the progress of Alabama. Gentleman have heard of the 
horse who, the more he carried, the faster he ran. I never heard 
of but one instance, my friend Mr. Abercrombie, who said of his 
horse Buck-Rabbit, the more weight you put upon him, the high¬ 
er he jumped. So the more burdens you put upon the people, the 
more prosperous they come—the less weight they carry, the slow¬ 
er they run. That, my friend, is not in accordance with human 
experience either with the success of men or the fleetness of 
horses. Now, Mr. Chairman, I have but one word more. I am 
amazed at the contradictory statements. My esteemed colleague 
from Montgomery says that if you were to reduce this rate, this 
limitation of taxation, the people would rejoice, and it would fill 
their hearts with gratitude. Why? Because it is in accordance 
with common sense, and relieves them of heavy burdens. An¬ 
other friend of mine from Montgomery, a very brilliant man, says 
the people would not be grateful at all, that they would rather 
pay the tax than to be relieved of burdens. They remind me— 
both of them are wrong in their positions—but they remind me 
of two men riding down Pennsylvania Avenue. Both of them 
were a little cross-eyed, each of them was mounted on a bicycle, 
they were riding at full speed, as the young men say, ‘'scorching.” 
Each saw the other coming, each was anxious to avoid the col¬ 
lision, Hut their care did not prevent their clashing together. They 
came together, one fell to the right and the other fell to the left, 
and one of them got up and brushing his knees said: “Why in 
the devil don’t you look where you are going?” And the other 
said, rubbing his shoulder: “Why in hell didn’t you go where 
you were looking?” And so of my friends from Montgomery, 
both of them are cross-eyed on this question, and they are going 
wrong. If you have high taxes you may have a splendid govern¬ 
ment, but a splendid government in a Republic, is a golden sor¬ 
row, but by having light burdens, low taxes, you will have a pros¬ 
perous and a contented people, and such people make the glory of 
a country. 

MR. WHITE (Jefferson)—I do not expect to take the wide 
range on the pending measure which has been taken by my friends 
on both sides of this question, nor do I expect to go into the sta¬ 
tistics, for I have long since Teamed that if you will give a man 
paper and pencil, he can figure out a deficit or a surplus according 
to his own inclination. But I do want to ask this Convention 
to be consistent. A few days ago I was urging, the best I knew 
how, a limitation on or a repeal of the tag tax. All of my friends 
admitted one of two things, they all said the tax was unjust and 
unequal, but some said we could not spare the revenue, and 
therefore we must vote against it. Well, if we could not spare 



1362 


OFFICIAL PROCEEDINGS 


the revenue to relieve the farmer of that unjust and unequal taxa¬ 
tion, how can we spare the revenues which will amount to $266,- 
000 of a just and equal taxation. The better argument, however, 
was, and there was great force in it, that the legislature would 
attend to that matter, and that it was something peculiarly within 
the sphere of the legislature. I say there was great force in that 
argument. We remitted that to the legislature. Now, can we not 
afford to leave this question of limitation also to the legislature? 
When we undertake to say to the legislature that you shall not 
exceed 65 cents on the $100, or 6 1-2 mills, that we are afraid for 
you to have the power to levy 7 1-2 mills, have we not voted a 
want of confidence in the people of Alabama? The people of Ala¬ 
bama can only act through their Legislature, and the Legislature 
has never yet failed to respond to any material extent to a just 
demand for a reduction of taxation where that taxation was di¬ 
rect. It is only where taxes are indirect, and the people don’t 
realize the burden, that legislators are disinclined to reduce taxes. 
I am going to advise you, gentlemen of the Convention, to adopt 
a strange course. I am going to ask you this afternoon to differ 
with me. I am going to take one position, and ask you to take 
another. If I should look narrowly upon the question, I would 
be in favor of the 65 cent rate, because the county from which I 
hail pours into the treasury every year $40,000 of this one mill 
tax. By leaving it at 65 cents, instead of 75 cents, the people of 
Jefferson county would retain annually in their pockets $40,000, 
or they would have $40,000 to apply to their local schools. But I 
shall take a wider and a broader view than that. The county of 
Jefferson, in her political destiny, is wrapped up with the destiny 
of sixty-five other counties in Alabama. The sixty-five other 
counties in Alabama must make the laws and the appropriations, 
and especially declare the policies under which Jefferson county 
and her people must live. I think that I ought not to look nar¬ 
rowly, and alone to the interests of my immediate constituency, 
but I should take in the whole field, look at the whole State as 
one great political unit in which the future destiny of every other 
county is locked with mine. Did it ever occur to you, and I want 
you men now from the poorer counties, the white counties in 
Alabama, to heed what I say, because the day will come when 
you will rue it if you do not heed it. I will take every county 
south of Montgomery save Mobile. Jefferson county pays as 
much taxes into the State treasury as all of them combined. I 
can take all the counties east of Jefferson and north of Elmore 
saving Calhoun. Jefferson county pays as much taxes as all of 
these combined. I can take all of the counties north of Marengo 
and west of Jefferson to the Tennessee line, and Jefferson pays as 
much as all of them But you say, Jefferson has the population 
as well, and she will receive back her share of this money. Let 
me show you: The population of the counties south of Montgom- 
ery of which I have just spoken, excluding Mobile, has 380,000 



CONSTITUTIONAL CONVENTION, 1901 


1363 


population. Jefferson county has 140,000 population. Then Jef¬ 
ferson pays into the treasury as much as all of them and receives 
back only in the proportion that her 140,000 bears to the popu¬ 
lation of 380,000. Take the tier of counties north of Elmore and 
east of Jefferson to the Tennessee line. They have a population 
of 344,000 people, and they pay no more taxes than Jefferson. 
Take the tier of counties west of Jefferson and north of Marengo, 
they have a population of 365,000, Jefferson has 140,000, and the 
disparity is even greater than that when you come to estimating 
upon the number of children, because the number of educated in 
Jefferson is less in proportion to the whole population than any 
other county in the State, because of the fact that there are thou¬ 
sands of men in Jefferson who have no families. Remember that 
in Jefferson county we pay taxes upon millions and millions of 
dollars that do not represent any population at all in Alabama, 
yet in justice and right that property should contribute to the 
upbuilding and the uplifting of the entire population of the State. 
Can you men who come from the poor counties, from the white 
counties of Alabama, refuse to take from the great county of Jef¬ 
ferson this boon, or rather can you refuse to allow Jefferson to 
make her contribution to the common good? I know, and you 
know, that when the times comes the common schools of Ala¬ 
bama will receive the blow that this reduction will give. When 
riots are running rampant in the land cash must be advanced to 
pay for their suppression, when epidemics sweep over the country, 
when we are scouraged with yellow fever and smallpox, cash must 
be advanced to meet the bills. You dare not vote down the old 
soldier tax, because there is a sentiment behind it that will never 
allow you to do it, but this blow that you do today you are deal¬ 
ing at the pale-faced children of Alabama that live in the hills. 

MR. LONG (Walker)—Bare-footed? 

MR. WHITE—Yes, bare-footed, bare-headed, barely receiv¬ 
ing the necessities of life and wdthout any of the means of edu¬ 
cation. Remember again, that the earning power of a people de¬ 
pends upon their education. Consult the statistics of this country 
and you will see in Massachusetts that the people of that State 
earn more money per capita than any other State in the Union, 
because of her educational advantages. You men from the poorer 
counties, the sons of whom must gather around the great indus¬ 
trial plants in my section, remember if your children are not edu¬ 
cated, they must be the hewers of wood and drawers of water. If 
you want them to participate in that great development, and re¬ 
ceive their share of the wage that will be paid, educate them in 
order that they may be enabled to take the best positions that this 
industrial development affords. Think over this, you men who 
represent a white constituency, whose lands are too poor, and 
whose property is too scarce, to provide them by local taxation 
with public schools. Remember that your hopes, and the hopes 



1364 


OFFICIAL PROCEEDINGS 


of your children, are linked to the great industrial section, and 
that you must keep the chain that binds you to us together, when 
you break it you fall back and we leap forward, you will be left 
far behind. I ask you today, for one time in your lives, to be 
selfish. I think it is better for the whole State, and even better for 
my county, to pay an undue proportion of this money, than to 
allow the people of Alabama to continue in their illiteracy. I 
tell you, gentlemen of the Convention, that illiteracy has cast its 
shadow upon the industrial, political and the social life of Ala¬ 
bama long enough. I warn you, now, against what you are doing. 

MR. WILLIAMS (Marengo) — I think the Convention is 
ready for a vote on this question. It has been discussed fully 
enough, and I therefore call for the previous question on the Sec¬ 
tion as reported by the Committee and on the amendment thereto. 

THE PRESIDENT The gentleman from Marengo moves 
the previous question on the amendment to the Section reported 
by the Committee. 


MR. WHITE—In order that the amendment offered by the 
gentleman from Talladega (Mr. Graham) which was laid on the 
table may be recalled, I move to table the amendment offered by 
the gentleman from Hale. 


PRESIDENT — The gentleman from Jefferson moves 
table? 6 amendment of the ff^tleman from Hale be laid upon the 


A vote being taken the amendment was tabled. 

MR. WILLIAMS (Marengo) — I have moved the previous 
question on the Section as reported by the Committee. 

MR. WHITE—In order that we may recall from the table 
the amendment offered by the gentleman from Talladega (Mr 

on a the 1 table mOVe ^ ^ ^ Section as re P° rted by the Committee 


MR. BROWNE—And on that I call for the ayes and noes 
MR. WHITE—And I join in the call. 


MR. BROWNE All right, we will be with you. 

The call for the ayes and noes was sustained by the rising of 

^ JIT* V U . mber and ,he resul * of the r °" “•> on the mofion 
to table the Section as reported by the Committee was as follows: 


Ashcraft, 

Banks, 

Barefield, 

Beddow, 


AYES 


Cobb, Eyster, 

Davis, of Etowah, Ferguson, 

Dent, Graham, of Montgomery, 

Eley> Greer, of Calhoun, 



CONSTITUTIONAL CONVENTION, 1901 


1365 


Henderson, 

Norwood, 

Smith, Mac. A., 

Jenkins, 

O'Neal (Lauderdale), 

Waddell, 

Jones, of Montgomery, 

Opp, 

Watts, 

Jones, of Bibb, 

Reynolds (Chilton), 

Weakley, 

Locklin, 

Rogers (Lowndes), 

White, 

Lowe (Jefferson), 

Sanders, 

Williams (Barbour), 

Murphree, 

TOTAL—32. 

Smith (Mobile), 

NOES 


Messrs. President, 

Heflin, of Chambers, 

O’Rear, 

Bethune, 

Heflin, of Randolph, 

Parker (Elmore), 

Brooks, 

Hinson, 

Pettus, 

Browne, 

Hodges, 

Phillips, 

Burnett, 

Howze, 

Pillans, 

Burns, 

Inge, 

Pitts, 

Byars, 

Jackson, 

Reese, 

Carnathon, 

Jones, of Wilcox, 

Robinson, 

Cofer, 

Kirk, 

Rogers (Sumter), 

Coleman, of Walker, 

Knight, 

Sanford, 

Cunningham, 

Kyle, 

Sentell, 

Davis, of DeKalb, 

Leigh, 

Sloan, 

Espy, 

Long (Butler), 

Sorrell, 

Fletcher, 

Long (Walker), 

Spears, 

Foshee, 

Macdonald, 

Spragins, 

Foster, 

Martin, 

Stewart, 

Gilmore, 

Maxwell, 

Studdard, 

Glover, 

Merrill, 

Tayloe, 

Grant, 

Moody, 

Weatherly, 

Grayson, 

Mulkey, 

Whiteside, 

Greer, of Perry, 

NeSmith, 

Williams (Marengo), 

Harrison, 

TOTAL—66. 

Norman, 

Winn. 

ABSENT OR NOT VOTING 

Altman, 

deGraffenreid, 

McMillan (Baldwin), 

Almon, 

Duke, 

McMillan (Wilcox), 

Bartlett, 

Fitts, 

Malone, 

Beavers, 

Freeman, 

Miller (Marengo), 

Blackwell, 

Graham, of Talladega, 

Miller (Wilcox), 

Boone, 

Haley, 

Morrisette, 

Bulger, 

Handley, 

Oates, 

Cardon, 

Hood, 

O'Neill (Jefferson), 

Carmichael, of Colbert, 

Howell, 

Palmer, 

Carmichael, of Coffee, 

Jones, of Hale, 

Parker (Cullman), 

Case, 

King, 

Pearce, 

Chapman, 

Kirkland, 

Porter, 

Coleman, of Greene, 

Ledbetter, 

Proctor, 

Cornwall, 

Lomax, 

Renfro, 

Craig, 

Lowe (Lawrence), 

Reynolds (Henry), 



1366 


OFFICIAL PROCEEDINGS 


Sam ford, 

Searcy, 

Setheimer, 

Smith, Morgan M., 


Sollie. 

Thompson, 

Vaughan, 

Walker, 


Willett. 

Williams ( Elmore), 
Wilson (Clarke), 
Wilson (Washington). 


So the house refused to table the section as reported. 


During the roll call:— 

MR. ALMON—I am paired with the gentleman from Jeffer¬ 
son, Mr. Cornwall: he would vote aye and I would vote no. 

MR. BLACKWELL—I am paired with the gentleman from 
Jackson, Mr. Proctor; he would vote no and I would vote aye. 

MR. CARDON—I am paired with the gentleman from Tal¬ 
ladega, Mr. Graham; he would vote aye and f would vote no. 

MR. CARMICHAEL (Colbert)—I am paired with Mr. Ha¬ 
ley ; he would vote no and I would vote aye. 

MR. CHAPMAN—During the session of the convention on 
last Saturday the delegate from Hale (Mr. deCraffenreid) ap¬ 
proached me and asked me to pair with him. I told him I had 
some doubt about the propriety of pairing, as there might he some 
collateral question. After some conversation he left, without any 
understanding on my part that there was a pair. I am informed 
by delegates that Mr. deGraffenreid considered I was paired with 
him. I was subsequently informed by another delegate that Mr. 
deGraffenreid was paired with another gentleman. Although I 
did not understand that I had made a pair, I would not in any 
way like to be put in the position of violating a pair with Mr. 
deGraffenreid, and, for that reason, I ask that my name be passed, 
and unless there is a pair announced for him during the roll call, 
I will allow this pair to stand. If he were here, he would vote 
aye and I would vote no, but I will not have it so recorded unless 
another pair is announced for him. 

MR. BROWNE—I had forgotten when I spoke to the gen¬ 
tleman who it was that told me of a pair that Mr. deGraffenreid 
had. Mr. Burns of Dallas told me that Mr. Craig of Dallas had 
stated to him that he was paired with Mr. deGraffenreid. I do not 
know that Mr. deGraffenreid was standing closer than four or five 
feet of us at the time. When the gentleman spoke to me about 
it this morning, I could not recollect who it was, but the gentle¬ 
man from Dallas refreshed my recollection. 

MR. LONG (Walker)—I heard the pair made between Mr. 
deGraffenreid and Mr. Craig. 

MR. CHAPMAN—If that is the case, I will vote no. The 
vote was recorded. 


MR. ELEY—I am paired with Mr, Proctor of Jackson. 



CONSTITUTIONAL CONVENTION, 1901 


1367 


MR. O NEAL 1 here has been a pair announced for him. 

Mr. Eley then voted. 

MR. JACKSON—I desire to know if the amendment fixing 1 
the amount at seventy cents has been tabled? 

THE PRESIDENT—It has. 

MR. JACKSON—Then I vote no. 

MR. LEDBETTER—I am paired with the gentleman from 
Lee; he would vote no and I would vote aye. 

MR. LOMAX—I am paired with the delegate from Tusca¬ 
loosa, Mr. Searcy; if he were present he would vote no and I 
would vote aye. 

MR. LOWE (Lawrence)—I am paired with Mr. Selheimer; 
if he were present he would vote aye and I would vote no. 

MR. MILLER (Marengo)—I am paired with Mr. McMillan 
of Wilcox; he would vote aye and I would vote no. 

MR. WILLER (Wilcox)—I am paired with Mr. Wilson of 
Washington; I would vote no and he would vote aye. 

MR. OATES—I am paired with Mr. Morrisette; he would 
vote no and I would vote aye. 

MR. PALMER—I am paired with Mr. Wilson of Clarke; if 
he were here he would vote aye and I would vote no. 

MR. SOLLIE—I am paired with my law partner, Mr. Kirk¬ 
land of Dale; he would vote aye and I would vote no. 

MR. CHAPMAN—I have some doubt as to the propriety of 
voting. I would not like to be put in the position of even allow¬ 
ing an intimation that I had broken a pair. 

THE PRESIDENT—The gentleman can recall his vote. 

MR. CHAPMAN—I would prefer to recall it rather than 
be put in the position of violating a pair. 

MR. WILLIAMS (Marengo)—I move the adoption of the 
section as reported by the committee, and on that I call for the 
previous question. 

A vote being taken, the main question was ordered. 

MR. BROWNE — I desire to congratulate the gentleman 
from Jefferson (Mr. White) upon his fine display of parliamentary 
ability. For two days, the Committee on Taxation has graciously 
yielded in order that every member who was opposed to this re¬ 
duction of taxation should be heard. The gentleman from Jeffer¬ 
son secured the floor, and, in order to cut off the right of the 



1368 


OFFICIAL PROCEEDINGS 


Committee on Taxation to be heard from, after the previous ques¬ 
tion has been called, moves to lay the amendment and section 
upon the table. 

MR. WHITE—I wish to say to the gentleman from Talla- 
clega that I had no such desire. My purpose was simply to get 
the other amendment from the table. 

MR. BROW NE — Then the gentleman pleads ignorance of 
the parliamentary result. 


a i 'WHITE—If you had made known that you wanted to 

debate it, I would have withdrawn it instantly. 

BROWNE-! think, Mr. President, the gentleman was 
y wise m the course he pursued, which certainlv. whether he 

rpn1 nd f d i! ° r n0t ’, wouIcl have had the ef fect of cutting off anv 
reply to his remarks. 

Only a few days ago the gentleman stood upon this floor the 
champion of the farmers of the State of Alabama, pleadiim long 

S80 000 0 f I at T PO °i; farmer mi K h ‘ saved the «,m of 

^80,000 although by making that saving to the farmer, would de¬ 
stroy all the agricultural schools within the State of Alabama 
Today we hear him speaking long and loud against relief to his 

= f rr m m htTo o p;o n si c n o ;r sayinK ,hat *«» su h 5 

Mr. President, this tax reduction will t r- 

K ‘ 0 h f ^ s 

save the poor tamersafew doUa' Td ”! “ rder d h! ‘ t !>' -«h« 
duction that would give them an Oim m mm'' H res,s . ts , a re ' 
of the little boy who went fishimr wJ ° nt He reminds me 

cat pole, then went wRh some’a&lewomTanftS" 'TV"™ * 
and, bye and bye, got a tug and pulled nuf n V CW Ime ,n ’ 
when, with a look of diippointmem. he 

stream and said. “I am fishing for ca,; , am not fishing for t’rou't ” 

It would be impossible in an hour or two hm,rc * , . , 

to reply to the false argument that has been m-tde ’ ° l ' aderta * <e 
against this tax reduction, and the-false estimates of 1 ?” ^ * t°°I 
it be sufficient to say that estimates h-ive K»» CS i°^ *'K ures - Let 
side that are confessedly false. They are predicate ^ P ° n th L° ther 
timates made by the Auditor, upon the thirtieth d “tT the es ' 
which the Auditor now admits to be Iron l f Y ° f laSt year ’ 
hundreds of thousands of dollars. * and erron eous by 

In reply to the farmer from Wilcox who re™iu * u 
sold cotton at 3 1-2 cents a pound, and ZoUecS L»t th l H ? 
of that low price was to reduce taxable values, I desi« to 'ay 



CONSTITUTIONAL CONVKNTION, 1901 


1369 


that the year of the lowest price of cotton within the memory of 
man was 1898, when it sold for 3 1-2 cents a pound. The gentle¬ 
man said, as a matter of course, the taxable values would decrease 
in the next year. The Auditor’s report shows that in 1899 taxable 
values increased three million dollars. One gentleman upon the 
floor the other day said the suffrage ordinance, if adopted, would 
decrease the poll tax $250.(XX). Well, all 1 have to say in answer 
to that is we only collect $150,000 of poll taxes, and that the col¬ 
ored people only pay about $35,000 of that. It is a well known 
fact, Mr. President, that a great many of the boys who do the vot¬ 
ing, do not pay any poll tax. Young men, twenty-two to twenty- 
five years old, who are clerking in stores, or engaged in other oc¬ 
cupations, hut who have no property that necessitates their go¬ 
ing before the tax assessor, do not go and hunt him up to give in 
their poll tax. but now it means disfranchisement if they do not 
assess their poll tax and pay it, and I contend that we will get a 
greater yield from that source for schools in the future than in 
the past. 


fust one minute on the figures again. Mr. President and 
gentlemen oi the Convention, I hold in my hands the figuics as 
made by Judge Cook, and upon which this committee predicted 
the recommendation to reduce taxation. No one has assailed these 
figures. It is admitted that they are correct, but they have gone 
to guessing against the actual figures. The gentleman from Mont¬ 
gomery Mr Watts, read a paper that somebody said had come 
from the Auditor’s office in which he showed that under certain 
contingencies or possibilities we would not have collected but 
$2,540,000 this vear. As a matter of fact they had collected up 
to the eighteenth day of June $2,612,000. The collections will be 
from that date to September thirtieth, if no larger than last year, 
$190 000 Our estimate was that they would be at least $10,000 
more, making the total this year $2,712,000 and all expenditures 
will be $2,754,000. Deduct and we have a difference in round fig¬ 
ures &59 000 Add that to the actual cash balance in the treasury 
October D1901. of $620,000. and you have $679,000 in the treas- 
ruy upon the first day of October against which are chargeable 
a Hke amount of liabilities, but they are payable in October, No¬ 
vember and December. Now I have another estimate- 

MR. ASHCRAFT—Will the gentleman permit me to ask 
him a question? 

MR. BROWNE — No sir, I have not the time. The total 
amount oaid into the treasury during last October, November, 
December and January was $1,276,000. The total payments dur¬ 
ing October, November, December and January last were $1,- 
247 000 showing that the receipts during those months were about 
$30 000’ in eTei of the disbursements. Did they decrease the 
Haolooo cash balance? By no means, but in that t.me they added 



1370 


OFFICIAL PROCEEDINGS 


about $30,000 more to it. Again, in 1895, upon the first (lav of 
October, there was a cash balance in the treasury of only $11,000. 
On the first dav of October 1900, there was in the treasury $620.- 
000. A gain of $609,000. 

Again, on the first day of July, two years ago, there was in 
the treasury, when the July interest upon the bonds had been 
paid, only $333,000. Today there is $902,000 in the treasury and 
the July interest long since paid. We are not gaining.' We can¬ 
not comply with our promises to the people to reduce taxes, if 
practicable, when we are gaining in July cash in treasury $330,000 
a year upon an average? 

No one has shown anything to controvert the figures or the 
estimates made by this committee. I say to you, Mr. President 
and gentlemen on this floor, if this report had been made In some 
other committee, and that statement had been made, and I had 
had doubts upon the subject, and had heard the able men who 
have opposed this measure make the kind of speeches they have 
made, and fail to pick any flaw in these figures, that doubt would 
have been entirely removed. 

MR. W ADDELL—May I ask the gentleman a question. 

MR. BROWNE—No sir. You have not been able to show 
anything. Your fears are at the bottom of the whole thing. You 
fear you will not be able to build a magnificent Capitol, a Gov¬ 
ernor s mansion and buy these shacks south ot here. You fear 
your school teachers. You are friends of the schools, and are 
afraid you will not be able to pile up a large surplus and appro¬ 
priate it to the public schools from the general fund of Alabama, 
when it is a well known fact to every one, or ought to be, that 
for every dollar you take from the people vou swipe about fif¬ 
teen cents off before it goes back to them, and then force them 
to divide it with a non tax paying race. Tell me that we must 
relegate this matter to the Legislature? Then why did the Demo¬ 
cratic party put it in its platform ? I for one do not agree with 
those newspapers that say that was done only for the purpose of 
winning votes. No man can pledge me for that purpose If I 
go upon a platform, and that platform has pledged those who 
stand upon it to a course of action, I will follow that course of 
action or get down off of the platform. The charge has been 
made by able gentlemen, the charge has been made by my per¬ 
sonal friends, and I know that they do not mean it. that we were 
in the attitude of members of the Legislature, who wanted to cut 
down the taxes and go back home and sav “Ain’t I a statesman 
I saved you some money.” The gentleman who said it did not 
mean it. We are simply undertaking to do our duty, under the 
instructions of this body, and the people, who sent us here. 

Now, Mr. President, I desire simply to say this in conclu¬ 
sion. If any man upon this floor who is opposed to the report of 


1371 


constitutional convention, 1901 


tlu* loinnmuw could have found one* figure wrong in this state¬ 
ment, could have ca>t one doubt upon it, 1 would have been the 
fir>t man to >a\ for Heaven s sake don’t let me, or my Commit¬ 
tee, be the niMiuinent by which the State of Alabama would be¬ 
come a defaulter. \> 1 knew that gentleman after gentleman 
was going to get tip and attack these figures, I spent night after 
night, and day alter day, going over them, all of them, the ones 
made by the Auditor > otlice. and the ones made bv me, and I 
never found but one mistake and that was a mistake of $20 made 
in the Auditor's office. 

Mr. Urisident, 1 have nothing more to say. 

THK lM<KSII)K\T~The motion is to adopt the motion as 

reported by the Committee. 

I he motion was carried the Section adopted. 

Section 5 was read as follows: 


Sec. 5. No county in this State shall be authorized to levy 
a larger rate of taxation in any one year, on the value of the tax¬ 
able property therein, than 1-2 to 1 per centum. Provided, that 
to pay debts existing at the ratification of the Constitution of 
1875. an additional rate of 1-4 of 1 per centum may he levied and 
collected, which shall be exclusively appropriated to the payment 
of such debts or the interest thereon, provided, further, that to 
pay any debt or liability now existing against any countv, in¬ 
curred for the erection, construction and maintenance of the neces- 
sarv public buildings, or bridges, or that may hereafter be cre¬ 
ated for the erection of necessary public buildings, bridges or 
roads, any county may levy and collect such special taxes not to 
exceed a rate of 1-4 to 1 per centum as may be authorized by law, 
which taxes so levied and collected shall be applied exclusively 
to the purposes, for which the same were so levied and collected; 
provided further, that for the maintenance of public schools any 
county mav low and collect such special tax as may be authorized 
by law: provided such special tax. the time it is to continue and 
the purposes thereof shall have been first submitted to a vote of 
the property tax payers who are qualified electors in said county, 
and voted for my a majority thereof in numbers, and in value of 
taxable property’, voting at such election; provided that the rate 
of such special tax for maintenance of public schools shall not in¬ 
crease the rate of taxation in any one year to more than $1.25 
on every $100.00 worth of taxable property, for all State and coun¬ 
ty purposes, excluding any special tax for the erection, construc¬ 
tion and maintenance of necessary public buildings, bridges and 
roads • and provided further, that such special tax for schools sha 1 
be apportioned equitably and paid to the public schools of such 
county, by the Court of County Commissioners or Board of Rev- 
enue thereof. 



1372 


OFFICIAL PROCEEDINGS 


MR. CUNNINGHAM (Jefferson) — I desire to offer an 
amendment to that Section. 

The amendment was read as follows: 

Amend Section 5 by striking’ out in the fifteenth line the 
phrase, “property tax payers who are” and in the sixteenth and 
seventeenth lines the following words “in numbers and in value 
of taxable property.” 

MR. CUNNINGHAM (Jefferson) — When the Committee 
examined this report, there were two or three of us, possibly 
more, who did not approve of so much of the Committee’s report 
as gave to property the right to vote in an election. We did not 
at the time, however, desire to embarrass the purposes of the 
Committee, and the objects that it had in view, by burdening it 
specially with a minority report, but we reserved the right, on the 
floor of the Convention, to offer the amendment that has been 
read at the Secretary’s desk, and to which I desire briefly to call 
the attention of the Convention. 

It will leave the Section to read like this, beginning in the 
twelfth line: 

Provided further, that for the maintenance of public schools 
any county may levy and collect such special tax as may be au¬ 
thorized by law, provided such special tax, the time it is to con¬ 
tinue and the purposes thereof, shall have been first submitted 
to a vote of the qualified electors in said county and voted for by 
a majority thereof voting at such election, provided that the ratr 
of such special tax for maintenance of public schools shall not 
increase the rate of taxation in any one year to more_” 

In other words, it simply leaves it to the qualified electors 
of the county. 

Now I have two purposes in offering this amendment. In the 
first place I will acknowledge the equity of the proposition that 
the property which pays the tax has an equitable right to vote 
upon the question, but I am fearful of the principle, Mr. President 
of admitting the dollar to the right to vote. I believe it would be 
an innovation upon the established principles of the Party to 
which I have the honor to belong, and the fundamental principles 
of a Republican form of government. For that reason I am op¬ 
posed to it as a matter of principle. In the second place, Mr. 
President, w^ere it to be adopted, I cannot see very w r ell how^ we 
could determine the fact as to how the property voted at these 
elections. I would either require a viva voce vote, or the ballots 
would have to be numbered. In either case it would result neces¬ 
sarily in a material change in the election laws of the State. I 
am heartily in favor of this tax. I am heartily in favor of local 
taxation for the public schools. I believe it to be to the best in- 



1373 


CONSTITUTIONAL CONVENTION, 1901 

terest of the State of Alabama, and this was one of my reasons 
for supporting the Section which has just been adopted, but I be¬ 
lieve, Mr. President, it would be too serious an innovation upon 
the established principles, usages and customs of this Republic 
and of the State of Alabama to admit the dollar to vote in com¬ 
petition with man. bor that reason I offer the amendment, and 
I am firm in the conviction and belief, that the property interests 
in the State can, in this, as in other particulars, rely upon the elec¬ 
torate, which \ye propose to purge, and to make pure, honorable, 
safe, conservative and patriotic, by suffrage regulations in this 
Convention, bor these reasons, Mr. President, I hope the amend¬ 
ment will be adopted. 

MR. HROWNK — If the conditions all over the State of 
Alabama were the same as they are in my county, I would cheer¬ 
fully agrte to the amendment offered by the gentleman from Tef- 
ferson. but we must not forget that in making this Constitution 
we are making one for the whole State, for every county in the 
State, and that conditions are materially different in different 
counties. 

The provision for school taxation incorporated in this Section 
is identical with the one incorporated in the Constitution of the 
State of Louisiana. It requires in that State a majority of the 
qualified electors who are tax payers in numbers, and in value of 
property, voting at an election. The provisions are exactly simi¬ 
lar. 

When this report was made it was said by some of the public 
press of Alabama that it was a most ridiculously absurd proposi¬ 
tion. That in not a single county in Alabama would property 
vote this tax upon itself for the education of children. It may be 
that that sentiment found a lodgment with certain members of this 
body. But I wrote to the Superintendent of Education of Louisi¬ 
ana," and I desire to read his letter upon this subject. I only asked 
him how the law worked, and if it was favored by the people; 
nothing else did I ask him. and he said : 

“Our State has local taxation for the schools, voted for by 
the people who are a majority in number and value of the prop¬ 
erty. Our school districts are either entire counties, cities, or 
small districts. Second, as a rule the voters do favor this special 
tax. Third, I regard this special local tax as beneficial in its re¬ 
sults/' 

Now in Texas they have a special school tax that can only be 
levied after having been voted for by a two-thirds majority of 
the qualified electors who are property tax payers. That pro¬ 
vision is not subject to the objection urged by the gentleman from 
Jefferson. The vote of the man who is worth $10,000 does not 
count for any more in Texas than the vote of the man who is only 



OFFICIAL PROCEEDINGS 


W4 

worth $100, but by requiring a two-thirds majority of all of the 
property tax payers you will readily see that, in the great majority 
of instances, before that tax can be imposed, a majority in value 
of alt the property in the county must favor it. I would not ob¬ 
ject to so amending this law as to provide that it should be left to 
a vote of the property tax payers, who are qualified electors, and 
voted for by a two-thirds majority thereof. It seems to me such 
a provision would meet all of the objections urged by the gen¬ 
tleman from Jefferson, and still not be subject to the objection 
which would be raised by certain portions of the State of Alabama 
to the amendment proposed by him. There are counties possibly 
in the State of Alabama, where to allow a bare majority of the 
qualified electors to tax the property in that county for school 
purposes would almost amount to confiscation of property. That 
condition does not exist in North Alabama, but it does exist in 
parts of South Alabama and in order to make this law acceptable 
to all portions of the State of Alabama, I believe that it will be 
necessary to require it to be submitted to a vote of the qualified 
electors who are property holders. 

MR. LOWE (Jefferson)—May I ask the gentleman a ques¬ 
tion ? 

MR. BROWNE—Certainly. 

MR. LOWE (Jefferson)—Does the gentleman know of any 
time in the history of Alabama, or of any Southern State, when 
property has been allowed to vote or when a man has been al¬ 
lowed to vote in proportion to his holdings of property? 

MR. BROWNE—Had the gentleman been listening he would 
have heard my remarks a few minutes ago, when I said in Louisi¬ 
ana they have a provision that before this tax is levied— 

MR. LOWE (Jefferson) I heard the gentleman’s remarks 
as to the Louisiana special tax, but I ask the gentleman if he has 
ever known where a man has been allowed to number his votes 
according to the amount of property he owns, in any Southern 
State ? 

MR. BROWNE—In Louisiana they do it, when it is voting a 
tax upon the property, a voluntary tax, or a voluntary contribu¬ 
tion, through governmental agencies, for schools. 

MR. LOWE (Jefferson) May I ask the gentleman another 
question? 

MR. BROWNE—Yes. 

MR. LOWE (Jefferson) In reference to this section, I un¬ 
derstand you desire to make an explanation of this section. 

MR. BROWNE—That is what I was undertaking to do. 



CONSTITUTIONAL CONVENTION, 1901 


137S 


MR. LOWE (Jefferson) — In connection with the amend¬ 
ment I would like to ask another question. This section, as I un¬ 
derstand it, provides that before a special school tax can be levied 
in a county, it must be submitted to all the qualified voters of the 
County, does it not? 

MR. BROWNE—Who are the property tax payers. 

MR. LOWE—Now, for instance, in Jefferson County, before 
the tax could be levied for a school fund for Jefferson County, the 
voters in the city of Birmingham and Bessemer, in Pratt City, 
in Woodlawn, and in the other special school districts there, would 
be required to vote upon that question, would they not? 

MR. BROWNE—I should think so, yes. 

MR. LOWE (Jefferson)—I ask the gentleman another ques¬ 
tion. Is that all the hope you hold out to the country people for 
a special school fund under this special tax? If there is anything 
else in it, I would like to have the suggestion? 

MR. BROWNE—The gentleman must have been reading the 
editorials upon this Tax Committee in The Age-Herald for the 
last two weeks— 

MR. LOWE (Jefferson) — I am reading the report of the 
Committee now, to see if there is anything in it that I have not 
read. 

MR. BROWNE—In this provision we are still holding stead¬ 
fastly to the pledges we have made to the people that we would 
not increase the taxes. This provision is to the effect that the 
county can vote any tax that may be authorized by law, provided 
it shall not go beyond the present constitutional limitation. Now 
as we have lowered the tax rate from seventy-five to sixty-five, 
the countv can only take one mill, or ten cents on the hundred 
dollars. Should the Legislature in the future, as I confidently 
think they will, see they can get along with less than sixty-five, 
and take only sixty, the county can levy fifteen for school pur¬ 
poses,-which would be in addition to what they now receive. 

In answer to the gentleman’s suggestion, if this is all we can 
do for these little children, I want to say to him, and to other gen¬ 
tlemen who have paraded the bare-footed children before this 
body, that they are not the only persons whose hearts are touch¬ 
ed by the glad songs the little children sing. It is a slander upon 
the fair name of Alabama to say that this State is doing less for 
the school children than any other State. We have before us fre¬ 
quently discussions in the newspapers, and they say look what 
Georgia is doing for her school children, and then look what a 
pitiful little sum Alabama gives? I tell you Alabama gives more 
to the schools than does Georgia in proportion to the taxable 
value of all the property. I have corresponded with every Super- 



1376 


OFFICIAL PROCEEDINGS 


intendent of Education in the United States, and with very rare 
exceptions Alabama is doing as much for the schools, according 
to her taxable property, as any other State in the Union. We 
well know that under the present system that has been defended 
upon this floor, and has been defended in the lobby, that we a re 
engaged in the farcical performance of taking money from the 
people, taking out a big swipe, and sending back from eighty to 
eighty-five per cent of it, and forcing them to divide it with a non¬ 
tax paying race, when they do not use it for education. There 
is no use to mince words. There are counties in the State of Ala¬ 
bama that get large sums of money from the general fund, that 
do not spend it for schools. When they have deducted for the 
colored children, there is enough to divide around among the 
white people, and they do divide it. They do not pay it to the 
schools, but those white people send their children off to schools. 
Now that has been condemned in some portions of the State but 
that is all wrong. That is not deserving of condemnation. It is 
the system that is at fault. If you take from Lowndes county 
thousands upon thousands of dollars, and then give it hack to 
her for school purposes, and she does not need it, there is no rea¬ 
son why we ought to keep it and not return it. We pay that 
money out per capita, because it is paid by them. Under the pres¬ 
ent system, the State of Alabama ought never to give one other 
dollar from her general fund to the schools, but they should leave 
it in the counties to be appropriated equitably among the schools 
in their own counties. 

The hour of five having arrived, the Convention adjourned 
until tomorrow morning. 


THIRTY-FIFTH DAY 

MONTGOMERY, ALA., 
Tuesday, July 2, 1901. 

The Convention met pursuant to adjournment, was called 
to order by the President, and opened with prayer by the Rev. Mr. 
Patterson as follows: 

Dear Lord, in Thy good providence Thou hast brought us 
through another night, and Thou hast set before us with its priv¬ 
ileges and responsibilities another day of life, and we would not 
begin the work of this day without asking Thy blessing and pray¬ 
ing for Thy guidance and Thy direction. We realize that in all 
things we are dependent upon Thee and we praise Thee for Thy 
kindness and Thy thoughtfulness toward us, and our Father we 
beseech Thee Thou wouldst permit us to address ourselves to 
all tasks Thou hast laid upon us, with an eye single to Thy glory 
and honor, with a full determination, as Thou dost give us grace 



CONSTITUTIONAL CONVKNTION, 1901 


1377 


and wisdom, to discharge every obligation in a way acceptable in 
Thy sight. Me with these Thy servants, strengthen them, guide 
them, support and uphold them, and at last when Thou hast 
served Thy will with us all here on earth, receive us on High, for 
the Redeemer's sake. Amen. 

Upon the call of the roll, 121 delegates responded to their 
names. 

Leaves of absence were granted to Mr. Proctor for today; 
Mr. Carmichael (Coffee) for yesterday; Mr. Thompson (Mibb) for 
Saturday, Monday and Tuesday; Mr. Renfro for Monday and 
today. 

MR. COMM—I have sent to the reading clerk a resolution 
which I desire to put upon its immediate passage, and to that 
end 1 ask a suspension of the rules, after the reading of the reso¬ 
lution. 

Resolution No. 215 by Mr. Cobb: 

Whereas, one of our colleagues, realizing the truth of the 
sentiment that it is not well for man to live alone, has taken to 
himself a life companion, and 

Whereas, we recognize in this course of our brother delegate 
the exhibition of that wisdom and prudence which have always 
characterized him, and 

Whereas, this Convention desires to put the stamp of approval 
upon conduct so eminently conducive to the happiness and use¬ 
fulness of men, and 

Whereas, the family relation is the chief corner stone of our 
political institutions, 

Therefore be it resolved. That we the members of this Con¬ 
vention extend to Hon. 1C 1). Willett, and his accomplished wife, 
our sincere felicitations; and express to them our earnest wish that 
the journey on which they have recently entered may be thornless 
and protracted, leading them at the last to that perfect 1)1 iss which 
comes to those who make secure entrance into the beautiful land. 

Resolved, That the clerk of this Convention deliver to Mr. 
and Mrs. Willett a certified copy of these resolutions (Applause.) 

MR. COBB—I move a suspension of the rules. 

Upon a vote being taken the rules were suspended. 

MR. COBB—Mr. President, the declaration contained in the 
resolutions just read that "‘it is not well for man to live alone,” 
is as true and forceful as it is trite. And so of the other sentiment 
that our political institutions rest upon the family relation as their 
chief corner stone. As member of this body, we are the repre- 



1378 


OFFICIAL PROCEEDINGS 


sentatives of intelligent and upright constituencies, who love vir¬ 
tue and faithfulness to duty; and are ever ready to extend the 
meed of commendation to every word and act which will secure 
the one and promote the other. And they will pardon us, I am 
sure, if we turn aside from the work we have to do, to give the 
plaudit of well done to our worthy confrere, and to extend to 
him and his accomplished bride the congratulations and well wish¬ 
es of the people of Alabama. That we may give emphasis to 
their approval and ours, I move the adoption of the resolutions 
by a rising vote. 

And by a rising vote, the resolutions were unanimously adopt¬ 
ed. 


The report of the Committee on the Journal was read, stat¬ 
ing that the journal for the thirty-fourth day of the Convention 
had been examined and found to be correct, and the same was 
adopted. 

MR. ROBINSON—I now move to take from the table the 
resolution reported by the Committee on Rules to limit debate. 
I think it is high time that that resolution, or one of similar im¬ 
port should be adopted. That resolution was reported by the 
Committee, and it was laid upon the table, to be taken up at anv 
time at the pleasure of the Convention. Therefore it is a privi¬ 
leged question. If the convention does not desire to limit the de¬ 
bate to five minutes, then they can amend the resolution, but it 
does seem to me if we are ever to get through with the making 
of a constitution, there must be some limit to debate in this bodv. 
Therefore I move to take the resolution from the table and put 
it upon its passage. 

MR. PETTUS—I would like to ask the gentleman a question. 
Is not there a limit on debate now, under the rules of the Conven¬ 
tion ? 

MR. ROBERTSON—There don’t seem to be. 

THE PRESIDENT—The gentleman from Chambers moves 
to take from the table the report of the Committee on Rules. 

Upon a vote being taken, a division was called for, and by 
a vote of seventy-one ayes and twenty-four noes the motion was 
carried. 

MR. ROBINSON—I now move the adoption of the resolu¬ 
tion. 

MR. O’NEAL (Lauderdale)—I move an amendment to the 
resolution. 

A reading of the resolution reported by the Committee was 

called for. 



CONSTITUTIONAL CONVENTION, 1901 


1379 


MR. SOLLIE—I have an amendment, Mr. President. 

MR. BULGER—I ask for a reading of the resolution. I dp 
not remember the original resolution. 

THE PRESIDENT—The Secretary will read the resolution 
as reported by the Committee on Rules, and will read the amend¬ 
ment offered bv the gentleman from Dale. 

The resolution was read as follows : 

Resolution No. 166, by Mr. Harrison: Reported favorably by 
the Rules Committee, with an amendment: 

Original resolution : 

Resolved That all speeches on amendments to ordinances re¬ 
ported by the standing committees be limited to five minutes each. 

Amendment by the committee: 

Amend Resolution No. 166, by Mr. Harrison of Lee, so as to 
read as follows: 

Resolved, That all speeches on amendments to ordinances 
reported by the standing committees be limited to five minutes 
each, whether made before or after the ordering of the previous 
question. 

Amendment by Mr. Sollie: 

Amend by striking out the word “five” and substituting there¬ 
for the word “ten,” so that it will read ten minutes. 

MR. O'NEAL (Lauderdale)—I desire to offer an amendment 
to the amendment. 

THE PRESIDENT—The committee reports the resolution 
with an amendment, and the proposition of the gentleman from 
Dale would be an amendment to the amendment. 

MR. O’NEAL (Lauderdale)—Would a substitute be in order? 

THE PRESIDENT—An additional amendment in the opin¬ 
ion of the Chair would not be in order at this time. 

MR. O’NEAL (Lauderdale)—I think the gentleman will ac¬ 
cept my amendment. 

MR. SOLLIE—Let me hear it. 

MR. O’NEAL (Lauderdale)—Resolved, that the rule shall 
not apply to debate on the report of the Committee on Suffrage, 
or to the chairman of committees. 

MR. SOLLIE—Yes, I accept that as a substitute. 



1380 


OFFICIAL PROCEEDINGS 


THE PRESIDENT—The gentleman from Dale asks unani¬ 
mous consent to accept the amendment proposed by the gentleman 
from Lauderdale. Is there objection? 

MR. ROBINSON—I object. 

MR. SOLLIE — Among my immediate colleagues, coming 
up from the wire grass, I brought to the Convention with me 
something of a reputation for being long winded in speech mak- 
mg, and the amendment extending the time from five to ten min¬ 
utes coming from me will at least, be consistent, I believe, how- 
cver, that I might say, by way of parenthesis, that I have been 
out-Heroded in the matter of speech making, and that whatever 
ot pride I might have felt in my previous reputation along that 
line, the time has come when I must surrender both the reputa¬ 
tion and the proud feeling following it. Yet, it occurs to me, Mr. 
President, that a debate to be limited to five minutes, is to great 

fu- m A tatlon • r the q uesti °n that are constantly coming before 
this Convention. Many of these questions have so many bear¬ 
ings, and such varied aspects; the dangers in their passage, or the 
reasons for their passage, are so numerous, and touch upon so 
many points, that in my judgment, gentlemen who are capable 
of speaking to resolutions and to ordinances, cannot in five min- 
utes present the arguments which they would like to present, and 
which, if it is well to argue them at all, this Convention ought to 
hear. But there will rarely come before the Convention any ques¬ 
tion which a man of moderately swift speaking capacity and or¬ 
dinary powers of condensation, may not speak down within the 
ten minutes; and it occurs to me that the ten minute limit would 
be a more reasonable limitation upon the right to speak than the 
five minute limitation. There are two extremes in all matters 
and it does appear that we have been heading strongly towards 
the extreme of great length in speech making in This Conven- 

tl01 t 1 thlnk !t ls a fault which none of the orators who have 
spoken here can say belongs to the balance, and not to himself 
It seems to be general. Inasmuch as it is general, we all may stop 
an take counsel to ourselves, and see if we, each one including 
v”? S M inthe . nu mber are not taking too much time in debate 
Yet Mr President, I for one will not consent, that the right to 
speak, the right to throw light upon the various questions which 
will be brought before the Convention, shall be cut off and limit 
ed to five minutes. We have already, from the ordinances which 
have been introduced, seen what a disposition there is among 
members of the Convention to introduce and bring in through 
committees reports making radical changes in the fundamental 
law of Alabama; and when that is shown to be the case—when 
it seems that we are so anxious to make grave and radical depart 
ures from the Constitution as it now stands, although the matter 
in which we depart from it is not one where the old Constitution 
has proven msufficient-I say when that disposition shows up™ 



CONSTITUTIONAL CONVENTION, 1901 


1381 


the Convention that it is not well that we should cut off the right 
to debate and show the wrong in these proposed departures. Ten 
minutes is not more than sufficient time for any gentleman of 
moderate ability to present an argument upon these great ques¬ 
tions, which are being brought before us. I hope that the five 
minute limit will not be put upon the Convention. I insist re¬ 
spectfully that no gentleman who is able to speak, not even those 
who are not able to speak, can make an argument upon a grave 
constitutional question inside of five minutes. We have a way 
in debate of laying certain predicates and proceedings to a con¬ 
clusion, and there are sufficient predicates in many propositions 
that come before us, if they are stated categorically, to require 
five minutes to state them. Therefore I insist that the five min¬ 
utes rule is too short, and I hope that the Convention will join 
in the amendment and permit the limit to be put at ten minutes 
and not five. 

MR. GILMORE—Judging from the quality of the speeches 
this Convention has been forced to listen to, it seems to me that 
one minute is quite sufficient. Yesterday morning while the 
speech making was going on, I was compelled to wonder what 
sins we had committed on Sunday that we should be cursed in 
listening to the speeches that we were forced to listen to on yes¬ 
terday, and I for one, Mr. President, shall insist on the five min¬ 
utes. 


MR. KIRKLAND—I move to lay the amendment of the gen¬ 
tleman from Dale on the table. 

Upon a vote being taken a division was called for, and by a 
vote of 43 ayes and 63 noes the motion to table was lost. 

MR. SOLLIE—I move the adoption of the amendment. 

MR. SMITH (Mobile)—I desire to call attention to the fact 
that the resolution introduced by the Committee is confined en¬ 
tirely to discussion upon amendments to reports and not to the re¬ 
ports themselves. It is to be presumed that where a more lengthy 
consideration of the purposes of the report are desired by the 
Chairman, that it will follow the course that was taken by the 
Chairman of the Committee on Executive Department, moving 
in the first place the adoption of the report, and giving the mem¬ 
bers ample time to discuss the purposes of the report as a whole. 
In the discussion here, there have been some amendments of very 
considerable importance offered before the House, and on which 
possibly it was reasonable to permit a longer debate than that 
prescribed by the resolution offered by the Committee, but the 
great quantity of amendments have not been of that character. 

MR. O’NEAL (Lauderdale)—Will the gentleman from Mo¬ 
bile permit me to ask a question? 

MR. SMITH—Yes sir. 



OFFICIAL PROCEEDINGS 


1382 


MR. O’NEAL (Lauderdale)—Is it not a fact that the most 
important questions that have come before the Convention so far, 
have been on amendments to the original propositions? 

MR. SMITH (Mobile)—Yes. 

MR. O’NEAL (Lauderdale)—The ones requiring more con¬ 
sideration and debate? 


MR. SMITH (Mobile)—In one or two instances, and I be¬ 
lieve it to be the fact that some of the longest speeches could have 
been made, so far as the information that they gave the conven¬ 
tion, or so far as they aided in reaching a conclusion, trimmed 
entirely of ornamentation, could have been made in less than five 
minutes. (Applause.) 

I do not believe that if any of these gentlemen had been sit- 
ting by the side of his neighbor and had undertaken to give him 
instructions, and all the information and his reasons for voting 
for or against a proposition, that he could have talked three min¬ 
utes to save his life without his neighbor asking him some ques¬ 
tion to stir him up. 


Now, so long as it looked like we would get through with this 
debate within a reasonable period, I for one was in favor of al¬ 
lowing every gentleman to exhibit to the fullest extent his great 
ability for flights of imagination and oratory, but the hour is 
coming when not only the members of the Convention, but the 
people of the State, will become restless under the delays and 
procrastinations of this Convention, and it seems to me that it 
would be better to adopt the five minute rule, and if we do find 
some gentleman speaking that is so pregnant with thought that 
he cannot deliver himself within that time, we can ask unanimous 
consent to hear him for a longer period. I am afraid that might 
break the hearts of some of our orators, however. 


MR. PETTUS—It seems to me that this is rather an anomo- 
lous procedure, for a deliberative body to adopt such a stringent 
rule for cutting off debate. I believe that one of the chief objects 
for assembling together of the delegates and representatives of 
the people in this convention, was for the purpose of delibera¬ 
tion, in order that they might discuss these great questions that 
come up, some of the most important of which have come before 
the convention by amendments offered to different propositions 
by different delegates, and it seems to me that it is very improper 
for this body to adopt a rule at this time which will limit dele¬ 
gates to ten minutes debate upon amendments, except by unani¬ 
mous consent, which in hot weather is very difficult to obtain 
when the temper of delegates are not as calm and serene as thev 
would be on the snowy heights of Monte Sano. We have already 
in the rules of this Convention, a limit on debate, and a limita¬ 
tion on the number of speeches. Rule fourteen, on page six lim 



CONSTITUTIONAL CONVENTION, 1901 


1383 


its speeches to thirty minutes, and it seems short time in which 
to discuss the pros and cons of any great constitutional question. 
The action of this body is final. It is not like a General Assem¬ 
bly, when the House can force under its cloture rule a measure 
through the lower house, and then, it is found that they have 
made a mistake, the friends of the bill in the House can go be¬ 
fore the Senate Committee and have it side-tracked, or if it gets 
through the Senate, members of the Senate seeing they have 
made a mistake, can go to the Governor and get him to hold it 
up. The action of this Convention is final, and I think it would 
be very unwise to adopt a rule that is going to bind us down and 
limit debate on amendments on any important question to five or 
ten minutes. Within the last two or three weeks we have seen 
some remarkable instances of the change of sentiment in this 
Convention brought about by unlimited debate. 

Now as the matter stands at this time, under the rules of this 
Convention, a majority of the delegates present, at any time, can 
cut off debate absolutely, under a call for the previous question, 
or a motion to lay on the table, which has precedence over any 
other motion, except a motion to adjourn. I am willing to see 
the debate cut off at any time when a majority of the delegates 
upon this floor say that they have made up their minds upon a 
subject, and that they are ready to vote, and they are tired of 
hearing the question discussed; but until the times comes when a 
majority of the delegates are satisfied that the question has been 
sufficiently discussed, and sufficiently argued, I am opposed to 
being put in the power of any single delegate, by objection, on a 
hot July day, to cut off debate and force the Convention to pre¬ 
mature action on any of these questions. 

Now it has been said that the people are restless, and that 
this Convention is getting restless, but I do not care how restless 
they may become, or how restless certain members of the Con¬ 
vention and certain people may get to be, I do not believe it is 
right or wise or patriotic for any rule to be adopted in this Con¬ 
vention, by which measures may be railroaded through, or by 
which wise, just and equitable amendments, offered to any propo¬ 
sition, may be side-tracked and laid on the table, and killed with¬ 
out a full, fair and free debate. I see, Mr. President, that the 
sentiment of the convention is in favor of cutting off debate on 
these propositions, and I simply rise to go on record here as rais¬ 
ing my voice in protest against any such procedure. 

I believe that the rules as they are, have gone too far in cut¬ 
ting off debate in a body of this character, from which there is 
no appeal, and here the action of the body is final. I believe 
that under the previous question, and under a motion to lay on 
the table, we put it in the power of the majority of the delegates 
to cut off debate at any time, and that we have gone far enough, 



OFFICIAL PROCEEDINGS 


m* 

SteP J Urt f he f wiU be , absolutely dangerous to the liberties 

L°e,t 7*Z Conven P ,Z le °' ' hiS S ' aK ' and 1 pr °* est 

m «„i VI ^' + u OGEI ? S ( Su f mter )—I move the adoption of the amend¬ 
ment of the gentleman from Dale, and I move the previous ques¬ 
tion, upon the original section and the amendment. 

MR. JONES (Montgomery)—Does the Chair recognize the 
gentleman from Sumter. There were several of us up. 

THE PRESIDENT The gentleman from Sumter is small 
and actwe, and I think got to his feet a little before the other 
gentlemen. The Chair recognizes him at any rate. 

MR. ROGERS (Sumter)—I move the adoption of the amend¬ 
ment of the gentleman from Dale, in connection with the original 
section, as reported by the Committee. 

The main question was ordered. 

MR. SOLLIE—Mr. President, I do not know that I have a 
very great deal to say by way of closing the argument upon this 
amendment. As the opportunity has come, however_ 

MR. ROGERS (Sumter)—I rise to a point of order. 

ordeJ HE PRRSIDRNT —The gentleman will state the point of 

th MR \ ROGRRS (Sumter) — It seems that having called for 
the previous question upon the original section and upon this 
amendment that the gentleman is out of order in speaking to the 
question. His amendment has been adopted. K 

MR. O NEAL (Lauderdale)—No sir, it has not. 

MR. SOLLIE—No sir. 

c1osi^iL B ^»? WNE ~ I make . the P° int of ord er that the right to 
dose after the previous question has been ordered on the amend¬ 
ment and original section, or a resolution reported by the Com¬ 
mittee, is with the chairman of the Committee reporting it. 

THE PRESIDENT—It seems to the Chair that the point 
o order is well taken, and that the chairman of the Committee 

whe^ g th report t WOuld have th e right to conclude the debate! 
where the proposition covers both. 

MR. SOLLIE—A question of inquiry. 

THE PRESIDENT-The gentleman will state the question. 

MR. SOLLIE—As I understand the rule, where there is an 

aSertfon?* pend !? R t0 an T igi u al P r °P° sition > and the previous 
question is moved upon each, that the order of the vote is first 

upon the amendment, and second upon the original proposition. 



CONSTITUTIONAL CONVENTION, 1901 1385 

Now Mr. President if the two propositions are to be merged 
into one, I move a division of the previous question so that each 
may come up separately, and I may have a right to conclude the 
debate upon the amendment offered by me. 

THE PRESIDENT—It seems to the Chair that as the rule 
authorizes only one person to conclude the debate under the call 
for the previous question, the chair would not be authorized to 
extend the privilege of closing the debate to two delegates. But 
the gentleman is entitled to a division of the question. 

MR. SOLLIE—After it becomes two questions as I under¬ 
stand it, Mr. President— 

THE PRESIDENT—The Chair rules that the acting Chair¬ 
man of the Committee would be entitled to the floor if he desires 
it. 


MR. SOLLIE—I have moved a division of the question, Mr. 
President. 

THE PRESIDENT—The question is upon the question of 
debate, and as to who shall conclude the debate. The Chair is of 
the opinion that the gentleman is entitled to a division of the ques¬ 
tion, but the debate upon the whole matter is not yet closed, un¬ 
less the acting chairman of the committee declines to debate it 
further. Does the gentleman from Mobile desire to conclude the 
discussion? 

MR. SMITH (Mobile) — No sir, I do not care to add any¬ 
thing to the example I have protested against. 

THE PRESIDENT—The question is on the amendment of¬ 
fered by the gentleman from Dale. 

A division was called for and on a vote of 67 ayes to 38 noes 
the amendment was adopted. 

The question recurred upon the resolution as amended, and 
a division being called for it was adopted by a vote of 76 ayes 
to 20 noes. 

The question then recurred upon the original resolution as 
amended. 

MR. JONES (Montgomery) — Has the previous question 
been called? 

THE PRESIDENT—Yes sir. 

MR. BROOKS—I rise to a parliamentary inquiry. 

THE PRESIDENT—The gentleman will state his parlia¬ 
mentary inquiry. 



1386 


OFFICIAL PROCEEDINGS 


M R. EROOICS— Is the effect of the resolution now on its 
passage to deprive the chairman of the committee or the mover 
J? a , res ^«tion under the previous question of the thirty minutes 

to close? Does it limit that to ten minutes also? 

agaiJ HE PRESIDENT ~ The Secretary will read the resolution 

BROOKS—If it is in order I move— 
time^^ E PRESIDENT An amendment is not in order at this 

MR. RONG (Walker) — I understood the gentleman from 

ale accepted the amendment of the gentleman from Lauderdale 
excepting as to the report of the Committee on Suffrage. 

MR. SOLLIE—I tried to, but could not. 

.. PRR SIDENT—The gentleman from Chambers (Hef¬ 

lin) objected and the proposition is not debatable. 

MR. LONG—Would it not be in order now to offer that? 
dereJ HE PRESIDENT—Not when the previous question is or- 

On a viva voce vote the resolution was adopted as amended. 

. jP 5 EN<3 i‘~ I , have a resolu ti°n that I wish to offer, and I 
ask that the rules be suspended in order that it may be placed 
upon its immediate passage. 

The Secretary read the resolution as follows: 

Resolution 216: 

he / eafter th w hoU j S -, of the session of this Convention 
shall be as follows: Meet daily at 9:30 a. m. and adjourn at 1 
p. m.; meet at 3:30 p. m. and adjourn at 6 p. m. 

MR. DENT—I have noticed that at 3 o’clock, the present 
hour for meeting of the afternoon session, that the House is usu- 
al ly very thin, and a great many delegates come in after the roll 
call, it seems to me that we could have a half hour in the morn¬ 
ing and a half hour in the afternoon with great comfort and sat¬ 
isfaction, and thereby add an hour to the daily sessions of the 
Convention. I move to suspend the rules and that the resolution 
be placed upon its passage. 

MR. REESE—Upon that motion I would like this Convention 
to go on record, and I demand the ayes and noes. 

The call for the ayes and noes was not sustained. 

MR. BULGER—I desire to offer an amendment. 



CONSTITUTIONAL CONVENTION, 1901 


1387 


THE PRESIDENT—Amendments are not in order, as the 
question is on the suspension of the rules. 

MR. BROWNE—I call for the reading of the resolution— 
there is some misunderstanding. 

The secretary again read the resolution. 

A vote being taken the rules were suspended, there being 68 
ayes and 22 noes. 

MR. BULGER—I desire to offer an amendment. 

“Strike out 3 :30 and add 4 p. m.” 

MR. O'NEAL (Lauderdale)—I have an amendment to offer. 

The clerk read the amendment as follows: “Strike out 9:30 
a. m. and insert 10 a. m. 

THE PRESIDENT—There is an amendment pending. 

MR. BULGER—I would ask unanimous consent to accept 
the amendment of the gentleman from Lauderdale. 

Objection being made unanimous consent was refused. 

MR. REESE—I move to table the amendment offered by the 
gentleman from Tallapoosa. 

The Chair recognized the gentleman from Lauderdale for the 
purpose of offering an amendment to the amendment. The sec¬ 
retary will please read the amendment to the amendment. 

The secretary read as follows: Amend the amendment by 
adding 10 a. m, instead of 9:30 a. m. 

MR. REESE—I move to table the amendment offered by the 
gentleman from Lauderdale to the amendment offered by the gen¬ 
tleman from Tallapoosa, and the amendment offered by the gen¬ 
tleman from Tallapoosa. 

A vote being taken the amendments were laid upon the table. 

MR. PETTUS (Limestone)—I move to strike out 6 p. m. and 
insert in lieu thereof 5 :30 p. m. 

MR. REESE—I move to lay that amendment on the table. 

A vote being taken the amendment was tabled. 

MR. CARMICHAEL (Coffee)—I have a resolution that I 
desire to offer as a substitute. 

MR. REESE—I move the previous question upon the reso¬ 
lution. 



1388 


OFFICIAL PROCEEDINGS 


THE PRESIDENT—Does the gentleman yield to the gen¬ 
tleman from Coffee? 

Mr. Reese declined to yield, and a vote being taken the pre¬ 
vious question was ordered. The Chair recognized Mr. Dent, the 
mover of the resolution. 

MR. DENT—I do not desire to add anything. Under my 
resolution the Convention begins sooner in the morning, and 
gains one hour, and I hope the resolution will be adopted. 

A vote being taken the resolution was adopted. 

MR. CRAIG (Dallas)—I have a petition that I desire to have 
read. 


. THE PRESIDENT—The rules do not provide for the read- 
mg of petitions unless the Convention so orders. 


MR. CRAIG—I would like to have the consent of the Con¬ 
vention to introduce that petition. 


The Convention consented to the reading of the petition. 

To the Constitutional Convention of the State of Alabama : 


Gentlemen — The undersigned women tax payers of Madison 
county, Alabama, respectfully petition and memorialize your hon¬ 
orable body to incorporate in the Constitution for the State of 
Alabama, which you are now formulating, a provision for woman 
rage, or at least a provision authorizing all women who are 
residents of the State of Alabama, and who are tax payers or prop¬ 
erty owners therein, to vote on all questions affecting their prop- 
tkm ° r thC taxatl ° n thereof > and on all questions affecting educa- 


• W f ^ase ( this request and petition upon the time-honored 
principle that taxation without representation is unjust ” and that 
governments derive their just power from the consent of the 
governed We maintain that these just principles are as aoofb 

the tn° thC taxatl ° n of the P ro Perty of women as of men. aneUo 
the government of women as of men. We protest that the "axa° 
tion of women and their property, without giving them a voice 
in elections affecting their taxation, is unfair and a denial nf tbe.V 
just nghts. We insist that these powers of Kovernme™ are only 
just which are derived from the consent of the governed and that 
the consent of women of Alabama to government affecting the* 

of g suffra n ge PrOP ' rty Ca " ° nly te 0btai " ed ^ th? tight 

Respectfully submitted— 

Virginia Clay Glopton, Celeste C Clav Viro- 17 aj 
E. Robertson, Laura M. Hewlett, Laura B. Rowe,' Sarah ‘) Pel 



CONSTITUTIONAL CONVENTION, 1901 


1389 


vey, Mrs. Ben P. Hunt, Ellelee Chapman Humes, Mary Cumming, 
Bettie Davis, Mary Dowd, Mary H. Dowd, M. L. McGee, Mrs. 
Kate Milligan, Mrs. Carrie H. Martin, Mrs. J. C. Clanton, Mrs. 
Henry Bradford, Mrs. Vassar L. Allen, M. W. Wales, M. C. Veele, 
A. B. Robertson, V. Blackwell, V. H. Bradford, D. K. Carr, Mary 
Carr, A. C. Taylor, Alberta Taylor. 

MR. GREER (Calhoun)—I move that the Convention vote 
the gentleman from Dallas a vote of thanks if he will not intro¬ 
duce any more resolutions upon that subject. 

MR. CRAIG — That petition comes here from the ladies of 
Huntsville, from the county of Madison, and was presented to 
the Convention in a very respectful manner, and I cannot see why 
gentlemen should throw any discredit upon the ladies of Madison 
county, or upon the women generally, in the State of Alabama. 
They are ladies of this State, many of them widows with little 
children to support, whose property is taxed. They have a mere 
pittance to support those children- 

MR. GREER—I rise to a point of order. 

THE PRESIDENT—The gentleman will state the point of 
order. 

MR. GREER—There is nothing before the Convention. 

THE PRESIDENT—The point of order is well taken. Does 
the gentleman from Dallas (Mr. Craig) desire the petition refer¬ 
red to the Committee on Suffrage? 

MR. CRAIG—Yes, sir. 

THE PRESIDENT—The petition will be so referred. 

On a call of the roll of standing committees, Mr. Jones 
(Montgomery) offered the following report, and resolution from 
the Committee on Executive Department: 

MR. PRESIDENT—The Committee on the Executive De¬ 
partment direct me to ask that the Article on the Executive De¬ 
partment which has heretofore been adopted and been engrossed 
be ordered to a third reading, and they recommend the adoption 
of the accompanying resolution. 

Thomas G. Jones, Chairman. 

Resolution No. 217, by Mr. Jones of Montgomery: 

Resolved, That the ordinance to create and define the Execu¬ 
tive Department be now taken up and ordered to a third reading 
and final passage. 

THE PRESIDENT—Does the gentleman from Montgomery 
ask unanimous consent? 



1390 


OFFICIAL PR()CKLOIN(3S 


MR. REESE—I object. 

MR. JONES—The committee asks it. I submit it as a privi¬ 
leged matter, it is unfinished business of this House, and 1 am not 
even asking the courtesy, by carrying out unfinished business, 
and it is in order to have it fixed for a special time. 

MR. BULGER—I desire to ask the gentleman from Mont¬ 
gomery a question. 

THE PRESIDENT—Does the gentleman from Montgomery 
consent to be interrogated? 

MR. J O N E S—Certa i n 1 y. 

MR. BULGER—I de sire to ask the chairman of the com¬ 
mittee if he has examined the ordinance and knows that it is cor¬ 
rectly and accurately engrossed? 

MR. JONES—I have examined it three times and it is abso¬ 
lutely correct. 

MR. PILL A NS—As passed? 

MR. JONES—As passed. We made three corrections in it. 

The motion of the gentleman from Montgomery to suspend 
the rules was adopted by a vote of 68 ayes to 18 nays. 

THE PRESIDENT—The question recurs on the adoption 
of the resolution proposed by the gentleman from Montgomery. 

MR. JONES—Now, I desire briefly to state that the com¬ 
mittee thought that the work ought to be disposed of. In unit¬ 
ing on that, however, they have sacrificed their desire to make 
some amendments, but they believed it would provoke discus¬ 
sion, and they believe it is best as it is, and they therefore ask 
that the ordinance be placed upon its third reading" and passed. 

A vote being taken the resolution was adopted. 

MR. HEFLIN (Chambers)—I rise to a question of inquiry. 

THE PRESIDENT—The gentleman will state the inquiry. 

MR. HEFLIN—Can any gentleman be allowed to offer an 
amendment or substitute for any section? 

THE PRESIDENT—It seems to the Chair not. 

MR. HEFLIN (Chambers) — There have been some ordi¬ 
nances offered and now in the hands of the Committee on Im¬ 
peachment. A number of the members of this Convention have 
expressed a desire to discuss this matter, offer this amendment, 
and I hope this Convention will not at this time if it precludes 
any amendment, adopt this article. 



CONSTITUTIONAL CONVENTION, 1901 


1391 


MR. ASHCRAFT—We have a committee to which all ordi¬ 
nances that have been adopted will be referred for the purpose 
of harmonizing. If the article be put upon its third reading and 
passed, I desire to ask it the Committee on Harmony should de¬ 
sire to make some alteration, so as to harmonize that chapter 
with some other chapter, would it then be in order to do so. 

THE PRESIDENT—The inquiry is so far reaching that the 
Chair would dislike to pass on that question without further con- 
sideration. 

MR. OATES — Mr. President, I would say, in reference to 
that, in my limited experience in such matters, I know how it was 
in the Convention of 1875, when that committee made its report 
there were some changes in it. All the changes were before the 
Convention, and so far as accepted by the Convention conclusive, 
but changes made in it w'ere open to the Convention at the time 
when the committee reported. 


MR. LONG (Walker)—I rise to a question of parliamentary 
inquiry. 

THE PRESIDENT — The gentleman will state the parlia¬ 
mentary inquiry. 

MR. LONG—Would it not be in order to offer to strike out 
any particular section of this report as a whole r 

THE PRESIDENT—Not after it has been ordered to a third 
reading. 

MR. REESE—I desire to make a motion to rescind the ac¬ 
tion of this Convention in adopting Section 30 of this article of 
Executive Department. 

MR. JONES (Montgomery)—I rise to a point of order. 

THE PRESIDENT—The gentleman will state his point of 


order. 

MR TONES—When Section 30 was adopted the gentleman 
voted against it, and did not give any notice of a motion to recon¬ 
sider, and be is now too late to make that motion, even if amend¬ 
ment could be allowed. 

THE PRESIDENT—It seems to the Chair— 

MR. REESE—Will the Chair hear from me on that point? 

THE PRESIDENT—The Chair will be glad to hear from 
the gentleman from Dallas. 

MR REESE_Mr President, I withdraw that motion, and I 

now move to rescind the action of this Convention by a motion 
to reconsider the action of this Convention by which it was or¬ 
dered to a third reading and engrossed. 



1392 


OFFICIAL PROCEEDINGS 


MR. JONES—I would like to inquire of the gentleman if lie 
did not vote on the losing side? 

MR. REESE—I will state to the gentleman I am not making 
a motion to reconsider, but to rescind the action of this Conven¬ 
tion. 


MR. JONES—There is no such motion under the rules. 

MR. REESE—If the gentleman will read Robert’s Rules of 
Order he will find that there is such a rule, Section 25. 

MR. JONES—Not under the Rules of our Convention. 

MR. REESE—I desire to call the attention of the Chair to 
Section 25: “When an assembly wishes to annul some action it 
has previously taken and it is too late to reconsider the vote, the 
proper course to pursue is to rescind the objectionable resolution, 
order or other proceeding. This motion has no privilege, but 
stands on a footing with a new resolution. Any action of the 
body can be rescinded regardless of the time that has elapsed." 
I am going to stick to my first proposition, a motion to rescind 
the action of this Convention by which Section 30 of this article 
on Executive Department was adopted. It is too late for recon¬ 
sideration, and that is the only method in my opinion by which 
it can be done. 

MR. JONES—I beg to submit on that—and the Chair per¬ 
haps would be willing to be advised, as the parlimentarians say, 
that we are not operating under Robert’s Rules of Order in the 
first place, and in the second place we are operating under rules 
of our own and in the third place he cannot escape the rules of re¬ 
consideration by saying that he wants to reconsider not by mo¬ 
tion to reconsider, but a motion to rescind. A motion to rescind 
with a subsequent action taken with reference to some matter 
theretofore passed such as rescinding the resolution about Andrew 
Jackson as done in Congress but even under the gentleman’s con¬ 
tention it would have to go to the Committee and could not be 
considered now. 

THE PRESIDENT—It seems to the Chair that possibly it is 
in the power of the Convention to rescind any action that it may 
have taken, just as a legislature might repeal any bill that it has 
passed, but to do so the proposition to rescind would have to go 
through the same formula that the ordinance did. It would have 
to be regularly introduced, referred and reported and the Chair 
cannot entertain a motion of that sort one terms. 

MR. LONG (Walker) — I move to reconsider the vote by 
which the article was ordered to a third reading. 

THE PRESIDENT—It would seem to the Chair that a mo¬ 
tion to reconsider would be in order, and the Chair entertains 
the question, but it would go over until tomorrow morning. 



CONSTITUTIONAL CONVENTION, 1901 


1393 


AIK. LONG Under Rule 27, I move that we now reconsider 


™ ^ as K the House by unanimous consent to do 

so if they want to reconsider. 

the rules" It can only he done by suspension of 


Mk. )()N’I,S I hope the House will give unanimous con¬ 
sent and let us get through—on behalf of the Committee, I ask it. 

O?*' TkhSIDENl There is no motion before the Chair, 
the Chair has i uled the motion out of order. 


MR. JONES—I move unanimous 
be allowed to offer his amendment—I 


consent that the gentleman 
have a right to do that. 


1 lib, I RhSIDRN ] J he gentleman asks unanimous 
sent that the Convention take up the motion at once of the 
tleman from Walker to reconsider. Is there objection? 


con- 

gen- 


Objection was made. 


THE PRESIDENT — The Chair would suggest to the dis¬ 
tinguished gentleman from Montgomery that a motion to sus¬ 
pend the rules would be in order, and does not require unanimous 
consent. 


AIR. ROBINSON (Chambers)—I rise to a point of inquiry. 

THE PRESIDENT—The gentleman will state his point of 
inquiry. 

MR. ROBINSON—After this Article has been referred to 
the Committee on Harmony, and that Committee reports, if it be 
subject to amendment then they can strike out that Article. 

AIR. WILLIAMS (Marengo) — I move that the rules be 
suspended, and that the Convention now take up the motion of 
the gentleman from Walker (Air. Long.) 

AIR. BULGER—I call attention to Rule 27: “When a vote 
has passed, except on the previous question, or on a motion to 
lay on the table, or to take from the table, it shall be in order for 
any delegate who voted with the majority to move for a recon¬ 
sideration thereof on the same day, or within the morning session 
of the succeeding day, and such motion, if made on the same dav, 
shall be considered immediately after the approval of the Journal 
on the day succeeding that on which it is made : but if first moved 
on such succeeding day, it shall be forthwith considered; and 
when a motion for reconsideration is decided, that decision shall 
not be considered, and no question shall be twice reconsidered. 
A motion to reconsider a vote, upon any incidental or subsidiary 
question, shall not remove the main subject under consideration 



1394 


OFFICIAL PROCEEDINGS 


from the House, but shall be considered at the time when it is 
made; provided, that any vote taken on the last day of the ^ses¬ 
sion of this Convention may be reconsidered on the same day. 

The question I desire to ask is if a motion is made not on 
the succeeding day, but made on any succeeding day does not 
the rule apply as if it had been made on the first succeeding day. 
This motion would have to be immediately considered now. In 
other words, a motion to reconsider, there is only one motion 
that goes over to the succeeding day, that is the motion on the 
same day, all others must come up immediately. 

THE PRESIDENT—The Chair would call attention to the 
fact that the motion now sought to be reconsidered was made to¬ 
day, ordered to a third reading, and the motion to reconsider is 
to reconsider the action of this Convention, whereby the ordi¬ 
nance was ordered to a third reading, and the gentleman from 
Marengo moves that the rules be suspended for the purpose of 
taking up consideration at once. 

MR. PILLANS—I rise to a point of inquiry. 

THE PRESIDENT—The gentleman will state the point of 
inquiry. 

MR. PILLANS—Does the record show that any motion to 
reconsider Section 30 was made on the day on which the Section 
was adopted, or on the day next succeeding, or is this an original 
motion coming in too late under Rule 27? 

THE PRESIDENT—The gentleman from Mobile seems to 
misapprehend the scope of the motion of the gentleman from 
Walker. The motion is to reconsider the action by which this 
Convention ordered this report to a third reading, which action 
was taken today. The gentleman from Marengo moves to sus- 
pen the rules that this motion may be taken up and reconsidered 
at this time. 

A vote was then taken and the motion to suspend the rules 
was sustained by a vote of 59 ayes to 23 noes. 

MR. LONG (Walker)—Is an amendment in order? 

THE PRESIDENT—Motion to reconsider is in order. 

MR. WILLIAMS (Marengo)—I move to lay the motion to 
reconsider on the table. 

MR. LONG (Walker)—On that I call for the ayes and noes. 

The requisite number did not rise and the call for the ayes 
and noes was not sustained. 

MR. HEFLIN (Chambers)—I rise to a question of parlia¬ 
mentary inquiry. 



1395 


CONSTITUTIONAL CONVENTION, 1901 


THE PRESIDENT—The gentleman will state his point of 
parliamentary inquiry. 

MR. HEb LIN—Will a motion be in order when the article 
is ordered to a third reading to strike Section 30 from it? 

1 H h PRESIDENT—The Chair is of the opinion that a mo¬ 
tion to amend would not be in order after the ordinance is ordered 
to a third reading. 


its 


MR. HEbLIN—J hen 1 move that the Convention rescind 
action in ordering the whole article to a third reading. 


JHh PRESIDENT—That is not in order, the question is 
upon the motion to lay upon the table the motion to reconsider 
action of this Convention whereby the ordinance was ordered 
to a third reading. 


MR. HKb LIN—I understand that was done. 


THE PRLSIDLNT—A division was called for and by a viva 
voce vote it seemed to the Chair that the ayes had it. Thereupon 
a division was called for and ayes and nays demanded, and the 
call was not sustained. As many as favor the motion to table 
will please rise and remain standing until they are counted. 

By a vote of 55 ayes to 43 noes the motion to reconsider was 
laid upon the table. 


MR. JONES (Montgomery)—I now call for the previous 
question on the article as engrossed. 

MR. SOLLIE—I request the gentleman to withdraw that 
for a moment. I have an amendment. 


MR. JONES—I would like to do it, but there are a great 
many questions that we have yielded ourselves. 

MR. LONG—I hope the gentleman will at least give us the 
opportunity of protesting against the article? 

MR. JONES—The gentleman can do that on the minutes, 
on the stump, or in the public press ; I would not insist upon it 
but have debated it five or six days. I move the suspension of 
the rules on the adoption of the ordinance. 

The President—It seems to the Chair that under the resolu¬ 
tion offered by the gentleman from Montgomery, the ordinance 
was ordered to a third reading. 

MR. JONES—It was and nothing can be done, but some of 
my parliamentarv friends say it might, and I want to cut them 
off. 

MR. HEFLIN (Chambers)—I desire to make a motion to 
postpone the pending question until Monday next. 



1396 


OFFICIAL PROCEEDINGS 


MR. JONES—I move to lay the motion on the table. 

THE PRESIDENT—The ordinance has been ordered to a 
third reading’ and the question is on the adoption. 1 he Secretary 
will read the ordinance. 

MR. REESE—I rise to a question of inquiry. After this or¬ 
dinance has been read a third time will not the question then be 
on the adoption of the article? 

THE PRESIDENT—It will. 

MR. REESE—Will not that be considering the article? It 
has been ordered to a third reading and following the third 
reading will be the question of adoption. Now it is not in order 
for the Convention to postpone the further reading of the article 
and consideration for adoption until Monday morning as moved 
by the gentleman from Chambers? 

THE PRESIDENT—It seems to the Chair that after the 
ordinance is ordered to a third reading that nothing is in order 
except the third reading of the ordinance, unless reconsidered, 
and the Convention has refused to reconsider the action by which 
it was ordered to a third reading. 

MR. SOLLIE—I rise to a point of order. The postpone¬ 
ment was demanded by the gentleman from Chambers. I make 
the point of order that when the question before the House is 
the reading of the ordinance, that a motion for the previous ques¬ 
tion for adoption is out of order and cannot be made until after 
the reading. 

THE PRESIDENT — There is no such question pending. 
The ordinance has been ordered to a third reading. 

MR. LONG (Walker)—I move to lay Article V on the table. 

THE PRESIDENT—The motion is out of order. 

MR. BROWNE—After an ordinance has been ordered to a 
third reading, no motion is in order except the third reading and 
adoption or rejection of that ordinance, except a motion to recon¬ 
sider the vote by which it was ordered to a third reading. 

MR. REESE — I desire to make a motion to postpone the 
third reading of this section until Monday morning at 11 o'clock. 

In the opinion of the chair, the motion is out of order. 

The Article was read as follows: 

AN ORDINANCE 

To Create and Define the Executive Department. 

Be it ordained by the people of Alabama, in convention assembled. 
That Article V of the Constitution be stricken out and the following Article 
inserted in lieu thereof: 



1397 


CONSTITUTIONAL CONVENTION, 1901 

ARTICLE V. 

Executive Department. 

Section 1. 1 lie Executive Department shall consist of a Governor, 

Lieutenant Governor, Secretary of State, Auditor, Treasurer, Attorney Gen¬ 
eral, Superintendent of Education, Commissioner of Agriculture and Indus¬ 
tries ami a Sheriff for each county. 

Sec. 2. I he Supreme Executive power of this State shall he vested in 
a Chief Magistrate, who shall he styled “The Governor of the State of 
Alabama.” 

Sec. 3. The Governor, Lieutenant Governor, Secretary of State, Treas¬ 
urer, Auditor, Attorney General, Superintendent of Education, and Com¬ 
missioner of Agriculture and Industries, shall be elected at the same time 
and place appointed for the election of members to the General Assembly 
in D>02 and every four years by the qualified electors of the State. 

Sec. 4. \ he return for every election for Governor, Lieutenant Gov¬ 
ernor, Secretary of State. Auditor, Treasurer, Attorney General, Superin¬ 
tendent of Education, and Commissioners of Agriculture and Industries, 
shall he sealed up and transmitted by the returning officers to the seat of 
Government, and directed to the Speaker of the House of Representatives, 
who shall, during the first week of the session to which such returns shall 
he made, open and publish them in the presence of both houses of the Gen¬ 
eral Assembly in joint convention; but the Speaker’s duty and the duty 
of the joint convention shall be purely ministerial. The result of the elec¬ 
tion shall be ascertained and declared by the Speaker from the face of the 
returns without delay. The person having the highest number of votes 
for any one of said offices shall be declared duly elected; but if two or more 
persons shall have an equal and the highest number of votes for the same 
office, the General Assembly, by joint vote, without delay, shall choose 
one of said persons for said office. Contested elections for Governor, Lieu¬ 
tenant Governor, Secretary of State, Auditor, Treasurer, Attorney General, 
Superintendent of Education, and Commissioner of Agriculture and Indus¬ 
tries. shall 1)0 determined by both houses of the General Assembly, in such 
manner as may he prescribed by law. 

Sec. 5. The Governor, Lieutenant Governor, Secretary of State, State 
Treasurer, Attorney General. State Auditor, Superintendent of Education 
and Commissioners of Agriculture and Industries, elected in 1902, shall 
hold their respective offices for the term of four years, from the 15th day 
of November of the vear in which they shall have been elected, and until 
their successors shall he elected and qualified and after the first election 
under this Constitution, no one of said officers shall be eligible as his own 
successor- and the Governor shall not be eligible to election or appoint¬ 
ment to any office under this State or to the Senate of the United States 
within one year after the expiration of his term. 

Sec 6 The Governor and Lieutenant Governor shall each he at least 
thirty years of age when elected, and shall have been citizens of the United 



1398 


OFFICIAL PROCEEDINGS 


States ten years and resident citizens of this State at least seven years next 
before the date of their election. The Lieutenant Governor shall be ex of¬ 
ficio President of the Senate, which shall elect a President pro teni, from 
among its own members, who shall discharge the duties of the Lieutenant 
Governor in the Senate whenever he is absent or disqualified, but the Lieu¬ 
tenant Governor, when acting as President of the Senate, shall have no 
right to vote except in the event of a tie. 

Sec. 7. The Governor, Lieutenant Governor, Secretary of State, Au¬ 
ditor, Treasurer, Commissioner of Agriculture and Industries, Attorney 
General, Superintendent of Education shall receive compensation for their 
services, which shall be fixed by law r , and which shall not be increased or 
diminished during the term for which they have been elected, and shall ex¬ 
cept the Lieutenant Governor, reside at the Capitol, during the time they 
continue in office, except in cases of epidemic. The Lieutenant Governor 
shall he paid the same compensation as that received by the Speaker of the 
House except when serving as Governor, when he shall receive the salary 
of said officer. 

Sec. 8. If the session of the General Assembly next after the ratifica¬ 
tion of this Constitution shall enact a law increasing the salary of the Gov¬ 
ernor, such increase shall become effective and apply to the first Governor 
elected after the ratification of this Constitution if the General Assembly 
shall so determine. 

Sec. 9. The Governor shall take care that the laws be faithfully exe¬ 
cuted. 

Sec. 10. The Governor may require information in writing, under oath, 
from the officers of the Executive Department named in this article, or cre¬ 
ated by statute, on any subject relating to the duties of their respective of¬ 
fices; and he may at any time require information in writing, under oath, 
from all officers and managers of State institutions, upon any subject re¬ 
lating to the condition, management and expenses of their respective offices 
and institutions. Any such officer or manager who makes a wilfully false 
report, or fails without sufficient excuse to make the required report when 
demanded, is guilty of an impeachable offense. 

Sec. 11. 1 he Governor may by proclamation on extraordinary occa¬ 

sions, convene the General Assembly at the seat of Government or at a dif¬ 
ferent place, if since their last adjournment, that shall have become dan¬ 
gerous from an enemy, insurrection, or other lawless outbreak, or from any 
infectious or contagious diseases, and he shall state specifically in such 
proclamation each matter concerning which the action of that body is deem¬ 
ed necessary. 

Sec. 12. The Governor shall from time to time, give to the General 
Assembly information of the state of the government, and recommend to 
their consideration, such measures as he may deem expedient; and at the 
commencement of each regular session of the General Assembly, and at 
the close of his term of office, give information by written message of the 
condition of the State; and he shall account to the general Assembly, as 



CONSTITUTIONAL CONVENTION, 1901 


1399 


may be prescribed by law, for all moneys received and paid out by him, 
or by his order; and, at the commencement of each regular session, he shall 
present to the General Assembly estimates of the amount of money required 
to be raised by taxation for all purposes. 

Sec. 13. The Governor shall have power to remit fines and forfeitures, 
under such rules and regulations as may be prescribed by law; and, after 
conviction, to grant reprieves, paroles, commutations of sentence and par¬ 
dons except in cases of impeachment. The Attorney General, Secretary 
of State and State Auditor, shall constitute a Board of Pardons, who shall 
meet on the call of the Governor, and before whom shall be laid all recom¬ 
mendations or petitions, for pardon or commutations or paroles, in cases 
of felony; and the Board shall hear them in open session, and give their 
opinion in writing, to the Governor thereon, after which or on the Board's 
failure to advise for more than sixty days, the Governor may grant or re¬ 
fuse the commutation, parole or pardon, as to him seems best for the public 
interest. He shall communicate to the General Assembly at each session, 
each case of remission of fines and forfeitures, reprieve, commutation, pa¬ 
role or pardon, with his reasons therefor, and the opinion of the Board of 
Pardons in each case required to be referred; stating the name, the crime 
of the convict, the sentence, its date and the date of reprieve, commutation, 
parole or pardon. Pardons in cases of felony and other offenses involving 
moral turpitude, shall not relieve from civil and political disabilities, unless 
specifically expressed in the pardon, and approved by the Board of Pardons. 

Sec. 14. Every bill which shall have passed both Houses of the Gen¬ 
eral Assembly shall be presented to the Governor; if he approve, he shall 
sign it; but if not, he shall return it wdth his objections to that House in 
wdiich it shall have originated, wdio shall enter the objections at large upon 
the journal and proceed to reconsider it. If the Governor's message pro¬ 
poses no amendment which would remove his objection to the bill the House 
in which the bill originated may proceed to reconsider, and if a majority 
of the whole number elected to that House vote for the passage of the bill, 
the bill shall be sent to the other House, which shall in like manner, re¬ 
consider and if a majority of the whole number elected to that house, vote 
for the passage of the bill, the same shall become a law notwithstanding 
the Governor’s veto. If the Governor’s message proposes amendment which 
would remove his objections, the House to w'hich it is sent may so amend 
the bilk and send it w T ith the Governor’s message to the other House, which 
may adopt, but cannot amend said amendment; and both Houses concurring 
in the amendment, the bill shall again be sent to the Governor and acted on 
by him as on other bills. If the House to which the bill is returned refuses 
to make such amendment, it shall proceed to reconsider; and if a majority 
of the whole number elected to that House shall vote for the passage of 
the bill, it shall be sent with the objections to the other House, by which 
it shall likewise be reconsidered, and if approved by a majority of the whole 
number of that House, it shall become a law. If the House to w'hich the 
bill is returned makes the amendment and the other House declines to pass 
the same, that House shall proceed to reconsider, as though the bill had 
originated therein, and such proceedings shall be taken thereon as above 
provided. In every case, the vote of both Houses shall be determined by 



1400 


OFFICIAL PROCEEDINGS 


yeas and nays, and the names of the members voting for or against the 
bill, shall be entered upon the Journals of each House respectively. If an> 
bill shall not be returned by the Governor, Sundays excepted, within six 
days after it shall have been presented the same shall become a law in like 
manner as if he had signed it, unless the General Assembly, by their ad¬ 
journment, prevent its return, in which case it shall not be a law; but when 
return is prevented by recess such bill must be returned to the House in 
which it originated within two days after reassembling, otherwise it shall 
become a law; but bills presented to the Governor within five days befoie 
the adjournment of the General Assembly may be approved by the Governor 
at any time within ten days after the final adjournment, if approved and 
deposited with the Secretary of State within that time. Every vote, order 
or resolution to which concurrence of both Houses may be necessary, ex¬ 
cept questions of adjournment, and the bringing on of elections by the two 
Houses, and amending this Constitution, shall be presented to the Governor; 
and, before the same shall take effect, be approved by him; or, being dis¬ 
approved, shall be repassed by both Houses according to the rules and 
limitations prescribed in the case of a bill. 

Sec. 15. The Governor shall have power to approve or disapprove 
any item or items of any bill making appropriations embracing distinct 
items, and the part or parts of the bill approved shall be the law, and the 
item or items disapproved shall be void, unless repassed according to the 
rules and limitations prescribed for the passage of other bills over the Ex¬ 
ecutive veto; and he shall in writing, state specifically the item or items he 
disapproves, setting the same out in full in his message; but in such case, 
the enrolled bill shall not be returned with the Governor's objection. 

Sec. 16. In case of the Governor’s removal from office, death or resig¬ 
nation the Lieutenant Governor shall become Governor. If both the Gov¬ 
ernor and Lieutenant Governor are removed from office, die, or resign, 
prior to the next general election, after their election for members of the 
General Assembly, the Governor and Lieutenant Governor shall be elected 
at such election for the unexpired term and in the event of a vacancy in the 
office, caused by the removal from office, death or resignation of the Gov¬ 
ernor and the Lieutenant Governor, pending such vacancy and until their 
successors shall be elected and qualified, the office of Governor shall be held 
and administered by either the President pro tern of the Senate, the Speaker 
of the House of Representatives, Attorney General, Auditor, Secretary of 
State or Treasurer and in the order herein named. In case of the impeach¬ 
ment of the Governor, his absence from the State for more than twenty 
days, unsoundness of mind, or other disability, the power and authority of 
the office shall devolve, in the order herein named, upon the Lieutenant 
Governor, President pro tern of the Senate, Speaker of the House of Rep¬ 
resentatives, Attorney General, State Auditor, Secretary of State and State 
Treasurer; if any of these officers be under any of the disabilities herein 
specified, the office of Governor shall be administered in the order named 
by these officers free from such disability, until the Governor is acquitted, 
returns to the State, or is restored to his mind, or relieved from other dis- 



CONSTITUTIONAL CONVENTION, 1901 


1401 


ability. If the Governor shall be absent from the State over twenty days, 
the Secretary of State shall notify the Lieutenant Governor, who shall en¬ 
ter upon the duties of Governor and so on; in case of such absence, he shall 
notify each of the other officers named in their order, who shall discharge 
the duties of Governor, until the Governor or other officers entitled to ad¬ 
minister the office in succession to the Governor, returns. If the Governor- 
elect fails or refuses from any cause to qualify, the Lieutenant Governor- 
elect shall qualify, and exercise the duties of the Governor s office until 
the Governor-elect qualifies; and in event both the Governor-elect and 
Lieutenant Governor-elect, from any cause, fail to qualify, the President 
pro tern of the Senate, the Speaker of the House of Representatives, the 
Attornev General, State Auditor, Secretary of State, and State 1 1 easurer 
shall in like manner, in the order named, administer the Government until 
the Governor or Lieutenant Governor-elect qualifies. 

Sec. 17. If the Governor or other officer administering the office shall 
appear to become of unsound mind, it shall be the duty of the Supreme 
Court of Alabama, upon request in writing of any two of the officers named 
in Section 15. not next in succession to the Governor, to ascertain the men¬ 
tal condition of the Governor, or other officer administering the office— 
and if he is of unsound mind, to so certify upon its minutes; a copy of 
which, duty certified, shall be filed in the office of the Secretary of State; 
and in that event, it shall be the duty of the officer next in succession, to 
perform the duties of the Governor, until the Governor or other officer 
administering the office is restored to his mind. When the incumbent de¬ 
nies that the Governor or other person entitled to administer the office, 
has been restored to his mind, the Supreme Court, at the instance of any 
officer named in Section 15, shall ascertain the truth concerning the same, 
and, if the officer has been restored to his mind, shall so certify on its 
minutes and file a duly certified copy thereof with the Secretary of State, 
and in that event, his office shall be restored to him. The request in writ¬ 
ing hereinabove provided for, shall be verified by the affidavit of those 
making such request. And the Supreme Court shall prescribe rules of 
practice in such proceedings, which rules shall include a provision for the 
service of notice on the Governor of such proceeding, and the method of 
taking testimony therein. 

Sec. 18. The Lieutenant Governor, the President pro tern, of the Sen¬ 
ate, and the Speaker of the House of Representatives, Attorney General, 
Secretary of State, and State Treasurer, while administering the office of 
Governor, shall receive like compensation, and no other than that prescribed 
by law for the Governor. 

Sec. 19. No person shall at one and the same time hold the office of 
Governor of this State, and any office, civil or military, either under this 
State or the United States, or any other State or government, except as 
otherwise provided in this Constitution. 

Sec. 20. The Governor shall be commander-in-chief of the militia and 
volunteer forces of this State, except when they shall be called into the ser¬ 
vice of the United States, and he may call out the same to execute the laws, 



1402 


OFFICIAL PROCEEDINGS 


suppress insurrection, and repel invasion; but neet not command in person 
unless directed to do so by resolution of the General Assembly, and, when 
acting in the service of the United States, he shall appoint his staff, and 
the General Assembly shall fix his rank. 

Sec. 21. No person shall be eligible to the office of Secretary of State, 
State Treasurer, State Auditor, Superintendent of Education, Attorney 
General, or Commissioners of Agriculture and Industries, unless he shall 
have been a citizen of the United States at least seven years, and shall 
have resided in this State at least five years next preceding his election, 
and shall be at least 25 years old when elected. 

Sec. 22. There shall be a great Seal of State which shall be used of¬ 
ficially by the Governor, and the Seal now in use shall continue to be used, 
until another shall have been adopted by the General Assembly. Said Seal 
shall be called The Great Seal of the State of Alabama. 

Sec. 23. The Secretary of State shall be the custodian of the Seal of 
the State, and shall authenticate therewith all official acts of the Governor; 
his approval of laws, resolutions, appointments to office and administrative 
orders, excepted. He shall keep a register of the official acts of the Gov¬ 
ernor, and when necessary, shall attest them and lay copies of same, to¬ 
gether with copies of all papers relative thereto, before either House of the 
General Assembly, when required to do so, and shall perform such other 
duties as may be prescribed by law. 

Sec. 24. All grants and commissions shall be issued in the name and 
by the authority of the State of Alabama, sealed with the Great Seal and 
signed by the Governor and countersigned by the Secretary of State. 

Sec. 25. Should the office of Secretary of State, State Auditor, State 
Treasurer, Attorney General, Superintendent of Education, or Commis¬ 
sioner of Agriculture and Industries become vacant, for any cause, the 
Governor shall fill such vacancy until the disability is removed or a suc¬ 
cessor elected and qualified. In case any of said officers shall become of 
unsound mind, such unsoundness shall be ascertained by the Supreme Court 
upon the suggestion of the Governor. 

Sec. 26. The State Treasurer, State Auditor, Attorney General, and 
the Commissioner of Agriculture and Industries shall perform such duties 
as may be prescribed by law. The State Treasurer and State Auditor shall 
every year at a time the General Assembly may fix make a full and com¬ 
plete report to the Governor, showing the receipts and disbursements of 
revenues of every character, and all claims audited and paid out by items, 
and all taxes and revenues collected and paid into the Treasury, and from 
what sources and they shall make reports oftener upon any matters per¬ 
taining to their office if required by the Governor or General Assembly. 

Sec. 27. The State Auditor, State Treasurer, Attorney General, Sec¬ 
retary of State and Commissioner of Agriculture and Industries shall not 
receive to their use, any fees, costs, perquisites of office, or other com¬ 
pensation than their salaries as prescribed by law, and all fees that may be 



CONSTITUTIONAL CONVENTION, 1901 


1403 


payable for any services performed, through such officers, shall be at once 
paid into the State Treasury. 

Sec. 28. A Sheriff shall be elected in each county by the qualified 
electors thereof, who shall hold his office for a term of four years unless 
sooner removed, and shall be ineligible to such office as his own successor. 
Whenever any prisoner is taken from the jail or from the custody of the 
Sheriff or his deputy, and put to death, or suffers grievous bodily harm, 
owing to the neglect, connivance, cowardice or other grave fault of the 
Sheriff, such Sheriff may be impeached under Section 2 of Article VII. of 
the Constitution; and the Governor when satisfied, after hearing the Sheriff, 
that he should be impeached, may suspend him from office until the im¬ 
peachment proceedings are decided. If the Sheriff be impeached, he shall 
not be eligible to hold any other office in this State during the time for 
which he had been elected to serve as Sheriff. 

MR. JONES (Montgomery) — Under the rules of the con¬ 
vention, there has to be an aye and no vote. 

MR. LONG (Walker)—Under Rule 37, I call for a separa¬ 
tion of Section 30 from the remainder of the Article. 

THE PRESIDENT—In the opinion of the chair there can be 
no division. The question is before the Convention on the adop¬ 
tion of the Whole Article. 

MR. REESE—Is it not a debatable question as to whether 
we will adopt the Article? 

THE PRESIDENT—It seems to the chair not after it was 
ordered to a third reading. 

MR. REESE—Is it possible that the adoption of an ordinance 
in its entirety is not a debatable question? 

THE PRESIDENT—The ordinance is not open for amend¬ 
ment. 

MR. REESE—But is the question not open as to whether we 
will adopt it in the shape it is in? I do not mean to say that we 
will argue as to whether any amendment should be made, but 
have not the members of this Convention the right to argue 
against the adoption of this Article at all? 

THE PRESIDENT—The chair recognized the gentleman 
from Dallas and has allowed him to proceed, hearing no objec¬ 
tion to the debate. 

MR. COFER—Well, I object right now to the debate. 

MR. HEFLIN (Chambers) — But the chair announced, I 
thought, he had heard no objection. 

MR. REESE—I had the consent of the House. 



1404 


OFFICIAL PROCEEDINGS 


MR. COFER—I rise to a point of order. This is not de¬ 
batable after the previous question has been ordered, and the 
Article ordered to its third reading. It is not open for amend- 
ment or debate. 

THE PRESIDENT—It seems to the chair the point of order 
is well taken. After the Article is ordered to its third reading, 
it is not open to amendment or debate. When the gentleman from 
Dallas rose, the chair did not know for what purpose he rose, and 
there was no objection, and the chair did not feel authorized to 
interpose any objection on his own account, but as objection is 
made, it seems to the chair the point of order is well taken. 

MR. REESE—I move to strike out the enacting clause of 
this ordinance. 

MR. LONG (Walker)—I second the motion. 

MR. HARRISON—I rise to a point of order. 

THE PRESIDENT—The gentleman will state the point of 
order. 

MR. HARRISON—There is nothing in order but voting on 
the adoption of this Article. 

THE PRESIDENT—The point is well taken. 

MR. LONG (Walker)—Mr. President,— 

THE PRESIDENT—For what purpose does the gentleman 
rise ? 

MR. LONG (Walker)—To a parliamentary inquiry. 

THE PRESIDENT—What is the inquiry? 

MR. LONG (Walker)—Ought not delegates be allowed to 
have spread upon the journal of the house why they object to 
Article 5. Debate has been shut off, the gag law has been applied, 
and I want to say why I object to the Article and I want mv ob¬ 
jections placed on record. 

MR. JONES—I object. We debated this matter three days. 

THE PRESIDENT—The Convention is in the act of taking 
a vote and the Chair cannot entertain a motion. 

MR. LONG (Walker)—I don’t make any motion. I was 
asking if I could spread my objection on the journal. 

THE PRESIDENT—The Chair will give due investigation 
to the inquiry of the gentleman and will give an opinion later. 

MR. BURNS—I rise for information. 



CONSTITUTIONAL CONVENTION, 1901 1405 


THE PRESIDENT—The gentleman will propound his in¬ 
quiry. 

MR. BURNS—I want to know the effect of this ballot. Does 
this close the scene? Has the Convention at any time hereafter 
any right to amend or strike out or do anything? 

MR. JONES (Montgomery.)—Mr. President— 

THE PRESIDENT—The gentleman from Dallas has pro¬ 
pounded an inquiry. 

MR. JONES—I know what the gentleman is after and I want 
to answer his inquiry. 

A I HE PRESIDENT—The gentleman is propounding it to 
the Chair. The Chair is of opinion that the question is now upon 
the final passage of this ordinance as read. It is not now, and 
will not be after it is passed open to amendment. The Secretary 
will continue the call of the roll. 

MR. JONES (Montgomery)—I would like to state as it may 
have some effect upon the vote, that any member hereafter may 
offer an ordinance on any subject embraced in this report, and if 
acted on favorably could thus amend a section of this Article. 

THE PRESIDENT—The Chair has so announced that the 
Convention can rescind any action it has taken but it has to be 
done by the introduction of a separate ordinance, reference to 
Committee, report, etc. 

The roll was called on the adoption of the Article and re- 


suited as follows: 

AYES. 


Messrs. President, 

Davis, of Etowah. 

Henderson, 

A1 moil, 

Dent, 

Hinson, 

Ashcraft, 

Duke, 

Hood. 

Banks, 

Elcy, 

Howzc, 

Beavers, 

Eyster, 

Inge, 

Beddow, 

Espy, 

Jackson, 

Betluinc. 

Fitts, 

I ones, of Bibb, 

Blackwell, 

Fletcher, 

Jones, of Hale, 

Brooks, 

Foshee, 

Jones, of Montgomery, 

Browne, 

Foster, 

Jones, of Wilcox, 

Bulger, 

Gilmore, 

Kirk, 

Burnett, 

Glover, 

Kirkland, 

Burns, 

Grant, 

Knight, 

Cofer, 

Grayson, 

Kyle, 

Cornwall, 

Greer, of Calhoun. 

"Ledbetter, 

Craig, 

Harrison, 

T eigh. 

Cunningham, 

Heflin, of Randolph, 

Lomax, 



1406 OFFICIAL PROCEEDINGS 


Lowe, of Jefferson, 

Palmer, 

Sorrell, 

Lowe, of Lawrence, 

Parker (Cullman), 

Spears, 

McMillan (Wilcox), 

Parker (Elmore), 

Spragins, 

Martin, 

Pettus, 

Stoddard, 

Maxwell, 

Fitts, 

Tayioe, 

Merrill, 

Reese, 

Waddell, 

Miller (Marengo), 

Reynolds, of Henry, 

Watts, 

Miller (Wilcox), 

Robinson, 

Weakley, 

Mulkey, 

Rogers (Lowndes), 

Weatherly, 

Murphree, 

Rogers (Sumter), 

White, 

NeSmith, 

Sanders, 

Whiteside, 

Norman, 

Searcy, 

Willet, 

Norwood, 

Selheimer, 

Williams (Barbour), 

Oates, 

Sentell, 

Williams (Marengo), 

O’Neal (Lauderdale), 

Smith (Mobile), 

Wilson (Clarke), 

Opp, 

Smith, Mac. A., 

Winn. 

O’Rear, 

Smith, Morgan M., 


Total—101. 

Barefield, 

NOES. 

Cobb, 

Phillips, 

Byars, 

Davis, of DeKalb, 

Proctor, 

Cardon, 

Greer, of Perry, 

Reynolds (Chilton), 

Carmichael, of Colbert, 

Haley, 

Sloan, 

Carmichael, of Coffee, 

Jenkins, 

Sollie. 

Carnathon, 

Long, of Walker, 


Chapman, 

Moody, 


Total—19. 

ABSENT OR NOT VOTING. 

Altman, 

Heflin, of Chambers, 

Pillans, 

Bartlett, 

Hodges, 

Porter, 

Boone, 

Howell, 

Renfro, 

Case, 

King, 

Samford, 

Coleman, of Greene, 

Locklin, 

Sanford, 

Coleman, of Walker, 

Long, of Butler, 

Stewart, 

deGraffenreid, 

Macdonald, 

Thompson, 

Ferguson, 

McMillan, of Baldwin, 

Vaughan, 

Freeman, 

Malone, 

Walker, 

Graham, of Montgomery, 

Morrisette, 

Williams (Elmore), 

Graham, of Talladega, 

O’Neill, of Jefferson, 

Wilson (Washington). 

Handley, 

Pearce, 


During the roll 

call Mr. Burns who 

had voted no, changed 

his vote to aye for 

the purpose of moving a reconsideration as 

to Section 30. 

MR. REESE—I 

move to reconsider 

the vote by which this 


Article has been adopted. 



CONSTITUTIONAL CONVENTION, 1901 


1407 


MR. JONES (Montgomery)—And I move to lay that mo¬ 
tion on the table. 

MR. REESE—I make the point of order that cannot be done 
now. Under rule it goes over until tomorrow. 

MR. JONES (Montgomery)—When a member gives notice 
of an intention to reconsider it goes over, but when a motion is 
made, can it not be taken up immediately? 

THE PRESIDENT—The Chair will call the attention of the 
gentleman from Montgomery to rule 27. “When a vote has 
passed, except on the previous question, or on a motion to lay 
on the table, or to take from the table, it shall be in order for any 
delegate who voted with the majority to move for a reconsidera¬ 
tion thereof on the same day, or within the morning session of 
the succeeding day, and such motion, if made on the same day, 
shall be considered immediately after the approval of the journal 
on the day succeeding that on which it is made; but if first moved 
on such succeeding day, it shall be forthwith considered.” The 
motion will go over until tomorrow morning. 

MR. JONES (Montgomery)—Then I move to reconsider the 
vote by which the ordinance was passed and I move to suspend 
the rules for the purpose of considering that motion now. 

MR. LONG (Walker)—I make the point of order that the 
gentleman cannot do indirectly what he cannot do directly. 

THE PRESIDENT—It seems to the Chair that the gentle¬ 
man from Montgomery would be in order to move to suspend the 
rules and that this motion be considered now, if the Convention 
desires. 

MR. SOLLIE—I rise to a point of order. 

THE PRESIDENT—The gentleman will state the point. 

MR. SOLLIE—That that precise motion to reconsider was 
made by the gentleman from Dallas and the other motion is of 
equal dignity. We cannot accumulate motions to reconsider on 
the same matter. 

THE PRESIDENT—The Chair understood the gentleman 
from Montgomery to move to suspend the rules that the motion 
of the gentleman from Dallas might be considered at once. 

MR. SOLLIE—If that is the motion, my point of order is 
withdrawn. But I did not so understand the gentleman from 
Montgomery. 

THE PRESIDENT—The Chair so understood it. 

MR. BURNS—I rise to a point of order. 



1408 


OFFICIAL PROCEEDINGS 


THE PRESIDENT—The gentleman will state the point of 
order. 

MR. BURNS—The Chair has announced that it would lie 
over until tomorrow under the rules. If we have any rules now 
is the time to enforce them. 

THE PRESIDENT—It would lie over under the rules unless 
the rules are suspended. 

MR. REESE—If it is the purpose to save time by gagging 
the Convention and depriving the minority of any right- 

THE PRESIDENT—The gentleman is not in order. 

MR. JONES—We have already debated five days on this 
matter. 

THE PRESIDENT—Gentlemen will be in order. Debate is 
not permissible. 

A vote being taken, a call for the ayes and noes was not sus¬ 
tained, and on a division the house refused to table the motion to 
reconsider by a vote of 59 ayes and 37 noes. 

MR. SOLE IE—I offer an ordinance. 

THE PRESIDENT—It is not in order at this time except 
by unanimous consent. 

Objection was made. 

THE PRESIDENT—The regular order will be the considera¬ 
tion of the report of the Committee on Taxation and the gentle¬ 
man from Talladega has the floor. 

MR. BROWNE—I have only a few words more to say in 
regard to Section No. 5. Shortly before adjournment yesterday I 
read an extract from a letter received from the State Superinten¬ 
dent of Education of Louisiana with respect to local taxation for 
schools in that State wherein he stated that that tax was voted 
usually when submitted to the people by a majority in property 
and taxable value of property voting at such an election. I now 
desire to read an extract from a letter from the State Superin¬ 
tendent of Texas. The Constitution of Texas provides a local 
taxation for schools provided it is first submitted to a vote of the 
qualified electors upon whom the tax bears, and that it shall be 
voted for by a two-thirds majority thereof voting at such election. 
The Superintendent says : 

“Answering your letter of the 17th inst. I beg leave to send 
you under separate cover a copy of our school laws, a copy of the 
last report of this department, copy of circular No. 16, from which 
you will be able to gather information relative to our school sys¬ 
tem, methods of taxation, etc. 



CONSTITUTIONAL CONVENTION. 1901 


1409 


As a general rule, the people of this State favor the special 
local tax feature. In my opinion, this tax subserves the highest 
school interests of the districts levying the same. 

“The average school term in this State is about 5 1-2 months. 

Now under the Constitution of Texas the Legislature of that 
State has to enact a law carrying that provision into effect the 
first section of which law reads as follows: 

“The Commissioners' Court of the several counties of this 
State shall have power to levy a special tax for the further main- 
tenance of public free schools and the erection within each school 
district of school buildings therein; provided, two-thirds of the 
qualified property tax paying voters of the district voting at an 
election to be held for the purpose, shall vote such tax. not to 
exceed in any year twenty cents on the one hundred dollars valua¬ 
tion of the property subject to taxation in such district." 

I will state that I had another letter from the Superintendent 
stating that that tax had been voted in every instance where is was 
submitted to the people. 

MR. WHITE—That is for the school district and not for the 
county ? 

MR. BROWNE—It is for the school district. 

Now I have a letter which is sample taken from the letters 
of Superintendents of States where the matter is left to the quali¬ 
fied electors alone. This letter is from the Superintendent of 
Education of Colorado, who by the way signs himself or herself 
Helen G. Greenfell. I desire to say that this is one of the best 
letters I have received. 

“Colorado has State and local taxation for schools. The school 
electors of the various districts at a meeting called for the purpose, 
or in connection with the annual election of school directors, vote 
for such tax, the question being decided by a majority in numbers, 
no property qualification being necessary. Our school districts do 
not consist of counties; they consist of cities or various areas of 
territory. 

In my opinion, a special local tax for schools is most bene¬ 
ficial in results. j 

Colorado appropriates no money from the general fund for 
schools. 

The length of term of the free schools in this State varies 
from six months in the poorer districts to nine and one-half 
months in the cities." 

The gentleman asks the question if the local tax is not levied 
in Texas by school districts. It is so levied and in the report 



OFFICIAL PROCEEDINGS 


1410 

of the Committee on Taxation it is provided that this tax shall 
be only levied in counties or cities. We are not familiar with the 
conditions in Texas as we are with those in Alabama. After care¬ 
ful investigation, the committee came to the conclusion to allow 
this special tax to be voted in school districts would, in a very 
large number of the school districts of Alabama amount to taxa¬ 
tion without representation. There are numerous townships in 
the State of Alabama that are school dsitricts, where the owners 
of almost all the property and in some cases all are non-residents 
and don’t live in the district. To allow a tax to be voted in the 
matter would be practical confiscation of their property. In a 
majority of the districts, the property hoders do live within the 
district, and there would be no objection in cases of that kind to 
allowing the school districts voting the tax instead of the counties. 
But we must make this law to suit the different conditions in dif¬ 
ferent counties. 

MR. WATTS—May I ask the gentleman a question? 

MR. BROWNE—Yes, sir. 

MR. WATTS—For instance, take a county like Montgomery 
where a majority of the taxpayers and people reside inside the citv 
and have to provide for their own schools. How many would the 
country precincts get if the citizens of Montgomery had to vote 
additional taxes on themselves? 

MR. BROWNE—It would be owing to the liberality of the 
taxpayers and citizens of Montgomery. 

MR. LOWE (Jefferson)—Will you pardon an interruption? 

MR. BROWNE—When I get through answering the ques¬ 
tion of the gentleman from Montgomery. The city of Montgom¬ 
ery would levy the tax and would get a large part of it hack. 

MR. LOWE (Jefferson)—May I ask the question now? 

MR. BROWNE—Yes. 

MR. LOWE—Does the gentleman intend to say to the Con¬ 
vention that the free schools in the country districts of Alabama 
must be dependent upon the generosity of the taxpayers of the 
cities and towns? 

MR. BROWNE—I do not, but every thinking man will know 
under this provision the poor country school districts will get 
more money than they would get if they were allowed to vote a 
tax upon themselves, because they would not pay as much of that 
tax as they would get back, the city paying most of the tax. 

MR. WHITE—Provided they can get the city to vote the 

tax? 



CONSTITUTIONAL CONVENTION, 1901 


1411 


MR. BROWNE—Provided the cities are liberal enough to 
vote the tax. If the gentleman thinks this tax ought to be levied 
and appropriated back to the school districts and townships in 
proportion as it is paid by them, then let him offer an amendment 
and take the responsibility of saying that the money derived from 
taxation from the cities shall be appropriated exclusively to the 
city and that no part thereof shall go to the outlying poorer dis¬ 
tricts. 

MR. WHITE—The tax rate in the city cannot exceed $1.75. 

MR. BROWNE—As a rule not, but Birmingham can do 
almost anything she wants. 

MR. WHITE—No. There is 50 cents for the bonded debt 
and 65 cents for State tax, makes $1.15, and 50 cents for general 
purposes for city, makes $1.65, leaving only a small margin for 
city and county, 15 cents. Do you suppose the city will vote that 
15 cents away from the city? 

MR. BROWNE—It is owing altogether to the liberality in 
the city. I should think the city would be interested in the county 
surrounding the city and in the upbuilding of it and from that 
standpoint I should say the city would be willing to vote the tax 
and not get every bit of it back but that it should be appropriated 
to the whole county equitably as is done now in Alabama. Does 
the gentleman know that there are counties in Alabama that give 
for educational purposes three times the amount they do for other 
purposes ? 

MR. WHITE—That is what I was talking about the other 
day. You say you think the cities will be liberal enough to educate 
the outlying districts. I thought the State would be willing yes¬ 
terday to help the outlying counties. (Applause.) 

MR. BROWNE—I did not yield to the gentleman for the 
purpose of having him make a speech. 

MR. WEAKLEY—Will the gentleman yield to a question 
from me? 

MR. BROWNE—Yes. 

MR. WEAKLEY—If the city is to be taxed to support the 
county schools, what provision is made to allow the city to sup¬ 
port its own schools? 

MR. BROWNE—If the gentleman had studied the ordinance 
as reported by the Committee he would see what provision is 
made. If the county levies that tax and levies all there is of it, 
then there is no room allowing the city to levy an additional tax. 

MR. WEAKLEY—Then what are we to do with the city 
schools? 



1412 


OFFICIAL PROCEEDINGS 


MR. BROWNE—What are you doing now? 

MR. WEAKLEY—Running the best we can. 

MR. BROWNE—You will continue to run them the best 
you can. 

MR. BULGER—Will the gentleman permit an interruption? 

MR. BROWNE—If it is not to be taken out of mv time. 

MR. BULGER—Will the gentleman consent to this amend¬ 
ment to the section? 

MR. BROWNE—No, sir; I will not be interrupted with that. 
I don’t think it is fair to the Convention or the Committee for me 
to be offering other people’s amendments. 1 am one of those who 
want to get through as soon as we can and take my seat. 

MR. O’NEAL—Will the gentleman yield to me for a ques¬ 
tion ? 

MR. BROWNE—Yes, sir. 

MR. O’NEAL—Does the gentleman say the adoption of this 
provision with reference to local taxation will lessen the fund in 
the poorer counties? 

MR. BROWNE—Not at all. 

MR. O’NEAL — That is under the general State tax the 
poorer counties would receive more from the general tax than 
from the local? 

MR. BROWNE—Not at all. I think I can explain the matter 
so these gentleman can understand it if they will listen. This 
provision has no effect upon the present system of public schools 
or the appropriations therefor. 

MR. LONG (Walker)—Will the gentleman permit an inter¬ 
ruption? 

MR. BROWNE—Yes. 

MR. LONG (Walker)—Did I understand the gentleman to 
be opposed to the amendment of the gentleman from Jefferson 
and in favor of the majority property vote. 

MR. BROWNE—I said something upon that vesterdav and 
after awhile will come back to it. 

• MR. LONG (Walker)—I want to know if the gentleman takes 
that position? 

MR. BROWNE—Mr. President, I shall have to decline to 
allow this continual interruption. I do not care personal I v I 
could stand here and answer these questions all day, but I want 
to get through. 



CONSTITUTIONAL CONVENTION, 1901 


1413 


MR. LONG—Will the gentleman permit me a question? 

MR. BROWNE—I understand the question and will answer 
it presently. 

MR. LONG (Walker)—I object to the gentleman under¬ 
standing my question before I put it. 

MR. BROWNE—Ask the question and I will answer it. 

MR. LONG—Suppose one voter in a beat owned a majority 
of all the taxable property in that beat. Does the gentleman con¬ 
tend that that one voter should offset all the other voters in the 
beat ? 

MR. BROWNE—If the gentleman had been in his seat yes¬ 
terday and had been listening to what I had to say, he would not 
have had to ask that because I stated, as far as I was individually 
concerned and my county, I would cheerfully leave that question 
to be determined by a bare majority of the qualified electors. 

MR. LONG—May I ask another question? 

MR. BROWNE—No sir, I decline to yield. I have not an¬ 
swered that question yet. There are different conditions in dif¬ 
ferent counties in the State that made it necessary to put some 
safeguard against the non-tax-paying electors carrying this tax 
over the heads of the property holders. When the gentleman of¬ 
fered it I said I was willing to it for my county, but I am not 
one of those who look at everything from a selfish standpoint-, 

MR. WADDELL—I rise to a point of order. The gentleman 
is out of order, he has spoken over ten minutes. 

MR. BROWNE—I make the point of order that the rule does 
not apply to a Chairman of a Committee. 

THE PRESIDENT PRO TEM (Mr. Proctor) — In the 
opinion of the Chair the gentleman has thirty minutes. 

MR. LOMAX—I rise to a question of parliamentary inquiry. 
As I understand the rule the ten minutes only applies to discussion 
on amendments proposed and does not a Chairman have thirty 
minutes notwithstanding that rule? 

THE PRESIDENT PRO TEM—The gentleman has thirty 
minutes. 

MR. BROWNE—I was saying I was not one of those who 
look at everything from a selfish standpoint. I am very much 
in favor of local taxation for schools, but I am in favor of adopt¬ 
ing some provision looking to that end in our Constitution that 
will work to the best interest of every county and every communi¬ 
ty in the State of Alabama. 



1414 


OFFICIAL PROCEEDINGS 


When the gentleman from Jefferson offered his amendment 
I stated I thought probably it would be a good plan to have the 
tax provision to allow every tax payer to vote and to allow a 
two-thirds majority. However, the objection to the Louisiana plan 
is that one means dollars counted against cents. I will say for one 
that I am not afraid of the people upon the Louisiana plan, 
do not believe you can go before any of your Hill Billy audiences 
and explain that matter to them but what they will agree with 
you. I am not afraid to stand here and say that when the question 
of voting voluntary taxes for any particular object is before our 
people, the property holders ought to have the biggest say as to 
whether that tax shall be levied, and I do not believe the Hill 
Billies will agree with the gentlemen who take the other view of 
the question. 

MR. WHITE—Is the gentleman entirely acquainted with the 
views of that class of our fellow citizens? 

MR. BROWNE—I am pretty familiar with them. I have 
been elected by them half a dozen times. 

MR. LONG (Walker)—Does the gentleman take the position 
that no Hill Billy in Alabama pays any taxes? 

MR. BROWNE—I do not. I was going to say that when 
you get among them you will find that most of them pay taxes 
on a gun or a pistol, or something of that sort. 

MR. HEFLIN (Chambers)—Can the gentleman explain the 
difference between a Hill Billy and a Black Belt Democrat? 

MR. BROWNE—No, sir; I cannot see the difference. 

MR. O’NEAL—Will the gentleman permit me a question? 

MR. CUNNINGHAM—I rise to a point of order. 

THE PRESIDENT—The gentleman will state the point of 
order? 

MR. CUNNINGHAM—I make the point of order that the 
word “Hill Billy” has no place in the nomenclature of this State 
or of any political subdivision thereof, that it is not parliamentary 
language, and is out of place in this Convention. 

THE PRESIDENT—The point of order is sustained. 

MR. BROWNE—In reply to that point of order, I think it 
would have been well if it had been made when the “hill billv” 
first made his appearance on this floor, by introduction of the 
gentleman from Walker. 

MR. HEFLIN (Randolph)—I rise to a point of order. 

THE PRESIDENT—The gentleman will state the point of 
order. 



CONSTITUTIONAL CONVENTION, 1901 


1415 


MR. HEFLIN (Randolph)—There is so much disorder that 
the gentleman from Talladega cannot proceed and we cannot 
hear. 

MR. REYNOLDS (Chilton)—I desire to ask a question. Who 
would vote the property held by a partnership, or by a corporation. 

MR. BROWNE—No corporation would be allowed to vote. 

MIL REYNOLDS (Chilton)—But I say who would vote the 
property of a partnership? 

MR. BROWNE No one would, unless it was taxed separate¬ 
ly. A partnership cannot vote. 

MR. REYNOLDS (Chilton)—If there were three men in the 
partnership, worth ten thousand dollars, and two of them favored 
that tax, and one was opposed to it, who would vote at the elec¬ 
tion? 

MR. BROWNE—It would not be assessed to either one. If 
it was assessed to the partnership, and the taxes were paid by the 
partnership, a partnership would not have any voice in the mat¬ 
ter, nor would a corporation. 

I want to say, and I hope gentlemen will respect mv request, 
that I do not desire to be interrupted any more, because^ one gen¬ 
tleman gets up and asks a question, and before I finish one sen¬ 
tence another gentleman gets up and interrupts me. 

Now, about the cities and towns, if this section becomes a 
law, and the tax is levied, it is with the Commissioners’ Court 
how they will appropriate, or apportion it among the different 
schools. Some cities may be so selfish that they would desire 
to get back all of the taxes they pay; other cities might be liberal 
enough to be willing to pay their part of that ten cents on the 
hundred dollar tax and leave the money to be equitably appor¬ 
tioned among the schools in the county by the Commissioners’ 
Court. No one, it seems to me, would be so selfish as to desire 
that any city should get all of its tax back, and not divide it with 
the country precincts, upon which the city relies for its support. 
It the county should see fit not to collect their ten cents of that 
tax, then the city could levy that ten cents on the hundred dollars ; 
or if any county took only five cents, why the city could take the 
other five. 

Now we deal with that as only ten cents upon the hundred 
dollars, but gentlemen forget the restraining influence upon the 
future Legislatures of Alabama that this section will have. Gen¬ 
tlemen will not be so anxious to appropriate sums of money in the 
future as they have been in the past, when they know that by not 
levying the full amount of the sixty-five cent limit that they will 
thereby allow their counties to get more than the ten cents on 



1416 


OFFICIAL PROCEEDINGS 


the hundred dollars. In other words if in three or four rears, the 
Legislature should see that they can pay the expends ot t u * a t 
Government, economically administered, hy le\\ing a tax o 01 \ 
sixty cents on the hundred dollars, then the count \ can gtt titucn 
cents on the hundred dollars for her public schools it the conn v 
wants it. If not, the county is not forced to take it, ami be ou i 
can be taken, it must be voted for, under the pro\ i>ion> ot t n> 
ordinance, as reported, by a majority in number and in the \a uc 
of the taxable property. 

For one, I am willing to accept the amendment offered bv the 
gentleman from Jefferson. I favor it tor my county, but w un 
gentlemen tell me of conditions in their counties. 1 do not cate to 
force a provision upon their counties, against their will, that would 
tend to confiscate their property to some extent. 1 am told that 
under the most rigid suffrage law that can be enacted, that in M>me 
counties there will still be almost a majority of colored voters 
who are non-tax payers. That certainly, with a large majoritx 
of the colored non-tax paying voters of the county, and the verv 
small minority of possibly non-tax paying white men. a tax could 
be voted upon the property of that county, against the will ot the 
property tax payers, and I am opposed to any law that would allow' 
such a proceeding as that. 

Now, I am told that in Texas that the result of the two-thirds 
law' is similar to that in Louisiana; that when you have gotten a 
two-thirds majority of all of the qualified electors who are tax 
payers, that in almost every instance you have a majority ot the 
taxable values of the county. For one, 1 propose to vote upon 
this subject in the interest of the public schools of Alabama with¬ 
out any thought as to w r hat effect such vote will have in the future, 
and without considering whether or not a small cla>> of non-tax 
paying voters wdll object to it. The question is, how can we best 
help the public schools of Alabama and keep faith with the people, 
whose representatives w r e are? It seems to me that the onlv pos¬ 
sible way is by permitting counties to levy a special tax for schools, 
wdthin the present constitutional limit, not the one we fixed on 
yesterday, but the one in the old Constitution, of sevent-five cents 
for State and fifty cents for county purposes. 1 have nothing more 
to say, Mr. President. 

MR. MERRILL—I desire to offer a substitute. 

The substitute was read as follows: 

Substitute for the amendment to Section 5 of the Article on 
Taxation; in line sixteen, after the word “by" insert the letter “a." 
and after the word majority, insert “of two-thirds," and strike 
out of lines sixteen and seventeen the words “in number and in 
value of taxable property/’ 



CONSTITUTIONAL CONVENTION, 1901 


1417 


MR. MERRILL—I agree with the gentleman from Jefferson 
that no question of dollars ought to enter into an election. I do 
not think that a man with a dollar ought to have any more power 
at the ballot box than the man without the dollar, but when we 
transfer this remarkable power of levying a tax to the people of a 
county. I think that it ought to be guarded in a conservative way, 
and that not only a majority, but more than a majority ought to 
be required to put the tax upon the property owners of the coun¬ 
ty. 

Now, I am in favor of this local tax for educational purposes, 
and mv action in regard to the limit that I voted in the tax rate 
on yesterday, was controlled very largely by my desire that this 
local tax should be vested in the counties. Under the Democratic 
platform, as I construe it, we were limited not to go above 75 
cents, and if we had placed the limit at 75 cents, then, Mr. 
President, we would not have been able to pass this section 
of the ordinance, which confers upon counties the right to levy 
this local tax for educational purposes, because with a 75-cent 
limit and a constitutional right conferred upon counties to vote 
this local taxation for educational purposes, we would have 
exceeded the power and the right conferred upon us in the Demo¬ 
cratic platform. 

Now, it is my opinion—of course, it is not worth much, but 
it is the thing upon which I am acting—that when we put it above 
a majority, then we protect to a very large extent the property 
owners, and if we put it at two-thirds, I believe that a majority of 
the property owners in the county will have voted for it before 
it is carried, and, therefore, are willing to put the tax upon them¬ 
selves. I think that this is a conservative amendment and ought 
to be adopted by this Convention. 

MR. WILLIAMS (Barbour)—As I understand the immediate 
issue, it is confined to one single proposition, and I do not pro¬ 
pose to weary the gentlemen but a very few minutes. The im¬ 
mediate question is whether the tax raised by the counties is to 
be voted by a majority or two-thirds of the county, or voted sim¬ 
ply by those who contribute the money. That is the issue as 
raised by the amendment of the gentleman from Jefferson. Again, 
so that I can understand it clearly myself, the question is whether 
this taxation, which is to be raised by an election in the different 
counties, is to be voted by the counties at large, or whether it is 
to be voted by those who have it to pay. 

Well, it seems to me, Mr. President, that we need not go 
far for a solution of this question. It is in the nature of a con¬ 
tribution to the public schools by those who are able to contri¬ 
bute, and to hold that a contribution, or anything in the form 
of a contribution, shall be required by the vote against those who 
pay nothing, and who do nothing except to vote against those 
who have the property out of which to furnish a little money, 



1418 


OFFICIAL PROCEEDINGS 


would be a strange thing to do. Inasmuch as a sort of new era 
is upon us, by which counties are, under proper proceedings, to 
hold elections for the purpose of taxing the people for their con¬ 
tributions to the schools. I think it is wrong to subject those who 
have to pay the money to the will of those who have no money 
to pay and who do not pay any money. It seems to me it would 
be in the nature of taking a man’s property without just provision 
of law. Look at it as you are situated in your own county. I do 
not care whether the property holders have a majority or not, in 
many of the counties they are not in the majority. This is a 
proposition to hold an election for the purpose of advancing ad¬ 
ditional support to the public schools, supplementing the State 
fund, and strengthening the schools of the county. As a matter 
of course, every man who has got a house full of children, and 
no money to pay for their tuition, would be in favor of taxing 
his neighbor to the full extent. The committee seems to think it 
wise to limit the taxing power to those who have the tax to pay. 
It is well enough for us not to forget that under the present school 
system, everybody is paying for schooling everybody else’s chil¬ 
dren, and here is an additional and supplementary proposition to 
pay for everybody else’s children but his own. I repeat that [ 
do not care how the majority may stand in a county, but I repeat 
further that I do not believe that men ought to have the casting 
vote upon that question who have to pay the means by which the 
schools are to be carried on. 

Now you turn the man who has some little ability to give this 
contribution to the schools into the power and control of men 
who have no means to contribute to the schools, even if thev de¬ 
sired to do so, and have no means to aid in the enlargement of 
this fund, and let them vote this charge upon the property- of the 
taxpayers, you thereby add to the burdens those property-holders 
have already borne, which are chiefly the burden of the adminis¬ 
tration of the government of the State. 

MR. LONG (Walker)—May I ask the gentleman a question? 

MR. WILLIAMS (Barbour)—Certainly; but I don’t know 
whether I can answer him. 


MR. LONG (Walker)—Suppose a member of the legislature 
is a non-property owner, would he not have the right to vote on 
any question relating to taxation in this State? 


MR. WILLIAMS (Barbour)—To taxation generally, as a 
matter of course, but that means general taxation for the purpose 
of carrying out the legislation of the State, but the gentleman 
must not forget that this is a special tax to be laid by a vote of 
the people of the County for the purpose of raising a special fund 
to educate the children of that County, and it comes in the nature 
of a special tax. 



CONSTITUTIONAL CONVENTION, 1901 


1419 


MR. LONG (Walker)—Suppose there was a special tax for 
the State. They levy a special tax of one mill in this State for the 
Confederate soldiers. Would not the poor man he allowed to 
vote on that question in the legislature? 

MR. WILLIAMS (Barbour)—That is general legislation. 
The question is in a nut shell. Mr. President, and that is why I 
desire to be understood as speaking on the single proposi¬ 
tion, and not long on that, and the issue comes right square down 
to all of us. Here is a proposition in any county you may name, 
to raise an additional tax out of the people of that county, for 
the purpose of supplementing the general fund in that county. 
There are people in that county who could do nothing towards 
it, however much they desired to do so. There are others who 
can. Now, who shall have the privilege of determining when, 
where and how much of the means of the taxpayers of the County 
shall be appropriated to the object of schooling? 

MR. WHITE—Will the gentleman allow a question? 

MR. WILLIAMS (Barbour)—Yes. 

MR. WHITE—Then if the property owner ought to be al¬ 
lowed to vote, what about females that own property? 

MR. WILLIAMS (Barbour)—I have got nothing to say about 
women voting, whether they own property or not. I am against 
their voting to the end. 

It is a common saying that those who are able to pay taxes, 
must come up to the command of those who are not able to pay 
taxes, and pay in their funds to educate the children. You proper¬ 
ty owners that pay the taxes of the State, we who do not pay the 
taxes of the State for the schools or anything else, we say to you, 
you must march up like good fellows to the ring here, and submit 
your fund to this general fund for the county for the education of 
our children, and we will reap the benefit of it. 

MR. BULGER—May I ask the gentleman a question? 

THE PRESIDENT PRO TEM—Does the gentleman per¬ 
mit an interruption? 

MR. WILLIAMS (Barbour)—Yes, the gentleman may ask 
any question he pleases. I do not pledge you I will answer it. 

MR. BULGER—Do you not think it would be wise to post¬ 
pone the further consideration of this section until the Committee 
on Education reports a like section on this subject? 

MR. WILLIAMS (Barbour)—Yes, I think so. If the gentle¬ 
man will make such a motion, I will vote with him, but just now 
the matter of inquiry is as to what this Convention will determine 
upon the question. 



1420 


OFFICIAL PROCEEDINGS 


MR. BULGER—I will ask the gentleman another question. 
Will you not make the motion, or yield to me to make it.'' 

MR. WILLIAMS (Barbour)—I will yield to you to make the 
motion. 

MR. LOMAX—Wait until he gets through. 

MR. BULGER—Then I move that this section— 

THE PRESIDENT PRO TEM—Does the gentleman from 
Barbour yield? 

MR. WILLIAMS (Barbour)—I do. 

MR. BULGER—Then I move that this part of the section 
referring to local taxes, be recommitted to the Committee on Taxa¬ 
tion, until the Committee on Education reports a like section. 

MR. O'NEAL (Lauderdale)—To he considered at the same 
time ? 

MR. HEFLIN (Chambers)—Before the gentleman takes his 
seat— 


MR. O NEAL (Lauderdale)—To be considered at the same 
time as the report of the Committee on Taxation? 

MR. BULGER—To be considered at the same time the same 
kind of a section is considered in the report of the Committee on 
Education. 


THE PRESIDENT PRO TEM.—The gentleman from Talla¬ 
dega moves that this Section 5, together with the amendment, be 
referred back to the Committee, to be considered at the same time 
a like section is considered from the Committee on Education. 

. MI J- BROWNE—Mr. President, as Chairman of the Com¬ 
mittee I will state that we have given this thing our most careful 
consideration, and that there is no necessitv to send it hack to 
the Committee. It will be reported just exactly as it is now and 

1 d + °i S ^ C Wh ^ a matter of taxes should be left and held’here 
until the Committee on Education reports. Certainly the Com- 

effect »“ m -n„e r ,oo (l t he 

tio„ Whkh U r L efafe? to“pecTaTl 0 a"e s °tr sjhoot^'rp^ef" °' ScC ‘ 

h ™- P™- 

middle of the twelfth line of Section q , t -° stnke f rorn the 

further- to the remainder of the Section, asTunde'Sood ‘? t r ° Vi<led 



CONSTITUTIONAL CONVENTION. 1901 


1421 


MR. BULGER—That is right. 

MR. HARRISON—I call attention to the rule of the House 
which requires these motions to be made in writing, and that it 
is therefore out of order. 

THE PRESIDENT PRO TEM—The present occupant of 
the Chair is not aware of the rule. 

MR. LOMAX—I submit that the rule does not apply to a 
motion to postpone or refer, but it applies to an amendment. 

THE PRESIDENT PRO TEM—The Chair is of the opinion 
that it does not apply to a motion of this character. 

MR. HARRISON—It ought to be written out. There was a 
difference between gentlemen as to what the motion was. 

THE PRESIDENT PRO TEM—The gentleman from Talla¬ 
poosa moves to recommit all of Section 5, beginning with the 
word “provided,” in the twelfth line, will the gentleman put his 
motion in writing? 

MR. REESE—I make the point of order that this House 
cannot consider a motion that is not in writing, and it has univer¬ 
sally been ruled that this Convention- 

MR. JENKINS—I offer a substitute to the motion of the 
gentleman from Tallapoosa. 

THE PRESIDENT PRO TEM—The Chair would hold that 
a substitute is not in order at this time. 

MR. WILLIAMS (Barbour)—I yielded to nobody but the 
gentleman from Tallapoosa to make a motion. I am holding the 
floor. 

MR. REESE—A point of order. There can be no proposition 
before this Convention of the character made by the gentleman 
from Tallapoosa unless it is in writing; therefore there is no propo¬ 
sition before this House and the amendment by the gentleman 
from Wilcox is out of order. 

MR. O’NEAL (Lauderdale)—Will the gentleman allow a 
question? 

MR. HEFLIN (Randolph)—I make the further point of order 
that the gentleman from Barbour has the floor, and yielded only 
to the gentleman from Tallapoosa. 

THE PRESIDENT PRO TEM—All motions of that charac¬ 
ter the Chair would hold should be in writing. As the motion 
of the gentleman from Tallapoosa was not in writing, the chair 
will hold it was out of order, and the gentleman from Barbour 
has the floor. 



1422 


OFFICIAL PROCEEDINGS 


MR, WILLIAMS (Barbour)—I will not trouble the Conven¬ 
tion but a minute or two longer- 

MR. OATES—If the delegate from Barbour will allow me, 
I hear much difference of opinion expressed, and I would ask him 
on this point, it seems that the proposition of the Committee was 
that only tax payers should be allowed to vote in the proportion 
to the amount of taxes paid. 

MR. GILMORE—I make a point of order. 

THE PRESIDENT—Will the gentleman from Montgomery 
suspend? The gentleman will state the point of order. 

MR. GILMORE — The gentleman from Barbour has con¬ 
sumed his time. 

MR. LOWE (Jefferson)—I move that the time of the gentle¬ 
man from Barbour be extended five minutes. 

THE PRESIDENT PRO TKM—The Chair holds that the 
Chair shows that the gentleman from Barbour had two minutes left 
when he yielded to the gentleman from Tallapoosa. 

MR. LOWE (Jefferson)—I move that the time of the gentle¬ 
man from Barbour be extended five minutes. 

THE PRESIDENT PRO TKM—The Chair holds that the 
gentleman's time has not expired, that that he has two minutes. 

MR. BROWNE—I make the point of order that the gentle¬ 
man from Barbour cannot yield for the purpose of introducing a 
motion by the gentleman from Tallapoosa without allowing a 
motion to be made to lay that motion on the table. 

THE PRESIDENT PRO TEM—The gentleman from Bar¬ 
bour yielded to the gentleman from Tallapoosa, and the gentleman 
from Tallapoosa offered a motion, which was ruled out of order; 
then the Chair held that the gentleman from Barbour had the 
floor. 

MR. HEFLIN (Chambers)—I rise to a point of order, that 
the motion made by the gentleman from Jefferson, as I understood 
it, to extend the time of the gentleman from Barbour five minutes, 
under the rules of this House, this Convention stands adjourned 
at 1 o clock, and it is now, I understand, about three or four min¬ 
utes to 1, and unless the rules are suspended we could not go be¬ 
yond 1 o'clock- 

THE PRESIDENT PRO TEM—The Chair will entertain 
the motion of the gentleman f rom j e ff er son. The Chair was la¬ 
boring under the impression that the gentleman from Jefferson 
did not know that the time of the gentleman from Barbour had 
not expired. It is now moved by the gentleman from Jefferson 
that the gentleman’s time be extended five minutes. 



CONSTITUTIONAL CONVENTION, 1901 


1423 


During the stating of the question and the taking of the vote, 
Mr. Reese (Dallas), and Mr. Pettus (Limestone), sought to secure 
recognition upon a point of order, but failed. 

And upon the vote being taken, the time of the gentleman 
from Barbour was declared to be extended for five minutes. 

MR. REESE—I rise to a parliamentary inquiry. 

THE PRESIDENT PRO TEM—The gentleman will state 
the inquiry. 

MR. REESE—How can that time be extended without a 
suspension of the rules? 

MR. HEFLIN (Chambers)—That is the point of order I 
wanted to make. 

THE PRESIDENT PRO TEM—The Chair understood that 
was the motion made by the gentleman from Jefferson. 

MR. REESE—The motion made by the gentleman from Jef¬ 
ferson— 

MR. LOWE (Jefferson)—The time of the gentleman from 
Barbour has been extended and the gentleman from Barbour has 
the floor. 

MR. HEFLIN (Chambers)—I made the point of order that 
unless the rules are suspended- 

THE PRESIDENT PRO TEM—The gentleman from Jef¬ 
ferson, as the Chair understood it, made a motion to suspend the 
rules, and that the time of the gentleman from Barbour be ex¬ 
tended five minutes, and that was put to the house and the Chair 
decided that the motion was carried, and the gentleman’s time is 
extended. 

MR. HEFLIN (Chambers)—The point of order is that the 
Convention did not understand it that way. 

The President here resumed the Chair. 

THE PRESIDENT—The gentleman is out of order. 

MR. BULGER—May I ask the gentleman from Barbour a 
question? 

THE PRESIDENT—Does the gentleman consent to be in¬ 
terrupted? 

MR. WILLIAMS (Barbour)—Well, I am embarrassed, Mr. 
President, I told the gentleman once that I would if he would 
make such a motion, and that I would vote for it. 

THE PRESIDENT—Does the gentleman consent to be in¬ 
terrupted by the gentleman from Tallapoosa? 



1424 


OFFICIAL PROCEEDINGS 


MR. WILLIAMS (Barbour)—Wait a moment. He was 
ruled out of order because he did not have his motion in writing. 
Since that time he began to write his motion and this humble in¬ 
dividual proceeded. I found so many gentlemen around me op¬ 
posed— 

THE PRESIDENT—Does the gentleman consent to have 
the inquiry submitted from the gentleman from Tallapoosa? 

MR. WILLIAMS (Barbour)—I was just going to state that 
I would answer my friend’s request in the negative. That I could 
not consent now to yield for the motion to be made. If it is 
simply a question that I am able to answer, I will do it with 
pleasure. 

MR. BULGER—The question I desire to ask the gentleman 
from Barbour is would he yield to me to submit my motion to the 
Convention in writing? 

MR. WILLIAMS (Barbour)—No sir, I cannot now yield. 

The clock struck one o’clock. 

MR. HEFLIN (Chambers)—A point of order. 

THE PRESIDENT—The gentleman from Barbour has the 
floor. The hour for adjournment has arrived and the Convention 
will stand adjourned until half past 3 o’clock this afternoon. 


AFTERNOON SESSION. 

The Convention was called to order by the President and a 
call of the roll showed the presence of 117 delegates. 

THE PRESIDENT—The pending question before the Con¬ 
vention is Section 5, as reported by the Committee on Taxation. 
To that has been offered an amendment by the gentleman from 
Jefferson and an amendment has been offered to that amendment 
by the gentleman from Barbour. 

The chair recognizes the gentleman from Randolph. 

MR. HEFLIN (Randolph)—Mr. President and gentlemen of 
the convention, it is not my purpose to consume much of the time 
of the Convention. I simply rise to enter my solemn protest 
against the passage of Section 5, as reported by the Committee 
on Taxation, and to suggest a few words in support of the amend¬ 
ment offered by the gentleman from Jefferson. 

It is supposed that this section is offered in the interest of 
education. I have always been a friend to the common schools 
of the country, a friend of education, as my record in the past has 
demonstrated. I have always willingly and gladly voted for an 



CONSTITUTIONAL CONVENTION, 1901 


2451 


to the extent of preventing the Legislature from appropriating 
where there is a surplus accumulated by a greater income than the 
amount of expenditures. The limitation is to keep the Legislature 
from making appropriations beyond and above the income. You 
won’t have any surplus at all unless the income is more than the 
outgo; and if it is more there is no limitation upon it. If it is 
more where is any language that prevents the Legislature from 
appropriating it and using it, just so they do not exceed the amount 
of the income. That is the limitation that this section puts upon it. 

MR. HOOD—If they appropriated an amount that exceeded 
the estimated income, would the appropriation be void? 

MR. OATES—Now you have propounded to me a question 
for the court to decide. That would present a question of entirely 
a judicial character and I cannot say whether it would be void 
or not. 

MR. HOOD—Wouldn’t it be discretionary with the Legisla¬ 
ture—wouldn’t it be left to the discretion of the Legislature. 

MR. OATES—That presents, as I say a judicial question. 
Now if the appropriations were to exceed, actually exceed the esti¬ 
mate of the income? 

MR. HOOD—Yes sir. 

MR. OATES—Then suppose the income exceeded the esti¬ 
mate? Is there any limitation or restriction upon the Legislature 
in appropriating that? So they do not go beyond the income 

MR. HOOD—It reads “the aggregate appropriations made 
shall not exceed in amount the income from the revenues of the 
State for the current fiscal year.” 

MR. OATES—That is not the section now, a substitute was 
adopted. 

MR. O’NEAL (Lauderdale)—What was the substitute? 

MR. OATES—To be estimated for each year. 

(Mr. Knox here resumed the chair.) 

MR. SAMFORD (Pike) — I will ask the gentleman from 
Montgomery if the Legislature is to be governed by the estimate 
made by these officers with reference to the revenues to be derived 
from taxation and other sources, if that would not place the ap¬ 
propriations by the Legislature absolutely in the hands of the party 
who makes the estimate? 

MR. OATES—Not at all. It seems that certain delegates, I 
don’t mean the delegate from Pike, but there seems to be such a 
wide apprehension in the minds of a good many of the delegates. 



1426 


OFFICIAL PROCEEDINGS 


ured by that standad. It is wrong; it is class legislation, and if we 
pass it, the people will rise up and curse us. 

Who is the man on this floor who had that in his platform 
when he went before his people for election? Not one, and 1 dare 
say, there is not a man on this floor who, if he had argued for 
such a provision, could have been elected constable in his beat. 

Now, Mr. President, who does this discriminate against r 
Paupers, serfs, a low grade of people? Not at all; but against the 
best class of people on God’s green earth, that band of men who 
followed Lee and Stonewall Jackson, who responded to the call 
of their State when the tocsin of war was sounded, and who rallied 
to the tune of Dixie under the bonnie blue flag, and went forward 
to meet fourfold their number in the death struggle of war. Shall 
we say by our votes that that class of men, that bank of patriots 
shall be disfranchised? No, forever no. We will ever keep green 
in the garden of memory their heroic achievements and deeds ni 
valor done on field of battle. It will ever remain with us as 
pleasant recollections of a dark and bloody war and float down 
the silent stream of memory while life shall last. W> say to them 
and to those who have crossed over the river, “We remember vou. 
you need no marble shaft, molten brass nor monumental granite 
to perpetuate your deeds of valor on field of battle but your names, 
like the untitled stars of heaven shall shine forever.” Those soldiers 
were as patriotic as Washington or Jefferson and as brave as the 
defenders of the Alamo or of Thermopylae. 

Mr. President, this is a dangerous provision. It is a departure 
from beaten paths. It is striking at the old landmarks. W’e are 
drifting in the wrong direction and if we pursue this course, ere 
long we will have trouble, turmoil and strife. W’e should profit 
by the history of the past. 

Ill fares the land to hastening ills a prey 
Where wealth accumulates and men decay, 

For an honest yeomanry, a country’s pride. 

When once destroyed can never be supplied. 

Mr. President, we should keep our word with the people. I 
am on& of those servants of the people who believe we should be 
true and that platforms were not made to get in on, but to stand 
on after we have gotten in; and we should be sincere and not de¬ 
ceive the people. If we deceive the people you can rest assured 
that this will be the last opportunity we have of doing so. 

Oh, worker, whatever your fortunes 
Wherever your lot be cast, 

Look first that your efforts be honest 
And men will accept you at last. 



CONSTITUTIONAL CONVENTION. 1 ( >()1 


1427 


The world may he heartless and stupid 
And its judgment is often severe. 

Hut sooner or later its favor 

(jo out to him who's sincere. 

Mr. President, the best citizenship of the State of Alabama, 
or some of the best, is represented by that class known as poor 
people, the* poverty-stricken people, the common people, the 
veomanry of the country, the best people on G,od’s green earth. 
Some writer has said they are the best people ot earth and that 
the Lord demonstrated that fact by having made more common 
people than of any other class, and 1 believe it. 

Mr. President, in this country of oiir’s the poor boy, the son 
of the pauper, has an equal showing with the son of the million¬ 
aire. Here is this Southern clime, in the land of Dixie, in this 
home of patriotism, virtue walks hand in hand with justice, brav- 
erv, truth and religion and here in America today where the tree 
of liberty dies not and heroic sentiment lives forever, the magnifi¬ 
cent temple of justice, the Goddess of Liberty stands out in all its 
august and radiant beauty and throws its rays on every nation of 
the earth, inspiring each and every one of them to loftier pa¬ 
triotism. 

Now, Mr. President, in considering this question I ask every 
man to put his hand on his heart and to do what is right and see 
if his people, when he goes home, if he has acted conscientiously 
will not praise him. But if he has been untrue, if he has betrayed 
that trust they will curse him and the next time he offers for office 
he will not be in the fight at all. The history of the world has 
been that when a nation or a monarchy has drifted along this 
channel— 

THK PRESIDENT—The time of the gentleman has expired. 

MR. POSTER—I move that the gentleman’s time be ex¬ 
tended. 

MR. HARRISON—I move that the gentleman have leave 
to print. 

MR. HEFLIN (Randolph)—Shall I proceed? (Laughter.) 

MR. O’NEAL—I move that the rules he suspended and that 
the gentleman’s time he extended five minutes. 

A vote being taken the motion was carried. 

MR HEFLIN (Randolph)—I am very much obliged to the 
Convention for extending this courtesy to me. This is the first 
time I have attempted to make a speech and I promise the Con¬ 
vention not to trouble it much hereafter. 



1428 


OFFICIAL PROCEEDINGS 


As I was going to say, we should be governed by the history 
of the past. Take the centuries that have gone and see what was 
the result in nation or monarchy that has divided its people into 
classes. Rome tried class legislation and divided her people into 
patricians and plebeans and she fell down among her beautiful 
hills and died. England tried it and bleeding Ireland tells the tale. 
France tried it and there was the French revolution with the 
history of which you are all familiar. And I believe even in this 
liberty loving land of ours, if we persist in this course, ere long 
trouble and strife and turmoil will come and ruin will stare us in 
the face. 

Another thing in regard to the platform. I appear here today 
as the representative of the people, the common people and I say 
we should keep our pledges to that class of people. If we do not, 
we shall never have the opportunity to keep a pledge hereafter. 1 
say to you now unless we do, our days are numbered and soon 
the places that now know us will know us no more forever. If 
you are not true to the people, not only will you never be a delegate 
to a Constitutional Convention again, but you will never have the 
enjoyment of occupying any other office while you live, because 
no people will ever put faith in a man who has once been untrue 
to a trust reposed in him. And in connection with that I am re¬ 
minded of a piece I read in the newspaper several years ago on 
the state of man. It reads after this manner: 

Man that is born of a woman is as small potatoes and few in a 
hill. In infancy he is full of colic and catnip tea. In old age he 
is full of cuss words and rheumatism. In his youth his mother 
draweth him across her knee and sweeteneth his life with a slipper. 
When he is a man grown up the Sheriff pursueth him all the daws 
of his life. He getteth into office. His friends cling to him like 
spring flies to a sugar barrel. He swelleth with vanity and cutteth 
ice for a time but is hewn down at the next Convention, cast in 
the salt box and his name is Dennis. Out of office he soon goeth 
busted and lieth down in the cow pastures beside the still waters 
of brook. He dieth out of the world and goeth where it is warm 
enough without clothes. The last end of that man is worse than 
the beginning. 

Take care that that is not the future of some of us. 

Mr. President, I ask fou and each of you to consider this 
question. Take it up link by link, thread by thread, explore it 
in all its bearings, do your duty and when you leave these sacred 
halls whether you shall be successful hereafter politically or not, 
you can feel the sweet consciousness of having discharged your 
duty, of having kept the Democratic platform, of having been true 
to the pledge made to the white people during the campaign, and 
then when you start on your journey to the other world, when you 
come to that river that marks the unknown shore, like the dying 



CONSTITUTIONAL CONVENTION, 1901 


1429 


swan with its latest breath you can chant the sweetest strains and 
sing yourself to death. 

Mr. Long obtained recognition and asked for the reading of 
the section and all amendments, which was had. 

MR. LO\Ti (\Valker)-~Mr. President, I am heartily in favor 
of the amendment offered by the gentleman from Jefferson. This 
is a democratic government under a republican form of govern¬ 
ment. There can be no more reason given here why members upon 
this floor should vote to exclude electors of the State of Alabama 
who are not property owners than that they should vote that no 
man who does not own property in Alabama should be allowed 
to hold office. The very question is repulsive to every idea of a 
republican form of government. A man in a beat might have 
$2(X),CXX) worth of property and all the other men in the beat 
might not have one thousand and that man would then control the 
beat upon this proposition. If that is right Clod made a mistake 
when he admitted Lazarus into the Kingdom of Heaven and re¬ 
fused admittance to Dives. If that proposition is right, everv 
form of American government is wrong and Thomas Jefferson 
and all the others did wrong when they allowed men and not 
property to vote in the United States. Now, Mr. President, .this 
is a serious question for us to consider. 1 do not believe it is 
necessarv to speak upon this question because I have confidence 
in the members upon this floor, and I do not believe there ai e a 
dozen men on this floor who favor this proposition. If any excuse 
could be offered for it in this black belt, the majority report of 
the Committee on Suffrage will eliminate that excuse. 1 here can 
be no excuse for it in the mountains because the people don t want 
it and there cannot be a good reason given why it should be 
granted. If Christ himself were here he could not vote under that 
proposition and neither could his disciples. There are not half a 
dozen ministers of the Gospel in the State of Alabama who could 
vote if this section is adopted, no matter how intelligent or good 
they are. If you denv them the right to vote on a little pittance 
of one-tenth of one per cent, tax for the benefit exclusively of the 
public schools vou had as well deny them every other right of 
suffrage and you had as well deny them the right to hold office 
Whv there cannot be a single sound reason given why this should 
he in the Constitution of the State of Alabama. You put it there 
and I tell vou the people of Alabama will not support such a radi¬ 
cal piece of legislation in the fundamental laws of our State and 
this Constitution will go under by fifty thousand majority. 

The poor people in Alabama made as good soldiers as the 
rich in the last war and many a man today sleeps under the sod 
who never owned a slave but was fighting for slavery. Many of 
those who were formerly overseers own plantations now in Ala 
bama. And I want to deny the assertion that has been made here 



1430 


OFFICIAL PROCEEDINGS 


that property pays the tax, A man in London may own farming 
lands in Alabama, but he does not pay one cent of the taxes. It 
is the tenant on the farm that pays those taxes; it is his labor that 
pays the taxes and produced all the wealth in Alabama, and even - 
where else. A man, no matter how poor he is, has certain inalien¬ 
able rights guaranteed to him by the Federal Constitution. You 
talk about the suffrage plank being against the Federal Constitu¬ 
tion ; you put this provision in the Constitution, and if the question 
were contested, I believe it would be the duty of Congress to sav 
to the people of Alabama, you have not a republican form of gov ¬ 
ernment, because you deny to the poor people a right to vote*; vuii 
allow property, instead of votes, to control your political destinies. 
Mr. President, I do not desire to say anything further on a propo¬ 
sition so absurd on its face. I do not believe there are a dozen 
members on the floor that are in accord with the report of the 
committee. 


MIL REYNOLDS (Chilton) — I dislike to take up the time 
of the Convention in discussing this question, hut 1 feel that I 
would lx- untrue to the people I represent did 1 not sav a leu 
words on this subject. This is a remarkable proposition and some- 
thing new in the history of the country, that propertv, and not 
men, should vote. 


I take this view of the question that the Convention should 
not. and ought not, to put anything in the Constitution that is 
not needed, that is not right and just and demanded bv the people. 

Mr. President, we have lowered the tax limit with the idea 
that we would give to the people of the State the right of local 
self-taxation for public schools. I submit that there is no one 
on the floor can gainsay that. We have reduced our tax rate 
guaranteeing they would give to the people locallv the right to 
levy the amount that the tax was reduced. Hut this provision 
is so worded that it is inoperative, and the people cannot enforce 
. , , , a >' flown the broad proposition that there is not a countv 

in Alabama that can levy a school tax under this provision If 
this proposition is right and just, why not put it so the people can 
enforce it. I say, if it is wrong, this Convention should not be put 
in our organic law; if it is right, it should he put in a shape that 
it can he enforced. 1 

Who pays the taxes in the country? Go down these Greets 
and you find tenants in houses paying rent. They are the ones 
who own the property, figures the taxes and includes it in the 
amount or which he rents. And will we say that the man who is 
poor shall not vote? I believe levying taxes upon propertv for the 
benefit of education is for the benefit of the propertv itself T 
represent the hill billies—but I believe that has been niled out- 
so I represent a poor agricultural people. In my countv we have 
this law. It is inoperative because the officers don’t put it into 



CONSTITUTIONAL CONVENTION, 1901 


1431 


operation. In my county, in the remote country districts, wherever 
we have good school houses and good schools, valuations are high¬ 
er than in districts where we have no school houses and churches. 
Then, to levy school taxes and build up common schools in the 
country, increases the value of the property, and why not let the 
property bear its share of taxation to build up the schools? You 
educate people in the country and you elevate them and make 
them ride more on the railroads and the railroads ought to be made 
to pav their share of taxation, because they get the benefit when 
you elevate the people. This Convention ought to be the last body 
of men who would for a moment consider any proposition to tear 
down the school houses of the State. Why? Because we have 
before us now a problem as to what to do with the ignorant white 
man in Alabama. That is a great problem before the Convention. 
And should we put down in the organic law of the State for all 
time to come such a proposition as it embodied in this section? 
This ought to he the last body of men in the world to strike down 
the common schools of the country when it is said in the future 
only the educated can he allowed to vote. So I ask the delegates 
to pause and consider the great undertaking upon which they are 
entering before thev put this proposition into the organic law 
for all time. 

Who have fought the great battles of the country? When 
our country calls for warriors, men to go out and fight the battles, 
does she call for the property owners of the country? No. they 
are the biggest cowards that ever lived in the country. W ealth 
is always cowardly, and the poor people are those who fight the 
battles. 


Now I want to say to this Convention that I never cast my 
vote for any special privilege for benefits of education to any class 
of people or against any class. I do not believe because men are 
rich or because corporations are wealthy that they ought to be 
oppressed by law. I believe the laws on the statute hooks should 
hear equally on all classes alike. I do not believe in any special 
laws or special licenses or license taxes that are now on our books. 
Always in the Legislature I have voted against them. Some gen¬ 
tlemen I believe referring to some tax said the poor people would 
not have much to pav of it, that it would all fall on the rich people 
and possibly so heavily that they could not pay it. That would 
not he right It is the duty of this Convention not to allow any¬ 
thing become part of our law* that permits one class to bear heavily 
on another class. I think the laws should be made just and equita¬ 
ble and nothing that operates harshly on any portion of our citizen¬ 
ship should be tolerated. 


If this measure is 
statute books, but if it 
rule upon this question 


just, Mr. President, let us put it on the 
is just that the men of Alabama should 
let that be the provision. 



1432 


OFFICIAL PROCEEDINGS 


Where is the man who went before the people of Alabama 
and advocated such a thing- as this? Some of the tno>t fluent 
speakers of the State made speeches in my county and territory, 
and they said there will be no white man disfranchised, not a single 
individual. They promised my people if a single white man \va> 
discriminated against except on account of crime, they would come 
back and make speeches against the ratification of the Constitu¬ 
tion, and if you put this provision that is reported by the Com¬ 

mittee into this instrument, I serve notice now that we shall hold 
those gentlemen to their promises and demand that they come 
back to my county and oppose the adoption of this Constitution. 
This is the most important matter that has come before the Con¬ 
vention since it has been in session. Yesterday we were on an¬ 
other important matter, and I cast my vote against the reduction 
of the tax rate. I believe that the Legislature has appropriated a 
great deal of money that it should not have appropriated, but I 
was afraid if you lowered the tax limit the next thing would he a 
blow' at the common schools and I cast that ballot against w hat I 
thought a majority of my people would do, but I believe 1 did it 
believing I was doing my duty towards the poor boys and girls 

of Alabama. I will not sav barefooted boys, because I believe 

another member has copyrighted that. I hope the amendment of 
the delegate from Jefferson will pass, and I am opposed to the 
substitute of the gentleman from Lowndes. 1 believe in a ma¬ 
jority rule. I believe w'hen one man goes up to the polls and casts 
his ballot that ballot should count as much as the ballot of anv 
other man. I do not believe that men should be measured bv the ir 
wealth. We will drift into that sooner or later, but let us not 
hurry into it. I do not think the people of Alabama are readv for 
this system and I think they will rise up and repudiate it. 

The Chair recognized the delegate from Tallapoosa (Mr. 
Bulger) who yielded to the delegate from Barbour (Air. Merrill.) 

MR. MERRILL—I ask unanimous consent to be allowed to 
correct my amendment. I want to strike out five words in the 
fifteenth line. It was my intention to strike out entirely the proper¬ 
ty holders. My amendment is to strike out the words “property 
tax payers who are.” I ask unanimous consent that this mav be 
done. 

THE PRESIDENT—The gentleman desires unanimous con¬ 
sent to correct the amendment which,he has offered. 

MR. MERRILL—That leaves it to the qualified electors with¬ 
out reference to any property qualifications. 

The consent was given and the amendment corrected as indi- 
cated. 

MR. BULGER—One of the most prominent pledges made 
to the people of Alabama when this Convention was called was 



1433 


CONSTITUTION A], CONVENTION, 1901 

that we should take no backward step in education. On that 
pledge we went to the people on the question of Convention or 
no Convention, and a majority of the people voted fur the Conven¬ 
tion. Aow the people of Alabama have a right to expect that this 
Contention will adhere to its pledge. In the wisdom of the Con¬ 
vention we have reduced the tax limit from seven and a half to 
six and a half milL. Some of the members of the Convention are 
appi eheiiM\e that that w ill put the Convention in a position that 
it will be impossible for them to maintain and continue the present 
appropriation to the public schools of Alabama. If that is true, 
if by this ordinance we have put the Legislature in a position that 
it cannot tuither help the public schools, then it becomes necessarv 
if we would keep our faith with the people, to put the people where 
they themselves can help the public schools, and now the question 
is as to how that shall be done. In my humble judgment it would 
be unwise to put any clause in the Constitution of this State bv 
which you elevate money against men. It will be a departure 
from our theory and system of government. It will be contrary 
to the grand principles and grand doctrines of the Democratic 
party. 

Mr. President, [ have faith in the distinguished gentlemen 
who compose and make up the Committee on Taxation and I 
think they should be willing and this Convention should be willing 
on an all important question like this to be conservative, to be wise 
and not hastily consider this question; I have learned that the 
Committee on education has this same subject under consideration 
and very soon will bring into this body an ordinance on the subject 
of local taxation for the benefit of the schools. My purpose in 
rising was not to make a speech, but to make a motion that this 
particular section 5 as reported by the Committee on Taxation 
from and including the word “provided” in Section 5 be laid upon 
the table to be taken up and considered when the Committee on 
Education makes its report. I believe that this would be wise as 
I have suggested it is all important. The people of Alabama while 
they are interested in the great subject of suffrage, purifying the 
ballot and having honest elections, have never lost sight of the 
great subject of free schools and education in Alabama. 

MR. HARRISON—When does our Committee on Education 
expect to report and wdiat does it expect to report and in what 
way are thev better informed than the Committee on Taxation? 

MR. BULGER—They are not any better informed. Thev do 
not claim that, but they have had under consideration this subject 
of education and it seems to me that this particular subject is as 
w'ell in the hands of the Committee on Education as it is in the 
hands of the Committee on Taxation and certainly it is safe in the 
hands of both of these learned committees and w'e have then the 
advantage of a report from both of the committees on this subject. 



1434 


OFFICIAL PROCEEDINGS 


MR. HARRISON—Can you not tell us the report? 

MR. BULGER—No, sir; because the reduction in the rate of 
taxation has somewhat changed the views of the Committee on 
Education and since that has passed, they have been formulating 
a report upon that particular subject that will be more satisfac¬ 
tory than the one we are now discussing and at least this Conven¬ 
tion and the people of Alabama cannot be injured by having them 
both together. 

MR. MILLER (Marengo)—You say they have been formu¬ 
lating a plan since the tax limit was reduced. Have they had a 
meeting since? 

MR. BULGER—We have a sub-committee that is working 
on that matter. 

MR. REESE — Has not the Committee on Education bv a 
vote decided to formulate no plan providing for local taxation? 

MR. BULGER—No, sir; that committee has a sub-committee 
which is now considering this subject. 

MR. REESE—Has not the full committee passed a resolu¬ 
tion saying there shall be no local taxation? 

MR. BULGER—Yes; but that was on the theory that there 
would be no reduction of the tax rate from seventy-five to sixty- 
five. 

Mr. Jones of Wilcox sought recognition from the Chair. 

THE PRESIDENT — Does the gentleman desire to inter¬ 
rupt the delegate from Tallapoosa? 

MR. JONES (Wilcox)—No, sir; I thought he had finisher! 
his remarks. 

MR. BULGER—I am not through. I just want to lay that 
part of the section and the amendment or substitute on the table 
to be taken therefrom when the Committee on Education makes 
its report. 

THE PRESIDENT—With what part do you start? 

MR. BULGER—After the word “provided.” 

MR. Jones (Wilcox)—Will the gentleman withdraw that mo¬ 
tion for a moment? 

THE PRESIDENT—The gentleman from Wilcox asks the 
gentleman from Tallapoosa will he withdraw his motion to table 
for a moment? 

MR. BULGER—I will if the gentleman agrees to renew the 
motion. Will he do that? 



CONSTITUTIONAL CONVENTION, 1901 


1435 


MR. JONES (Wilcox)—No. sir. 

MR. BULGER I hen I decline to withdraw the motion. 

MR ROBINSON—I rise to a point of order. 

THE PRESIDEN 1—The delegate will state the point. 

MR. ROBINSON—The gentleman cannot move to lay half 
the section or proposition on the table. 

THE PRESIDENT—It seems to the Chair that that point is 
well taken. 

MR. BULCER—Then I move to lay that whole section on 
the table. 

THE PRESIDENT—The gentleman from Tallapoosa moves 
to lay Section 5 of the report of the Committee on the table to be 
taken therefrom at the pleasure of the Convention, when the re¬ 
port from the Committee on Education comes in. 

A vote being taken on the motion to table and a division be¬ 
ing called for, the motion was carried by 63 ayes and 40 noes. 

So Section 5 of the Committee's report was tabled. 

THE PRESIDENT*—The gentleman's motion I believe, ap 
plied to the Section and pending amendments? 

MR. BULGER—Yes, sir. 

THE PRESIDENT — The gentleman so stated his motion 
but the Chair in announcing the question, omitted to include the 
amendments, but it was so understood. The clerk w r ill read the 
next section. 

Section 6 was read as follows : 

Sec. 6. The property of private corporations, associations 
and individuals of this State, shall forever be taxed at the same 
rate; provided, this section shall not apply to institutions devot¬ 
ed exclusively to religious, educational, or charitable purposes. 

MR. HEFLIN (Randolph)—I move that the section be adopt¬ 
ed. 

MR. COBB—I have an amendment. 

The amendment was read as follows: 

Amend Section 6 by adding, “hut this exemption so far as 
applicable to educational institutions shall be limited to 200 acres 
of land and the buildings thereon which are used exclusively for 
educational purposes, and to personal property not to exceed $10,- 
000 exclusive of philosophical and chemical apparatus and musical 
instruments and libraries. 



1436 


OFFICIAL PROCEEDINGS 


MR. COBB—I do not propose to make any argument upon 
this amendment but simply desire to call the attention of the 
Convention to this fact that there are educational institutions in 
this country, and they are multiplying, that are accumulating from 
time to time vast quantities of land. Those lands they claim to 
be used for educational purposes and it is going on in this direc¬ 
tion until in some counties of the State the revenues of the county 
are endangered and it is also putting in danger the other property 
holders of the county and making it oppressive on them and I do 
believe that the time has come that we should put some limit to 
the amount of land that can be held free from taxation by these 
institutions. I therefore introduce this amendment. I am not 
committed to any number of acres. My belief and best judg¬ 
ment is that while it is wise to exempt from taxation all the build¬ 
ings erected for educational purposes without regard to the 
amount of money expended in their erection, and all philosophi¬ 
cal and chemical apparatus and musical instruments and prop¬ 
erty of that kind which must be used for exclusively educational 
purposes, when they reach out as they are to my certain knowl¬ 
edge and gather in from time to time all the land they can get in 
certain counties by purchase and claim it to be free from taxation 
because they belong to institutions which are educational, that 
there should be a halt. 

MR. WILSON (Clarke)—Under your amendment would the 
State University and the Industrial School have to pay taxes on 
their land? 

MR. COBB—This would not apply as that land belongs to 
the State of Alabama and is not covered by my amendment. 

MR. ROBINSON—This says devoted exclusively to religious, 
educational or charitable purposes, and that would prevent it. 

MR. JACKSON—Will the gentleman permit an interruption? 

MR. COBB—There are so many trenching on my time that 
I don’t like to, but I can’t refuse. 

MR. JACKSON—Would this affect the A. & M. College? 

MR. COBB—It would not in my opinion. The A. & M. Col¬ 
lege and the Girls Institute at Montevallo and institutions of that 
kind which have attached to them certain amounts of property 
will not be affected. 

MR. FITTS — You stated that the land of the University 
stood in the name of the State. That is not the case. The title is 
in the Board of Trustees of the University of Alabama. 

MR. LOMAX—It certainly would affect them if that amend¬ 
ment is passed. 



1437 


CONSTITUTIONAL CONVENTION, 1901 


MR. FITTS I know that because I had charge of it. 

^ on * know but my friend to the right informs 
me that these lands are non-taxable and I know they belong to 
the State although the title may be Trustees. 


MFC LONG (Walker)— Would it affect Booker Washing¬ 
tons school. owning fifteen or thenty thousand acres of land in 
this State? 


MR. COBH—I think it would. 

MR. LONG (Walker)—I hope so it is just that class of insti¬ 
tutions that I am trying to call the attention of the Convention 
to, not that I am opposed to any of these institutions but— 

MR. BL LGER—May I ask the gentleman a question? 

MR. COBB—I have six already ahead of you that I have not 
disposed of, but you can go on. 

MR. LOMAX—Would it affect the nine district agricultural 
schools ? 

MR. COBB — It would not, in my opinion; but if there is 
doubt about that I am perfectly willing that the amendment shall 
be so framed as to exempt schools where the lands or property 
belong to the State of Alabama, although they are held by trus¬ 
tees. But there are private institutions chartered in this State 
that have vast amounts of money coming to them year after year, 
and they are buying every acre of land that they can put their 
hands on—but let me answer the question of my friend from 
Chambers. 1 would say, in my opinion, these lands are not ex¬ 
empt from taxation, but when they go before the assessors and 
claim that they are exempt, the assessors of the various counties 
are too prone to take refuge behind this exemption clause of the 
law and exempt all of these lands from taxation. They claim 
they are exempt from taxation and frequently those claims are 
allowed. I think before we get through with this section that it 
should be made plain that while we encourage these private edu¬ 
cational institutions, while we wish them God-speed and will give 
them every reasonable exemption, there should be some limit to 
it in behalf of the other people of the State. 

MR. GREER (Calhoun)—Wlien we went before the people 
of Alabama, there was a pledge made that no backward step 
should be taken on education. I believe this amendment is a 
backward step, and I move to table the amendment of the gentle¬ 
man from Macon. 

MR. W'HITESIDE—Will the gentleman permit a question? 

MR. GREER (Calhoun)—Yes, sir. 



1438 


OFFICIAL PROCEEDINGS 


MR. WHITESIDE—I have heard that expression that it was 
a pledge in the Democratic platform that no backward step 
should be taken on education that I would like to inquire in what 
section of the platform it is? 

MR. GREER (Calhoun)—I think it is in the platform, al¬ 
though even if it is not in words, it is in principle. 

THE PRESIDENT—The question is on the motion of the 
delegate from Calhoun to table. 

A vote being taken on a call for a division, the House, by a 
vote of 46 ayes and 54 noes, refused to table. 

MR. CARMICHAEL (Coffee)—I wish to offer an amend¬ 
ment. 

The amendment was read: Amend the amendment bv insert¬ 
ing $20,000 instead of $10,000. 

MR. COBB—I accept that. 

MR. O’NEAL—Why don’t you exclude all furniture used in 
the operation of a school? 

MR. COBB—My amendment says that. 

MR. O'NEAL—No, sir; your amendment refers to philoso¬ 
phical and chemical and musical instruments. 

MR. COBB—Put in everything in that line you want. 

MR. CARMICHAEL (Coffee)—By unanimous consent, we 
can include all school furniture. 

Objection was made. 

THE PRESIDENT—The question is on the amendment of 
the gentleman from Coffee to the amendment of the delegate from 
Macon. 


MR. COBB—My amendment was drawn up in great haste 
and I am perfectly willing that it be put in shape. 

MR. SPEARS May I ask the gentleman a question? 

MR. COBB—Certainly. 

MR. SPEARS—Do you remember that the Government of 
the United States donated 25,000 acres of land to Montevallo and 
in the same act donated 25,000 acres of land to the Booker T 
Washington school? Now, what I want to know is, do you nro- 
pose to tax what the Government gave to the negro school and 
not tax what the Government gave to the whites? 

MR. COBB—No, sir ; I don’t propose to tax any of that land 
I was going to make this motion. This matter occurred to me 



CONSTITUTIONAL CONVENTION, 1901 


1439 


hastily, and I drew up this amendment hurriedly, and I move that 
this matter be referred to the Committee on Taxation to formulate 
such a report as, in their judgment, will meet the sense of the Con¬ 
vention in this behalf. 

THE PRESIDENT—The gentleman from Macon offers an 
amendment to Section 6. Thereupon the gentleman from Coffee 
offered an amendment, and now the gentleman from Macon moves 
to refer the section with the pending amendments back to the 
Committee on Taxation. 

MR. LOMAX—I do not think either of these amendments 
ought to be referred back to the committee or adopted by this 
Convention. By no amendment that could be offered would you 
strike a deadlier blow at higher education in Alabama than by 
the adoption of this amendment. The amendment as framed and 
as amended put a tax upon every acre of land owned by the Uni¬ 
versity of Alabama because that land is held in the name of the 
Board of Trustees of the university and not in the name of the 
State of Alabama. 

MR. FOSTER—May I interrupt the gentleman? 

MR. LOMAX—Certainly. 

MR. FOSTER—Does not the gentleman know that it is uni¬ 
formly held by the courts in this country that lands held in the 
names of trustees for the benefit of States are not taxable? 

MR. LOMAX—I do not know that it would be so held as 
to this land. The Supreme Court of Alabama has never passed 
on the question and there has never been a constitutional pro¬ 
vision of this sort in this State. We cannot tell what the Supreme 
Court will hold in view of the new and changed purposes of the 
part of the Constitution makers of the State. This amendment 
puts a tax upon the A. and M. College, the school at Montevallo, 
all of their lands. If it so happens that Howard College at Bir¬ 
mingham owns any land, or has in prospect the owning of any 
land, it would tax that. It would put a tax upon the land of the 
Greensboro College if it owns any land. It will put a tax upon the 
land of everv institution for higher education in the State of Ala¬ 
bama and I submit it ought not to be done. It also puts a tax 
upon the personal property of institutions of that sort over $20,000. 
Suppose it should happen, and God grant that it may! that either 
the university of the A. and M. or Howard College or the Uni¬ 
versity of the South at Greensboro or that at Owenton should re¬ 
ceive an endowment which would enable them to put in a plant 
for the education of the young men of Alabama worth $100,000, 
do you propose to say that the people of Alabama want to put a 
tax on $80,000 of that money invested in Alabama for the educa¬ 
tion of her young men? Suppose, as my friend from Lauderdale 



1440 


OFFICIAL P R O C E EDI N (S 


suggests, some philanthropist should give a library to one of these 
great institutions of learning in the State of Alabama of the value 
of $100,000? 

MR. COBB—-That is exempted in my amendment. 

MR. LOMAX — Is apparatus exempted? 

MR. COBB—Yes. 

MR. LOMAX—Let that amendment be read again. 

The amendment was read showing that the language was not 
as the delegate from Macon understood. 

MR. COBB—Put it there. 

MR. LOMAX—That don’t include mechanical apparatus or 
for a school of mines and apparatus that would be needed in maiiv 
different schools that might be established in any of these insti¬ 
tutions. 

MR. WHITE—If some gentleman should donate $100,000 of 
bonds to the university the interest to be applied annually, would 
that be exempt? 

MR. LOMAX—It would not be under this amendment. 

But even admitting that the university lands would be exempt, 
even admitting that the Montevallo property and lands would be 
exempt and that the Agricultural and Mechanical College would 
be exempt and that Howard College and the Greensboro and 
Owenton Colleges would be, are we going to pass this amendment 
to put a tax upon the school of Booker Washington? Why should 
we tax that more than other schools? I submit to you gentlemen 
of the Convention. 

MR. OATES—I would like to ask my colleague from Mont¬ 
gomery if the State is not a contributor to that school? 

MR. LOMAX—Yes. 

MR. OATES—And would it not assist in cutting down so 
much of the State’s appropriation? 

MR. LOMAX—Yes. 

A Delegate — I would like to inquire whether or not the 
Masonic Temple costing over $50,000 would be exempt under this. 

MR. COBB—That is education. 

MR. LOMAX—It is charitable, devoted exclusively to charity. 

MR. COBB—The gentleman misunderstood the amendment. 
This applies only to educational institutions and does not include 
the Masonic Temple or churches or charitable institutions, and 



CONSTITUTIONAL CONVENTION, 1901 


1441 


while I am on my feet I want to disclaim any purpose to dis¬ 
criminate on account of race, color or previous condition. 

MR. ROBINSON—May I ask the gentleman from Montgom¬ 
ery a question? 

MR. LOMAX—Certainly. 

MR. ROBINSON—Ought not agricultural schools to have 
more than two hundred acres of land? 

MR. LOMAX—Certainly they should. Then look at it in 
another way. The State of Alabama contributes—I beg your 
pardon—pays to the University of Alabama on the debt it owes 
it, $24,000 a year and pays to the University of Alabama on the 
debt it owes it, $24,000 a year and contributes out of the general 
fund $10,000 a year to support the institution. Where is the sense, 
as suggested by my colleague from Montgomery, (Mr. Oates), 
of paying $36,000 out of your treasury a year for the support of 
an institution and then taking back half of it in the way of taxes? 
The same proposition applies to the A. and M. College. 

MR. COBB—It has no application whatever to the University 
or to the A. and M. 

MR. BULGER—For information, suppose one of the religious 
denominations owned six or eight hundred acres of land and es¬ 
tablished a school on it, could that be taxed? 

MR. LOMAX—Under this amendment it would be taxed. 
And if the A. and M. College at Auburn owns land, the effect of 
this amendment is to tax that land, and there is no sense in giving 
to that institution a certain amount of money a year on its endow- 
ment fund and requiring it to pay back to the State Treasury a 
part of that money by way of taxation; and there is no more 
reason why the Constitutional Convention should put a tax on a 
denominational school because it owns property and is in better 
condition by reason of owning property to extend higher educa¬ 
tion to the sons of Alabama, than to extend the same proposition 
to State schools. Instead of undertaking to tax these institutions 
and cripple their energies, instead of undertaking to reduce their 
powers and curtail their influence, we should in the interest of— 
I am not talking about barefooted boys alone—but in the interest 
of education in Alabama, in the interest of the wider spirit and our 
broader enlightenment, in the interest of a grander civilization, we 
should contribute every means in our power to upbuild every in¬ 
stitution of learning which has for its purpose the improvement 
of our youth in letters, in morals, and in character. I submit that 
this Constitutional Convention cannot afford, in this day and time, 
in this enlightened age, when all the energies of all the civilized 
countries in the world are being used for the upbuilding of man’s 
character, for the elevation of his morals and the broadening of 



1442 


OFFICIAL PROCEEDINGS 


his mind—I submit that we ought not to take a step which puts 
Alabama back amid the dark ages in the line of education, and 
which, in my judgment, strikes down and impairs the usefulness 
of every institution of higher learning in the State. 

The section as reported by the committee is, I am informed* 
word for word the section which was in the constitution of 1875. 
I have no doubt if I had the references before me, I could show 
that the same section was in every Constitution that has been 
adopted in Alabama. I do not suppose that, ever before, in am 
Constitutional Convention in Alabama, it was proposed that the 
State, by means of taxation, should undertake to cripple and 
paralyze and destroy the institutions of higher education and 
learning that existed within the State. For the reasons I have 
stated, I move that the motion to refer this proposition and amend¬ 
ments back to the committee be laid on the table. I do not want 
to cut off debate, and if my friend from Macon wants to discuss 
it, I will withdraw the motion to table. 

MR. COBB—I would like to have five minutes. 

THE PRESIDENT—The motion cannot be withdrawn with¬ 
out the consent of the Convention. Is there objection? 

There was objection, and, a vote being taken, the motion to 
table was carried. 

MR. COBB—I withdraw my amendment. It was tentative, 
more than anything else, and I ask leave to withdraw it. 

There was no objection and the amendment was withdrawn. 

MR. LONG (Walker)—I move to amend by adding after 
the word education the words “not over 1,500 acres of land held 
for educational purposes shall be exempt from county taxation ; 
provided, that all buildings and personal property of every de¬ 
scription shall be exempt from all taxation. 

MR. LONG (Walker)—I shall not consume much of the time 
of the Convention on the amendment. I just want to say that tnv 
county is suffering more today than any two counties in the State. 
These institutions hold sixty-five or seventy thousand acres of 
the most valuable land in the State of Alabama in fee simple. If 
the State of Alabama wishes to exempt them from taxation, thev 
have the right to do it, but I do deny the right of the State to 
cripple my county’s resources by exempting them for all time to 
come. 

MR. BURNETT—May I ask the gentleman a question? Are 
you aiming at Booker Washington’s school? 

MR. LONG—Yes, sir; why, that institution has gotten so 
much land that absolutely a number of settlers have been turned 
out of their homes by donations of these lands. 



CONSTITUTIONAL CONVENTION, 1901 


1443 


MR. WHITE—1 would like to ask the gentleman a question. 
Were those lands on the tax rolls when they were given to that 
school? 

MR. LONG (Walker)—Some would have soon been. 

MR. W HITE—But were any on the rolls? 

MR. LONG (Walker)—No, they were not. The gentleman 
knows it takes five years under the laws of the United States for 
that land to become taxable. 

MR. FITTS—You are striking at the twenty odd thousand 
acres University endowment held in Walker County. 

MR. LONG (Walker)—No, sir; I am striking at all those 
institutions that hold these vast quantities of land without taxa¬ 
tion. 


MR. FITTS—That is what I thought you were striking at 
and I just wanted to uncover it. 

MR. LONG—As I say people have been turned out of homes 
so that the University of Montevallo and Booker Washington 
School may have more lands. You may have the power but you 
have no right to exempt them from County taxation. In the name 
of the Lord ain't fifteen hundred acres enough. Our development 
is being kept down by these holdings. You cannot walk across 
their land without risk of being persecuted and prosecuted by 
these great corporations. The State has the right to keep up the 
University and to keep up the school at Montevallo but it has not 
that right at the expense of Walker County. I am perfectly willing 
for the Convention to do as it pleases but it is a question of simply 
right and justice to my county and you should not allow the 
Montevallo University or any other institution to have hundreds 
and thousands of acres of land without paying taxes holding them 
in the hope that they will be worth 3 or 4 or 5 hundred dollars an 
acre. You have no right to let them hold their lands at the expense 
of Walker County. 

MR. JENKINS—May I ask the gentleman a question? 

MR. LONG (Walker)—Yes. 

MR. JENKINS—What is the assessment roll of Walker 
County? 

MR. LONG (Walker)—Six millions. 

MR. JENKINS—How much do you want? 

MR. LONG (Walker)—We want to manage our own affairs. 

MR. BROWNE—I move to lay the amendment on the table. 



1444 


OFFICIAL PROCEEDINGS 


A vote being taken the motion to table was carried and on a 
further motion by Mr. Browne the section was adopted. 

THE PRESIDENT—The Clerk will read the next section. 

Section 7 was read as follows: 

Sec. 7. No city, town, or other municipal corporation other 
than provided for in this Article, shall levy or collect a larger rate 
of taxation, in any one year, on the property thereof, than one- 
half of 1 per centum of the value of such property, as assessed for 
State taxation during the preceding year; Provided, that for the 
payment of debts existing at the time of the ratification of the 
Constitution of 1875 and the interest thereon, an additional rate 
of 1 per centum may be collected, to be applied exclusively to such 
indebtedness; provided further, that for the maintenance of public 
schools such city, town or other municipal corporation may levy 
and collect such special tax as may be authorized by law, provided 
such special tax shall not be levied and collected when it shall 
cause a greater rate of taxation in any one year than $1.75 on 
every $100 of taxable property, for all State, county and munici¬ 
pal purposes, except the erection, construction and maintenance by 
counties of necessary public buildings, bridges or roads, and pro¬ 
vided such special tax for schools, the time it is to continue and 
the purposes thereof, shall have been first submitted to a vote of 
the property tax payers who are qualified electors in said city, 
town or other municipal corporations, and voted for by majority 
thereof, in numbers, and in value of taxable property, voting at 
such election, and provided such tax for schools shall be appor¬ 
tioned equitably and paid to the public schools of said city, town 
or other municipal corporation by the municipal authorities there¬ 
of; and provided, this Section shall not apply to the city of Mo¬ 
bile, which city may levy a tax not to exceed the rate of three- 
fourths of 1 per centum to pay the expenses of the city govern¬ 
ment, and may also levy a tax not to exceed the rate of three- 
fourths of 1 per centum to pay the indebtedness of said city exist¬ 
ing at the time of the ratification of the Constitution of 1875 and 
the interest thereon : Provided further, that this Section shall not 
apply to the city of Birmingham, which city may levy and collect 
a tax not exceeding one-half of 1 per centum, in addition to the 
tax of one-half of 1 per centum hereinabove allowed to be levied 
and collected, such special tax to be applied exclusively to the 
payment of the interest on the bonds of said city of Birmingham 
heretofore issued by said city in pursuance of law, and for a sinking 
fund to pay off said bonds at the maturity thereof. 

MR. WEAKLEY—The Committee on Municipal Corpora¬ 
tions under instructions of this Convention has submitted a re¬ 
port upon municipal taxation. In order to save time that would 
be consumed in the discussion of this question I move that Sec¬ 
tion 7 be laid upon the table and be taken therefrom to be con- 



CONSTITUTIONAL CONVENTION. 1901 


1445 


sidered with Section II of the report of the Committee on Munici- 
pay Corporations which covers identically the same question. 

MR. BROWNE—As your report is in here, why not bring it 
up and consider it now. It has to come under the head of taxa¬ 
tion and when we get through with this report we can order it to a 
third reading and be through with it. 

MR. KYLE—Before that motion to table is put I would like 
to offer an amendment. 

THE PRESIDENT—Does the gentleman withdraw? 

MR. WEAKLEY—I will let him offer the amendment pro¬ 
vided it takes the same course. 

MR. BROWNE—I make the point of order that the gentle¬ 
man cannot do that and hold the floor. I would like to have him 
be as discourteous to other gentleman as to the Committee. 

MR. WEAKLEY—Then I decline to withdraw. 

THE PRESIDENT—It seems to the Chair that the gentle¬ 
man can yield to the gentleman from Etowah if he desires. 

MR. WEAKLEY—If the Chair so rules I take pleasure in 
yielding. I simply desire that this matter shall be discussed with 
the report of the Committee on Municipal Corporations. 

MR. BROWNE—I make the point of order that the gentle¬ 
man cannot control the floor by making a motion to table and 
then withdrawing it to let other members offer amendments and 
still hold the floor. 

THE PRESIDENT—The gentleman from Lauderdale yields 
to the gentleman from Etowah to offer his amendment. And the 
question as to who has the floor will be a question for the Chair 
to determine when it arises. 

MR. FOSTER—The gentleman from Lauderdale also yields 
to the gentleman from Tuscaloosa to offer an amendment. 

The amendment of the delegate from Etowah was read as 
follows: 

Strike out all of said section commencing on the eighth line 
after the word “collect” and ending at the word “qualified” on 
the fifteenth line and insert the following: 

A special tax not to exceed 1-4 of one per cent, provided such 
tax shall not be levied and collected until such special tax for public 
schools, the time it is to continue and the purpose thereof, shall 
have been submitted to a vote of the qualified— 

And to further amend said section, commencing after the word 
“thereof” on the twenty-ninth line and read as follows: 



1446 


OFFICIAL PROCEEDINGS 


And provided all cities, towns and municipal corporations in 
this State, except the cities of Mobile and Birmingham, otherwise 
provided for in this Constitution, having a bonded indebtedness 
created after the adoption of the Constitution of 1875 and now in 
effect, as well as all cities, tow'ns and municipal corporations in 
this State that desire to raise means to secure light plants, water 
works and sanitary sewerage by the issuance of bonds within the 
limit prescribed in this Constitution, shall be authorized to le\\ 
and collect a tax not to exceed 1-4 of one per cent on all real and 
personal property listed for taxation in said cities ; to be applied 
exclusively to the payment of interest on such bonded indebted¬ 
ness and to provide a sinking fund to pay off the bonds at ma¬ 
turity; provided, such devv and collection of said tax shall first 
have been submitted to a vote of the qualified electors of such 
city, town or municipal corporation and voted for by a majority 
thereof in number and value of taxable property voting at such 
election. 

Amendment by Mr. Foster was read as follows : 

Amend Section 7 by striking out of line 7 the words “main¬ 
tenance of public schools,” and inserting in lieu thereof the follow¬ 
ing: “payment of debts, existing at the ratification of this Con¬ 
stitution and interest thereon.” And by striking out all from and 
after the word “roads” in line 13, to and including the word 
“thereof” in line 19, and inserting in lieu thereof the following: 
“and provided that the question whether or not such special tax 
shall be levied be first submitted to a vote of the qualified electors 
in said city, town or other municipal corporations, and voted for 
by a majority thereof.” 

MR. WEAKLEY—I now renew my motion that Section 7 
and the amendments be laid on the table to be taken therefrom 
when Section 11 of the report of the Committee on Municipal 
Corporations is considered. 

MR. SPRAGINS—Will the gentleman allow me to offer an 
amendment before he does that? 

THE PRESIDENT—The Chair will state to the gentleman 
from Madison that there is an amendment and an amendment to 
the amendment already pending. 

MR. REYNOLDS (Chilton) — Haven’t we already got the 
committee’s report on the other question? 

THE PRESIDENT—It has been reported but it is not up for 
consideration at this time. 

MR. REYNOLDS—Could it not be taken up with this re¬ 
port? 



CONSTITUTIONAL CONVENTION. 1901 1447 

THE PRESIDENT—It is in the power of the Convention 
to do so if it chooses. 

MR. REESE—I rise to a question of inquiry. Can a motion 
to table have tacked to it that it should be considered at some con¬ 
tingent period when something else is to be considered? 

THE PRESIDENT—The Chair is of the opinion that when 
an amendment or resolution or ordinance is laid upon the table, 
it may be taken up at any time at the pleasure of the Convention. 

MR. REESE—Then that part of the motion that it shall be 
considered at a certain time will not be considered? 

THE PRESIDENT—It seems to the Chair that the Conven¬ 
tion can take it up when it chooses. 

MR. WHITE—Won’t the effect of this motion if carried be 
to postpone the consideration of this until that particular time? 

THE PRESIDENT—That is the effect of it, but the Con¬ 
vention could take it up immediately if it pleases. 

MR. REESE—I make the point of order that the motion is 
out of order because it is not a motion to table and that part of it 
is out of order which provides for the time when it shall be taken 
up. 

THE PRESIDENT—The point of order is overruled. 

A vote being taken the motion to table was carried. 

THE PRESIDENT—The Secretary will read the next Sec¬ 
tion. 

The Section was read as follows: 

Sec. 8. The General Assembly shall not have the power to 
require the counties or other municipal corporations to pay any 
charges which are now payable out of the State Treasury. 

MR. CARMICHAEL (Coffee)—I move that the Section be 
adopted. 

MR. GRAHAM (Montgomery) — Before that Section is 
adopted I would be pleased to hear the Chairman of the Com¬ 
mittee to explain what it means. I don’t understand what that 
means. 

MR. O’NEAL — Is not that same provision in the present 
Constitution ? 

MR. BROWNE — That has been in the Constitution since 
1875. And it means that the Legislature shall not have the power 
to require counties and municipalities to pay any of the charges 
that are now payable out of the State Treasury. 



1448 


OFFICIAL PROCEEDINGS 


MR. GRAHAM (Montgomery) — I don’t understand what 
that means. 

MR. WHITE—Does that include the judges salaries? 

MR. BROWNE—I suppose so. If it were not for such a pro¬ 
vision in the Constitution the General Assembly could require 
one county to pay the salary of the Governor. 

MR. ROGERS (Sumter)—-That is an exact copy of the old 
Constitution, is it not? 

MR. BROWNE—I did not want to inform the gentlemen it 
was. I wanted them to vote on their own convictions. I thought 
the lawyers would know it was a copy of old Section 9. 

A vote being taken the Section was adopted. 

THE PRESIDENT—The Clerk will read the next Section: 

The next Section was read as follows: 

Sec. 9. No county shall become indebted in an amount 
greater than 5 per centum of the taxable value of the property 
thereof; Provided, this Section shall not apply to any indebted¬ 
ness in excess of such 5 per centum, which has already been cre¬ 
ated, or authorized by law to be created. 

MR. WEAKLEY — I desire to offer an amendment to that 
Section. 


The amendment was read as follows: 

Amend Section 9 by striking out the word “five" in the first 
line and inserting instead the word “three.” 

MR. BROWNE I will state that the committee is willing to 
accept that amendment. 

MR. HEFLIN (Chambers) — Then I move the adoption of 
the section as amended. 


MR. BROWNE I will state that I am authorized by the 
committee to say we accept the amendment making it three The 
ordinance was originally introduced by the gentleman from Lee, 
Mr. Harrison, at three per cent., and the committee changed it to 
five, in order that the Convention could lower it if they saw fit. 

MR. O’NEAL (Lauderdale)—Will the gentleman state, for 
the information of the Convention, what counties, if any, in Ala¬ 
bama, have an indebtedness of more than 5 per cent, of the tax¬ 
able value of property. 

MR. BROW’NE—We know of none. 

MR. O’NEAL (Lauderdale)—W r hat is the largest percentage 
in any county at this time? * percentage 



CONSTITUTIONAL CONVENTION, 1901 


1449 


MR. BROWNE—I cannot answer the question. My county 
keeps out of debt, so I was not interested in it. 

MR. LOWE (Jefferson)—This seems to me to be an inno¬ 
vation, and it strikes me as being a very dangerous innovation. 
I certainly do not know, and evidently the Chairman of the com¬ 
mittee does not know, the average indebtedness of the counties in 
Alabama today, but we do know those counties which perhaps 
the greatest debts are in the most prosperous condition. There 
are counties in Alabama today which are progressive, building 
roads arid making improvements that are absolutely essential to 
the development and prosperity of the county. Now this Consti¬ 
tutional Convention ought not to think that it can supplant the 
local authorities in determining what is best for every county in 
Alabama. Every county in Alabama, before it issues bonds, will 
have to have the sanction of the General Assembly, and it will 
also have to have the sanction of the Commission li\s’ Court, the 
immediate representatives of the people of the county. I am will¬ 
ing, if this Convention in its wisdom thinks it proper to do so, that 
a limitation be put upon the counties, though I challenge the gen¬ 
tleman to show in any one instance in all the history of Alabama 
since the Republican days, when it has been necessary for the 
Constitutional Convention to limit the power or the right of the 
county to borrow money for local purposes, I challenge the chair¬ 
man of the committee, or any member of the committee, to show 
that any county in Alabama has abused its power at any time 
within the last quarter of a century. Why then should we, with 
no more consideration than it is apparent the committee has given 
this proposition, impose this limitation upon the counties of this 
State? 

Now, if we are going to adopt a limitation at all, let us adopt 
such a liberal limitation that there would be no danger on the one 
hand of the public works of the county suffering, or on the other 
hand of extravagance on the part of the local officers. I believe 
the people of my county are willing to trust their local authorities 
in matter of the expenditure of their moneys and the determina¬ 
tion of its indebtedness. Now I do not propose that any county 
should fix the limit of its indebtedness. It must be authorized by 
the General Assembly, and must be ratified by the Commissioners’ 
Court of the county, the immediate representatives of the people. 

I think that the amendment of three per cent, should lie upon 
the table, but I will not make the motion inasmuch as I under¬ 
stand Mr. Weakley wishes to speak to it. 

MR. KYLE—I want to say as far as the gentleman’s idea is 
concerned that it would not work in my county. The Commis¬ 
sioners’ Court came down to the last Legislature and without any 
consultation with the tax payers, secured the passage of a law 



1450 


OFFICIAL PROCEEDINGS 


authorizing' the county to issue thirty thousand dollars of addi¬ 
tional bonds, for the purpose of paying the current expenses of 
the county, without the knowledge of the people at all, and if that 
kind of chinaniging can be carried on with the Legislature, it is 
time to put a limit on it to stop it. 

MR. WEAKLEY — In my opinion the question of a debt 
limit is more important than the question of a tax limit. If the 
Constitution of 1875 had inserted in it some limitations upon the 
taxing power of the cities and counties of this State to create 
debts, the present financial condition with which we are confront¬ 
ed would not exist today. The gentleman who has preceded me 
seems to think that this limitation is too low, and that it would 
interfere with the county of Jefferson. In answer to him I desire 
to say that the county of Jefferson has an assessed valuation of 
forty millions of dollars, and under this limitation the countv of 
Jefferson can create a debt of $1,200,000, and I submit, gentlemen, 
that debt is all that the county of Jefferson is able to pay the in¬ 
terest on with the proceeds of a fifty cent tax rate. 

I have given the matter some investigation, and so far as I 
am able to find out, there is not a county in the State of Alabama 
that would be seriously affected by this limitation, and I do know, 
Mr. President, there is one county in the State that has contracted 
a debt of exactly five per cent of its assessed valuation, and has 
defaulted in its interest, and is unable to pay it, and that too when 
one-half of this debt is bearing interest at the rate of only 5 per 
cent, per annum. If gentlemen will take the report of the State 
Auditor, which they have upon their desks, they will see there the 
statement of the total assessed valuation of every county in the 
State, and each member can calculate for himself how much his 
county will be allowed to create under this limitation. I doubt 
not Mr. President, after that calculation has been made, every 
member will come to the conclusion that a limit of 3 per cent, 
will allow all the debt that the county in reason ought to create. 
The gentlemen must remember that counties are required to raise 
money and to incur debts for very few things. The building of 
Court Houses, the erection of jails, poor houses, and the construc¬ 
tion of a road system— 

MR. O'NEAL (Lauderdale)—Will the gentleman from Lau¬ 
derdale yield to a question? 

MR. WEAKLEY—Yes. 

MR. O'NEAL (Lauderdale)—You understand this Section to 
mean, then, that you could not impose a tax greater than 3 per 
cent., and you must include in that the debt which already exists? 

MR. WEAKLEY—Yes sir. 

MR. O NEAL (Lauderdale)—The bonded debt that already 
exists has got to be included in that 3 per cent? 



CONSTITUTIONAL CONVENTION, 1901 


1451 


MR. WEAKLEY—Yes. 

MR. O’NEAL (Lauderdale) — And counties that now have 
that limit— 

MR. WEAKLEY—Cannot create any additional debt. And 
there are very few counties that have it. 

I was going to say that the reason counties should create 
debts are very few. They are to build court houses and jails, and 
bridges, and roads- 

A DELEGATE—And poor houses? 

MR. WEAKLEY—And poor houses. And I will state fur¬ 
ther, that at the present rate we are contracting debts, we will 
have to build a few more poor houses in this country before very 
long. 

A calculation of these matters of the debt limit, has induced 
the leading financiers of the county to conclude that a 5 per cent, 
debt limit is a reasonable one, where there is no limitation upon 
the rate of taxation, but where there is a limitation upon the rate 
of taxation as in this State, and our means of paying the interest 
upon the debt we already have is small, a limitation of 3 per cent, 
is not too great a restriction. 

MR. O’NEAL — How many States in the Union have this 
limit ? 

MR. WEAKLEY—The gentleman asks how many States in 
the Union have this debt limit. I answer him that probably two- 
thirds or probably three-fourths of the States in the Union have 
a debt limit. It is recognized everywhere, as I said in the begin¬ 
ning, as more important than the tax limit, because if the debt is 
not created the tax will not have to be levied to pay it. 

MR. WATTS—I am opposed to the amendment of the gen¬ 
tleman from Lauderdale. I do not think the 5 per cent, should be 
stricken out and 3 per cent, substituted. It would not do for the 
county of Montgomery. We are engaged in a system of road 
building, to bridge our prairies and put our county in a fine con¬ 
dition. That system has been extended for about twelve miles in 
every direction. If this amendment were adopted it would pre¬ 
vent Montgomery from extending her road system, and I do not 
think it would be advisable to adopt the amendment in our case. 
The different counties have their Boards of Revenue, or Com¬ 
missioners’ Court, who have these matters under consideration, 
and 5 per cent, it seems to me is a small enough limit to put upon 
them. I hope, therefore, Mr. President, that the amendment of the 
gentleman will not be adopted. 

MR. HARRISON—I want to ask the delegate what should 
be the indebtedness of Montgomery County? 



1452 


OFFICIAL PROCEEDINGS 


MR. WATTS—About a million dollars. Five per cent, would 
make it a million, and 3 per cent, would make it about $600,000, 
and we already have $425,000 of bonds for roads, not counting 
those for the Court House and other purposes. 

MR. WADDELL—Mr. President, I oppose the amendment 
which proposes to change it from 5 to 3, simply for the reason 
that the poorer counties in the State, should they lose their court 
houses and jails, or either of them, by fire, they would not be able 
to rebuild them, if the 3 per cent, rate should carry. The taxable 
property in my county is given in this year at about $1,700,000, 
and I expect there are some counties in the State which come a 
great deal below that. Should it become necessary for my county 
to build the Court House or jail, under this rate, we would not 
be able to meet our current expenses and pay for it. For this 
reason I oppose the amendment. 

MR. WILSON (Clarke)—I favor the amendment proposed 
by the gentleman from Lauderdale. I think it is more important, 
as he says, to limit the debt contracting power of a county, than 
it is to limit the rate of taxation. While the gentleman was 
speaking I reverted to my own county, and made some figures. 
In my county, as I remember, the taxable values are in round 
numbers, three millions of dollars. If the Committee’s report is 
adopted, authorizing that county to incur an indebtedness of 5 
per cent, of its taxable values, it might incur an indebtedness of 
$150,000. At 6 per cent interest, the interest on such a debt would 
be $9,000, to say nothing of ever providing for paying back the 
principal. The total tax which could be collected under the limita¬ 
tion of 50 cents on the hundred dollars is $15,000, leaving only 
$6,000 to pay all of the living expenses of the county, after paving 
the interest of $9,000 on the maximum amount of the debt which 
could be contracted. On the other hand, with a capacity to con¬ 
tract debts to the extent of 3 per cent of the taxable values— 

MR. LOWE (Jefferson)—Will the gentleman pardon me for 
an interruption? 

MR. WILSON (Clarke)—Certainly. 

MR. LOWE (Jefferson)—What is the debt of your county 
now ? 

MR. WILSON (Clarke)—I think it is about $10,000, prob- 
ably. It is very small. 

MR. LOWE (Jefferson)—There is no limit in the Constitu¬ 
tion now. 

MR. WILSON (Clarke)—None whatever. 

MR. LOWE (Jefferson)—Then do you need a limit to keep 
the Commissioners Court from running up that debt beyond what 
they can pay? 



CONSTITUTIONAL CONVENTION, 1901 


1453 


MR. WILSON (Clarke)—Yes; I think a limit should be put 
on the power to contract debts, and I will tell you why. We de¬ 
sired to build a court house a few years ago, and issued $15,0(30 
in bonds to build it, and when we went to sell those bonds, we 
had to pay about 6 per cent interest. In my judgment, if it had 
been absolutely guaranteed in the Constitution that that county 
could never create any debt above what it could pay the interest 
on, we could have sold those bonds at a great deal less rate of in¬ 
terest than we did. That is the reason I want to put in there to 
limit the capacity to contract debts. 

Now at 3 per cent, my county could contract $90,000 worth 
of debts. Six per cent on that debt, would be $5,400, which would 
leave for the general living expenses of the county $9,600. Now, 
I figure that on the basis of 6 per cent, but I believe if we put 
a limitation in the Constitution upon the debt-contracting power, 
then every one of these counties can get their debt floated for a 
lower rate of interest than they have to pay now to get their bonds 
floated. For that reason, I am in favor of the amendment pro¬ 
posed by the gentleman from Lauderdale, and I believe this Con¬ 
vention should adopt it. 

In answer to the gentleman from Montgomery, in reference 
to his public roads, I will ask the chairman of the committee if, 
under the prior section of this Article, the County Commissioners 
have not the right to levy additional taxes above this 50 cents, for 
public roads? 

MR. BROWNE—They have a right to include public roads 
along with bridges and public buildings, as one of the subjects 
of special taxation. 

MR. WILSON (Clarke)—For special taxation above 50 cents, 
and it is not limited at all? 

MR. BROWNE—Yes, it is limited in the report of the com¬ 
mittee to one-fourth of one per cent. In the present Constitution, 
it is not limited at all. 

(Mr. Ashcraft here took the chair). 

MR. HARRISON—I trust that the amendment offered by 
the gentleman from Lauderdale and accepted by the committee 
will be adopted. There can be no question in my mind that this 
limit should be fixed both for the counties and for the cities and 
towns. For the information of my friend from Jefferson, Mr. 
Lowe, who asks the question if, in the last half century, we have 
ever had any reason to complain, I would remind him of the his¬ 
tory of seven counties that were long known in Alabama as the 
strangulated counties? 

MR. LOWE—I said in the last quarter of a century. ; 



1454 


OFFICIAL PROCEEDINGS 


MR. HARRISON—And those strangulated counties, or some 
of them, have been laboring from the effects of that ever since. 

MR. LOWE (Jefferson) — That was under the Republican 
administration in carpet-bag days. 

MR. HARRISON —- Yes, under Republican administration, 
when they were allowed to vote on it, and went through the form 
of voting for it. 

MR. HINSON—I have been informed that the Countv of 
Colbert has a bonded indebtedness of $2(X),tX)0, and that is about 
5 per cent of the taxable valuation of the property in the county. 

MR. HARRISON—They need a guardian if they owe that 
much. 


MR. HINSON—I also understand that she has made default 
in the payment of her interest, and is unable to pay the interest, 
and that this state of affairs exists right now in Colbert County, 
and she has a debt of only 5 per cent of the value of her taxable 
property. I would like to ask if that is the fact? I do not know, 
but I have been informed that is the condition of affairs in that 
county. 


MR. HARRISON—I would be pleased to reply to the dele¬ 
gate, but I am not familiar with the condition of affairs in the 
county to which he refers. What county did you inquire as to? 

MR. HINSON—Colbert County. I say if that is a fact, it 
would answer every objection that the gentlemen make to this 
limit, and show the necessity for a 3 per cent limit. 

MR. HARRISON—Yes, sir; there is no question of the ne¬ 
cessity. I think we owe it to the people of Alabama. We owe 
it to those counties, and we owe it to the cities, too. because they 
are today paying a higher rate of interest than any other munici¬ 
pal corporation in the country. 


Answering the question of the gentleman to my right, one of 
my colleagues here has furnished me some figures as to the tax¬ 
able property in Colbert County. It is placed at $3,874,000. Mak¬ 
ing a calculation at a limit of 5 per cent, it would be able to in¬ 
cur a debt of $193,000, which shows, as intimated bv the gentle¬ 
man’s question, the necessity for this limit. The great necessity 
for it is that no county, no municipality, city or town, should be 
permitted to incur a debt which they cannot reasonably expect to 
pay within the limit of taxation authorized bv the State We 
need, Mr. President and delegates, to prevent their incurring 
debts, for we do not want to place anything in the Constitution 
that sounds like repudiation, and we should not permit munici¬ 
palities to go beyond what they can reasonably pay by the authori- 
ty they have to raise money within the tax limit, and I submit 



CONSTITUTIONAL CONVENTION, 1901 


1455 


that not only as to the counties, but the delegates will observe 
that the very next section of this report places the same restric¬ 
tion on towns and cities, and if you make a calculation, and ap¬ 
ply it to the tax limit, you will find three per cent for both of 
them is a safe and conservative limit, and that while we ought not 
to interfere with any debt already contracted, because if they have 
incurred it they should pay it if they can, we should come in with 
the strong arm of the fundamental law of the land and say thus 
far you shall go and no further. We have fixed the limit of taxa¬ 
tion, and now we fix the limit beyond which you shall not incur 
any debts. It would give credit to these counties. It would give 
credit to the cities. It would prevent what we have seen in Ala¬ 
bama, and what we hear today. As said in my opening remarks, 
I know of one county that was prostrated for years, and never 
would have gotten out of her trouble if the State of Alabama had 
not come to her rescue and loaned money to the county in an in¬ 
direct way. After her inability to pay her debts, they effected a 
compromise and finally worked out of it, and upon the principle 
that a burnt child dreads the fire, I trust that no other county 
will have to pass through it. My good friend from Chambers 
and I labored here for years to try and work out of it, his county 
being one of them. 

While, perhaps, the danger today is not so great as it has 
been. I ask the delegates to reflect upon the fact that recently 
many cities and towns in Alabama have defaulted in the interest 
on their bonds. In my own town recently it was with great diffi¬ 
culty that they could float a small number of bonds, because cer¬ 
tain towns, I don’t care to name them, but you can name half a 
dozen towns in Alabama that have defaulted and have not paid 
their interest, and the credit of Alabama cities and towns have 
been affected in the great markets of the country, and those who 
are disposed to pay their debts have to pay one, one and half and 
two per cent more interest simply because they say that Alabama 
towns are permitted to incur a greater debt than the tax limit will 
authorize them to pay. 

For this reason I trust this limit will be conservative. My 
good friend from Russell made the illustration that the court house 
might be burned down. Taking his own county as an illustra¬ 
tion it has an assessed valuation of $2,484,000, which at 3 per cent 
would authorize his county to incur a debt of $74,520, which I 
apprehend is as much as Russell County ought to incur. Certain¬ 
ly for his court house, because I am satisfied it could be replaced 
for twenty-five thousand dollars if it were burned down, and sev¬ 
enty-four thousand dollars, I submit, would be ample. Even if 
you apply it to the great County of Montgomery, I submit with 
all of its capital and wealth ought not to be allowed to go ovetr 
$600,000 indebtedness, because I doubt their ability to pay it if 
they should incur it. 



J456 


OFFICIAL PROCEEDINGS 


MR. SANDERS—I desire to offer a substitute. 

The substitute was read as follows: 

No county shall become indebted in an amount greater than 
three per centum of the taxable valuation of the property thereof, 
provided this limitation shall not affect any existing indebtedness 
exceeding such three per centum which have been authorized by 
law to be created. 

MR. SANDERS—I offer that substitute not for the purpose 
of discussing the merits of the three per cent or the five per cent 
limitation, but for the purpose of clearing up a manifest and pa¬ 
tent ambiguity. Section 9, as it reads, is as follows: No county 
shall become indebted in an amount greater than five per centum 
of the taxable value of the property thereof; provided, this section 
shall not apply to any indebtedness in excess of such five per 
centum, which has been already created or authorized by law to 
be created.” 

The reasonable construction of that language is that if an in¬ 
debtedness of five per cent or three per centum, which ever may 
be adopted, already exists, the section does not prevent the cre¬ 
ation of an additional indebtedness of five per cent or three per 
centum. I am satisfied that this is not the meaning or tlie inten¬ 
tion of the Committee. 

MR. BROWNE—Will the gentleman allow me to ask a ques¬ 
tion? 

MR. SANDERS—Yes, sir. 

MR. BROWNE — Is the only change you make by your 
amendment inserting the word limitation in lieu of the word sec¬ 
tion? 

MR. SANDERS—I ask the clerk to read the amendment, it 
is short. The amendment was again read. 

MR. SANDERS—It simply means that if there is an existing 
indebtedness, exceeding three per centum, or if by law such in¬ 
debtedness has been authorized to be created, this section shall 
not affect it, and shall not apply to it. If, in a county where no 
indebtedness has been created at all, under the substitute that I 
offer, an indebtedness of 3 per cent may be created. If one and a 
half per cent indebtedness already exists, there would only be an 
additional indebtedness of one and a half per cent. In other 
words, Mr. President, where the indebtedness is not already up to 
the limit it may be increased to the limit. If it exceeds the limit 
already, or if, by law, an indebtedness exceeding the limit has 
been authorized, this limitation shall not apply to it. I merely 
offered the substitute for the purpose of clearing up what in my 



CONSTITUTIONAL CONVENTION. 1901 


1457 


inind is a very manifest ambiguity in the meaning of the section 
as reported by the committee. 

MR. O’NEAL (Lauderdale)—I fully concur in the wisdom of 
a provision limiting the power of counties to create debts. I think 
it is one of the most important provisions in this Article, but at 
the same time I am inclined to believe that the limitation of 3 per 
cent, as suggested by the amendment of the gentleman from Lau¬ 
derdale is too low. Now by an examination of the Constitutions 
of all the States on this subject, we find that but one State has a 
limitation as low as that. That is the State of Indiana. All of 
the Constitutions enacted since about 1890 contain similar provi¬ 
sions. The State of New York had a provision of 10 per cent in¬ 
stead of three. 

The State of California has the following provision: No coun¬ 
ty, city, town, township, board of education, or school district, 
shall incur any indebtedness or liability in any manner, or for any 
purpose, exceeding in any year the income and revenue provided 
for it for such year, without the assent of two-thirds of the quali¬ 
fied electors thereof voting at an election to be held for that pur¬ 
pose, nor unless before or at the time of incurring such indebted¬ 
ness, provision shall be made for the collection of an annual tax 
sufficient to pay the interest on such indebtedness as it falls due, 
and also provision to constitute a sinking fund for the payment of 
the principal thereof on or before maturity, which shall not ex¬ 
ceed forty years from the time of contracting the same. Any in¬ 
debtedness or liability incurred contrary to this provision shall 
be void.” 

Now, take the State of Georgia, our neighbor. Here is a pro¬ 
vision which they have: “The debt hereafter incurred by any 
county, municipal corporation or political subdivision of this State, 
except as in this Constitution provided for, shall never exceed 7 
per centum of the assessed value of all the taxable property there¬ 
in, and no such county, municipality or division shall incur any 
new debt, except for a temporary loan, or loans, to supply casual 
deficiencies of revenue, not to exceed one-fifth of one per centum 
of the assessed value of the taxable property therein, without the 
assent of two-thirds of the qualified voters thereof, at an election 
for that purpose, to be held as may be prescribed by law.” 

Now the State of Georgia authorizes a rate of 7 per cent, and 
in addition excepts temporary loans to supply casual deficiencies 
of revenue, not to exceed one-fifth of one per cent. 

It further provides: “But any city, the debt of which does 
not exceed 7 per centum of the assessed value of the taxable 
property at the time of the adoption of this Constitution, may be 
authorized by law to increase, at any time, the amount of said 
debt, three per centum upon such assessed valuation.” 



1458 


OFFICIAL PROCEEDINGS 


Now, there is 7 per cent with an additional provision. The 
State of Idaho provides for 5 per cent., with an authority to in¬ 
crease it over 5 per cent in certain contingencies. 

Now the State of Indiana has the lowest limit of any State 
in the Union, so far as I have been able to ascertain. Here is 
the provision of that State: “No political, or municipal corpora¬ 
tion, in this State, shall ever become indebted, in any manner or 
for any purpose, to any amount, in the aggregate exceeding 2 per 
centum of the value of taxable property within such corporation, 
to be ascertained by the last assessment for State and count\ 
taxes, previous to the incurring of such indebtedness, and all 
bonds or obligations, in excess of such amount given by such 
corporations shall be void; provided, that in time of war, foreign 
invasion, or other great public calamity, on petition of a majorits 
of the property owners in number and value, within the limits of 
such corporations, the public authorities, in their discretion, may 
incur obligations necessary for the public protection and^ defense, 
to such an amount as may be requested in such petition. 

Now that State, with that low limit, provides that in ca>e of 
a great public calamity, or pestilence, or war, invasion or insur¬ 
rection, that the people, by petition, can increase that amount, 
provided the petition is ratified by an election. But, we would 
have absolutely no provision for any class of emergency that may 
arise. 

Take the State of Iowa. The State of Iowa is one of the great 
States of the Union, and it provides: “No county, or other politi¬ 
cal or municipal croporation, shall be allowed to become indebted 
in any manner, or for any purpose, to an amount, in the aggregate, 
exceeding 5 per centum on the value of the taxable property with¬ 
in such county or corporation, to be ascertained by the last State 
and county tax lists, previous to the incurring of such indebted¬ 
ness.” 

Illinois and Kentucky have much larger rates than that. The 
State of Missouri has this provision: 

“No county, city, town, township, school district, or other 
political corporation, or subdivision of the State shall be allowed 
to become indebted in any manner or for any purpose to an 
amount exceeding in any year the income provided for such vear, 
without the assent of two-thirds of the voters thereof voting at 
an election to be held for that purpose; nor in cases requiring such 
assent shall any indebtedness be allowed to be incurred to an 
amount, including existing indebtedness, in the aggregate exceed¬ 
ing 5 per cent.” And then it provides that even that can be in¬ 
creased. 

“It may be allowed to become indebted to a larger amount 
for the erection of a court house, or jail; and provided, further, 



CONSTITUTIONAL CONVENTION, 1901 


1459 


that any county, city, town, township, school district, or other 
political corporation or subdivision of the State, incurring any in¬ 
debtedness requiring the assent of the voters aforesaid, shall, be¬ 
fore or at the time of doing so, provide for the collection of an an¬ 
nual tax sufficient to pay the interest/’ 

North Dakota provides for 5 per cent., and permits 3 per cent, 
for certain contingencies. 

Pennsylvania has 7 per cent, upon the assessed value, and al¬ 
lows an increase of 2 per cent, in certain contingencies. 

So, gentlemen, 5 per cent, is about the lowest limit in the 
Union except the State of Indiana. The Committee adopts the 
amendment of the gentleman from Lauderdale without any quali¬ 
fications, without any provision for contingencies of any kind, for 
calamities or war, for invasion or insurrection, or for epidemics, 
and this might result in tying the hands of the people and pre¬ 
venting them from relieving themselves of this cast iron rule when 
it would become oppressive. 

Therefore, Mr. President, I think that the report as made by 
the Committee should be adopted. Five per cent, is low enough, 
and it contains no exceptions for any contingencies. I am willing 
to accept that. I think that may be safe, but to go any lower, 
without additional provisions providing for contingencies, would, 
in my judgment, be unwise and unsafe. I shall, therefore, move 
to lay the amendment of the gentleman from Lauderdale on the 
table. 

MR. WADDELL—I rise to a question of personal privilege. 
I stated in my remarks that the taxable value of the property in 
my county was about $1,700,000. It is $2,700,000 for this year— 

MR. HEFLIN (Chambers)—I make the point of order that 
is not a question of privilege. 

THE PRESIDENT PRO TEM—The question is upon the 
adoption of the substitute offered by the gentleman from Lime¬ 
stone. 

MR. O’NEAL-—My motion is to lay the amendment and sub¬ 
stitute on the table. 

THE PRESIDENT PRO TEM—The question is upon the 
motion of the gentleman from Lauderdale to lay the amendment 
offered by the gentleman from Lauderdale and the substitute of¬ 
fered by the gentleman from Limestone on the table. 

MR. WHITE—I call for the reading of the amendment of¬ 
fered by the gentleman from Limestone. 

The amendment was read as follows: 



1460 


OFFICIAL PROCEEDINGS 


Amend Section 9 so as to read: “No county shall become in¬ 
debted in an amount greater than 3 per centum of the taxable 
property thereof, provided this limitation shall not affect any ex¬ 
isting indebtedness exceeding such 3 per centum which has al¬ 
ready been created, or which has been authorized by law to be 
created. 

Amendment by Mr. Weakley—Amend Section 9 by striking 
out the word five in the first line, and insert instead the word 
three. 

MR. SOLLIE—I ask for a division of the motion. The mo¬ 
tion reaches both the substitute and the amendment. 

THE PRESIDENT PRO TEM — A division of the motion 
has been demanded. The question is upon the motion to table 
the substitute offered by the gentleman from Limestone. 

Upon a vote being taken the motion to table was carried. 

THE PRESIDENT PRO TEM—The question is on the mo¬ 
tion to table the amendment offered by the gentleman from Lau¬ 
derdale. 

Upon a vote being taken, a division was called for, and by a 
vote of 52 ayes to 49 noes the motion to table was carried. 

The President resumed the Chair. 

MR. KIRK—I have an amendment. 

The amendment was read as follows: 

Amend Section 9 by adding the following: “Except where it 
may be necessary for the erection of bridges and county buildings, 
which may be paid for by a levy of a special tax.” 

MR. KIRK—Now the question as to what the limit should 
be I do not care to discuss, but as my county has been spoken of, 
it may not be amiss for me to refer to the condition of that coun¬ 
ty before reaching the point raised by this amendment. 

I do not think it is wise for any county to create a debt great¬ 
er than 5 per cent, of the assessed value of its property. Colbert 
County has an assessment of something over $3,800,000. She owes 
a debt of $200,000, one half of which draws an interest of 5 per 
cent, and the other half draws 6 per cent., making the total charge 
for interest $11,000. We receive as taxes about $19,000 in that 
county, under the present tax rate. You will see from that the 
small amount that has been left to the county to defray the ex¬ 
penses of the county. We are today in arrears in the payment of 
interest. We have defaulted, in other words, in the payment of 
interest. The interest that we are paying, or that we have obli¬ 
gated ourselves to pay, cannot be paid out of the taxes collected 



CONSTITUTIONAL CONVENTION, 1901 


1461 


by the county and at the same time defray the other expenses. 
Therefore, I say it is eminently wise to place a debt limit and that 
limit, in my judgment, should be three per cent. But whether it 
is three per cent or five per cent, Colbert County cannot increase 
that debt. 

Now to the point raised by.my amendment. The section pro¬ 
vides that no county shall become indebted in an amount greater 
than five per centum of the taxable value of the property thereof. 
Colbert County has, as I have stated, already exceeded that 
amount, and if she should meet with the misfortune of losing her 
court house, it would be impossible for the county to build an¬ 
other court house, or to incur the expense of building another 
court house, until she could raise the money by this special rate of 
taxation that is allowed in the Constitution we are now framing. 
Therefore some provision, or some exception should be made to 
the rule that would allow any county which had already incurred 
a debt equal to the constitutional limit, or greater than the con¬ 
stitutional limit, to provide against such contingencies. 

MR. FOSTER—Would not your special tax raise sufficient 
funds to build your court house? One-fourth of one per cent? 

MR. KIRK—I think not. 

MR. FOSTER — Would it not be about eleven or twelve 
thousand dollars? 

MR. KIRK—We collect now, I believe, about nineteen thou¬ 
sand dollars. 

MR. FOSTER—It would be half of that. 

MR. HEFLIN (Chambers)—I would like to ask the gentle¬ 
man as the hour of adjourning has nearly arrived, if he will yield 
to me for the purpose of introducing a short ordinance. I want 
it referred to a Committee which will meet immediately after this 
Convention adjourns. 

THE PRESIDENT—Does the gentleman yield? 

MR. KIRK—Yes, sir. 

Ordinance No. 408, by Mr. Heflin of Chambers: 

Be it ordained by the people of Alabama in Convention as¬ 
sembled, That a Sheriff shall be elected in each county, by the 
qualified electors thereof, who shall hold his office for the term 
of four years, unless sooner removed, and shall be eligible to such 
office as his own successor, unless he is impeached during his first 
term for failing to discharge his duties. Vacancies in the office 
of Sheriff shall be filled by the Governor, as in other cases; and 
the person appointed shall continue in the office until the next 
general election in the County for Sheriff, as provided by law. 



1462 


OFFICIAL PROCEEDINGS 


Sec. 2. That the Sheriff shall be subject to impeachment and 
removal for such causes and in such a manner as may be provided 
by law. 

MR. HEFLIN (Chambers)—I ask that the ordinance be re¬ 
ferred to the Committee on Impeachment, as they have one on 
that same line. 

MR. JONES (Montgomery)—I ask that the ordinance be re¬ 
ferred to the Committee on Executive Department. K\identiv 
this is an attempt to substitute that Committee on a matter on 
which the Executive Committee has passed, and I do not think it 
should be done. 

MR. HEFLIN (Chambers)—I move that the ordinance be 
referred to the Committee on Impeachment, because it has a sec¬ 
tion in it referring to impeachment. 

MR. PILLANS—A question of order. 

The clock struck the hour of six. 

MR. SANFORD—It is six o’clock. 

THE PRESIDENT—The point of order is well taken and 
without a suspension of the rules the question of reference would 
not be in order at this time. 

MR. HEFLIN (Chambers) — I will let it go over until to¬ 
morrow. 

Thereupon the Convention adjourned until 9:30 a. m. tomor¬ 
row morning. 


THIRTY-SIXTH DAY 

MONTGOMERY. ALA.. 

Wednesday, July 3. 1901. 

The Convention met pursuant to adjournment, was called to 
order by the President, and opened with prayer by the Rev. Mr. 
Patterson as follows : 

Almighty and Ever Living God, King of Heaven and Earth. 
Maker and Preserver of our bodies and of our spirits, without 
whose help we can do nothing, but upon whose sympathy and 
support we may constantly rely, we praise and bless Thee this 
morning for Thy goodness. We thank Thee for Thy providential 
care, and we come unto Thee for Thv favor and for "Thy grace to 
help us during this day. We pray that Thou wilt enlighten our 
minds with the knowledge of Thy truth, and that in all things 
we undertake to do, we may remember that Thou art our King 
and our God. We ask that Thou wilt help us. That Thou wilt 



CONSTITUTIONAL CONVENTION, 1901 


1463 


strengthen us for every duty. That Thou wilt guide these Thy 
servants in their deliberations. Wilt Thou keep them true unto 
themselves, unto duty and unto Thee. Surround us all with Thy 
protecting care. Watch over us and our interests and those in- 
terests which are put in our trust and protection, and when Thou 
hast served Thy will with us here upon earth, receive and own 
us as Thine in Heaven, and to Thy name shall be the praise, 
world without end. Amen. 

Upon the call of the roll 114 delegates responded. 

Leaves of absence were granted to Mr. Craig for Friday and 
Saturday; Mr. Sollie for this morning’s session; Mr. Sentell for 
this afternoon and Thursday; Mr. Fitts for today; Mr. Davis (De- 
Kalb) Thursday, Friday and Saturday; Mr. Greer (Calhoun) for 
Thursday and Friday and Saturday; Mr. Samford (Pike) for to¬ 
day and Thursday; Mr. Gilmore for Friday and Saturday. 

The report of the Committee on the Journal was read, stat¬ 
ing that the Journal for the thirty-fifth day of the Convention 
had been examined and found to be correct, and the same was 
adopted. 

MR. REESE—On yesterday I made a motion to reconsider 
the vote by which the article on Executive Department was or¬ 
dered to a third reading. 

THE PRESIDENT—The special order this morning will be 
the consideration of the motion to reconsider the vote whereby 
the ordinance on the Executive Department was ordered to a 
third reading. 

MR. REESE—I desire to submit at this time a few remarks 
as to why the vote should be reconsidered. I am not one that 
subscribes to the views laid down by the gentleman from Mont¬ 
gomery a few days ago, w r hich asserts the infallibility of minori¬ 
ties; that minorities are always right and majorities are always 
wrong. I do not prefer to be classed with minorities. I would 
rather be with majorities. I concede, however, in the matter be¬ 
fore this convention now, that the gentlemen with whom my sym¬ 
pathies are appear to have been in the minority. I think that with 
all due deference and respect to the gentlemen who compose the 
committee on Executive Department that they have unwisely ad¬ 
vised this Convention. I think the extreme eloquence of the gen¬ 
tleman who is the chairman of that committee has carried this 
Convention away from its sober thought. Guided by the highest 
and best motives, the distinguished chairman of that committee 
has set his great and noble heart upon the adoption of this pro¬ 
vision, which is directed and aimed at the Sheriffs of Alabama. I 
think it is an extremely unwise and imprudent provision. Mr. 
President, I do not believe that anything that may appear in my 
humble remarks will perhaps have the effect of changing a vote 



1464 


OFFICIAL PROCEEDINGS 


upon this question, blit I was sent here to represent some of the 
citizens of Alabama, and I should think that l had done less than 
my duty if I did not hold up my hand with a feeble warning to 
this Convention. I make an appeal, Mr. President, in behalf of 
the constituents that I represent, and 1 do not make it to the Con¬ 
vention, Mr. President. It may be. perhaps, in bad taste, but I 
make this appeal to a class in this Convention that I believe the 
people of Dallas county have a right to appeal to. A class in this 

Convention that I believe the people of the Black Belt have a right 

to appeal to. Mr. President, the constituents of the clas-. that I 

represent have lost their character apparently. I hey have lost it 

in the northern counties of this State, and they have lo>t it in that 
section of the United States from which it appears at this date 
that we are to be advised and by whose opinions this Convention 
should be guided. I speak of the maudlin sentiment or opinion 
of the people of the North on these questions that confront us 
here today. There are evils that exist in this country, and to cor¬ 
rect those evils the distinguished gentleman, the chairman of the 
Executive Department Committee, would make a radical depart¬ 
ure from a system that has prevailed since kuiinvnude. The jurv 
system of this country, Mr. President, has been good enough for 
the common people of this country, and until a man rise'*, and 
gets as elevated and stands upon as high a plane as the distin¬ 
guished chairman of that committee, he has confidence in the hon¬ 
esty and integrity of the Grand and Petit Juries of this countrv. 

MR. JONES (Montgomery)—Will the gentleman allow me 
to ask him a question, because 1 might have the conclusion and 
want him to have an opportunity to answer it. 

MR. REESE—I would be glad to answer the question of the 
gentleman. 


MR. JONES (Montgomery)—Has it ever been a part of the 
system of impeachment that a party tried was entitled to a jurv 
trial until put in the Constitution of 1865. in certain cases ? 


MR. REESE I will answer that question bv saving to the 
gentleman that I have never heard of a Sheriff being impeached 
in the State of Alabama by any other method. 


Mr. President, here you have a class of countv officers men 
selected by the electors of the county, and the gentleman has sin¬ 
gled out a particular class, and an active, aggressive and vindictive 
war has been made against this class of office holders. This class 
of office holders, Mr. President, are citizens of the State of \la- 
bama, and good citizens, too. They are the best citizens we have 
and in this connection I am reminded of the tragic death of the 
£ reat T" easar at R° me > when the last stab was made, he remarked 
u th ™ t0 ° B ™ tus ’ * or ’ Mr * Pratdent. it would have been 
well had this stab come from any other source than from which 



CONSTITUTIONAL CONVENTION, 1901 


1465 


it originated. The Sheriffs and clerks and the probate judges of 
this Black Belt country have been the bulwark of the safety of 
this government, Mr. President, in my short life, I have been ac¬ 
tively engaged in the carrying on of those measures which I have 
thought were for the best interest of the people. I first partici¬ 
pated in public affairs of this State at a time which was the most 
critical in twenty-five years. It was at a time when the white 
man’s government was threatened in this country. When I saw 
men to the manor born had been misled, and allowed themselves 
to march under the flags and in the clans of the enemies of white 
supremacy, men parading under piratical flags, blood of our blood, 
born in this country, and it was at that period that the power 
and the patriotism of the Sheriffs and their two supervisor col¬ 
leagues was mostly invoked. I refer to the election of 1892. And 
I say, Mr. President, without fear of contradiction by any man 
upon this floor, that had the Sheriffs of the Black Belt wavered 
at that time, instead of having enthroned in the Governor’s chair 
of this State a man whose integrity, honesty and courage set him 
above many of his predecessors, the peer of all, the inferior of 
none, we would have had someone else. The great party of white 
supremacy in this country would have melted away, and a mon¬ 
grel crowd would have administered the affairs of the State in 
Alabama, and we would have never had the bright recollection 
of the record of the administration of the gentleman from Mont¬ 
gomery. 

Mr. President, it was the Sheriffs that did this. We have 
been charged in the county that I have the honor to represent, 
with being a little careless with election figures and in view of 
the fact that those charges of carelessness had been made against 
us prior to 1892, at the time that the gentleman was a candidate 
for election to the office of Governor of this State, there were 
some rumors that messages were sent to Dallas county, and to 
her neighbors, these Black Belt counties, that for fear of a mis¬ 
take there would not be any hurry in announcing the result of 
the election. Now the acts of the Sheriffs on those occasions, and 
on subsequent occasions has caused my people to fall under the 
ban of suspicion. We have actually been charged with engaging 
in fraudulent practices in the matter of elections, but there never 
has been a man, and there is not a man in this Convention, that 
has ever refused to accept the benefits of whatever little irregu¬ 
larities that might have occurred. But we have been condemned 
in the Northern press. 

MR. KIRKLAND—I rise to a point of order. 

THE PRESIDENT—The gentleman will state the point of 
order. 

MR. KIRKLAND—The gentleman has spoken ten minutes. 



OFFICIAL PROCEEDINGS 


1466 


MR. REESE—I desire to say that this is not an amendment 
that I am discussing, it is a motion to reconsider. 

MR. KIRKLAND—I understand the rule applies to his case. 

THE PRESIDENT—The Chair will examine the resolution 
passed on yesterday, and rule upon the point of order. 

MR. JONES (Montgomery)—I move that unanimous consent 
be given that the gentleman's time be extended. 

MR. REESE—I object, Mr. President to the extension of any 
one's time. 

THE PRESIDENT—The motion Is not in order at this time. 
The Chair will rule upon the point of order made by the gentle¬ 
man from Dale as soon as he examines the resolution. 

MR. CHAPMAN—I would suggest that the gentleman speak 
on while the Chair is examining the question. 

THE PRESIDENT—In the opinion of the Chair the rule is 
confined to debates upon amendments and that it does not apply 
to this case. 

MR. REESE—Mr. President, up to the time that I came to 
this convention, from my intimate association with this class of 
citizens that have been so bitterly fought here, I had the idea they 
were a very clever set of fellows. I thought that the sheriffs of 
Alabama were about as honest and patriotic a set of men as the 
other citizens of Alabama. Some how in Dallas County they have 
been about the most popular citizens we have had. They have 
been as good citizens as we have had. and there has been a great 
flourish of trumpets here, and a whangbanging of drums, about 
the great evils existing in this State. Why, Mr. President, it is 
almost like a phonographic reproduction of the performances in 
the north, criticizing the way we ought to run our government 
here in Alabama, and, Mr. President, I regret to see where this 
thing comes from. I see no pressing necessity to adopt any radi¬ 
cal legislation to force sheriffs to perform their duty. In mv re¬ 
stricted field of observation I have seen no cause for that. 

This convention will pardon me for a home reference, but I 
desire to refer to the last three sheriffs of my county. At a crucial 
time in the period of this State, when gentlemen who fought un¬ 
der the flags of Democracy and called themselves Democrats, 
when they allied themselves with the enemies of the white su¬ 
premacy in this country, in 1896, and at other times, the sheriffs 
of this State have been brave enough to turn their guns on them, 
just like they have on the negro party parading under their own 
proper flag, and in their proper uniform. Mr. President, I have 
seen the sheriff in my county in 1892, in the fall election, drag the 
United States Marshal from the booth and keep him from inter- 



CONSTITUTIONAL CONVENTION, 1901 


1467 


fering with an honest count in that election. I have seen that 
man s successor and have helped to undress the sheriff of Dallas 
County, when he was wounded by four wounds, just received in 
the discharge of his duty. The last sheriff of Dallas County, a 
ni j an u ' name °f Lumpkin, arrested a desperado, or surround¬ 
ed the house where this desperado and others were, and in the 
attempt to arrest that man, the sheriff was shot four times, se¬ 
riously, and at one time his life was thought to be in danger. With 
the blood dripping from those wounds, Mr. President, and at a 
time when that posse was enraged almost beyond control, and 
sought to take the life of that prisoner that they had just taken 
from that house and arrested under a charge of shooting the 
sheriff, that great man, the Sheriff of Dallas County, a man that 
belongs to the class that is being fought and abused in this Con¬ 
vention, turned to that posse and said he would kill any man that 
interfered with the life of that prisoner. That he was going to put 
him in jail, and he did put him in jail. It has not been two months 
ago since I attended the funeral of an officer, a deputy sheriff of 
Dallas County, who had been shot by a felon he was undertaking 
to arrest. In a few days after that, with all the excitement that 
was pending against that man, the sheriff of Dallas County ar¬ 
rested that man and he is safely confined in the jail today, await¬ 
ing his trial. 

MR. GILMORE—I would like to call the gentleman’s atten¬ 
tion to the fact that the sheriff of Dallas County did not arrest 
that man. 

MR. REESE—I desire to call the gentleman’s attention to 
the fact that I did not say the sheriff did arrest him. 

MR. GILMORE—I understood it so. 

MR. REESE—I said he was arrested and put in jail and that 
he will be there until he is tried. I do not desire to quibble about 
words. 

MR. GILMORE—I understood the gentleman to say that the 
sheriff arrested him, and the sheriff of Dallas County did not put 
him in jail. 

MR. REESE—The man was arrested in Clarke County, I de¬ 
sire to state for the satisfaction of the gentleman. I don’t suppose 
anybody else is interested in it, that this prisoner was arrested at 
Grove Hill. 

MR. GILMORE—The negro gave himself up. 

MR. REESE—The negro was taken charge of by the sheriff 
of Dallas County at Thomasville, but he was put in jail by the 
sheriff. 



1468 


OFFICIAL PROCEEDINGS 


Now, just in conclusion, I want to say that these sheriffs 
have stood up to the Democratic party, and it is to the Democratic 
party that I make this appeal. We have had to do things in the 
Black Belt, and as I have said, even the holier than thou gen¬ 
tleman from North Alabama has never refused to profit by these 
irregularities. We have had to do those things for which we 
have been commended, in a quiet way, and slandered in the North. 
We want relief from those conditions. We plead with the Demo¬ 
crats of this Convention for relief from a system that compels us 
to raise our boys up under a system of elections that is bound 
to corrupt. Mr. President, our boys are being corrupted and we 
ask you in their names, to help us to reform the suffrage. We 
ask this Convention to give us the plan that a wise and able com¬ 
mittee have recommended to this Convention, under which it may 
be possible to teach our boys to be honest in all things, and under 
which we may teach our boys that the laws ought to be obeyed. 

THE PRESIDENT—The gentleman's time has expired. 

MR. BEDDOW—I for one, am tired of this conglomerated 
mass of hetrogenous eloquence. There is no man who obeys the 
laws that ought to be afraid of any hearing, and I move that the 
motion of the gentleman from Dallas be laid on the table. 

Upon a vote being taken, a division was called for, and by a 
vote of seventy-four ayes and twenty-three noes the motion to 
reconsider was tabled. 

MR. SENTELL—I desire to ask unanimous consent to in¬ 
troduce a resolution. 

Resolution No. 218. 

Whereas, as tomorrow, July 4th, is a National Holiday, and 

Whereas, many of the members of this Convention desire to 
observe the same with their families and friends at home, there¬ 
fore be it resolved that when this Convention adjourns at 6 
o'clock this afternoon it stands adjourned until 9:30 o’clock next 
Friday morning. 

MR. SENTELL—In order to get the sense of this Conven¬ 
tion upon the question of adjournment, I ask for a suspension of 
the rules and that the resolution be put upon its passage. 

MR. REESE—I move to lay that on the table. 

THE PRESIDENT—A motion to suspend the rules cannot 
be laid upon the table. 

MR. REESE—I call for a yea and nay vote. 

THE PRESIDENT—The question is, is the call sustained. 

The requisite number did not rise and the call was not sus¬ 
tained. 



CONSTITUTIONAL CONVENTION, 1901 


1469 


Upon a vote being taken the rules were suspended. 

MR. BEDDOW—I move to amend the resolution by ad¬ 
journing until Monday at 12. 

MR. O'NEAL—I move to lay that amendment on the table. 

MR. SENTELL—I move that the amendment of the gentle¬ 
man from Jefferson be laid on the table. 

The motion to table was carried. 

MR. SENTELL—I move that the resolution be placed upon 
its final passage. 

MR. REESE—I move to table the resolution. 

MR. REESE—I demand the ayes and noes. 

THE PRESIDENT—The ayes and noes are demanded, the 
question is, is the call sustained. 

The requisite number not rising the call was declared to be 
not sustained. 

A vote being taken, a division'was demanded, and by a vote 
of thirty-nine ayes and sixty-four noes, the motion to table was 
lost. 


THE PRESIDENT—The question recurs on the motion of 
the gentleman from Crenshaw. 

MR. CUNNINGHAM (Jefferson) — I desire to offer an 
amendment. 

MR. PETTUS—I move the previous question and the adop¬ 
tion of the resolution. 

The amendment was read as follows: 

“Provided that no per diem be allowed to the members or 
officers of this Convention.” 

MR. REESE—I desire when I can be heard to say a word on 
the adoption of this amendment to the resolution. 

There are 155 of us here, and I doubt whether there are five 
of us that observed the fourth of July last year. We were work¬ 
ing for ourselves, or probably for somebody else. We are now 
working for the State of Alabama, at the great compensation of 
$4 a day, but we were all glad to get the job at that price. Now, 
Mr. President, the Legislature thought we were going to get 
through with our business here in fifty days and they expected 
if we could not do that, that we would do the best we could, and 
I submit that it is not in good faith for this convention to adjourn, 
I will ask the Secretary to read the resolution, to see the reasons 
that are given there. 



1470 


OFFICIAL PROCEEDINGS 


The resolution was read as follows: 

“Whereas, tomorrow, July 4th, is a National Holiday, and 
whereas many of the members of this Convention desire to ob¬ 
serve the same with their families and friends at home, therefore 
be it resolved that when this Convention adjourns at 6 o’clock this 
afternoon it stand adjourned until 9:30 o’clock next Friday morn¬ 
ing.” 

The amendment was read as follows: 

“Provided that no per diem be allowed to the members or 
the officers of this Convention.” 

MR. REESE—Now we are asked to adjourn this Convention, 
for what purpose? In order that we may be permitted to observe 
the fourth of July with our families at home. Gentlemen, I do 
not believe that there are one-tenth of the members of this Con¬ 
vention that ever have observed the fourth of July with their 
families at home, and probably they were not three blocks from 
their house either. Mr. President, if you are going to adjourn 
at all, let’s put it on some higher ground than the one given there. 
The courts in this country do not shut up on the fourth of July. 
If we have got any private business to attend to, we never let the 
fourth of July interfere with it. The people of Alabama are get¬ 
ting impatient for this Convention to do the work for which it 
was sent here, and I think we will make a mistake to adjourn for 
any reason, and especially for the reasons stated in this resolu¬ 
tion. 


MR. CUNNINGHAM — I desire to say that I offered this 
amendment, that it is not a joke, and not in any spirit of bun¬ 
combe. I believe that this Convention should, with propriety ob¬ 
serve the National holiday, the natal day of our independence, but 
as a simple matter of justice, I do not believe that the tax payers 
of the State ought to pay us for the exercise of this patriotism. 
I voted against adjournment and against the suspension of the 
rules, because I thought that we should remain in session and do 
the business for which we have been elected. Now, as the ma¬ 
jority of the Convention seemed determined to observe this holi¬ 
day I submit as a matter of simple justice, that we should do it 
at our own expense and not at the expense of the tax payers of 
the State of Alabama. That is the proposition that is up to us 
on this amendment, and I sincerely hope that it will be adopted. 

MR. LEIGH—I call for the previous question on the resolu¬ 
tion and amendment. 

A vote being taken the main question was ordered. 

MR. PILLANS—I call for the ayes and nays. 

The call for the ayes and nays was sustained. 



CONSTITUTIONAL CONVENTION. 1901 


1471 


THE PRESIDENT—The Chair will state for the benefit of 
the members that the resolution is that the Convention is to ad¬ 
journ until Friday after 4th of July; the amendment of the gentle¬ 
man from Jefferson is that the members draw no per diem. 

The result of the roll call was as follows: 

AYES 


Messrs. President, 
Ashcraft, 

Banks, 

Barefield, 

Beddow, 

Bethune, 

Blackwell, 

Bowne, 

Bunett, 

Burns, 

Carmichael, of Colbert, 
Carmichael, of Coffee, 
Chapman, 

Cobb, 

Cofer, 

Coleman, of Greene, 
Coleman, of Walker, 
Cornwall, 

Craig, 

Cunningham, 

Davis, of Etowah, 
Dent, 

Duke, 

Eley, 

Eyster, 

Espy, 

Ferguson, 

Fletcher, 

Foster, 

Gilmore, 

Glover, 

Grant, 

Greer, of Calhoun, 
Greer, of Perry, 

Haley, 

Harrison, 

TOTAL—105. 

Bartlett, 

Beavers, 

Brooks, 


Heflin, of Chambers, 
Heflin, of Randolph, 
Henderson, 

Hinson, 

Hodges, 

Hood, 

Inge, 

Jackson, 

Jenkins, 

Jones, of Bibb, 

Jones, of Hale, 

Jones, of Montgomery, 
Jones, of Wilcox, 

Kirk, 

Kirkland, 

Knight, 

Kyle, 

Leigh, 

Lowe, of Jefferson, 
Lowe, of Lawrence, 
Macdonald, 

McMillan (Wilcox), 
Malone, 

Martin, 

Maxwell, 

Merrill, 

Miller (Marengo), 
Miller (Wilcox), 
Mulkey, 

Murphree, 

NeSmith, 

Norman, 

Norwood, 

Oates, 

O’Neal (Lauderdale), 
Opp, 

NOES 

Bulger, 

Byars, 

Cardon, 


O’Rear, 

Palmer, 

Parker (Cullman), 
Parker (Elmore), 
Pettus, 

Pillans, 

Pitts, 

Reese, 

Reynolds (Chilton), 
Robinson, 

Rogers (Lowndes), 
Sanders, 

Sanford, 

Searcy, 

Selheimer, 

Sentell, 

Sloan, 

Smith (Mobile), 
Smith, Mac. A., 
Smith, Morgan M., 
Sorrell, 

Spears, 

Spragins. 

Stoddard, 

Tayloe, 

Waddell, 

Walker, 

Watts, 

Weakley, 

Weatherly, 

White, 

Whiteside, 

Williams (Barbour), 
Wilson (Clarke), 


Carnathon, 

Davis, of DeKalb, 
Foshee, 



1472 


OFFICIAL PROCEEDINGS 


Graham, of Montgomery, Long, of Butler, 


Howze, 
Locklin, 
Lomax, 
TOTAL—21. 


Moody, 

Phillips, 

Porter, 


Rogers (Sumter), 
Stewart, 

Williams (Marengo), 
Winn. 


ABSENT OR NOT VOTING 


Altman, 

Almon, 

Boone, 

Case, 

deGraffenreid, 

Fitts, 

Freeman, 

Graham, of Talladega, 
Grayson, 

Handley, 

During roll call. 


Howell, 

King, 

Ledbetter, 

Long, of Walker, 
McMillan, of Baldwin, 
Morrisette, 

O’Neil, of Jefferson, 
Pearce, 

Proctor, 

Renfro, 


Reynolds, of Henry, 
Samford, 

Sollie, 

Thompson, 

Vaughan, 

Willet, 

Williams (Elmore), 
Wilson (Washington). 


MR. BURNS—I rise to a point of information, I did not vote, 
I want to ask for information so I can vote. 


THE PRESIDENT—The gentleman can be recorded, how 
does the gentleman wish to vote. 

MR. BURNS—I understood the reading of the resolution to 
include the officers and employees— 

THE PRESIDENT—The matter is not open for discussion; 
does the gentleman wish to vote aye or no. 

MR. BURNS—I vote aye. 

MR. SANDERS—If I am in order, I now move to table the 
whole business to adjourn and the amendment offered by the gen¬ 
tleman from Jefferson, and on that I call for an aye and no vote. 

THE PRESIDENT—It seems to the Chair that a motion to 
table is not in order after the previous question has been ordered. 
The previous question has been ordered on the resolution and 
amendment. 

MR. ROGERS (Sumter)—On the main question, whether we 
adjourn or not, I call for the ayes and noes. 

The call for an aye and no vote was sustained, and the roll 
call resulted as follows: 

AYES 


Cofer, 

Craig, 


Davis, of DeKalb, 
Eyster, 


Ferguson, 

Gilmore, 



CONSTITUTIONAL CONVENTION, 1901 


1473 


Harrison, 

Heflin, of Chambers, 
Heflin, of Randolph, 
Henderson, 

Hodges, 

Howze, 

Jackson, 

Jenkins, 

Jones, of Montgomery, 
Jones, of Wilcox, 

Kirk, 

Ledbetter, 

Total—41. 


Messrs. President, 
Banks, 

Barefield, 

Bartlett, 

Beavers, 

Beddow, 

Bethune, 

Blackwell, 

Brooks, 

Browne, 

Bulger, 

Burnett, 

Burns, 

Byars, 

Cardon, 

Carmichael, of Colbert, 
Carmichael, of Coffee, 
Carnathon, 

Chapman, 

Cobb, 

Coleman, of Greene, 

Cornwall, 

Cunningham, 

Davis, of Etowah, 
Dent, 

Duke, 

Kiev, 

Espy, 

Total—85. 


Maxwell, 

Miller (Marengo), 
Mulkey, 

Norman, 

Norwood, 

Oates, 

O’Neal (Lauderdale), 
Opp, 

Parker (Cullman), 
Pettus, 

Pitts, 

Reynolds (Chilton), 

NOES 

Fletcher, 

Foshee, 

Foster, 

Glover, 

Grant, 

Greer, of Perry, 
Greer, of Calhoun, 
Haley, 

Hinson, 

Hood, 

Inge, 

Jones, of Bibb, 

Jones, of Hale, 
Kirkland, 

Knight. 

Kyle, 

Leigh, 

Locklin, 

Lomax, 

Long (Butler), 

Long (Walker), 
Lowe (Jefferson), 
Lowe (Lawrence), 
Macdonald, 

McMillan (Wilcox), 
Malone, 

Martin, 

Merrill, 


Rogers (Lowndes), 
Sentell, 

Sloan, 

Smith, Mac A., 
Spears, 

Tayloe, 

Waddell, 

Watts, 

Weakley, 

White, 

Whiteside, 


Miller (Wilcox), 
Moody, 

Murphree, 

NeSmith, 

O’Rear, 

Palmer, 

Parker (Elmore), 
Pillans, 

Porter, 

Proctor, 

Reese, 

Robinson, 

Rogers (Sumter), 
Sanders, 

Sanford, 

Searcy, 

Selheimer, 

Smith (Mobile), 
Smith, Morgan M., 
Spragins, 

Stewart, 

Studdard, 

Walker, 

Weatherly, 

Williams (Barbour), 
Williams (Marengo), 
Wilson (Clarke), 
Winn, 


ABSENT OR NOT VOTING 


Altman, 

Almon, 

Ashcraft, 


Boone, 

Case, 

Coleman, of Walker, 


deGraffenreid, 

Fitts, 

Freeman, 



1474 


OFFICIAL PROCEEDINGS 


Graham, of Talladega, 
Graham, of Montgomery, 
Grayson, 

Handley, 

Howell, 

King, 

McMillan (Baldwin), 


Morrisette, 

O’Neill (Jefferson), 
Pearce, 

Phillips, 

Renfro, 

Reynolds (Henry), 
Samford, 


Sollie, 

Thompson, 

Vaughan, 

Willet, 

Williams (Elmore), 
Wilson (Wash’gton). 


MR. WILLIAMS (Marengo)—I ask unanimous consent to 
introduce a resolution to be referred to the Committee on Rules. 


MR. BEDDOW—I object. The gentleman's name will be 
called presently, and he will have an opportunity to introduce it. 

MR. SMITH (Mobile)—I have a report to introduce from 
the Committee on Rules, as a substitute for Resolution 205, intro¬ 
duced by Mr. Reese of Dallas. 

The Committee on Rules reports as a substitute for Resolu¬ 
tion No. 205, introduced by Mr. Reese of Dallas the following 
resolution: 


Resolved, That subdivision 6 of rule 22 be amended so as to 
read as follows: 


6. Call of the roll in alphabetical order for the introduction 
of resolutions, memorials, petitions and ordinances, and their 
proper reference. But if the roll call is not completed by 10:30 
o'clock of any day the Convention shall at that hour proceed with 
the next order of regular business. 

Resolution No. 205, by Mr. Reese: 

Whereas, But little time of this Convention is consumed by 
the regular call of the roll for the introduction of ordinances, reso¬ 
lutions, etc., and 

Whereas, Much unnecessary consumption of time is had in 
explaining and obtaining unanimous consent or suspension of the 
rules for the introduction of ordinances, resolutions, etc., there¬ 
fore 


Be it resolved, first that hereafter the roll call for the intro¬ 
duction of ordinances, resolutions, etc., shall not be suspended 
except by unanimous consent. 

Second, that no resolution or ordinance shall be introduced 
at any other time except by unanimous consent. 

Third, it will be deemed very bad taste on the part of any 
member taking up the time of the Convention in asking said con¬ 
sent, except in dire and pressing emergency. 

MR. SMITH (Mobile)—That rule is amended simply to con¬ 
form with the change of the hour at which the Convention meets. 



CONSTITUTIONAL CONVENTION, 1901 


1475 


Formerly the roll call was until 11 o’clock, but as the Convention 
meets hall an hour earlier we put the roll call a half hour earlier 
also. I move the adoption of the report. 

A vote being- taken the report of the Committee on Rules 
was adopted. 

MR. SMITH (Mobile)—The Committee on Rules desires to 
report Resolution No. 208. 

The Committee on Rules reports as a substitute for Resolu¬ 
tion No. 208, introduced by Mr. Cornwell of Jefferson, the follow¬ 
ing: 

Resolved, That rule 55 be amended so as to read as follows: 

That the rules of the Convention shall not be suspended except 
by a two-thirds vote of every delegate present, provided a quorum 
must vote; provided further, that the rule limiting debate upon 
ordinances reported by committees shall not be suspended except 
by unanimous consent. 

Resolution No. 208, by Mr. Cornwell: 

Resolved, That the time allowed each delegate for speaking 
on any one question be and is hereby limited to ten minutes, and 
that unanimous consent must be obtained to extend time. 

MR. SMITH (Mobile)—I move the adoption of that report. 

MR. PETTUS—I would like to ask the gentleman from Mo¬ 
bile a question. What difference it makes in the existing rule 
what the object of the change is? 

MR. SMITH (Mobile)—The object of the change is to pre¬ 
vent an extension of the limit for debate, as a mere matter of 
courtesy, which has been universal up to this time, and the com¬ 
mittee thought proper to avoid that if possible. 

MR. HEFLIN (Chambers)—Does it not take away the right 
of one member to yield his time to another? 

MR. SMITH—It does not affect that, as I understand it. 

MR. HEFLIN (Randolph)—Mr. President, I call for the read¬ 
ing of the resolution again, some of us did not hear it. 

The resolution was again read to the Convention. 

MR. JONES (Montgomery)—I sympathize as much as any 
member with the desire to shorten discussions of this body, but 
there are some things that ought to be discussed, and we ought 
to remember that no matter who it is that speaks, that he repre¬ 
sents a constituency who are entitled to be heard here. Here we 
are wrapping ourselves up in a network of rules that make the 
majority absolutely helpless. The majority of this body might 



OFFICIAL PROCEEDINGS 


14fc 


wish to suspend the limit of debate, or the majority wish to length¬ 
en »t, and yet they would be in the control of the minority— 

MR. DENT—And of one man. 

MR. JONES—And of one man, and it seems to me that we are 
fastening’ ourselves up, tying our hands, and surrendering the con¬ 
trol of this Convention to a minority. I yield as much deference 
as anybody to the Committee on Rules, but I am tired of that 
committee coming in here continually in the face of the sentiment 
j ls b°dy and asking us to turn over our power to a minority, 
and I move to lay the resolution on the table. 

MR. PILLANS I ask that the report be read again, as I did 
not hear the last part of it. 

The report was again read. 

A division was called for and the report of the committee was 
laid upon the table by a vote of 58 ayes and 40 noes. 

MR. SMITH (Mobile)—The Committee on Rules desires to 
report favorably Resolution No. 184. 

The clerk read the resolution as follows: 

. ^ eso ^ u ^°n 184: Resolved, That from and after the passage 
of this resolution, no per diem will be allowed to delegates of this 
Convention who are absent, except those granted leave, of absense 
on account of sickness of themselves or members of their families. 

MR. SMITH—I desire to ask the adoption of that resolution. 

MR. WILLIAMS (Marengo)—On that I call for the ayes 
and noes. 


call for the ayes and noes was sustained and the result 
of the roll call was as follows: 


Ashcraft, 

Banks, 

Barefield, 

Bartlett, 

Beddow, 

Blackwell, 

Brooks, 

Browne, 

Bulger, 

Burns, 

Carnathon, 

Chapman, 

Cobb, 

Cofer, 


AYES 

Coleman, of Greene, 
Cunningham, 

Dent, 

Eley, 

Espy, 

Ferguson, 

Fletcher, 

Foster, 

Glover, 

Greer, of Perry, 
Haley, 

Heflin, of Chambers, 
Heflin, of Randolph, 
Henderson, 


Howze, 

Inge, 

Jones, of Hale, 

Jones, of Montgomery, 
Jones, of W'ilcox, 

Kyle, 

Knight, 

Leigh, 

Lowe, of Lawrence, 
MacDonald, 

Malone, 

Martin, 

Maxwell, 

Miller, of Wilcox, 



CONSTITUTIONAL CONVENTION, 1901 


1477 


Murphree, 

NeSmith, 

Norman, 

Norwood, 

Oates, 

O’Neal, of Lauderdale, 

Opp, 

Palmer, 

Parker, of Elmore, 
Pettus, 

Total—72. 


Beavers, 

Bethune, 

Burnett, 

Byars, 

Cardon, 

Carmichael, of Colbert, 
Carmichael, of Coffee, 
Cornwall, 

Craig, 

Davis, of DeKalb, 

Davis, of Etowah, 

Duke, 

Eyster, 

Graham, of Montgomery, 
Grant, 

Grayson, 

Greer, of Calhoun, 
Hodges, 

Total—52. 


Phillips, 

Pillans, 

Porter, 

Rogers, of Lowndes, 
Rogers, of Sumter, 
Sanders, 

Sanford, 

Searcy, 

Smith, of Mobile, 
Smith, Mac A., 


NOES 

Hood, 

Jackson, 

Jones, of Bibb, 

Kirk, 

Kirkland, 

Ledbetter, 

Locklin, 

Lomax, 

Long of Butler, 

Long, of Walker, 
Lowe, of Jefferson, 
McMillan, of Wilcox, 
Merrill, 

Miller, of Marengo, 
Moody, 

Mulkey, 

O’Rear, 

Parker, of Cullman, 


Spears, 

Spragins, 

Stewart, 

Waddell, 

Walker, 

Weakley, 

Weatherly, 

White, 

Whiteside, 

Williams, of Marengo, 


Pitts, 

Proctor, 

Reese, 

Reynolds (Henry), 
Reynolds, of Chilton, 
Robinson, 

Selheimer, 

Sentell, 

Sloan, 

Smith, Morgan M., 
Sorrell, 

Studdard, 

Watts, 

Williams, of Barbour, 
Wilson, of Clarke, 
Winn. 


ABSENT OR NOT VOTING 


Messrs. President, 
Almon, 

Altman, 

Boone, 

Case, 

Coleman, of Walker, 
deGraffenreid, 

Fitts, 

Foshee, 

Freeman, 

Gilmore, 

Total—31. 


Graham, of Talladega, 
Handley, 

Harrison, 

Hinson, 

Howell, 

Jenkins, 

King, 

McMillan (Baldwin), 
Morrisette, 

O’Neill (Jefferson), 
Pearce, 


Renfro, 

Samford, 

Sollie, 

Tayloe, 

Thompson, 

Vaughan, 

Willet, 

Williams, of Elmore, 
Wilson, of Washington. 


desires to report fa- 


MR. SMITH (Mobile)—The committee 
vorably Resolution No. 169. 



1478 


OFFICIAL PROCEEDINGS 


The clerk read the resolution as follows: 

Resolution No. 169, by Mr. Williams (Marengo) : 

Whereas, The Convention has incurred considerable expense 
in obtaining a stenographic report of the proceedings of the Con¬ 
vention, and whereas, the wisdom of the reports appears more 
apparent every day, and whereas, as a ready reference the reports 
are a failure as they are now, and whereas an index would add 
greatly to the value of the reports; 

Now, therefore, Be it resolved by the Convention, that as 
soon as the Convention shall have adjourned sine die, that the Sec¬ 
retary of State be, and is hereby authorized to contract with some 
reliable party who shall make a complete index of said reports and 
shall place the same in each of the volumes of the reports here¬ 
tofore ordered kept for the use of the State, and shall further cause 
to be printed in some paper in Alabama the said index, so that 
those people of Alabama who are preserving the reports may easily 
obtain a copy of said index for their use and preservation. 

MR. SMITH—I desire to move the adoption of the resolu¬ 
tion. 

A vote being taken the resolution was adopted. 

MR. SMITH (Mobile) — On behalf of the Committee on 
Rules, I desire to report Resolution No. 192, without recommenda¬ 
tion. 


Resolution No. 192, by Mr. Rogers (Lowndes): 

To amend rule 36 so as to read: The ayes and noes shall only 
be ordered when the call therefor is sustained by fifty delegates. 

MR. REESE—Mr. President, I move to lay that upon the 
table. 

A vote being taken the resolution was laid upon the table. 

MR. BEDDOW—I ask unanimous consent to introduce a 
resolution. 

MR. WILLIAMS (Marengo)—I object. (Laughter.) 

MR. BEDDOW—I will withdraw my objection to your reso¬ 
lution. 

MR. WILLIAMS (Marengo)—I will present mine first then. 
I ask unanimous consent to introduce a resolution. 

MR. BEDDOW—I object. 

THE PRESIDENT—The clerk will call the roll for the in¬ 
troduction of ordinances, petitions and resolutions. 



CONSTITUTIONAL CONVENTION, 1901 


1479 


MR O NEAL (Lauderdale)—We adopted a rule fixing the 
limit at 10:30 a. m. 

MR. HEFLIN (Chambers)—But it was after 10:30 when we 
adopted the changed rule, and it does not apply today. 

THE PRESIDENT—In the opinion of the Chair it would 
not go into operation until tomorrow. 

MR. HEFLIN (Chambers)—On yesterday I introduced an 
ordinance which went over until today. It refers to the election 
of sheriff filling of vacancies to that office, impeachment or re- 
moval of the Sheriff. It has been the custom in this Convention, 
Mr. President, without a single exception, when any delegate has 
offered a resolution or an ordinance, and has indicated to the 
President a desire to have it referred to any particular committee— 
with but one exception, and that was yesterday by the gentleman 
from Montgomery, who stands guarding on all occasions the re¬ 
port of the Executive Department, and because, forsooth, it has 
gone through in a manner and is now beyond the reach of this 
Convention, sits watching ordinances introduced pertaining to 
that department and he, on yesterday, raised the objection that 
my ordinance should not be referred to the Committee on Im¬ 
peachment. One section in that ordinance referred, Mr Presi¬ 
dent, to the impeachment and removal of the sheriff, and I asked 
that !t be referred to that committee, without seeing the Chairman 
of that Committee, without knowing how a single member of that 
Committee stands upon this proposition, I asked that they might 
consider this ordinance and report it back to this Convention in 
some shape or other. Ordinances on this line have gone to the 
Committee on Executive Department, and, Mr. President they 
are sleeping there until this good hour. This Convention has 
never had an opportunity to investigate them or to express its 
desire concerning them. For that reason I desire this ordinance 
to go to a Committee that would act upon it and report its action 
back to this Convention. I did think, Mr. President, and I think 
now, that it comes with bad taste from the Chairman of that Com¬ 
mittee to object to the reference of this ordinance to another 
Committee and ask that it be referred to his own. I will state 
that if I were the Chairman of a Committee in this Convention, 
and any delegate on this floor, no matter how humble and obscure 
he might be, if he indicated by a suggestion to the Chair that he 
did not want his ordinance referred to my Committee, I would sit 
as silent as the tomb. I would not ask, Mr. President with a 
display of enthusiasm to have that ordinance referred to my Com¬ 
mittee for its action. 

MR. COFER—I rise to a point of order, 
order'^^ PRESIDENT—The gentleman will state his point of 



1480 


OFFICIAL PROCEEDINGS 


MR. COFER—The point is there is nothing before the House. 

MR. HEFLIN—I will inform the towering statesman and 
splendid genius from the County of Cullman, that the ordinance 
has not yet been referred, and I am now speaking to the subject. 

THE PRESIDENT—The Chair will state for the informa¬ 
tion of the gentleman that when the ordinance was offered on 
yesterday the hour of adjournment was about reached pending 
the consideration of the question of reference, the Convention ad¬ 
journed. 

MR. COFER—I make the point of order that a motion to 
refer to a Committee is not debatable. 

THE PRESIDENT—It seems to the Chair that the point of 
order is well taken. 

MR. HEFLIN—I just want to state, Mr. President, in con¬ 
clusion, that I do not know what the Committee will do- 

The point of order was made that hour of 11 o'clock had 
arrived. 

THE PRESIDENT—Point of order is sustained. 

MR. JONES (Montgomery)—That leaves the objection in 
a bad fix, after having heard the gentleman from Chambers. I 
ask unanimous consent to be allowed to speak in reference to the 
su gg es ti° n that I made to refer it to the Executive Department. 

MR. HEFLIN (Chambers)—I raise the point of order that 
the Chair has already sustained a point of order that the motion 
is not debatable. 

MR. JONES—I ask unanimous consent. 

Objection was made. 

MR. JONES—I am sorry the gentleman charged us with lack 
of courtesy, and then is not willing to hear from us. 

MR. BROOKS—I desire to call attention to the fact that 
while a motion to refer is not debatable, yet it is within the power 
of the President to allow of sufficient debate as to why it should 
or should not go to a certain Committee to allow him to determine 
that question. I think if the President will reflect he will see the 
propriety. 

THE PRESIDENT—Will the gentleman refer the Chair to 
the rule? 

MR. BROOKS—There is no special rule. 

THE PRESIDENT—The recollection of the Chair is that 
all ordinances when introduced will be referred without debate. 



CONSTITUTIONAL CONVENTION. 1901 


1481 


MR. BROOKS—But it is in the province of the Chair to allow 
of sufficient debate to see to what Committee it should go. 

THE PRESIDENT—It seems to the Chair the question to 
refer would not be debatable. 

MR. JONES (Montgomery)—Then I rise to a question of 
privilege. 

THE PRESIDENT—The gentleman will state the question. 

MR. JONES—It has been charged in the debate that the 
Committee of which I have the honor to be Chairman has been 
hiding out or pigeonholing resolutions. I have a right to make 
a statement as to that. 

THE PRESIDENT—It does not seem to the Chair that that 
is a question of personal privilege. 

MR. JONES (Montgomery)—Then I make another point: 
The Chair allowed the gentleman to speak and have all the ad¬ 
vantage of debate and never called him to order and I submit 
under those circumstances if the Chairman has not an equitable 
right to be heard. 

THE PRESIDENT—-The Chair did not call the gentleman 
from Chambers to order and would not call the gentleman from 
Montgomery to order unless delegates raise the question. Then 
the Chair is compelled to. 

MR. KIRKLAND—I desire to withdraw the objection I in¬ 
terposed to hearing the gentleman from Montgomery. 

MR. HINSON—I object to the consideration of the question. 

THE PRESIDENT—The question is whether unanimous 
consent shall be given the gentleman from Montgomery. 

MR. JONES—I don’t ask it now. 

Objection was made. 

MR. HINSON—As I understand the rule, it is proper for 
any delegate to object to the consideration of a question and if 
two-thirds of the Convention sustain that objection, the question 
shall be considered no more during the session. I understand that 
is the parliamentary rule. 

THE PRESIDENT—The question now before the Conven¬ 
tion is on the reference of the order introduced by the gentleman 
from Chambers. 

MR. JONES (Montgomery)—I move to amend that by re¬ 
ferring it to the Committee on the Executive Department. 



j m 


OFFICIAL PROCEEDINGS 


THE PRESIDENT— And the gentleman from Montgomery 
moves to amend by referring it to the Committee on Executive 
Department. 

MR. REESE—I move to lay the amendment on the table. 

MR. LONG (Walker)—I rise to a point of order. A mere 
motion to refer to a Committee is not subject to amendment. It 
is a question which should be left to the President. 

THE PRESIDENT—It seems to the Chair that when a gen¬ 
tleman moves to refer an ordinance to a special Committee it 
would be in order for the convention to amend the motion and 
refer it to some other committee. The point of order is overruled. 

MR. CUNNINGHAM—I rise to a point of order. 

THE PRESIDENT—The gentleman will state the point. 

MR. CUNNINGHAM—Under our rules when a motion is 
made to refer an ordinance to a Committee other than that Com¬ 
mittee to which it should properly go, the question should first 
come on referring it to the committee to which it naturally would 
go. Section 29 is as follows: “When motions are made for the 
reference of a subject to a select committee and a standing com¬ 
mittee, the question for the reference to a standing committee 
shall be first put.” 

THE PRESIDENT—The point of order is overruled. 

MR. HINSON—I rise to a point of order. 

THE PRESIDENT—The gentleman will state the point of 
order. 

MR. HINSON—As I understand the rule, I objected to the 
further consideration of the question, and I did it upon authority 
of Rule 15 of Robert’s Rules of Order. My idea in making that 
objection is that we have discussed this question as long as neces¬ 
sary and the rule reads like this- 

THE PRESIDENT—The ordinance is not up for considera¬ 
tion now. The only question is the question of reference. The 
Chair would overrule the point of order. 

MR. REESE—I move to table the motion of the gentleman 
from Montgomery. 

A vote being taken the motion to table was lost, and a further 
vote being taken on the amendment of the delegate from Mont¬ 
gomery (Mr. Jones) on a division, there were 64 ayes and 44 noes. 

So the amendment was adopted. 

A further vote being taken the motion as amended was car¬ 
ried, and the ordinance was referred to the Committee on the 
Executive Department. 



CONSTITUTIONAL CONVENTION. 1901 


1483 


MR. LONG' (Walker)—If I am in order I move that the 
Executive Department be requested to report this ordinance one 
way or the other and not to let it sleep there and die as all other 
similar resolutions have done— 

THE PRESIDENT—The gentleman will be in order. 

MR. JONES (Montgomery)—I insist on my right to speak 
in behalf of the committee. 

THE PRESIDENT—The gentleman is not in order. 

MR. JONES (Montgomery)—I yield to the Chair, but at the 
same time I desire to state it is because of the respect I have for 
the Chair and not because I think the Chair is right. 

THE PRESIDENT—The Chair will state that the ordinance 
to define and regulate the Executive Department which has been 
adopted by this body is referred to the Committee on Order, Con¬ 
sistency and Harmony. 

MR. O’NEAL—I ask unanimous consent to introduce a short 
resolution. 

THE PRESIDENT—Is there objection? 

MR. BURNS—I object. I call for the regular order. 

MR. HEFLIN (Randolph)—I move for the regular order, 
the continuation of the roll call. 

THE PRESIDENT—The hour of 11 having arrived, under 
the rules the roll call will be dispensed with and the secretary will 
call the roll of standing committees. 

This was done, and on the call of the Committee on Schedule, 
Printing and Incidental Expenses— 

MR. HEFLIN (Randolph)—I desire on behalf of my com¬ 
mittee to call up a report that I made from the Committee on 
Schedule, Printing and Incidental Expenses, and ask that it be 
put on its passage. 

THE PRESIDENT—The clerk will read the report to which 
the gentleman refers. 

The report was read as follows: 

The Committee on Schedule, Printing and Incidental Ex¬ 
penses have instructed me to make the following partial report, 
viz: 

The committee have audited the accounts hereto attached 
and find that the State of Alabama is indebted to the Brown Print¬ 
ing Company of Montgomery, Alabama, in the sum of $255.25. 
We find that said State is indebted to Marshall & Bruce of Nash¬ 
ville, Tenn. in the sum of $12. 



1484 


OFFICIAL PROCEEDINGS 


We also find that said State is indebted to Ed. C Fowler 
Company, Montgomery, Alabama, in the sum of $24.75. 

All of the above amounts are for articles furnished the State 
of Alabama for the use of the Constitutional Convention, and all 
of the above amounts are itemized as shown by bills hereto at¬ 
tached. Total amount $302. 

And we recommend the payment of the same, all of which is 
respectfully submitted, 

John T. Heflin, 

Chairman of Committee on Schedule, Printing and 
Incidental Expenses. 

MR. HEFLIN (Randolph)—I move that the report of the 
committee be adopted and that the President be authorized to 
draw his warrant in favor of these parties for the amounts there 
set out. 

MR. ROBINSON—Does this require an ordinance to carry 
it into effect ? 

THE PRESIDENT—The ordinance has been introduced 
heretofore and adopted. 

MR. LOMAX—My impression is that there has been a change 
in the rules requiring that the payment of money be done only 
on a yea and nay vote, and there might be some objection to the 
payments in these matters unless that the rule is complied with. 

THE PRESIDENT—Will the gentleman refer to the rule? 

MR. HEFLIN (Randolph)—We passed a resolution a few 
days ago that no appropriation be made except by a yea and nay 
vote, and I call for the adoption of this report bv a vea and nay 
vote. 


MR LOMAX—The secretary informs me that the resolution 
to which I and the gentleman refer is on the calendar and has 
not been adopted. 

MR. HEFLIN (Randolph)—Then this does not require a vea 
and nay vote, and I withdraw the call. 

THE PRESIDENT— As the Chair recollects the veas and 
nays are returned upon the final adoption of any article or section 
of the Constitution. The yeas and nays are then taken and spread 

cy and J Ha r rmony '° "* Committ « <>" Order. Consisten- 

Resolution 120 that all resolutions authorizing the payment 
of any money shall only be adopted by a yea and my 
been placed on the calendar, but has not yet been passed 



CONSTITUTIONAL CONVENTION, 1901 


1485 


The special order is the report of the Committee on Taxation. 
MR. WHITE—I have an amendment to Section 9. 

THE PRESIDENT—There is an amendment pending to 
Section 9. 

MR. WHITE—Then I offer mine as amendment to that 
amendment. 

THE PRESIDENT—Did the gentleman have the floor at 
the time the gentleman occurred? 

THE CLERK—No sir; Mr. Kirk had the floor. 

THE PRESIDENT—The gentleman is not in order at this 
time to offer the amendment. The Chair recognizes the gentleman 
from Colbert. 

MR. KIRK—The amendment which I offered on yesterday 
afternoon is one which is of great interest to every county in the 
State. This move of establishing a debt limit for each county, as 
suggested by the gentleman on yesterday, is an innovation in this 
State, and should receive the careful consideration of every dele¬ 
gate in this Convention. I believe it is a wise innovation, but 
the point at which I am driving is to get every delegate on this 
floor to consider the effect of this innovation and so frame this 
section of the Constitution that it will not work a disadvan¬ 
tage to the county instead of an advantage as we propose 
and suppose. Now it is very probable that every county in 
the State of Alabama will at some day or other find it neces¬ 
sary to create a debt to the extent of the debt limit. When 
that has been done, that county will not be able to create a debt 
for any purposes however great the needs of that county may be. 
If you make that limit three or five per cent when the county has 
created a debt that comes up to that limit, then she is unable to 
create and other debt. Take my county that has already exceeded 
a limit of 5 per cent and if her court house and every bridge in 
the county were swept away, we would be unable to raise money 
to replace those bridges or to rebuild the court house. Now I 
submit to the gentleman that would be a very bad condition for 
any county to get into, with her court house destroyed, her bridges 
swept away and unable to create a debt by which she could replace 
those improvements. Then I think it is wise to adopt the amend¬ 
ment I offer providing in cases of that kind where the county has 
created a debt up to the amount of the limit that it may when 
necessary, increase that indebtedness for the purpose of erecting 
buildings and county bridges. It seems to me that will address 
itself to the attention of every delegate here who feels an interest 
in the welfare of his county. A provision of that kind should be 
made. None of us know when the other counties of the State 
will want to increase their debt to the extent of the debt limit. 
Perhaps this question weighs on my mind more heavily from the 



1486 


OFFICIAL PROCEEDINGS 


very fact that my county is already in that condition. Not only 
that, but as I stated on yesterday, we are unable even to pay the 
interest on those bonds and we have here today representatives 
of the bondholders who are desiring and working to get this Con¬ 
vention to increase the tax rate in my town and county in order 
to pay off those debts. You can see the condition we are in and 
other counties should profit by that in my judgment. 

MR. WHITE—Will the gentleman allow me a question? 

MR. KIRK—Yes, sir. 

MR. WHITE—Should your county have the opportunity to 
go more in debt than now? 

MR. KIRK—Yes; if the bridges or the court house should 
be destroyed we could issue county warrants and place those in¬ 
terest drawing warrants with our own bankers or some one in 
the county and raise sufficient money to replace the bridges and 
rebuild the court house. 

MR. O’NEAL—Could you get anyone to advance money to 
your county when you admit your county has failed to pay in¬ 
terest on its public debt? 

MR. KIRK—We can for the reason that the Constitution or 
the report of the Committee now before the Convention has pro¬ 
vided for the levy of one-fourth of one per cent special tax to 
cover those expenses. 

MR. O’NEAL—Would not that one-fourth of one per cent be 
sufficient to enable you to rebuild a court house if destroyed? 

MR. KIRK—No, sir; it would not be one-fourth enough to 
build a court house. It would take two or three years. 

MR. O’NEAL—Could you not issue warrants and pay it as 
the money is collected under that tax? 

MR. KIRK—Not under that provision. 

MR. O’NEAL—Why not? 

MR. KIRK—Because it says when the debt limit has been 
reached the county shall not create any further indebtedness. That 
is the trouble. Whenever we reach the debt limit the county can¬ 
not create any further debt. 

MR. KYLE Will the gentleman permit me an interruption? 

MR. KIRK—Yes, sir. 

MR. KYLE—How did you create that debt of $200,000? 

MR. KIRK—The debt was created for the purpose of build¬ 
ing roads. 



CONSTITUTIONAL CONVENTION. 1901 
MR. KYLE—What sort of roads? 


1487 


MR. KIRK— Macadamized roads and very much against mv 
opposition Our representative succeeded in R ettin R a measure 
of r bonds th Th e a f 1S ^lature authorizing the issue and sale of $100,000 
Z b ?? ds ; 7 bat was submitted to a vote of the people and about 

occasion^ °Thev hH?” ° f ft® C °- Un . ty W ^ nt out and voted on that 
They had a small majority. Two years from that they 

voted that* 1 anH } ?su « of , a * lotEe . r hundred thousand and the people 
oted that and I will state if it were submitted to the people of 

my county they would still vote another hundred thousand dollars. 
MR. WHITE—I offer an amendment. 

The amendment was read as follows: 

Amend Section 9 so as to read as follows: After the ratifica¬ 
tion of this Constitution no county shall become indebted in an 
amount greater than 5 per centum of the taxable property thereof • 

debtrshal', m beTfcLded mOUnt °‘ ““ ind ' bted "' ss . ** «*«»* 

th ! r f iE P ^ ESi pE N T—The question is on the amendment of 
the delegate from Jefferson to the amendment of the delegate from 
Limestone to the report of the Committee. 

MR. WHITE—It has occurred to me that the main good to 
be accomplished is to increase the credit of the towns and to do 
that the law ought to be very clear and unambiguous. Of course 
we sympathize with the conditions in Colbert County, but all the 
other counties in Alabama cannot afford to have their credit im¬ 
paired and destroyed by those local conditions. In fact I doubt 
very much whether the county of Colbert even, if it had the privi¬ 
lege under the law of increasing the debt, could I do it. I do not 

ildes'offeS 0116 W ° U ' d b ® “ buyin S b ° nds or the ^ur- 

MR. KIRK Can I ask the gentleman a question? 

MR. WHITE—Yes. 

MR. KIRK—Could not the County Commissioners issue war¬ 
rants to pay for a court house and could it not pay for it out of 
the special tax to be levied of one-fourth of one per cent. 

MR. WHITE—They can do that now. 

MR. KIRK—They can’t do it under this section because it 
no^further debt ^ ^ rCached the ^unty shall create 

take yo R ur wa^nt 1 d ° Ub ‘ V<iry m “ ch * yOU <*" *« a "y°"e to 



1488 


OFFICIAL PROCEEDINGS 


MR. KIRK—There is a special tax to be levied for that pur¬ 
pose. 

MR. WHITE—The gentleman might after the section is 
agreed upon except Colbert from it, as far as that is concerned, 
but my idea is this, that this ought to be very clear and couched 
in such language that it cannot be misunderstood. My amend¬ 
ment provides that counties may become indebted to the extent o 
5 per cent of the value of the property of the county, but when 
you estimated that 5 per cent, it must include all past indebted¬ 
ness. 

I think 5 per cent, is as small amount as we should fix. It is 
as small as in any other State except one, and I am not sure but 
what it is as small as any other State. I know in Jefferson, with 
our great sewerage system upon which we are just entering we 
may need 5 per cent, and I take it most other counties may under 
certain circumstances need it. As I do not wish to discuss the 
matter further and it has been discussed sufficiently, I move the 
previous question. 

MR. COLEMAN (Greene)—Can I make a request of the gen¬ 
tleman? 

MR. WHITE—Yes, sir. 

MR. COLEMAN (Greene)—I would like to hear the amend¬ 
ment read. 

The amendment was read. 

MR. COLEMAN (Greene)—My objection to the amendment 
is that part of it which says the existing indebtedness shall be 
included. 

MR. WHITE—Including the existing indebtedness to make 
up the 5 per cent. 

MR. COLEMAN (Greene)—Where the section reported by 
the committee is that it shall not apply, the 5 per cent, to indebt¬ 
edness that has already been created. You antagonize that pro¬ 
vision ? 

MR. WHITE—Yes. The point is this, there is not a countv 
in the State but what is indebted to some extent now, some greater 
and some less, and if you are to absolutely eliminate its present 
indebtedness and not consider that at all, when you go to esti¬ 
mate the amount it shall be allowed to create, it may make it 9 
per cent. The county may be now in debt like Colbert, 5 per cent, 
and then you add 5 more which would make 10 per cent, if the 
gentleman from Green is right in his construction, and I am in¬ 
clined to think he is. My amendment limits it to 5 per cent, that 
is, with the debt now existing and the debt to be created, that 



CONSTITUTIONAL CONVENTION, 1901 


1489 


they shall not exceed 5 per cent. Whether you like it or not, that 
makes it plain. 

MR. O'NEAL—Can I ask the gentleman a question? 

MR. WHITE—Yes. 

MR. O'NEAL—Is it your purpose to repudiate any debt now 
in excess of 5 per cent? 

MR. WHITE—How could we repudiate it when the Federal 
Constitution protects it? 

MR. O'NEAL—We don't want to leave ourselves in uncer¬ 
tainty. 

MR. WHITE—There cannot be any uncertainty. Section 10 
of Article I of the Federal Constitution says no State shall pass 
any law impairing the obligation of a contract. As I understand 
this amendment has gone as far as an amendment can go. That 
we can offer no other amendment and I will ask the previous ques¬ 
tion on the adoption of the section with the amendment. That 
will give the chairman of the committee an opportunity to discuss 
it. 


MR. CARMICHAEL (Colbert)—I will ask the gentleman to 
withdraw that motion. 

MR. WHITE—I will if you will renew it. 

MR. O'NEAL—I ask the gentleman to withdraw it as the 
gentleman from Greene was preparing to make some remarks. 

MR. WHITE—I have no objection to yielding to the gentle¬ 
man from Colbert, and then the gentleman from Greene can dis¬ 
cuss it and renew the motion. 

MR. CARMICHAEL (Colbert)—All I desire to say is I hope 
the members of this Convention will not become fixed in their 
opinion about this matter as to prevent the relief that Colbert 
county needs. The gentleman from Colbert (Mr. Kirk) has re¬ 
ferred to the financial conditions of our county. We are now in¬ 
debted in a bonded debt to the amount of $200,000. This bears 
interest part of it at 5 per cent, and the other part at 6, which re¬ 
quires about $11,000 to pay the annual interest. It might be that 
we would need a new court house. I prefer the amendment of 
the gentleman from Colbert, because that provides that any county 
may incur an indebtedness for ordinary county purposes, that is 
for jails, court houses, poor houses, etc., but not for extraordinary 
purposes, such as the building of turnpikes or things of that kind. 
Now I can see no objection to allowing the county, even a county 
in the condition that Colbert is in, to contract indebtedness if that 
county can find those who are willing to enter into a contract with 
them for these ordinary and necessary county purposes. It would 



1490 


OFFICIAL PROCEEDINGS 


be absolutely impossible for our county to contract a debt of any 
kind or for any amount in the condition we are now. We already 
have an indebtedness of $200,(XX), which is more than 5 per cent, 
of the assessed value of our property. Now I submit to the mem¬ 
bers of this Convention that it would be absolutely impossible for 
us to incur a debt of any kind. 

MR. DENT—Can I ask the gentleman a question? 

MR. CARMICHAEL—Yes, sir. 

MR. DENT—As I understand the amendment of the gentle¬ 
man from Jefferson that would have it as it now stands at five 
per cent? 

MR. CARMICHAEL—Yes, sir. 

MR. DENT—Would that help your county? As I understand 
your taxable property is less than four million. 

MR. CARMICHAEL (Colbert)—No, sir; it would not help 
us. The amendment of the gentleman from Colbert which allows 
further indebtedness for the building of county jails and bridges, 
etc., will. 

MR. COLEMAN (Greene)—Will the gentleman permit me 
a question? 

MR. CARMICHAEL—Yes, sir. 

MR. COLEMAN (Greene)—If you will turn to Section 5, 
commencing at line 6, it reads: “provided further, that to pay any 
debt or liability now existing against any county incurred for 
the erection, construction and maintenance of the necessary public 
buildings or bridges, or that may hereafter be created for the erec¬ 
tion of necessary public buildings, or roads, any county may levy 
and collect” special taxes. Does not that cover your case. 

MR. CARMICHAEL—I think not. 

MR. COLEMAN (Greene)—Why not? 

MR. CARMICHAEL—For this reason: This says, provided 
further, that to pay any debt or liability now existing against any 
county, incurred for the erection, construction and maintenance of 
the necessary public buildings or bridges, or that may hereafter 
be created for the erection of necessary public buildings, bridges 
or roads, any county may levy and collect such special taxes not 
to exceed a rate of one-fourth of one per centum. 

Now that is in addition to the five mills; but that has to be 
levied upon the assessed value, which, in our county, amounts 
$3,800,000. That has to be levied on the assessed value. But 
there is a subsequent section which says that no county shall be 



CONSTITUTIONAL CONVENTION, 1901 


1491 


indebted in an amount greater than five per cent, of the assessed 
value, which I think controls this section. 

MR. COLEMAN—With your permission, I will reply when 
you get through. 

MR. CARMICHAEL—If this Convention is willing to adopt 
the amendment of the gentleman from Colbert, very well; but if 
not we would like to have an opportunity of offering amendment 
to provide that this amendment shall not apply to the county of 
Colbert and then we would be perfectly willing to the amendment. 

MR. WHITE—Will the gentlemen permit me just a moment? 
A number of gentlemen wish further to discuss this matter and I 
therefore release the gentleman from renewing the call for the 
previous question. 

MR. COLEMAN (Greene)—If the position of the gentleman 
from Jefferson is correct, that is, that the State shall pass no ex 
post facto law interfering with existing contracts, then his amend¬ 
ment is wholly unnecessary. What field has it to operate in. It 
says you shall take into consideration the existing indebtedness. 
The only effect it will have will be to prevent a county from con¬ 
tracting one dollar of liability if the existing indebtedness has al¬ 
ready reached an extent to equal five per cent. Now, the purpose 
of that provision by the committee was this: We do not wish to 
be placed in the attitude of repudiating honest debts which had 
been contracted by counties issuing their bonds putting them 
on the market and selling them for a valuable considera¬ 
tion. We thought it right and proper where counties had 
contracted these debts and had issued bonds and had received 
value received for them that those counties should be allowed 
to pay those debts. Otherwise you would be committing a 
fraud upon bona fide purchasers of bonds because in the ab¬ 
sence of this provision, and heretofore there has been no limit 
upon the power of a county to contract a debt, it could issue bonds 
ad libitum as mentioned by the delegate from Colbert. The pro¬ 
vision is simply one in the interest of honesty and the performance 
of bona fide contracts. But we wish to put creditors upon notice 
hereafter when you buy bonds from counties of this State you 
must do so with the understanding that the county has no author¬ 
ity to issue an indebtedness beyond a certain amount. That is 
fair dealing with the public and that is the reason that provision 
is put there. 

MR. KIRK—Can I ask the gentleman a question. 

MR. COLEMAN—Yes, sir. 

MR. KIRK—In order that I may bring out more fully the 
point made by my amendment this says that no county shall be¬ 
come indebted to an amount greater than five per cent of the 



1492 


OFFICIAL PROCEEDINGS 


property. Colbert having created a greater debt could not create 
any other debt for any purpose. 

MR. COLEMAN (Greene)—I will answer you when you get 
through. 

MR. KIRK—Another section reported, but not adopted pro¬ 
vides that a county may levy a special tax of not more than one- 
fourth of one per cent, to provide for certain expenses for county 
buildings. If Colbert could create a further debt by this levy of 
one-fourth of one per cent, she could pay it off in four or five 
years. 

MR. COLEMAN—Do you say that Section 5 has not been 
adopted ? 

MR. KIRK—No, sir; that is not yet adopted. It was passed. 

MR. COLEMAN—Then as it has not yet been passed, I 
will make no further argument other than to say it would require 
time and study to answer the question, and I do not feel like 
giving an impromptu answer as to whether the provision for a 
special tax would be controlled by the general provision. I am 
inclined to think the special tax would stand as against the general 
law, but as to that, I would not undertake to inform the Conven¬ 
tion. But, as I have said, the counties have issued bonds when 
there was no limit upon their power to contract indebtedness, and 
they have sold those bonds in the market, and certainly to insure 
fair dealing with their creditors this provision should stand and 
let the counties have the power to pay the debts they have con¬ 
tracted, but give warning to the creditors hereafter that they must 
take notice when they buy bonds issued by counties that the 
county has no authority to create indebtedness beyond a certain 
limit, to-wit, 5 per cent. 

MR. FOSTER—It seems to me that the objection raised by 
the gentleman from Colbert might be met and at the same time 
have this provision intact. As I understand the intention of that 
section is to prevent any bonded indebtedness in excess of 5 per 
cent, and that might be met by providing that it shall not apply 
to debts which mature within twelve months after their creation. 
In that way the counties might meet these temporary debts by a 
special tax which no doubt will be provided for by this Conven¬ 
tion. I intended to offer an amendment to that effect, but under¬ 
stand it would not be in order now, and I merely wish to call the 
attention of the Convention to that way out of the difficulty, as 
it seems to me the county of Colbert might, instead of issuing 
bonds, issue its warrants maturing within twelve months, which 
could be extended at the end of that time, and make payments of 
that by special tax, which, no doubt, the Convention will provide 
for. 



CONSTITUTIONAL CONVENTION, 1901 


1493 


A vote being taken, the amendment of the delegate from Jef¬ 
ferson was lost. 

MR. SANDERS—I desire to offer a substitute for the whole 
section. 

The substitute was read as follows: 

No county shall become indebted in an amount greater than 
5 per centum of the taxable value of the property thereof; pro¬ 
vided, this limit shall not apply to any existing indebtedness in 
excess of such 5 per centum which has already been created or 
authorized by now existing law to be created. 

MR. COLEMAN—So far as I am concerned, I have no ob¬ 
jection to that. The only difference is the insertion of the word 
“limitation” instead of “section.” 

MR. SANDERS—It changes some other provisions. 

MR. COLEMAN—But the meaning is the same. 

MR. HARRISON—I rise to a point of order. If I understand 
that correctly, that very provision was voted down yesterday. 

MR. WADDELL—It was 3 per cent and not 5 that was voted 
down. 

THE PRESIDENT—The point of order is not well taken. 

MR. HARRISON—It was more of an inquiry than of a point 
of order. 

MR. WHITE—Under that provision, is it possible to create a 
debt, considering past and future obligations that would amount 
to more than 5 per cent? 

MR. SANDERS—The meaning of the substitute is simply 
this, if a county is already indebted in excess of 5 per cent, it can¬ 
not create any further debt, but if it is not indebted to that extent, 
the indebtedness may be increased to 5 per cent hereafter. 

MR. WHITE—Including the past indebtedness? 

MR. SANDERS—Yes. 

MR. WHITE—Could Colbert County create any other debt? 

MR. SANDERS—If they are up to 5 per cent they can’t. 

MR. O’NEAL—You do not mean to say they can create 5 
per cent in addition to the indebtedness they now owe? 

MR. SANDERS—No, sir; the total indebtedness can only go 
up to 5 per cent. 



1494 


OFFICIAL PROCEEDINGS 


MR. HARRISON—I am opposed to that amendment, be¬ 
cause I think there should be a different amount fixed as the 

limit. I have no particular objection to the phraseology of this 

over the other proposition; it is tweedledum and tweedledee. But 

I do hope the delegates will not consent to that 5 per cent. The 

motion to strike out that proposition and insert three only failed 
by a majority of two. I hope the Convention will not go over 3 
per cent. Vote this proposition down, and we have prepared an 
amendment fixing it at 3 1-2. I think that is not only reasonable, 
but it is as much as any county in Alabama or any other State 
ought to want to incur. 

A vote being taken on a division, the substitute was lost bv 32 
a yes and 63 noes. 

MR. HARRISON—I offer an amendment. 

The amendment was about to be read. 

MR. HARRISON—Just wait a second. Some gentlemen 
seem to prefer the form of this substitute and I will change mv 
amendment. 

The amendment was changed and read as follows: 

No county shall become indebted in any amount greater than 
3 1-2 per cent of the taxable value of the property thereof; pro¬ 
vided, this limitation shall not apply to any existing indebtedness 
in excess of such three 1-2 per centum which has already been 
created or authorized by now existing law to be created. 

MR. O’NEAL—I move to amend by striking out 3 1-2 and 
substituting four. 

The amendment was declared out of order. 

MR. WATTS—I want to ask the gentleman from Lee a ques¬ 
tion. I w r ant to know what he means by the expression “now 
existing law.” 

MR. COLEMAN—Some bonds have been authorized, but not 
issued, and this would cover that. 

MR. WATTS—I am satisfied. 

MR. O’NEAL—I move to table the substitute. 

The ayes and noes were called for and sustained and the roll 
resulted as follows: 

AYES. 

Beddow, Brooks, Carmichael, of Coffee, 

Barefield, Burnett, Carnathon, 

Bethune, Cardon, Cobb, 

Blackwell, Carmichael, of Colbert, Coleman, of Greene, 



CONSTITUTIONAL CONVENTION, 1901 


1495 


Cornwall, 

Cunningham, 

deGraffenreid, 

Eyster, 

Ferguson, 

Foshee, 

Foster, 

Glover, 

Graham, of Montgomery, 
Grant, 

Grayson, 

Greer, of Calhoun, 

Haley, 

Heflin, of Randolph, 
Henderson, 

Hodges, 


Howze, 

Inge, 

Jones, of Bibb, 
Kirk, 

Kirkland, 

Knight, 

Ledbetter, 

Leigh, 

Lomax, 

Long (Walker), 
Lowe (Jefferson), 
Lowe (Lawrence), 
Macdonald, 

Martin, 

Moody, 

NeSmith, 


Total—54. 


Messrs. President, 
Ashcraft, 

Banks, 

Bartlett, 

Bulger, 

Burns, 

Browne, 

Byars, 

Chapman, 

Cofer, 

Craig, 

Davis, of DeKalb, 
Davis, of Etowah, 
Dent, 

Duke, 

Eley, 

Espy, 

Fletcher, 

Gilmore, 

Greer, of Perry, 
Harrison, 

Heflin, of Chambers, 
Hinson, 

Hood, 

Total—27. 


NOES. 

Jackson, 

Jenkins, 

Jones, of Hale, 

Jones, of Wilcox, 
Kyle, 

Locklin, 

McMillan (Wilcox), 
Malone, 

Maxwell, 

Merrill, 

Miller (Marengo), 
Miller (Wilcox), 
Mulkey, 

Murphree, 

Norwood, 

Oates, 

O’Rear, 

Palmer, 

Parker (Elmore), 
Pettus, 

Phillips, 

Pillans, 

Porter, 

Proctor, 


Norman, 

O'Neal (Lauderdale) 
O’Neill (Jefferson), 
Opp, 

Parker (Cullman), 
Rogers (Lowndes), 
Selheimer, 

Sentell, 

Sloan, 

Waddell, 

Walker, 

Watts, 

White, 

Willet, 


Reynolds (Chilton), 
Reynolds (Henry), 
Robinson, 

Rogers (Sumter), 
Sanders, 

Sanford, 

Searcy, 

Smith (Mobile), 
Smith, Morgan M., 
Sorrell, 

Spears, 

Spragins, 

Stewart. 

Studdard, 

Tayloe, 

Weakley, 

Weatherly, 

Whiteside, 

Williams (Barbour), 
Williams (Marengo), 
Wilson (Clarke), 
Winn, 


ABSENT OR NOT VOTING. 


Almon, 

Altman, 

Beavers, 


Boone, 

Case, 

Coleman, of Walker, 


Fitts, 

Freeman, 

Graham, of Talladega, 



1496 


OFFICIAL PROCEEDINGS 


Handley, Morrisette, 

Howell, Pearce, 

Jones, of Montgomery, Pitts, 

King, Reese, 

Long, (Butler), Renfro, 

McMillan (Baldwin), Samford, 


Smith, Mac. A., 

Sollie, 

Thompson, 

Vaughan, 

Williams (Elmore), 
Wilson (Washington), 


During the roll call:— 

MR. OATHS—When Mr. Morrisette left I was paired with 
him, hut I don’t know how he would vote, and I, therefore, vote 
no myself. 

MR. REESE—I ant paired with Mr. Fitts of Tuscaloosa. I 
suppose he would vote no. I would vote aye. 

So the motion to table was lost. 


MR. FOSTER—I offer an amendment. 

MR. HARRISON—I rise to a point of order. The amend¬ 
ment is not in order. 

THE PRESIDENT—The point is well taken. The question 
is on the amendment of the gentleman from Lee. 

A vote being taken on a division the amendment was adopt¬ 
ed, 72 ayes and 51 noes. 

MR. FOSTER—I desire to offer an amendment. 

The amendment was read as follows: Amend by inserting^be¬ 
tween the words “amount” and “greater” in the first line “not 
including debts which mature within twelve months after the 
creation of the same.” 

MR. FOSTER—Just a few words to explain that. The idea 
has occurred to me from conditions that frequently exist in my 
county though we are not up to the tax limit I can readily con¬ 
ceive that counties which are up to the limit can be put in a bad 
condition. We have a great many streams that are frequently 
swollen and bridges that are washed away and our court of coun¬ 
ty commissioners have frequently to make temporary loans and 
levy special taxes to provide for these matters. This is the pur¬ 
pose of my amendment. 

MR. KIRK—Can that amendment be voted on until the first 
amendment is disposed of? 

MR. FOSTER—I offer it as an amendment of the gentleman 
from Colbert. 

MR. LOMAX—As a matter of parliamentary procedure, with 
the original proposition pending the amendment of the gentle¬ 
man from Colbert, and the amendment of the gentleman from 



CONSTITUTIONAL CONVENTION, 1901 


1497 


Tuscaloosa to his amendment, can I offer this as a substitute for 
the section, and the amendments? 

THE PRESIDENT—It is called to the attention of the Chair 
that the substitute of the gentleman from Lee was offered as a 
substitute to Section 9 and the pending amendment. An amend¬ 
ment should be directed now to the substitute. 

MR. LOMAX—My substitute would be in order at this time 
then ? 

THE PRESIDENT—It seems to the Chair with the amend¬ 
ment of the gentleman from Tuscaloosa pending, we would have 
two amendments pending. A further amendment, (and a substi¬ 
tute would be an amendment), would not be in order at this time, 
until the amendment offered by the gentleman from Tuscaloosa 
is disposed of. 

MR. LOMAX—I am inclined to the opinion that the friends 
of a measure have a right to perfect it by amendment before a 
substitute is in order, and that I believe is the ruling of the Chair. 

THE PRESIDENT—If that point had been made before the 
substitute was acted upon, but the substitute of the gentleman 
from Lee has been acted upon and adopted. 

MR. LOMAX—And the Chair holds then that my substitute 
would not be in order until after action on the amendment now 
pending. 

THE PRESIDENT—Yes, sir. 

Upon a vote being taken, the amendment offered by the gen¬ 
tleman from Tuscaloosa (Mr. Foster) was lost. 

MR. LOMAX—I offer a substitute for the original section 
as amended and for the pending amendment, if there be one pend¬ 
ing. 

The substitute was read as follows: “No county in this 
State having an assessed valuation exceeding twenty million dol¬ 
lars of taxable property, shall become indebted in an amount ex¬ 
ceeding five per cent of its assessed valuation, and counties hav¬ 
ing -an assessed valuation of less than twenty million shall not 
incur a debt exceeding four per cent of its assessed valuation, 
provided this limitation shall not apply to debts created for the 
construction of court houses and jails. Nothing herein contained 
shall prevent the issue of renewal bonds or bonds to fund the 
floating indebtedness of such county, now existing.” 

MR. HARRISON—I rise to a point of order on that amend¬ 
ment, because it is undertaking indirectly to undo what this Con¬ 
vention has acted upon and adopted, and is a substitute for the 
whole section, and it is contrary to its provisions, particularly 



1498 


OFFICIAL PROCEEDINGS 


the substitution of four or five per cent for three and one-half, 
is an effort in an indirect way, without reconsidering it, to change 
the action of this Convention. 

MR. O’NEAL (Lauderdale)—I call attention to the fact that 
the proposed substitute of the gentleman from Lee was in fact 
an amendment. He offered it is an amendment as I understood 
it, and offered to amend by striking out from the original section 
the word five, and inserting three and one-half. 

THE PRESIDENT—The substitute of the gentleman from 
Lee was offered as a substitute to the pending amendment and 
was adopted. The Chair will hear from the gentleman from 
Montgomery upon the point of order. 

MR. LOMAX—I understand the Chair to rule that a substi¬ 
tute is nothing but an amendment. Then the effect of the sub¬ 
stitute offered by the gentleman from Lee was simply to amend 
the original section, by striking out and inserting. That was what 
it amounted to. It was nothing more than an amendment. Now, 
when an original proposition is pending, and an amendment is 
pending to that proposition, and an amendment to that amend¬ 
ment, a substitute cannot be offered, and under the rules of the 
Fiftieth Congress, (I have not a later rule), the rule was that a 
substitute was not in order until after the friends of the measure 
had perfected an amendment. In other words when a proposition 
was pending, and an amendment was offered, and an amendment 
to that amendment, a substitute was not in order until the friends 
of the measure had had the chance to perfect the amendment. 

Now if it be true that a substitute is nothing but an amend¬ 
ment, then after the adoption of the substitute of the gentleman 
from Lee, the original proposition stood before this House simply 
as amended, and nothing more. Standing in that position, then, 
it was subject to amendment again, as the Chair has held here, 
by entertaining the amendment of the gentleman from Tusca¬ 
loosa and other gentlemen upon the floor of the Convention, and 
if it is subject to amendment, then it is subject to substitute, be¬ 
cause a substitute is an amendment, and I submit that my propo¬ 
sition is in order under that view of the law. 

THE PRESIDENT—The point made by the gentleman from 
Lee is that the rate of 5 per cent, was stricken out by a vote of 
the Convention and 3 1-2 inserted in lieu of 5, and that the effect 
of your amendment, without reconsidering the vote whereby the 
Convention struck out the 5 per cent, and inserted the 3 1-2, is to 
reinsert the 5 per cent. 

MR. LOMAX — But my amendment does not go to that 
length. There is no better established rule in parliamentary law 
than this: that you can move to strike out and insert certain 



CONSTITUTIONAL CONVENTION, 1901 


1499 


words, and after that motion has been adopted, then you can move 
to strike out certain words preceding those which were inserted, 
or certain words which followed those inserted, and that motion 
would be in order, although the Convention had already adopted 
the motion to strike out and insert. So in that view of the case 
the amendment would be in order. Now another proposition is 
this: If my amendment— 

THE PRESIDENT—The point is that 5 per cent, was in the 
section,— 

MR. LOMAX—Yes, I am coming to that now. 

THE PRESIDENT—And the gentleman from Lee moves 
to strike out 5 per cent and insert 3 1-2, and that amendment was 
adopted. Now you propose to strike out 3 1-2 and insert 5— 

MR. LOMAX—Not entirely. 

THE PRESIDENT—And is that not practically a reconsid¬ 
eration of the question? 

MR. LOMAX—I was coming to that identical point when 
the Chair interrupted. 

MR. DENT—The gentleman from Montgomery wants to in¬ 
sert 4. 

MR. LOMAX—Five in one place and 4 in another. If my 
proposition had been to strike out the 3 1-2, after it had been 
adopted by this Convention in lieu of the 5, and insert 5, then the 
point of order would be well taken against my amendment, be¬ 
cause it was simply to undo a thing without reconsideration; but 
my proposition goes further than that. It proposes as to certain 
counties in the State, 5 per cent, shall be fixed as the limit; as to 
certain other counties 4 per cent, shall be fixed and the 4 and 5 
per cent, shall not apply to court houses or jails, or to the fund¬ 
ing of the debt of a county. 

Now coming to that point, and going further than the propo¬ 
sition, not attempting to reconsider it, but offering more, I sub¬ 
mit the proposition is in order, but that it would not have been 
in order if it merely sought to go back. It is entirely a new propo¬ 
stion. “No county in the State having an assessed valuation ex¬ 
ceeding $20,000,000 of taxable property, shall become indebted in 
an amount exceeding 5 per cent, of its assessed valuation, and 
counties having an assessed valuation of less than $20,000,000 shall 
not incur a debt exceeding 4 per cent, of its assessed valuation, 
provided this shall not apply to debts created for the construc¬ 
tion of court houses and jails. Nothing herein contained shall 
prevent the issue of renewal bond or bonds to fund the floating 
indebtedness of such county now existing.” 



1500 


OFFICIAL PROCEEDINGS 


MR. SANFORD—I offer an amendment to that amendment. 

THE PRESIDENT—The Chair will overrule the point of 
order. It seems to the Chair that there is sufficient change in the 
proposition of the gentleman from Montgomery to save it from 
the objection that it is a mere proposition to reconsider. 

MR. HARRISON—The Chair has not heard from me— 

THE PRESIDENT—The Chair will hear from the gentle¬ 
man if he desires to discuss it. 

MR. HARRISON—I will make a suggestion, Mr. President. 
The substitute offered by the gentleman from Montgomery, it 
occurs to me, is very largely the amendment that was offered 
by the gentleman from Colbert, with a little change in the phrase¬ 
ology* and mine was adopted, being a substitute for that, as well 
as for the original Section. The fact that he has merely varied 
it by putting in 4 in one place and 5 in another, instead of the 
3 1-2, I submit cannot change the rule. If a legislative body can 
strike out 5 and insert 3 1-2, and be permitted again to have a 
vote of the Convention and strike out 3 1-2 and insert 4 and 5, 
what becomes of the action of the Convention in fixing any defi¬ 
nite amount? It occurs to me that there would be no end to it, 
and if the Chair holds that it is in order, I only want to say that 
the Convention can probably settle it, and I move to lay the sub¬ 
stitute on the table. 

MR. SANFORD—I offer this— 

THE PRESIDENT—The chair thinks the proposition to fix 
the 5 per cent, rate for the whole State is not the same as to fix 
5 per cent, for a part of the State and 4 per cent, for another part. 

MR. HARRISON — It originally fixed it at 3 1-2 for the 
whole State. The substitute fixed the entire State at 3 1-2. 

THE PRESIDENT—The substitute fixes it at 3 1-2 for the 
entire State, and the amendment proposed by the gentleman from 
Montgomery is to fix it at 5 per cent, for a part of the State, and 
at 4 per cent, for another part. 

MR. HARRISON—His amendment would not allow 3 1-2 to 
apply anywhere. 

THE PRESIDENT—That is the reason he wants to offer 
the amendment. 

MR. HARRISON—It changes the action of the Convention 
entirely. 

THE PRESIDENT—But speaking to the point of order, and 
that was the question, the point of order was whether it was 
merely a question of reconsideration. The Chair is of the opin¬ 
ion that the point of order is not well taken. 



CONSTITUTIONAL CONVENTION, 1901 


1501 


MR. HARRISON—Then I move to lay the substitute on the 
table. 

MR. LOMAX—And on that I call for the ayes and noes. 

The call for the ayes and noes was sustained. 

THE PRESIDENT—The question is on the substitute offer¬ 
ed by the gentleman from Montgomery to the substitute offered 
by the gentleman from Lee, and the gentleman from Lee moves 
to lay the substitute offered by the gentleman from Montgomery 
on the table. The ayes and noes are called for and have been 
ordered. Those in favor of the motion to table will say aye, and 
those opposed no, as your names are called. 

During the call of the roll. 

MR. REESE—I am paired with the gentleman from Tusca¬ 
loosa, Mr. Eitts; if he were here he would vote aye and I would 
vote no. 

Upon the call of the roll, the vote resulted as follows: 

AYES 


Messrs. President, 

Harrison, 

Porter, 

Ashcraft, 

Heflin, of Chambers, 

Proctor, 

Ranks, 

Hinson, 

Reynolds, of Chilton, 

Bartlett, 

Hood, 

Reynolds (Henry), 

Beavers, 

Inge, 

Robinson, 

Brooks, 

Jackson, 

Rogers, of Sumter, 

Browne, 

Jones, of Hale, 

Sanders, 

Bulger, 

Jones, of Wilcox, 

Sanford, 

Byars, 

Kirkland, 

Searcy, 

Carnathon, 

Kyle, 

Sloan, 

Chapman, 

Leigh, 

Smith, of Mobile, 

Cobh, 

Locklin, 

Smith, Morgan M., 

Cofer, 

McMillan, of Wilcox, 

Sorrell, 

Coleman, of Greene, 

M alone. 

Spears, 

Craig, 

Martin, 

Spragins, 

Cunningham, 

Maxwell, 

Stewart, 

Davis, of DeKalb, 

Merrill, 

Studdard, 

Davis, of Etowah, 

Miller, of Marengo. 

Tayloe, 

Dent, 

Miller, of Wilcox, 

Waddell. 

Duke, 

Mulkey, 

Walker. 

Kiev. 

Murphree, 

Weatherly, 

Espy, 

Oates, 

Whiteside, 

Fletcher, 

O’Rear, 

Williams, of Barbour. 

Foshee, 

Palmer, 

Williams, of Marengo. 

Foster, 

Parker, of Elmore, 

Wilson, of Clarke, 

Gilmore, 

Pettus, 

Winn. 

Greer, of Calhoun, 

Pillans, 


Greer, of Perry, 
Total—82. 

Phillips, 




1502 


OFFICIAL PROCEEDINGS 


NOES 


Barefield, 

Beddow, 

Bethune, 

Blackwell, 

Burnett, 

Burns, 

Cardon, 

Carmichael, of Colbert, 
Carmichael, of Coffee, 
Cornwall, 
deGraffenreid, 

Eyster, 

Ferguson, 

Glover, 

Graham, of Montgomery, 
Total—45. 


Grant, 

Grayson, 

Haley, 

Heflin, of Randolph, 
Henderson, 

Hodges, 

Howze, 

Jenkins, 

Jones, of Bibb, 

Kirk, 

Knight, 

Ledbetter, 

Lomax, 

Lowe, of Jefferson, 
Lowe, of Lawrence, 


MacDonald, 

Moody, 

NeSmith, 

Norman, 

Norwood, 

O’Neal, of Lauderdale, 
O’Neil (Jefferson), 
Opp, 

Parker, of Cullman, 
Rogers, of Lowndes, 
Selheimer, 

Sentell, 

Watts, 

Weakley, 

White, 


ABSENT OR NOT VOTING 


Almon, 

Altman, 

Boone, 

Case, 

Coleman, of Walker, 
Fitts, 

Freeman, 

Graham, of Talladega, 
Handley, 

Howell, 


Jones, of Montgomery, 
King, 

Long, of Butler, 

Long, of Walker, 
McMillan (Baldwin), 
Morrisette, 

Pearce, 

Pitts, 

Reese, 

Renfro, 


Samford, 

Smith, Mac A., 

Sollie, 

Thompson, 

Vaughan, 

Willet, 

Williams, of Elmore, 
Wilson, of Washington. 


By a vote of 82 ayes and 45 noes, the motion to table pre¬ 
vailed. 


MR. CARMICHAEL (Colbert)—I offer an amendment. 
The amendment was read as follows: 


“Provided, that any county which is already indebted in an 
amount which equals, or exceeds the debt limit herein provided, 
may for the erection of the necessary public buildings, borrow 
in addition to said 3 1-2 per cent, a sum not greater than 1 1-2 per 
cent, of the assessed valuation of the taxable property of said 
county/’ 

MR. HARRISON—I move the previous question on the Sec¬ 
tion, the amendment adopted, and the pending amendment. 

The main question was ordered. 

THE PRESIDENT—The question is on the amendment of¬ 
fered by the gentleman from Colbert. 



CONSTITUTIONAL CONVENTION, 1901 


1503 


A vote was taken, viva voce, and the Chair stated that he 
was in doubt. 

MR. CARMICHAEL (Colbert) — Have I not the right to 
make some remarks on this amendment, being the mover of the 
amendment? 

THE PRESIDENT—The Chair is of the opinion that the 
gentleman is entitled to discuss the matter. The Chair failed to 
discover that the gentleman desired to be heard. 

MR. CARMICHAEL (Colbert)—I would like for the amend¬ 
ment to be read, Mr. President. 

MR. WILLIAMS (Marengo)—A point of order. 

THE PRESIDENT—The gentleman will state the point of 
order. 

MR. WILLIAMS (Marengo) — Did not I understand the 
Chair to rule the other day that the Chairman of the Committee 
had the right to close, under such conditions, and not the gentle¬ 
man offering the amendment? 

THE PRESIDENT—That is true, where the previous ques¬ 
tion has been ordered, unless the gentleman yields to the gentle¬ 
man from Colbert. 

MR. BROWNE—I will yield half of my time to the gentle¬ 
man from Colbert, and the other half to the gentleman from Lee, 
if the Chairman is entitled to it. 

The amendment was again read. 

THE PRESIDENT—The Chair will state that the gentle¬ 
man from Colbert will have five minutes, and the gentleman from 
Lee five minutes. The gentleman will proceed— 

MR. KIRKLAND—I rise to a point of order. The vote has 
already been taken on this question and a division called for. It 
is too late to discuss it. 

THE PRESIDENT—The Chair overlooked the fact that the 
gentleman from Colbert desired to debate the question. 

MR. KIRKLAND—I insist upon the point of order. 

MR. BROWNE—I make the point of order that the Chair 
has not announced the vote. 

MR. BULGER—I desire to make the point of order that the 
gentleman from Colbert had no right to debate the subject after 
the previous question was ordered, and it was only conceded to 
him by the Chairman of the Committee, after that was done. 



1504 


OFFICIAL PROCEEDINGS 


MR. BROWNE—I make the point of order that the Chair 
was only in the act of taking the vote. The vote had not been 
taken and announced. 

THE PRESIDENT—The vote had not been announced, and 
the Chair submitted the question to the Convention prematurely. 
The Chair should have paused to discover whether the Chairman 
of the Committee desired to discuss the question. The Chair will 
therefore overrule the point of order and recognize the gentle- 
man from Colbert. 

MR- CARMICHAEL (Colbert)—I venture the assertion that 
the County of Colbert has taken up as little of the time) of this 
Convention as any county in the State, and we would not be here 
now except for the purpose of appealing to this Convention to 
allow us to take care of ourselves. Now, unfortunately, it is true, 
we have become indebted in a much greater amount than per 
haps we ought, in the sum of $200,000. 

MR. OATES—Will my friend allow a suggestion? 

MR. CARMICHAEL (Colbert)—Yes, sir. 

MR. OATES—Why did you not frame your amendment for 
Colbert County and submit it? 

MR. CARMICHAEL (Colbert)—I would suggest that the 
amendment does not reach any county in the State except Col¬ 
bert. It does not now, and cannot possibly reach any county in 
the State except Colbert County— 

MR. SANFORD—Put Colbert in there, then. 

MR. CARMICHAEL (Colbert)—We would suggest to the 
gentlemen from Montgomery that we would like to avoid the 
naming of our county in the Constitution in that connection; and 
Mr. President, I would ask the gentlemen before they vote against 
this amendment, to read it carefully, and if they do so, it will be 
seen that it does not apply to any county in the State except Col¬ 
bert. It specifically says that provided that any county which 
has already contracted an indebtedness exceeding the limit, which 
is 3 1-2 per cent now, that they may, for the purpose of building 
court houses and jails, and for the ordinary expenses of the coun¬ 
ty, contract an additional indebtedness of 1 1-2 per cent. Now 
that only makes five. If the gentlemen will read that amendment, 
they will see that it cannot possibly apply to any other county in 
the State except the county of Colbert, and we appeal to this Con¬ 
vention to allow us to contract an indebtedness for these purposes, 
should it become necessary to do so. 

THE PRESIDENT—The time of the gentleman has expired. 

MR. HARRISON—Mr. President, it is with some diffidence 
that I oppose the request contained in that amendment but it is in 



CONSTITUTIONAL CONVENTION, 1901 


1505 


the nature of a general law. If the delegate from Colbert had 
confined it to his county, while perhaps it would have looked 
badly in the Constitution, I am afraid, for Colbert County, yet 
we merely have his assertion that it only applies to Colbert Coun¬ 
ty. If it does, why does he object to naming it? 

I have further objection to this amendment, and that is be¬ 
cause it is at least waiving in part the very principles that we are 
contending here for I do not think that Colbert, or any other coun¬ 
ty, if it is so badly in debt that it is unable to pay the interest 
upon its public debt, until it adjust that indebtedness, ought to be 
permitted to incur any more, and I feel the convention in placing 
the limit in the Constitution, should call a halt on the county. 

MR. deGRAFFENREID—Suppose the court house were to 
burn down? 

MR. HARRISON—Let them go, as they would have to do, 
in my opinion — if they could not issue bonds or borrow any 
money—and levy the tax to rebuild it, and, by levying that tax, 
perhaps their own banks and people, if the tax were levied and 
a warrant drawn on it, would aid them ; but I think if they are 
in that unfortunate condition, they will have to pay cash until 
they adjust their indebtedness. 

MR. CARMICHAEL (Colbert)—I would like to ask if it 
would be possible for Colbert County to contract any indebted¬ 
ness at all under your substitute? 

MR. HARRISON—Nor do I believe you can do without it. 

MR. CARMICHAEL (Colbert)—Would not you be willing 
to allow us the opportunity to try, should it become necessary? 

MR. HARRISON—If you will confine it to Colbert County, 
I would not object to it, but you are putting a general provision 
in there, which I do not think will do you any good. I sympa¬ 
thize with the delegate from Colbert, but I do not see why, if he 
is the only county in that condition, he does not name it. I think 
you will have remedy enough in Section 5, when you come to con¬ 
sider it. You will see you have authority to levy a tax for these 
purposes you desire to include in your amendment. You will 
have to levy a tax upon the property, without incurring a debt 
for these improvements. 

MR. CARMICHAEL (Colbert)—Does not Section 5 provide 
for the levy of the tax, but does not this section provide for a pro¬ 
hibition upon any increase of the debt of the county? 

MR. HARRISON—Yes; but if you pay cash for it, it would 
not be a debt. There is no inhibition on your raising money and 
going and building it. 



1506 


OFFICIAL PROCEEDINGS 


MR. CARMICHAEL (Colbert)—I suggest to the gentleman 
that the taxes would not furnish the relief we might need. 

MR. HARRISON—I think it would, Mr. President; and I 
have only five minutes, which I believe is about out 

MR. O’NEAL (Lauderdale)—Is not this limit of 3 1-2 lower 
than that fixed in any Constitution of any State in the Union? 

MR. HARRISON—I have not examined as to that. If there 
is any other State of the Union that has any lower limit, it does 
not affect Alabama. I know it is enough for any county in Ala¬ 
bama, and if you exceed that, you will default on your public 
debt. 

THE PRESIDENT—The question is on the adoption of the 
amendment proposed by the gentleman from Colbert. A division 
is called for. As many as favor the adoption of the amendment 
will rise and remain standing until counted. 

And, by a vote of 66 ayes and 44 noes, the amendment was 
adopted. 

THE PRESIDENT—The question recurs upon the substi¬ 
tute. As many as favor the adoption of the substitute proposed 
by the gentleman from Lee, as amended, will say aye. 

And the substitute was adopted. 

THE PRESIDENT—The question recurs upon the adoption 
of the section as amended. 

And the section as amended was thereupon adopted. 

MR. BROWNE—I desire to offer an amendment to the ar¬ 
ticle reported by the Committee. 

MR. LONG (Walker)—I ask unanimous consent to offer 
a resolution to have it referred. It is short. 

MR. BROWN—Not now. I offer an amendment to the Ar¬ 
ticle as reported, which amendment is a separate section, and I 
ask for the reading of the amendment. 

THE PRESIDENT—What section? 

MR. BROWNE—It has no number, but it will be numbered 
when the whole article is complete. 

MR. LONG (Walker) — It is in order to read the original 
section as reported. 

MR. BROWNE—I can explain it, if it needs explanation. 

THE PRESIDENT—What is the proposition of the gentle¬ 
man from Talladega? 



CONSTITUTIONAL CONVENTION, 1901 


1507 


MR. BROWNE — The proposition is an amendment to the 
article reported by the Committee, by incorporating a section in 
the article as reported. It has no number. 

MR. OATES—Is that in order to offer a section, until the 
article is completed? Then it seems to me would be appropriate 
time and place to offer the additional section. After it is com¬ 
pleted, it would be in order to offer an amendment to the article. 

MR. BROWNE—That is all brought about by a ruling of the 
Chair when the Committee on Executive Department was report¬ 
ing. I then offered an amendment to the whole article, to take 
the place of a section, that was laid upon the table, and the chair 
held that that could not be done as that section was laid upon the 
table. But I now offer a new section and there is no rule which 
requires one to wait until every section reported by the Committee 
has been considered before you can offer an amendment by add¬ 
ing another section. 

MR. LONG (Walker)—I make the point of order that no 
amendment can be offered before the House until the next section 
is reached. 

MR. BROWNE—The whole article is before the House. 

MR. LONG—It is being considered section by section. I 
make the further point of order that this section has never been 
read, so he cannot offer an amendment to it. 

MR. BROWNE—In reply to the point of order if the gen¬ 
tleman is correct, then I never could offer it because after the 
last section has been considered and acted upon, the gentleman 
could say with equal force that there was no section before the 
House. 

THE PRESIDENT—The gentleman from Talladega does 
not state the ruling of the Chair, as the chair recollects it. The 
Chair did not rule so far as the recollection of the Chair now goes, 
that upon the completion of an article that it could not be amend¬ 
ed by adding additional sections. On the contrary, the recollection 
of the Chair is that the ruling was that additional sections might 
be added, and they were added to the report of the Committee 
on Executive Department. Now the question is made that the 
Convention has under consideration the report of the Committee 
on Taxation, and that it is considering it section by section, and 
that nine sections have been disposed of, and the next order would 
be the consideration of section 10, and the gentleman from Talla¬ 
dega moves to amend the article by adding an additional section. 

MR. BROWNE—I did not move to amend by adding. By 
incorporating a section in the article as reported, but not by add¬ 
ing it; by incorporating a different section in it. 



1308 OFFICIAL PROCEEDINGS 

THE PRESIDENT—What number does the gentleman de¬ 

sire— 

MR. BROWNE—I have not given it any number. I will just 
mark it— 

THE PRESIDENT—Nine and a half? 

MR. BROWNE—Mark it nine and a half, and let the Com¬ 
mittee on “Harmonies” fix the number, or mark it ten. 

MR. PETTUS—I rise to a point of order. Under the rule 
adopted, the regular procedure is the consideration of the report 
of the Committee on Taxation section by section; until that order 
is completed, an amendment to the whole article, by incorporat¬ 
ing a new section, is not in order, without a suspension of the 
rules. 

MR. BROWNE—I make the point of order, and there are 
a great many gentlemen here who have sat in different legislative 
bodies and they all know it is correct, that in considering any or¬ 
dinance or act by section, it is competent to offer to amend the 
whole act by incorporating in the act an additional section, at anv 
point when you have concluded the consideration of a section. 

THE PRESIDENT—The Chair is in doubt upon the ruling 
and will reserve the ruling and announce it at the afternoon ses¬ 
sion. The Chair is unable at present to decide what ruling should 
be made. Does the gentleman from Montgomery desire to discuss 
the question? 

MR. OATES—I merely wish to remark in reply that the rule 
is that a report of a Committee, w'hen taken up, must be consid¬ 
ered section by section, and that not having been done, it is not 
completed, and it is not in order to go back into the body of the 
article and offer a new section, probably for one that has been 
knocked out. I don’t know about that, but it is going back, and 
until the ordinance is completed, the rule is not complied with. 
Then it would be competent to offer an amendment by way of a 
new section, that may come in any part of the article, but not 
until the report of the Committee is completed. 

THE PRESIDENT—That is the inclination of the Chair but 
it is now near adjourning time, and the chair will reserve the rul¬ 
ing upon the point. 

MR. BROWNE—I will withdraw it rather than take up so 
much time about it. I am perfectly confident I am right about 
it though. 

THE PRESIDENT—The Clerk will read the next section. 

Section 10 was read as follows: 



CONSTITUTIONAL CONVENTION. 1901 


1509 


Sec. 10. No city, town or other municipal corporation shall 
become indehted in an amount exceeding 5 per centum of the tax¬ 
able values of the property thereof; provided that for the erection 
or purchase of water works, gas or electric plants, or sanitary 
sewerage an additional indebtedness not to exceed 3 per centum 
may be created; provided, further, that this section shall not ap¬ 
ply to indebtedness in excess of such 5 per centum already created 
or authorized by law to be created. 

MR. BROWNE—I desire to offer an amendment. 

MR. LONG (Walker)—Will not the gentleman suspend un¬ 
til I can offer a resolution. We cannot get through with the sec¬ 
tion any way, and I desire the resolution to be referred to the 
proper committee. 

MR. BROWNE—This is a little amendment simply to cor¬ 
rect a defect— 

MR. LONG (Walker)—Will not the gentleman yield— 

MR. BROWNE—I will not. 

The amendment was read as follows: 

Amend Section 10 by inserting the words “the excess of” 
after the words “not applied to” on line five, and strike in “in ex¬ 
cess of” in line five, and insert in lieu thereof the word “over” and 
insert after the words “authorized by” in line six, the word “now 
existing.” 

MR. BROWNE—That amendment is simply to make it con¬ 
form to the changed phraseology in the section we have iust 
adopted, so as to relieve it of ambiguity. 

Mr. Long (Walker) sought recognition when the clock struck 

one. 


MR. KIRKLAND—I rise to a point of order. 

The Convention thereupon adjourned until 3 :30 o’clock p. m. 


AFTERNOON SESSION. 

The Convention was called to order by the President and a 
call of the roll showed the presence of 115 delegates. 

MR. REYNOLDS (Chilton)—I am authorized by the Mayor 
of my town and other authorities to inform the Convention that 
there will be a grand free barbecue at our city tomorrow and to 
extend to the members of the Convention, officers and pages an 
invitation to be present. 



1510 


OFFICIAL PROCEEDINGS 


THE PRESIDENT—On behalf of the Convention the Chair 
returns thanks to the people of Chilton for the kind invitation. 

MR. BROWNE—I ask unanimous consent to withdraw the 
amendment proposed by me immediately before adjournment in 
order that I may offer another amendment to meet the same ob¬ 
ject, but better expressed. 

MR. BEDDOW—I ask unanimous consent to introduce a 
short resolution. 

THE PRESIDENT—The gentleman asks unanimous con¬ 
sent to introduce a short resolution. Is there objection? The 
Chair hears none. 

MR. PILLANS—I objected. 

MR. O’NEAL—The objection was not made until after the 
Chair announced there was no objection. 

MR. PILLANS—I objected twice before the Chair announced 
and I heard other delegates object. 

MR. deGRAFFENREID—In order to settle the matter I 
move that the rules be suspended and that the delegate from Bir¬ 
mingham be allowed to introduce his resolution at this time. 

A vote being taken the motion to suspend was carried and 
the resolution was offered and was read as follows: 

Resolution No. 219, by Mr. Beddow of Jefferson: 

Whereas, various resolutions have been adopted throughout 
the State requesting that this Convention patronize union labor 
by having its printing done by members of the Typographical 
Union, and that the union label be printed thereon, and 

Whereas the union labor should be encouraged by the people 
of Alabama in Convention assembled. 

Therefore be it, 

Resolved, That the Committee on Schedule, Printing and In¬ 
cidental Expenses be and they are hereby instructed to patronize 
the printing establishments having in their employment union 
labor and have the union label printed thereon. 

Referred to Committee on Schedule, Printing and Incidental 
Expenses. 

The amendment offered by the delegate from Talladega, Mr. 
Browne, was read as follows: Amend Section 10 by striking out 
all the said Section after the word created in the fourth line and 
inserting in lieu thereof the following: “Provided further, that 
the limitation of five per cent mentioned in this section shall not 



CONSTITUTIONAL CONVENTION. 1901 


1511 


apply to any existing indebtedness exceeding such five per centum 
which has already been created or which has been authorized by 
now existing law to be created. 

MR BROWNE—I desire to state in regard to that amend¬ 
ment that it is simply done to relieve a possible ambiguity in the 
proviso. It does not change the sense of the section at all. 

The unanimous consent was not given. 

MR. WEAKLEY — I offer a substitute for Section 10 and 
pending amendments. 

The substitute was read as follows: 

Section 10. That no city, town or village shall hereafter 
become indebted for any purpose or in any manner to an am °unt 
which including existing indebtedness shall exceed seven p 
centum of the assessed valuation of the real and personal prop¬ 
erty within said city, town or village subject to taxation as shown 
by the last preceding assessment for State and county purposes, 
provided, however, that in determining the limitation of the power 
of such city, town or village to incur indebtedness there shall not 
be included the following class of indebtedness, to wit: 

fa) Notes, certificates of indebtedness or revenue bonds is¬ 
sued in anticipation of the collection of taxes unless the same be 
not paid within two years from the date of such issue and all sue 
notes, certificates of indebtedness and revenue bonds shall be 
provided for, and made payable from the taxes levied for the year 
in which they are issued, and shall never exceed the amount of 
such taxes. 

(b) Bonds issued for the purpose of purchasing or otherwise 
providing for a supply of water or for the construction or installa¬ 
tion of sanitary sewers or for the extension of either of the same. 

(c) Obligations incurred and bonds issued to procure means 
to pay for street or sidewalk improvements or storm water sewers, 
the cost of which is to be assessed against the property abutting 
or drained by such sewers. 

(d) Debts created for the preservation of the public health. 

(e) Debts existing on the 6th day of December, 1875, or any 
obligation issued to renew or refund the same. 

MR. WEAKLEY—The substitute which has just been read— 

MR. LONG (Walker)—Will the gentleman please allow me 
to offer a short resolution for reference to a committee. 

THE PRESIDENT—The gentleman from Walker asks unan¬ 
imous consent to introduce a resolution. Is there objection? 



1512 


OFFICIAL PROCEEDINGS 


There was no objection. 

MR. LONG (Walker)—I move a suspension of the rules that 
I may offer this resolution. 

A vote being taken the rules were suspended and the resolu¬ 
tion was offered and read as follows: 

Resolution No. 220, by Mr. Long (Walker): 

Whereas, This Convention passed a resolution today allowing 
no absent member per diem, unless excused on account of sick¬ 
ness, and whereas, the members of this Convention have great 
respect for the truth and veracity, and good wishes for the public 
health, and whereas, the adoption of said resolution will have a 
tendency to make all absent members feel badly and the effect of 
making all future leaves of absence be requested on account of 
sickness of members of their families. 

Therefore, for the public good, in the interest of truth, and as 
a preventive of an epidemic of sickness among members of this 
Convention and their families, one or both, be it resolved, by the 
people of Alabama in Convention assembled, that the said reso¬ 
lution No. 184, which offers a premium of $4 per day for sickness, 
be and the same is hereby repealed. 

Referred to Committee on Rules. 

MR. WEAKLEY—The substitute for Section 10, which has 
been read to the Convention, is Section 8 of the report of the Com¬ 
mittee on Municipal Corporations. 

The question of fixing a proper debt limit for the cities of 
Alabama is a very difficult proposition. The people who have 
investigated the financial condition of the various municipalities 
are convinced that there should be placed some restrictions upon 
the power of municipalities to incur debts. At the same time we 
must remember that under the Constitution under which we 
have been living for the last twenty-five years there has been a 
limited power on the part of cities to raise money by taxation and 
an unlimited power to increase debts. A great many of the cities 
of Alabama, in fact nearly all have incurred tremendous amounts 
of debt, far in excess of that which ought to be incurred by any 
city, the affairs of which are prudently conducted. For the purpose 
of ascertaining how a debt limit placed in this Constitution would 
affect the various cities of Alabama, I have instituted an inquiry 
and I will present to the Convention the substance of that so far 
as the same relates to a few of the leading cities of Alabama. 

The city of Birmingham has an assessment valuation of $15,- 
000,000. Its debt is somewhere in the neighborhood of $2,000,000, 
in other words, about 15 per cent. 



CONSTITUTIONAL CONVENTION, 1901 


1513 


The city of Bridgeport, North Alabama, has a bonded debt of 
31 per cent, of its assessed valuation. 

Decatur has an assessed valuation of $675,000, and a 10 per 
cent. debt. 

Dothan has an assessed valuation of $450,000 and an 8 per 
cent. debt. 

The city of Eufaula has a valuation of $2,700,000 and a 7^4 
per cent. debt. 

Gadsden has a debt of 11 1-2 per cent. 

Huntsville has an assessed valuation of $2,840,000 has a debt 
of 6 per cent. 

Mobile with an assessed valuation of $15,880,000 has a total 
debt of $3,100,000, or about 20 per cent. 

Montgomery with an assessed valuation of $12,500,000 has a 
debt of 16 per cent. 

Selma with a valuation of $4,692,000, has $324,000 debt, or 
7 2-10 per cent. 

Tuscaloosa with an assessed valuation of $1,576,000, has a 
debt of 8 per cent. 

Bessemer has a 4 per cent debt, Florence a 7 per cent, debt 
and Ozark 4 1-2 per cent. 

So the gentlemen of the Convention will see it is a difficult 
proposition to find the exact limit which should be placed on the 
powers of a city to create a debt that will not create some hard¬ 
ship or prevent cities from carrying on some necessary and much 
needed improvements. 

The Committee on Municipal Corporations after a full dis¬ 
cussion and consideration of this matter reached the conclusion 
that in the first place there should be no limit fixed upon the power 
of the cities to create a debt for the purpose of purchasing water 
works or acquiring a system of water works or system of sewer¬ 
age. These two items of public utility are so necessary to the 
public health and the public good that it ought under all circum¬ 
stances to remain within the power of the people to build water¬ 
works and a sewerage system. Apart from the fact that considera¬ 
tions of health and public safety require the construction of water¬ 
works and sewerage, it is also an admitted fact that no enterprise 
which produces a revenue to the city should be regarded in fixing 
the debt limit of the city. I wish to take up the time of the Con¬ 
vention long enough to read a short item from a paper prepared by 
the Honorable Bird S. Coler, Comptroller of New York City, who 
is a high authority upon all questions pertaining to municipal in¬ 
debtedness. He says: 

“I wish to state clearly my appreciation of, and adherence 
to, the wisdom of constitutional restrictions on the indebtedness 



1514 


OFFICIAL PROCEEDINGS 


of cities. These restrictions are to be found in the Constitutions 
of nearly all our States, and have been upheld both in letter and 
in spirit by the decisions of our courts. They have undoubtedly 
served to prevent the financial ruin of many small cities, which 
in the hands of unscrupulous political adventurers would other¬ 
wise have undergone disastrous experiences. Yet this constitu¬ 
tional limitation has itself its limitations. It should not be made 
a fetish to be worshiped blindly at the expense of really necessary 
progress. 

If the competition which exists today between nations and 
cities, as well as between individuals, to stand still means to re¬ 
trograde, and if it should happen that a choice must be made be¬ 
tween stopping the modernization of New York and amending the 
Constitution, I am in favor of the latter course, provided no real 
danger to the city’s credit and solvency be thereby threatened. 

I believe the clause in the Constitution limiting municipal in¬ 
debtedness—wholly admirable at the time it was written—is not 
altogether adapted to modern requirements, in that it does not dis¬ 
criminate sufficiently between two classes of city debts of a wholly 
different character. 

A city issues bonds only for permanent improvements, the 
benefits of which inure to posterity. But there are two classes 
of these improvements, easily distinguishable from one another, 
and between which a sharp distinction should be drawn. 

In one of these classes are improvements which, while adding 
to the attractiveness, beauty, and healthfulness of a city, to its 
economical administration, or to the better conduct of its govern¬ 
mental functions, bring in no direct financial returns. This is bv 
the erection of public buildings, including schools, the acquisition 
of parks, and the repaving of streets. No matter how great the 
material benefits may be that are derived from such improve¬ 
ments, the expense incurred is unquestionably a financial burden 
upon the taxpayers. In regard to such expenditures there can be 
no doubt as to the wisdom of establishing an arbitrary constitu¬ 
tional limit, since otherwise the burdens that might be thrown 
upon succeeding generations by excessive issues of bonds would 
become intolerable. 

There is another class of improvements, however, far less 
common, which either result in casting no burdens whatever upon 
the taxpayers or else bring in an actual profit to the municipality. 
In such cases it may be permissible to ask wherein there lies anv 
rational excuse for limiting the governmental activities of a citv 
by constitutional restrictions. A dim recognition of this truth 
seems already to have found expression in the Constitution of New 
York, which partially excepts from the operation of the debt 
limitation bonds issued to provide for the supply of water, and 



CONSTITUTIONAL CONVENTION, 1901 1515 

requires only that a special sinking fund be established for their 
ultimate redemption. Why this exception? Because pure water 
is a prime necessity for the health of a community? Scarcely, for 
there are many other public necessities paid for by the issue of 
bonds which are hardly less imperatively needed by the people, 
and as to such the Constitution is silent. The reason must be 
found in the fact that for the past century, by a universal custom 
which has the force of unquestioned law, it has been the practice 
of cities owning water-works to charge consumers for the water 
supplied, and that the rentals received from the operation of this 
natural monopoly have almost invariably shown a profit over the 
expense of maintenance and operation. In other words, bonds 
issued to provide for the supply of water are not a real burden 
upon the taxpayers, since the water rents received pay the inter¬ 
est on these bonds, amortize the principal, and still yield a profit 
to the city.” 

Summing up the result of this article, the author says : 

‘ Our constitutions should be amended so as to except from 
the limitation on the indebtedness of cities bonds issued to provide 
for improvements—which, while governmental in their character 
are, nevertheless, essentially business enterprises—and from the 
operation of which profits can be derived sufficient to provide a 
speedy payment of the indebtedness temporarily incurred.” 

I am aware, Mr. President, that the tendency of this argu¬ 
ment to a certain extent is to municipal ownership of all classes 
of public service industries. I wish to state here and now, in my 
opinion a city should own its water-works, its sewerage system, 
and its lighting plant. Beyond that, I am not yet prepared to go. 
It seems to me that the proposition just stated was sufficient 
reason why the Committee on Municipal Corporations should seek 
to exclude from any debt limit the debts created by a city for the 
purpose of supplying its inhabitants with water. Consequently we 
have so reported. 

MR. O’NEAL—Why do you except electric light and gas 
plants from that provision? 

MR. WEAKLEY—The theory of the committee in not in¬ 
cluding light plants is because the maintenance of a light plant is 
a drain upon the general revenue of a city, unless the city goes 
farther and furnishes not only lights for the streets, but commer¬ 
cial lights as well. I am aware of the fact that in many of the 
cities of the country this is done and the receipts from commercial 
lighting go to a considerable extent in paying for the expense of 
lighting the streets. I do not, however, regard that as an entirely 
safe proposition. 

THE PRESIDENT—The time of the gentleman has expired. 



1516 


OFFICIAL PROCEEDINGS 


MR. deGRAFFENREID—I move that the rules be suspended 
and that the gentleman be permitted to continue his remarks. 

THE PRESIDENT—What time does the gentleman indicate? 

MR. deGRAFFENREID—Until the gentleman gets through. 

A vote being taken the motion to suspend the rules was car¬ 
ried. 


THE PRESIDENT—The motion is that the gentleman’s time 
be extended indefinitely. 

A vote being taken a division was called for. 

MR. HEFLIN—I would like to amend by making it fifteen 
minutes. The gentleman says he can get through in that time. 

MR. deGRAFFENREID—We were taking a vote and a di¬ 
vision was called for and an amendment is not in order. 

The taking of the vote was completed and the time of the 
delegate from Lauderdale was extended indefinitely. 

MR. WEAKLEY—The question was just propounded by the 
delegate from Lauderdale asking why the Committee on Corpora¬ 
tions did not exclude from the debt limit bonds for the purpose 
of construction or acquiring electric light plants. I believe, gen¬ 
tlemen, as stated before, that every city ought to own its own 
lighting plant. It has been demonstrated by actual experiment 
not only in small cities such as Athens, Ala., but also in Chicago, 
which has the largest municipal lighting plant in the world that 
a city can furnish light for its streets from 40 to 50 per cent, cheap¬ 
er than any corporation will furnish it for them. But notwith¬ 
standing that fact, we believe the expense of lighting the streets 
of a city is a charge upon the general revenues of a city and that 
this expense, therefore, ought to be included in the debt limit. 

The Committee on Municipal Corporations have further 
recommended that debts created for the purpose of constructing 
sewers be not included in the debt limit and the reasons for that 
are that the public health sometimes demands the building of 
sewers and that they should be constructed in any event. Another 
reason for that recommendation lies in the fact that in a number 
—I started to say the majority of cases—sewers are constructed 
and paid for by abutting property owners or property situated in 
the district drained by the sewers. In other words, we have adopt¬ 
ed the rule that where any debt has been created which is not a 
charge upon the general revenues of the city, that debt should not 
be included in the limit. Section C of the substitute which I offer 
excludes from the debt limit bonds issued or obligations incurred 
to procure means to pay for streets or sidewalk improvements or 
storm water sewers, the cost of which is to be assessed against 
the property or the district drained by such sewers. 



CONSTITUTIONAL CONVENTION, 1901 


1517 


The same principle that leads us to exclude debts created for 
sewers also leads us to recommend to exclude debts created for 
public improvements which are created in the majority of cases 
at the request of the property owners who are benefited by those 
improvements and constitute no charge against the city but are 
charges against the property abutting the improvements, the prop¬ 
erty benefited by the improvements. 

Section D, in the report of the Committee on Municipal Cor¬ 
porations, also excludes debts created for the preservation of the 
public health. This provision was inserted in view of the fact 
that, frame the debt limit in the way you will, there will still be 
a number of cities above the limit and in the event of the outbreak 
of disease or epidemic, they would be absolutely powerless to 
protect the public health. Section E of the report of the Commit¬ 
tee excludes debts existing on the 6th day of September, 1875. In 
framing this Section no good reason could be found for inserting 
the provision therein except that otherwise the city of Mobile and 
the city of Montgomery would be debarred from raising any more 
money for public improvements. 

MR. MACDONALD—Will the gentleman permit me a ques¬ 
tion ? 

MR. WEAKLEY—Yes. 

MR. MACDONALD—I would like to inquire whether it was 
the intention in framing subdivision C to permit the entire cost of 
improvements to be assessed against contiguous property owners? 

MR. WEAKLEY—That does not contemplate any such 
thing. 

MR. MACDONALD—Does it not say so? 

MR. WEAKLEY—No, sir. It says that no debt for obliga¬ 
tions incurred or bonds issued to procure means to pay for street 
or sidewalk improvements or storm sewers, the cost of which is to 
be assessed against the property abutting or drained by such sew¬ 
ers, shall be included in the debt limit. 

MR. MACDONALD—Does not that necessarily imply the 
authority of the municipality to assess the entire cost of an im¬ 
provement against an abutting property holder. 

MR. WEAKLEY—I think not. 

Nearly all of the members are aware of the fact that the city 
of Mobile has a very large debt and it was feared by the delegates 
from that county that without this provision the city of Mobile 
would be absolutely helpless, and the city of Montgomery might 
also be seriously affected. 



1518 


OFFICIAL PROCEEDINGS 


I understand that this exception as to debts existing on the 
6th day of December, 1875, will probably affect but three cities of 
the State, Selma, Montgomery and Mobile. Now, gentlemen, I 
desire to say if the report of the Committee on Taxation is adopted 
and the power of a city to incur a debt be limited to 5 per cent., 
and only to be increased to 8 per cent, for the purpose of construct¬ 
ing water works and sewerage it will absolutely tie the hands of 
every municipality in the State of Alabama. In addition to that, 
if a city has a debt of 5 per cent, and is only allowed a further 
margin of 3 per cent, for the construction of water works and 
sewers, no city can build a system of water works or sewers for 
such an amount of money. By way of illustration, take Eufaula, 
which has an assessed valuation of over $2,000,000. Three per 
cent, for the purpose of a system of water works and sewers would 
make $60,000, and I do not see how it would be possible for that 
city to build these utilities for that sum. 


The Convention this morning adopted a provision fixing the 
debt limit of counties at 3 1-2 per cent., which under certain con¬ 
ditions might be increased to 5 per cent. It occurs to me with a 
debt limit of 3 1-2 for counties, a debt limit of 7 per cent, for cities, 
making the entire debt limit of city and county a total of 10 per 
cent., might be a reasonably safe proposition. 

Upon this point I desire to say that I have prepared a state¬ 
ment showing the debt limit of every State in the United States 
that has a limit and for the information of the Convention, and 
not to detain them, I will read a few of these figures. 

Arizona, 4 per cent; Georgia, 7 per cent; Illinois, 5 per cent; 
Indiana, 2 per cent; Iowa, 5 per cent; Kentucky has a varying limit 
ranging from 2 per cent for counties up to 10 per cent for cities; 
Maine, 5 per cent; Minnesota, 5 per cent; Missouri, the same; 
Montana, 3 per cent, which may be increased for the purpose of 
erecting water-works and sewers; New York, 10 per cent, with an 
exception in favor of debts created for constructing water-works • 
North Dakota, 5 per cent; Pennsylvania, 7 per cent; South Caro¬ 
lina, 8 per cent, South Dakota, 5 per cent; Utah, 4 per cent* Vir¬ 
ginia, 20 per cent; West Virginia, 5 per cent; Wyoming, 4 per 
cent, Washington, 10 per cent; Wisconsin, 5 per cent. I believe, 
gentlemen, this is all the information I desire to bring to the at¬ 
tention of the Convention, except to further state that the Com¬ 
mittee on Municipal Corporations endeavored as far as possible 
to protect the various cities in the State of Alabama in fixing the 
debt limit, and at the same time having in view the fact that some 
limitation was absolutely necessary. 


MR. BROOKS—I would ask the gentleman if the substitute 
he proposes is not Section 8 in the report of the Committee on 
Municipal Corporations ? 



CONSTITUTIONAL CONVENTION, 1901 15W 

MR. WEAKLEY—It is. 

MR. SMITH (Mobile)—I would like to ask the gentleman a 
question. What class of municipal indebtedness can he think of 
that would be covered under the 7 per cent clause? 

MR. WEAKLEY—Debts created for school buildings, city 
halls, fire stations, street improvements, parks. 

MR. SMITH (Mobile)—Steet improvements you have in the 
substitute? 

MR. WEAKLEY—Yes. 

MR. MACDONALD—I am entirely opposed to the very dan¬ 
gerous suggestion made in the substitute. I asked the gentleman 
during the course of his argument whether the true understand- 
ing of subdivision C of his substitute was to permit municipalities 
to impose on abutting property owners the entire cost of sidewalks 
and street improvements and sanitary and other sewers. The gen¬ 
tleman did not directly answer that question, but it is obvious, and 
will be plain, to every lawyer in this Convention that that is a di¬ 
rect permission or a full permission to put such burdens on the 
taxpayers of the city. 

MR. BROOKS—Would not that be obviated by inserting 
after the words “the cost of which is to be assessed,” the words, 
“in whole or in part.” 

MR. MACDONALD No, sir. If it is put “in whole or in 
part” that will still give the municipality the opportunity to put 
the full charge for the improvement on the abutting land owners. 

In this city we have had a painful experience in regard to the 
action of municipalities in imposing such burdens upon the people. 
We have seen the property of the poor confiscated. We have 
seen them compelled to sell their homes for the purpose of paying 
such assessments as these. I can state case after case which has 
occurred in Montgomery within the last two or three years where 
people have been absolutely deprived of their property by this 
character of improvement, and this suggestion carries it further 
than was ever contemplated in Montgomery or any other city. 
That was a bad day for Alabama and for the inhabitants of the 
cities of Alabama when the Supreme Court departed from the 
rule in Dargan vs. the Mayor, when they held such assessments 
were invalid and when they rendered the opinion in the Kearns 
case. Why, gentlemen, the municipalities of this and other cities 
select what character of pavements they want and what character 
of sewers and they assess the cost of one-half of the cost up to. 
this time, and this amendment suggests they can put it all upon 
the adjoining property owners, and they have gone on making 
such character of streets and sidewalks until it seems that they 



1520 


OFFICIAL PROCEEDINGS 


are trying to rival the streets of New Jerusalem in the cost of tin- 
streets they are putting down here. I could cite you many hard 
instances from personal experience of my own clients, and here 
we have a proposition not only endorsing what these municipali¬ 
ties have done before, but proposing to tell the cities of Alabama 
that they may go ahead and put down any character of sidewalks, 
pavement, sanitary and other sewerage and issue bonds and com¬ 
pel the people to pay such bonds. 

We have some instances of that kind in the city of Mont¬ 
gomery. We have what is known as the baby bond, where in 
direct opposition to the wishes of the property owners and over 
their protest, the municipality of Montgomery has undertaken to 
pave with brick certain streets and assess the entire cost against 
the abutting property owners. The injustice of that is apparent 
to everyone. Here is a man who owns fifty feet, and under the 
baby bonds he is compelled to pay something in the neighborhood 
of $500 for alleged improvements to his property. It would be 
something fair and just if the owner of the abutting property 
was assessed for these improvements the actual increase in value 
that his property made by reason of such improvements, but it is 
gross injustice and oppression to say that he should pay the full 
price of the improvement which is for the benefit of the entire 
municipality when, as a matter of fact, where he goes upon the im¬ 
provement once, the rest of the inhabitants go a thousand times. 
Then the proposition is suggested that the entire cost of the sani¬ 
tary sewerage or sewer which may drain any property owned bv 
other citizens should be assessed and collected against the citizen 
and not from the municipality. 

I say no such proposition can meet the approval of a man 
who is opposed to oppression and for the people. 

MR. WATTS—My distinguished friend from Montgomery 
totally misapprehends the resolution of the gentleman from Lau¬ 
derdale. There is no proposition in that resolution which fixes 
the cost of any pavement or any street improvement upon any¬ 
body. It simply says that any debt which the city mav owe for 
street improvements or for water-works or for sanitary sewerage, 
shall not be included in the 7 per cent. The gentleman has not 
read the substitute, or I am satisfied that he would agree with me 
readily that it does not effect the purpose he speaks about. 

MR. MACDONALD—The gentleman is mistaken; I have 
read it. 

MR. WATTS—The proposition of the gentleman from Lau¬ 
derdale is simply that the limit of city taxes shall not be exceed¬ 
ing 7 per cent, and when you count the 7 per cent, vou are not to 
count bonds issued for water-works, for sanitary sewerage and 
for paving as a part of the 7 per cent. He does not propose in 



CONSTITUTIONAL CONVENTION, 1901 


1521 


that ordinance to authorize the cities to charge either the whole 
or a part of any improvement upon the property owners. It sim¬ 
ply says it shall not include in the seven per cent debts for these 
purposes. 

Now, l desire to state to the Convention in addition to what 
my friend from Lauderdale has stated, about the ownership by 
the city of these utilities: A striking example is the city of Mont¬ 
gomery. The city of Montgomery paid $600,000 for her water 
works. She issued bonds to pay for that. Those water works 
can be sold today at a cash profit of $200,000 and those water 
works bring in an income to the city of Montgomery after furnish¬ 
ing, free water for all the purpose of the city, which more than 
pays the income on the $600,000 of bonds. Therefore, it seems 
to me that is not a bad investment on the part of the city of Mont¬ 
gomery. T simply speak of this because 1 saw my friend from 
Montgomery (Mr. Macdonald) had misunderstood the proposition 
of the gentleman from Lauderdale and I simply ask him to get it 
and read it to see that I am right. 

MR. SOLLIE—I shall not attempt to speak at length this 
time. I wish to second the first of the two gentlemen from Mont¬ 
gomery who spoke against subdivision C in these exceptions. I 
agree with the last gentleman who has just taken his seat that 
this provision is not an express conferring upon the municipalities 
of the power to assess adjacent or abutting property for street 
and sewerage improvements; but it recites, at least suggests, that 
such improvements, followed by such charges, are in contempla¬ 
tion of the Constitution. So, if it does not expressly confer, most 
assuredly it does not prohibit, that power; and there are lawyers 
enough in this Convention that I need not urge the recent deci¬ 
sions of the courts of higher resort to the effect that abutting 
property owners may now see their property entirely confiscated 
by pavements and other improvements of that kind. And I insist 
that of all the positions taken by courts in recent times, that po¬ 
sition is least tenable and least just and ought most of all to be 
stricken down by legislative bodies or Constitutional Conventions. 
Is it right, Mr. President, because forsooth I have a piece of prop¬ 
erty lying down here on Dexter Avenue which happens to im¬ 
mediately abut the street that my property shall be confiscated, 
the entire corpus taken from me, and a man only fifty feet away 
from me shall have his property enhanced in value fifteen, twenty 
or fifty per cent, by such improvements without paying anything 
therefor. There is no justice in such a law and this Constitutional 
Convention while dealing with the proposition of municipal cor¬ 
porations should rise up and place a restraining hand upon the 
power of municipal corporations to bring about such a condition. 
Suppose the Federal Courts do so decide, they have not the power 
to control us in State matters and we can put in the Constitution 
a veto on the right of any municipality to confiscate the property 



1522 


OFFICIAL PROCEEDINGS 


of abutting property owners under the guise of paying for these 
improvements. 

MR. O’NEAL—Is the town in which you live interested in 
street and sidewalk improvements? 

MR. SOLLIE—No; but I am not alone representing that 
town. I am representing the State at large, the best interests of 
all the towns. I come from a small inland town where we do not 
have paying admit, but who knows but that some of these davs 
I may be where they have pavements. We are disposed to hope 
—my imagination looks forward to the time when my little city 
shall awake and move up to a point of sufficient size to be the pos¬ 
sessor of such improvements. 

MR. WEAKLEY—Don’t you know it to be a fact that the 
Supreme Courts in every State in the United States except in the 
State of South Carolina have sustained sidewalk assessments? 

MR. SOLLIE—That is precisely the proposition to which I 
am directing my argument. The courts for some reason to me 
unknown have taken the most ridiculous position that a municipal 
government can absolutely confiscate the property of its citizens 
to make these improvements. 

MR. O’NEAL—Don’t the property receive benefit? 

MR. SOLLIE—Yes; and so long as the court stood by the 
doctrine that the adjacent property might be assessed to the ex¬ 
tent of the improvements or enhancement of the value of the 
property. I was willing to admit the decision was correct. Even 
in that case, I insist that it is unjust that the adjacent property 
should bear the whole expense of the improvements up to the en¬ 
hancement of the value of the property that does not abut, pavs 
nothing, and yet that property is enhanced in value. 

MR. MACDONALD—Is it not easily conceivable that such 
improvement instead of enhancing may decrease the value, for 
instance that the property might be left on a hill above the street 
or away down below the street, and is it not a fact that the Su¬ 
preme Court has held in such case that the municipality instead 
of collecting the cost of making the improvement may be com¬ 
pelled to pay damages? 

MR. SOLLIE—Yes, sir. But taking it in any aspect, whether 
increasing or decreasing the value of the property, I take the 
broad position that he who happens to live nearest the street 
ought not to have to pay the cost of the improvement for the 
whole city and I say here and now while we are dealing with the 
proposition, while we are making a Constitution, while we are 
continuing to give to the municipalities the power to make streets 
and regulate the assessments to pay therefor, it is our duty to put 
a limitation on the power of confiscation by city government. 



CONSTITUTIONAL CONVENTION. 1901 


1523 


MR. FERGUSON—I desire to ask the gentleman this ques¬ 
tion : Some of the people have already been assessed to pay for 
this character of improvements. If we stop it now, won’t it be a 
discrimination against a man who has already paid? 

MR. SOLLIE—Perhaps it would be, but it is better to do 
right late than never. 

MR. FERGUSON—In the city of Birmingham and Montgom¬ 
ery and other cities the citizens have paid this unjust tax and I 
ask upon the principle of stare decisis ought we not to let the 
matter stand? If some of the property owners in certain cities in 
this State have paid this unjust tax, would it not be better to 
let those who have not paid bear their burden? 

MR. MACDONALD—Will the gentleman from Dale allow 
me to make a suggestion right there? Neither the city of Bir¬ 
mingham nor the city of Montgomery has ever assessed the entire 
cost against the abutting property owners. 

MR. FERGUSON—I will ask the gentleman from Mont¬ 
gomery a question. 

THE PRESIDENT—The gentleman is out of order. The 
gentleman from Montgomery has not the floor. 

MR. FERGUSON—Then I will ask it of the gentleman from 
Dale. Have you any city in your county which has paid this tax? 

MR. SOLLIE—We have not. We happen to be a rural peo¬ 
ple in our county. 

THE PRESIDENT—The time of the gentleman has ex¬ 
pired. 

MR. ROGERS (Sumter)—I yield my time to the gentleman 
from Dale. 

THE PRESIDENT—The gentleman don’t seem to have any 
time to yield. Gentlemen are at liberty to yield or not to inter¬ 
rupt, but the Chair cannot take the interruptions out of their time. 

MR. SOLLIE—I shall take lesson by my experience. 

MR. CHAPMAN (Sumter)—If I heard correctly the clause 
now under consideration, the Chairman of the Committee on Muni¬ 
cipal Corporations says that his proposed amendment is an exact 
copy of Section 8 of his report. Am I correct in that? 

MR. WEAKLEY—Yes. 

MR. CHAPMAN—Then, if that be the case, Mr. Chairman, 
I see absolutely no limit to the power of corporations to tax the 
people. There is absolutely none if I correctly read this Section. 
It says that “no city, town or village shall hereafter become in- 



1524 


OFFICIAL PROCEEDINGS 


debted for any purpose or in any manner, to an amount which in¬ 
cluding' existing indebtedness, shall exceed 7 per cent, of the as¬ 
sessed valuation of the real and personal property within such 
city, town or village subject to taxation ^as shown by the last 
assessment for State and county purposes.” Now. Mr. President, 
that sounds very much like there is some limitation on the part 
of taxation and of creating indebtedness. But when we read 
further and include the proviso which says: Provided, however, 

that in determining the limitation of the State, city, town or vil¬ 
lage to incur indebtedness, there shall not be included the follow¬ 
ing class of indebtedness, to wit: Now, none of the classes enum¬ 
erated here below are included in that 7 per cent., and the town, 
city or village may go on and create indebtedness into the millions 
of dollars and vet not be precluded or prohibited by the first part 
of that clause. 

Request was made that the speaker read the Section. 

MR. CHAPMAN—The first Section is not to be included in 
that 7 per cent, limit. “No certificate of indebtedness or revenue 
bonds issued in anticipation of the collection of taxes unless the 
same be not paid within two years from the date of such issue, 
and all such notes, certificates of indebtedness and revenue bonds 
shall be provided for and be made payable from the taxes levied 
for the year in which they are issued, and shall not exceed the 
amount of such taxes.” Now it don't make any difference how 
far you go in making that exception. You may have a million dol¬ 
lars of notes out, and it don’t limit the issue of notes and bonds to 
any past time, but at the same time you are levying a tax of 7 
per cent, you may be issuing notes and certificates of indebted¬ 
ness under Class A. Now, here is Class B: 

(b) Bonds issued for the purpose of purchasing or otherwise 
providing for a supply of water or for the construction or instal¬ 
lation of sanitary sewers, or for the extension of either of the 
same. 

Now, until a proper construction of the language used, it 
appears to me that while that 7 per cent is levied for some other 
purpose, the town might go on and issue bonds to an indefinite 
amount, and this Class C obligation, bonds issued to procure 
means to pay for streets or sidewalk improvements or storm 
water sewers, the cost of which is to be assessed against the prop¬ 
erty abutting or drained by such sewers. As the gentleman from 
Montgomery, Mr. Macdonald, properly says, it would be an ab¬ 
solute tax imposed upon the abutting owners of property and that 
would not be covered in the 7 per cent it is true, but you are 
taxing the individual who happens to own an abutting piece of 
property for sewer or sidewalks, and that is not limited by the 
7 per cent, because the town may place side walks and sewers 



CONSTITUTIONAL CONVENTION. 1901 


1525 


along the whole street and yet not pay one dime of it under this 
clause, under the tax levied under that 7 per cent limit. So with 
debts created for the preservation of the public health. That is 
exempt. The town may deem it proper to create a debt of $50,- 
000, during the same time it is levying the tax of 7 per cent, and 
yet it is not limited or covered by the 7 per cent. Debts exist' 
ing on the 6th day of December, 1875. That is an indefinite quan¬ 
tity, 5t may be great or may be small, they may have been re¬ 
newed up to the present time with accruing interest, so it seems 
to me that this clause as it stands now is absolute death to a 
people or corporation, and they may be absolutely ruined if it 
is adopted into this Constitution. 

MR. RYSTER—I move the previous question. 

MR. COLKMAN (Greene) — I wish you would withdraw 
that motion for a moment. 

The motion for the previous question was withdrawn. 

MR. COLEMAN (Greene)—Mr. President and delegates of 
the Convention, it seems to me that there has not been a more 
dangerous proposition submitted to the delegates of this Con¬ 
vention than that submitted by the amendment of the gentleman 
from Lauderdale. The Section as proposed by the Committee 
on Taxation makes ample provision, as I conceive, for all exist¬ 
ing indebtedness, and simply provides a limitation as to future 
indebtedness. A good deal has been said in regard to rural towns. 
I wish to state to this Convention a fact which I did not intend 
to mention, as I live in a rural town, and which came very near 
being ruined by existing laws. We have a population of about 
800 only, and assessable property at $200,000, and we are today 
laboring under a debt of $1,800 per year for thirty years, amount¬ 
ing to $54,000. With what to pay for it? An assessment upon 
$200,000. Some gentleman has asked: “Have you sidewalks?*’ 
I say we have not, we have not the means of raising the money 
for sidewalks, it all goes for the purpose of water works and elec¬ 
tric lights, and as long as the system prevails that a delegate 
from a county can come up to this legislature without limitation 
on him and get a bill through affecting his county without respect 
or regard to the wishes of the people, just so long will every 
county be in danger, so long as there is no limitation upon the 
power of taxation. That is not all. Following upon this con¬ 
tract was an application made to the legislature for that little 
town to issue $45,000 of bonds to buy water works, in excess of 
what it was prior to its being passed. That is the protection 
that the people of this country desire, and that is what they must 
have. We know nothing about the cities and towns that speak 
of their $200,000, their $2,000,000 and their $5,000,000, perhaps 
they are able to stand it, but let there be some limitation, or else 
the little country towns where much of your wealth and taxes 



1526 


OFFICIAL PROCEEDINGS 


come from, will be left in a most deplorable condition. What ob¬ 
jection can there be to Section 10 as amended by the Chairman 
of the Committee? “Section 10. No city, town or other munici¬ 
pal corporation shall become indebted in an amount exceeding- 
five per centum of the taxable value of the property thereof.” 

estimate, take any town you see proper—say one of 
1200,000, 5 per cent is $10,000. Isn’t that enough for a town of 
that size to go, or one of a million dollars in the same proportion. 

Provided, that for the erection or purchase of water works, gas 
or electric plants, or sanitary sewerage, an additional indebted- 
ness not to exceed 3 per cent may be created; provided, further 
that this Section shall not apply to indebtedness in excess of such 
5 per cent already created or authorized by law to be created.” 
Nobody can be hurt, all previous creditors are provided for, and 
you protect the town against future indebtedness. 


, MR. HARRISON—I heartily indorse what has been said by 
the delegate from Greene. I admit my astonishment that an 
amendment should come from the gentleman from Lauderdale al¬ 
lowing cities and towns to incur an indebtedness of 7 per cent 
and he himself introduced a resolution limiting the counties to 
3 per cent which must necessarily contain within their borders 
all the cities and towns 'of the State. I had the pleasure, Mr. 
President, of introducing an ordinance on this section limiting 
this very tax to 3 per cent. I did it after careful examination and 
deliberation and after consulting financiers in the State, and after 
making the figures, and I ask the delegates here, whether their 
towns be large or small, take for instance a town with $1,000,000 
worth of property, we limit them in the present Constitution, and 
we are pledged, as Democrats, not to raise that limit to one-half 
S A milIlon dol lars worth of property would raise 

$SUO at 1-2 of 1 per cent, if I make no mistake in my calculation. 

A DELEGATE—$5,000. 


MR. HARRISON—That is it; you raise $5,000. Now, at 7 
per cent you can issue $70,000 worth of bonds. If you can get 
it for 5 per cent, the interest on these bonds alone will be $3 000 
Now, I ask you, where is the city or town that can live and run 
its municipal government, police force and other expenses, on less 
then 1-2 of 1 per cent. You will default in the first instance to 
say nothing of the exceptions pointed out by the gentleman vvho 
preceded me—notes, certificates, etc., to cover all the debts of a 
city. In other words, it is letting the bars down so completely, or 
so nearly so, I apprehend we will have more bankrupt cities and 
towns—a great many more than we have now. I look at the re¬ 
port on Municipal Corporations, and I find they are undertaking 
to exempt certain cities and towns. That may be all right when 
we come to it. I understand that perhaps the very city that the 
distinguished gentleman comes from, of which he is the Mayor, 


CONSTITUTIONAL CONVENTION, 1901 


1527 


is itself badly in debt. I know there are other cities in debt, 
an in^ru^ion? KLEY < Lauderdale )-Will the gentleman permit 

me ^^ap H > RR / S ? N_I - like to be P olite — if they don’t limit 
me, or take it out of my time. 

n n MR K ^5^, KLY ~^ T u e city of Florence has a bonded debt 
upon which it has paidthe interest. It does not owe a dollar in 
the world, and has $5,000 in the treasury. 

MR. HARRISON—If you are that well off, I don’t think 
you will need go out and levy the extraordinary expense. I heard 
the gentleman before the Committee on Taxation; we heard his 
argument, and it was considered by the Committee on Taxation 

s ^ tlon w as adopted. I appeal to the members 
to look at the tax lists of their towns and see where they will be 
I know my own town, if it made it 5 per cent, it could not pay 
and it would be in default and repudiation. 

If there is a city or town in this condition, it is but a stronger 
reason why the Convention should apply the brakes now and pro¬ 
tect others Cities and towns, like individuals, should be made 
to live within their income. This extravagance of beautifying 
ornamentation etc., is all right, and we love to see it, but I sub¬ 
mit we are pledged here to the people of Alabama in this Conven- 
lon that we shall not raise the rate of taxation, and we ought to 

bC ?u ne tV We ca " not raise jt - 1 have no *dea that the delegates 
on this Municipal Corporation Committee will ask us to raise the 
limit on cities and towns beyond half of one per cent. If one-half 
o one per cent will not allow them to pay more than 5 per cent— 

I regard that as the maximum—I yielded to it simply to have 
unanimity on that report. I believe it is possible we may go to 
i>, but I believe 3 is safe and conservative, and the city—smaller 
and with less property than the county—ought at least be brought 
down to the limit of 3 1-2 per cent, which the Convention has 
passed after a long discussion and test vote; we should not allow 
the cities and towns greater taxes, a greater rate than the county. 
We fixed that after examination of figures; the Convention itself 
tixed it at 3 1-2 per cent. Certainly, the ability of the county is 
greater than that of the town. Why should we adopt this amend¬ 
ment when the mover of this resolution himself stood by us in 
reducing from 5 to 3 1-2, and he now undertakes to tax the peo¬ 
ple or authorize indebtedness against the people of the cities and 
towns up to 7 per cent, with a dozen or more exceptions, which 
to my mind seem to be indefinite. So far as these exceptions are 
concerned, I would rather have no limit at all, because it is as 
much as to say to these people that we, as delegates in Convention 
assembled, have considered the matter and fixed the rate to which 
i can go with safety, but I do not believe the average city or 



1528 


OFFICIAL PROCEEDINGS 


town would dare undertake to do this, and we are doing ourselves 
injustice, we are doing wrong to the cities and towns to even 
say for one moment, you can incur the extent of indebtedness 
authorized by the substitute. I therefore hope, Mr. President 
and delegates of the Convention, that you will look into it. As 
has been well said by my distinguished friend from (iretne, to 
my mind, it is the most dangerous ordinance or attempt to amend 
an ordinance, made in this Convention since we have convened. 
I appeal to you, look into it. Apply it to your own municipalities. 
Look at your tax lists and see if it does not mean danger of repu¬ 
diation whenever we come near the 7 per cent mark. It is a con¬ 
tinuation of that spirit which is going over the cities and towns 
of Alabama and taxing every man, woman and child in business. 
Why, the very spirit, if not the letter of the Constitution, is being 
violated. It is our duty to stop it, and prevent them from in¬ 
curring this indebtedness that will inflict such taxation not only 
upon property, but upon business and occupations in the countrv. 

I feel it is our duty to put it in the fundamental law of the land, 
that if there is any city has gone beyond it, let them come up like 
Colbert and we will make exceptions as to them, but for those 
who have not reached that far, I appeal to the delegates of the 
Convention to come up with a strong arm and sav: “thus far 
shalt thou go, but no farther.” 


MR. GRAHAM (Montgomery)—I wish to state, Mr. Presi¬ 
dent, in order that the members of the Convention may not mis¬ 
understand the position I propose to take upon this floor that I 
favor a limit on municipal taxation. We are here assembled in 
a sovereign capacity for the purpose of framing a Constitution 
which is to wisely govern the entire people of the great State 
of Alabama and yet in the very beginning of those deliberations 
distinguished gentlemen upon this floor have their hands upon 
the throats of municipalities of the State attempting to choke the 
very life out of them. Distinguished gentlemen are here for the 
purpose of deliberating and framing fundamental laws for the gov- 

a thC .^ ood P e °P le of the State of Alabama and not to 
retard the prosperity of any. Why, sir, a mad bull is made mad- 
der by flaunting a red flag in his face, and the gentleman, my col¬ 
league (Mr. Macdonald) could not be made madder upon anv 
question than by flaunting in his face the red flag of increased 
taxes in municipalities, as administered by the municipal au¬ 
thorities of this city. It is his nature, I don’t blame him for the 
position he takes. He has been litigating at everv nnint A *, 

Cm 0 ? c W ° f Alabama but before the’Supreme 

Court of the United States, and they have in recent decisions de¬ 
livered, absolutely trampled the position assumed by him under 
foot, and yet after all these decisions, he comes up smiling and 
says he will look and see what the Supreme Court of Alabama 
will again say upon the subject and he is now before the Supreme 



CONSTITUTIONAL CONVENTION, 1901 


1529 


Court of Alabama testing a question, though the decision of the 
highest court in the land is against him. The case of village of 
Norwood vs. Baker, decided by the Supreme Court of the United 
States, was seized upon by the gentleman and others interested 
in this class of litigation to cry "Confiscation! confiscation!!" 
and yet the very first time the Supreme Court of the United States 
has an opportunity to pass upon, compare and distinguish this 
case with that of Parsons vs. the District of Columbia, they made 
the distinction so clear that the yell raised by the gentleman and 
others, that it was confiscation, sank so far in the minds of all 
reasonable men, that he does not dare raise it again. The case of 
Birdsong vs. city of Montgomery was a notable one and was de¬ 
cided against him. The Supreme Court of the United States has 
since that time also decided the proposition against him. In the 
city of Montgomery we have an indebtedness of about two mil¬ 
lion dollars. Five hundred thousand of it we have been laboring 
under for many, many years. It was appropriated by a Republi¬ 
can administration to the building of a railroad under certain con¬ 
ditions which were never complied with, but the bonds were used 
for the purpose of building the railroad. Six hundred thousand 
dollars of our indebtedness was caused by the purchase of our 
water works, and I defy any man on the floor of this Convention 
to take the report made by the Water Company and compare it 
with the report made by the city of Montgomery, and not say it 
was a blessing that the water works are owned by the city. 

MR. SANFORD (Montgomery)—The waterworks add a rev¬ 
enue to the town, nobody objects to that. 

MR. GRAHAM (Montgomery)—I have heard my friend be¬ 
fore, for whom I have great respect and almost affection. I have 
heard him before, there is more bluster in him than anything else. 
We have a condition existing in this State, Mr. President, in re¬ 
spect to our municipal corporations and this Convention ought 
to meet it like brave men and not like cowards, they ought to 
settle this matter in a way that will bring the “greatest good to 
the greatest number" of people that live in these cities, and if they 
fail to do it, they will fail to discharge one of the greatest duties 
enjoined upon them when called upon to assemble in this Con¬ 
vention and legislate for the people. There is a condition exist¬ 
ing here which we are bound to meet even though the limitation 
is put down to 5 per cent. In the language of the gentleman from 
Lee, municipal corporations, cities and towns, extending from the 
boundaries of Tennessee to the Gulf of Mexico will go down into 
the depths of bankruptcy. That condition exists. Is it our duty 
to jump on those that are down and trample the last particle of 
life out of them, or is it our duty to go to them with a helping 
hand and ask if we can render them assistance? and, if answered 
in the affirmative, to render them the assistance which we ought 
to render? 



IS30 


OFFICIAL PROCEEDINGS 


MR. HARRISON—Render assistance, but don’t bring all the 
others down. 

MR. GRAHAM—Yes, render assistance—I understand the 
motive of the gentleman who makes this argument — my dis¬ 
tinguished friend, whom I helped in this House in 1882 to save 
his county from a condition of utter helplessness. 

MR. HARRISON—A burnt child dreads the fire. 

MR. GRAHAM—Yes, when you get a fellow well burnt, the 
least little flame that comes around runs him crazy. That’s the 
condition of my friend from Lee. The exception that is made here 
is in the interest of these municipalities. The city of Montgom¬ 
ery, as I stated before, owes in the neighborhood of two millions 
and unless relieved by legislation in this Constitution we will go 
to the wall. 

MR. COLEMAN—Does not this meet your case: “Provided, 
this limitation shall not apply to indebtedness already existing 
or authorized to be created?” 

MR. GRAHAM—No, it will not, Mr. President, every man 
that comes to the city of Montgomery, the capital of the great 
State of Alabama, admires its condition. If our streets were in 
the condition they were twenty years ago, there would be fifty 
men on this floor who would get up and ask to have the Capitol 
removed to Birmingham, or some other city in Alabama. 

MR. COLEMAN—Do you propose, then, for all the towns 
of the State to be taxed in order that the Capitol be kept here in 
Montgomery ? 

MR. GRAHAM—No, sir; but if that law is passed, the very 
life of every municipality in this State will be choked out of it— 

MR. MACDONALD — Do I understand you as advocating 
that the total cost of sidewalks, street paving and sewers should 
be taxed upon the abutting owner? 

MR. GRAHAM—No, sir, and the amendment of the gentle¬ 
man from Lauderdale does not say anything of the kind. I say 
that the city at large ought to bear a proportion of the expense 
of paving, that it ought to do its share. All of us are living on the 
streets and ought to bear our proportion. I appeal to the dele¬ 
gates of this Convention after the manner of my distinguished 
friend from Lee, to save the municipalities of the State from de¬ 
struction which is threatened here by the position taken by dis¬ 
tinguished gentlemen on this floor. 

MR. CHAPMAN — Would it serve your purpose to have 
Montgomery excepted from the general law? 

MR. GRAHAM—I don’t want to play the dog in the manger. 



1531 


CONSTITUTIONAL CONVENTION. 1901 


MR. CHAPMAN—You don’t want to put all the other does 
in, do you? K 


MR. GRAHAM—No, sir. 

MR. SANFORD — I did not expect this discussion upon 
Montgomery affairs would be precipitated so early in the session 
of this Convention, and I would hardly have spoken this after¬ 
noon but for the very unkind remark of my friend who loves me 
so well that he speaks of me as being “full of noise” and having 
before - I have heard him before the people and gen¬ 
erally the people have endorsed the opposition to him. You can¬ 
not find an ex-Alderman or an ex-Mayor or an ex-City Attorney 
who is not for all these exactions in favor of municipalities and 
against the people. 


\Vhat have we done here in Montgomery? I tell you gentle¬ 
men it has been confiscation. Men have left the city. Men have 
houses in Montgomery for which they can never pay owing to the 
debts on them for pavements and sidewalks and tesselated streets, 
and , ?u gmn ,! )1( ? cks \ and .there >s starving inside of their houses. 
And they call that benefiting the property! Every tile takes that 
much bread from the mouth of some man who works day after 
day for his daily bread. Why, only the other day a citizen said 
to me, Colonel, if they carry out their project of paving the streets 
as they are doing now. I will have to sell mv house and move 
away because I will be unable to pay the cost of the benefits.” 
You take away the shelter of the poor man who works day after 
day for his daily bread and that of his family, and you take away 
all the hopes of his life. When he has made a little money and 
put it in a homestead you come along and say “we will pave these 
streets with Belgian blocks and tesselated streets,” and for what? 
bimply in order that some gentleman from Boston may walk the 
streets and say what a beautiful town Montgomery is.” That 
don’t feed the poor man. 


How many white people have you in Montgomery? Thir¬ 
teen thousand white people. Its population is supposed to be ac¬ 
cording to the census 30,34 6, but 17,000 of them are negroes Of 
course they are not tax-payers. And of the thirteen thousand 
white people, how many are tax-payers? Five years ago an in- 
quiry into that matter was had and there were seventeen hundred 
tax payers in the city of Montgomery. And all this great indebt¬ 
edness is a burden upon those people. Now, I know whereof I 
speak. One of the finest establishments in Montgomery is today 
under a mortgage which the young men owning it are laboring 
day after day simply to pay the interest and it will finally be 
swept from them. Another young man has a house which he in¬ 
herited from his father and he has said: “You can take my house 
for the pavements and the Opposed benefit.” These are facts. 
Your bankers have moved from Montgomery. Men who owned 



1532 


OFFICIAL PROCEEDINGS 


houses on the prominent streets have gone to the country, gen¬ 
tlemen of fortune, have built outside the city. I know that less 
than twelve months ago there was a meeting of the citizens to 
consider these matters, and there, sir, I know you heard my voice 
protesting that this taxation would amount to confiscation. These 
are facts about this thing and yet we have gentlemen who would 
tax you still more. What benefit are brick streets to a man who 
works day after day for his bread. How do brick streets benefit 
him? And yet you say to him “you must pay these taxes” when 
he can barely support those dependent on him. And these of¬ 
ficers who have been paid by the municipalities are always shock¬ 
ed by the voices when they appeal for the people and against 
grasping municipalities. I am glad to say that if my voice is 
harsh the people have heard it. Today a man said to me, “For 
God’s sake don’t let them continue this system of government. 
We rely upon you and our other friends to prevent that.” And 
I stand here today protesting against any such proposition which 
has been so ably exposed by the gentleman from Greene and the 
gentleman from Lee and which was defended by my two col¬ 
leagues from Montgomery, one an ex-alderman and the other an 
ex-city attorney and mayor. That carries out what I said that 
that class is always asking for power for municipalities against 
the people. 

They say that we are choking municipalities to death. Who 
are the municipalities? Are they not the people? When we say 
the city of Montgomery, it has no existence apart from the people 
who compose it, John Sanford and George Macdonald and James 
Smith, and others. We are protecting the people against these 
grasping municipalities and you will hear our voices before this 
Convention adjourns in more forms than one. 

Gentlemen of the Convention, I hope you will listen to the 
eloquent appeals of the gentleman from Lee, to the earnest and 
truthful argument of the gentleman from Greene and even to the 
voice, and nothing but voice, but with a great deal of heart and 
sincerity and earnestness for his people. I hope this amendment 
will be defeated by an overwhelming majority. 

MR. PILLANS—I offer an amendment. 

MR. HARRISON—Is not there already an amendment to an 
amendment? 

THE PRESIDENT—Yes, the Chair will state to the gentle¬ 
man from Mobile, that the gentleman from Talladega offered an 
amendment to the Section and the gentleman from Lauderdale 
offered an amendment. 

MR. PILLANS—Then my amendment is not in order? 

THE PRESIDENT—Not at this time. 



CONSTITUTIONAL CONVENTION, 1901 


1533 


MR. COLEMAN (Greene)—The amendment of the gentle¬ 
man from Talladega was simply a change in phraseology. It was 
really no amendment. 

MR. BROWNE—When the gentleman from Lauderdale was 
offering his amendment, I begged the Convention to allow this 
little verbal amendment of mine to be gotten out of the way but 
it was declined. Now I ask unanimous consent that the amend¬ 
ment offered by the Committee be taken up and disposed of in 
order that the gentleman from Mobile can offer his amendment. 
The amendment of the Committee is only a formal amendment. 

THE PRESIDENT—The gentleman asks unanimous con¬ 
sent on the part of the Committee to incorporate that amendment. 
Is there objection? The Chair hears none and the amendment 
will be made and the gentleman from Mobile can now send up 
his amendment. 

The amendment was read as follows: Amend the substitute 
by striking out paragraphs A and D. 

MR. PILL A NS—I will ask that the clerk read paragraphs 
A and D of the substitute offered by the gentleman from Lauder¬ 
dale. 


The sections were read as follows : 

(a) Notes, certificates of indebtedness or revenue bonds is¬ 
sued in anticipation of the collection of taxes, unless the same 
be not paid within two years from the date of such issue and all 
such notes, certificates of indebtedness and revenue bonds shall 
be provided for, and made payable from the taxes levied for the 
year in which they are issued, and shall never exceed the amount 
of such taxes. 

(d) Debts created for the preservation of the public health. 

MR. PILLANS—The object of this amendment is to make 
the substitute which is offered, and which contains a limitation 
upon the indebtedness which a municipal corporation can subject 
itself to, not applicable to the following extraordinary matters, to 
wit: (b) bonds issued for the purpose of purchasing or otherwise 
providing for a supply of water or for the construction or in¬ 
stallation of sanitary sewers, or for the extension of either of the 
same, (c) obligations incurred and bonds issued to procure means 
to pay for street or sidewalk improvements or storm water sew¬ 
ers, the cost of which is to be assessed against the property abut¬ 
ting or drained by such sewers, (e) debts existing on the 6th day 
of December, 1875, or any obligation issued to renew or refund 
the same. 

The purpose of the amendment therefore, is to make it plain 



1534 


OFFICIAL PROCEEDINGS 


that these extraordinary indebtednesses, above the limited in¬ 
debtedness of 7 per cent shall be confined to these three subject 
matters, namely, the providing of water for the people, putting in 
sanitary sewers, and debts existing at the time of the adoption 
of the constitution of 1875, and obligations for street improve¬ 
ments or storm water sewers, which are assessable in whole or in 
part against abutting property owners. 

MR. deGRAFFENRElD—Why do you not put lights in there 
as well as the other? 

MR. PILLANS—Well, because that is a part of the ordinary 
municipal expenditures, and I agree entirely with the Committee 
in not putting lights and so on in, and I will give the reason. The 
city I live in, which happens to be the largest in the State, not¬ 
withstanding that it is doubted by some of my friends here has 
been lighted for many years by electricity, and was lighted for a 
great many years, of course, by gas. It has never had a mu-* 
nicipal electric lighting plant, except after electric lighting came 
into vogue we tried electric lighting I think once by municipal 
ownership, and we did not find that it paid at all, and today we 
have no thought or idea of putting in an expensive plant to be op¬ 
erated by politicians in competition with private parties. Now if 
in other places you find it will pay better for the city to own the 
'f’hting plant, let them have it, but all of that is a matter that 
ought to be paid out of the seven per cent limitation, or whatever 
limitation this body fixes as the limitation for the ordinary in¬ 
debtedness of cities. 

Now, to speak particularly to the matter of street improve¬ 
ment bonds. If there shall be a limitation put into this Consti¬ 
tution upon the power of cities to incur debts or five, seven or 
three per cent., the cities of Alabama which have already incurred 
more than that amount of bonded indebtedness can never incur 
a debt to the extent of one penny. That is plain. Therefore everv 
one of those cities will be unable to incur one dime’s worth of 
debt for street improvement or pavement, or for water works, or 
any other thing, and particularly for street improvements, which 
whde apparently an indebtedness of the city, and temporarilv an 
indebtedness of the city, will be, in part at least, paid by the abut- 
ting property owners, and I am sure it will not be the policv of 
this Convention to cut off from the progressive cities of Alabama, 
large and small, the right and power to do what other cities in 
every portion of the United States do, and that is improve their 
streets, and pave their streets, as Montgomery has done, bv as¬ 
sessing part of the cost of the pavement against the abutting 
property owner. * 

MR. HARRISON—Do you know of any city in the United 
States that has larger indebtedness than that proposed? 



CONSTITUTIONAL CONVENTION, 1901 


1535 


MR. PILLANS—I can name the city of Mobile. It has a 
twenty per cent, indebtedness right there, and we are asking this 
Convention to enable us to pave our streets. The pavement we 
used to have, shells and cobble-stones, has been taken out, as it 
has become useless and we have got to repave, and we are now 
about to do it, and I speak from the standpoint of a property own¬ 
er who will have to pay heavily and severely for this improve¬ 
ment. 

MR. HARRISON—You have a right to double taxation now, 
an additional one-half. 

MR. PILLANS—Oh, we pay three-quarters of one per cent 
to our old creditors and we have three-quarters of one per cent 
for the maintenance of the city, and the three-quarters of one 
per cent for the maintenance of the city will allow us to do no 
paving. 

MR. O’NEAL (Lauderdale) — What was your purpose in 
striking out (D) “debts created for the preservation of the public 
health ?” I want to make this suggestion. Suppose an epidemic 
should occur in some city or town in the State, and it should be 
necessary to go beyond the seven per cent., don’t you think the 
city ought to have that power, if necessary, to preserve the health 
or life of the people? Ought their hands to be tied in the event 
of a great emergency of that kind, so they cannot create a debt 
which might be necessary to save the lives of its people? 

MR. PILLANS—I will answer the gentleman by saying that 
I perhaps occupy a unique position, not believing in a quarantine 
system that is the curse of this Southern land, and has done no 
good, but has nearly bankrupted some of the towns, I do not be¬ 
lieve in a time of panic, when reason is dethroned and every 
charletan controls the people, and when shot gun quarantines are 
in effect, that it is wise to leave your municipalities with an un¬ 
limited power of expenditure and of creating indebtedness at such 
a time as that. That is the time of all times, when they need the 
restraining influence of this Constitution in the matter of their 
power to create debts. That was the reason I introduced that, 
though I will say I am perfectly indifferent personally as to that 
part of my amendment. The chief reason for offering the amend¬ 
ment was to make sure that we would not in this Constitution 
establish the principle that there could be no local assessments 
for local improvements hereafter in the State of Alabama, in cities 
to which these improvements are absolutely essential to the 
progress, health and the well being not only of every city, but ev¬ 
ery large town in the State. 

THE PRESIDENT—The Chair will state that the gentle¬ 
man from Jefferson has the floor and yielded to the gentleman 
from Mobile, the Chair understood temporarily. 



1536 


OFFICIAL PROCEEDINGS 


MR. PILLANS—I thank the gentleman. 

MR. FERGUSON—Mr. President and gentlemen of the Con¬ 
vention, I regard it as a most unfortunate day for the State of Ala¬ 
bama and any municipality within it, when any bonded indebted¬ 
ness was incurred by the State or any part of the people of the 
State of Alabama. This, however, Mr. President, is a condition 
that has been forced upon us. It came upon us in the reconstruc¬ 
tion days. It is a condition and we must confront it. We have 
met it by a provision in the Constitution that we are about to 
adopt, limiting the power of the State to contract debts by the 
issuance of bonds, to the extent of nine millions of dollars. I de¬ 
sire to say, gentlemen of the Convention that I am in favor of the 
lowest possible limitation on State, county and municipal in¬ 
debtedness, consistent with the honor of the State, of the coun¬ 
ties, and of the municipalities of the State. 

There is a vital principle, however, involved in the question 
that is now before us, and I outlined that by the question that I 
put to the gentleman from Dale. That question is this: in the 
city of Birmingham, and I have no doubt the city of Montgom¬ 
ery, and in other large cities of the State, this abutting property 
tax that the Supreme Court has declared constitutional, has been 
fixed upon a majority of the property owners and the property of 
those cities. There is a standing decision of the courts that I 
think the Convention should stand by. I rise, Mr. President, to 
speak to the exception. In the amendment introduced by the 
gentleman from Lauderdale that this character of indebtedness 
that has already accrued within certain cities of this State shall 
be excepted from the general operation of the ordinances we are 
now about to adopt, is eminently fair, it is eminently just, and 
stands by the law that has been laid down by the Supreme Court 
of Alabama in this particular premises. 

Now, gentlemen to show you how unfair it would be at this 
time to exempt those cities that have already paid that tax, I will 
ask you this simple question: If those that have not paid have 
not already gained the benefit of those that have paid this oner¬ 
ous and burdensome tax? I do not know what the figures are, 
and do not undertake to give figures, in the premises, either for 
the city of Birmingham, or any other city in the State, but I would 
say at a hazard, that in the city of Birmingham, perhaps two- 
thirds of the citizenship within that city owning property have 
paid this tax, and that two-thirds in value have paid this tax. 
That would leave then one-third of the citizenship and one-third 
of the property that have not sustained the burdens of any of 
that tax. Those that have not paid it have gained the benefits 
arising from the payment of that tax by those that have paid it. 

MR. KYLE—Do you hold that it is just because you have 



CONSTITUTIONAL CONVENTION, 1901 


1537 


wronged two-thirds of your citizens, to wrong the other one-third 
to make them equal? 

MR. FERGUSON—I say let the decisions of the State courts 
stand as they do on every other question involving property right^ 
in this State. The time has not been within the history of Eng¬ 
lish jurisprudence where the courts have not stood by the deci¬ 
sions of the courts where property rights intervened, or became 
involved, no matter how oppressive the measure may seem. Ev¬ 
ery lawyer on this floor knows that to be the law, and I say iden¬ 
tically the same principle should prevail in this sort of a tax. 

MR. MACDONALD—Has it ever been decided by the Su¬ 
preme Court of this State, that the simple cost for such improve¬ 
ment should be assessed against the abutting property owner? 

MR. FERGUSON—I have not understood that the amend¬ 
ment in any way proposes anything of that sort. If the gentle¬ 
man will show me anything in it that proposes anything of that 
kind, either by the amendment of the gentleman from Lauder¬ 
dale, or the ordinance reported by the committee, I will abandon 
any position that I have taken in the premises. 

MR. MACDONALD—Have you read the substitute offered 
by the gentleman from Lauderdale? 

MR. FERGUSON—No; blit I have heard it read, and I do 
not understand that it proposes any such thing. 

MR. MACDONALD—If my friends will read it more care¬ 
fully, he will see. 

MR. FERGUSON—As I understand the amendment offered 
by the gentleman from Lauderdale, it simply proposes to except 
from the provision of this ordinance those debts, and that bonded 
indebtedness, that is already accrued, by reason of the assess¬ 
ment of these damages against the abutting property. Am I cor¬ 
rect in that? 

MR. WEAKLEY—You are. 

MR. PERGUSON—That is the way I understand it. Now, 
what I mean to say Mr. President, is that the only limitation what¬ 
ever that I care about in the bonded indebtedness of a city, is that 
which will protect the honor of the city; that which will give it 
credit in the financial world; that which will not burden the citi¬ 
zens of the community, nor burden the property to that degree 
where it will amount to a confiscation of property. 

I believe as much in low taxes, Mr. President, as any man 
upon this floor, but as I understand the proposition of the gen¬ 
tleman from Montgomery, and the gentleman from Dale here, to 
strike out that part of the amendment offered by the gentleman 



1538 


OFFICIAL PROCEEDINGS 


front Lauderdale, it would have the effect of letting 1 those people 
owning property in those cities who had not paid their taxes, to 
get the benefit of those who had already borne its burdens, and if 
that is the purpose of it, I am opposed to it. 

, MR. CUNNINGHAM—Will the gentleman permit a ques¬ 
tion. Does the gentleman hold that assessments made and con¬ 
tracts let under the present Constitution will be rendered void 
by the section of the committee’s report relating to this question. 

MR. FERGUSON—I am unable to answer the gentleman on 

that. 

MR. CUNNINGHAM—In other words, would it go back; 
would it be retroactive? 

MR. FERGUSON I will answer the gentleman to this ex¬ 
tent. If the money is already paid, why then they are concluded 
by it. 

MR. CUNNINGHAM The point is this: assessments that 
have been made and that have not been paid—would they be ren¬ 
dered void, or vitiated by this proposed provision in the Consti¬ 
tution? My understanding is that it could not be made retroac¬ 
tive. 

MR. FERGUSON—Well, I expect under the Constitution 
of the United States, affecting the obligations of contracts that 
have been entered into, that is, if any man acting under the in¬ 
fluence of those contracts had done any work, why the contract 
would still hold good. I believe that to be the law of the case. 

MR. O’NEAL (Lauderdale) — Will the gentleman allow a 
question, which I propound for information. Many of us do not 
understand this question very fully. If this limitation as to bonds 
to procure the means for street and sidewalk improvement is 
stricken out, I desire to know whether or not cities like Birming¬ 
ham, Huntsville, Florence, Montgomery, and other cities of that 
character, would be precluded from the improvement of their 
streets or sidewalks in the future on account of the fact that thev 
would exceed the limitation of 7 per cent? Would it have that 
effect? 

Now this provision prohibits any city contracting a debt in 
excess of 7 per cent. Now Birmingham already has a debt of 15 
per cent. Would it prohibit cities of that kind, or would it pro¬ 
hibit most of the cities in the State, from continuing the present 
system of street improvement by assessing it against the property 
owners ? 

MR. FERGLSON I candidly confess I am unable to answer 
the gentleman in that respect. I have not given enough consid¬ 
eration or thought to the subject. 



CONSTITUTIONAL CONVENTION, 1901 


1539 


THE PRESIDENT—The time of the gentleman from Jef¬ 
ferson has expired. 

MR. LOWE (Jefferson)—Mr. President, some allusion has 
been made by one of the distinguished gentlemen who has pre¬ 
ceded me in debate to the fact that those who have been connect¬ 
ed with municipalities in official positions were all one way upon 
the proposition that is now presented to this Convention. I as¬ 
sume that that will not be construed to weaken the force of the 
contention, when it appears to this Convention that those who 
have been honored by the people, among whom they live, by elec¬ 
tion to the office of Mayor, or Councilman, or City Attorney, and 
that all of those in fact, whose attention has been particularly 
called to these matters, should stand as one man upon this propo¬ 
sition, certainly ought not to a fair-minded man prejudice the 
proposition itself. 

Air. President and gentlemen of the Convention, I submit to 
you that to adopt Section 10, as reported by the Committee on 
Taxation, will stop the wheels of progress in the city that I come 
from. I believe, gentlemen of the Convention, that Section was 
prepared without consultation with those who had in their hands 
by virtue of the suffrage of the people of that community, the wel¬ 
fare and destiny of the community. I dare say that that provision 
was adopted with those who had expert and intimate acquaint¬ 
ance and knowledge with the methods, and result that are sought 
to be obtained in that community. Else they would not have sub¬ 
mitted this report. 

I say, and I say it deliberately, that the adoption of that pro¬ 
vision as embraced in Section 10, even as amended, will stop the 
wheels of progress where they are in my city. We have as this 
Convention knows, in the lifetime of all of us who sit here, and 
within less than a generation, converted a city into a wilderness, 
and that is not done without the expenditure of money. (Laugh¬ 
ter.) 

A gentleman has corrected me; we have converted a wilder¬ 
ness into a city, and your grandchildren will not see that city con¬ 
verted into wilderness unless this Convention lays its ruthless 
hands upon her today. (Applause.) 

This Convention, gentlemen, was brought here to deal with 
matters general. They are seeking to regulate matters special. 
They seem to have forgotten the time-honored Democratic doc¬ 
trine of local self-government. They are unwilling, forsooth, be¬ 
cause some of the gentlemen boastingly assert that they come 
from towns that do not have sidewalks and sewers, without con¬ 
sideration, or a study of the problem that my people are trying 
to solve, to say that Birmingham shall have sidewalks or sewers. 
Why, sir, it is a cruel proposition. We have now, after many 



1540 


OFFICIAL PROCEEDINGS 


years of struggling, arrived at a system of sidewalk and street 
improvement, and sewer improvement, by which the least hard¬ 
ship falls upon the people, and all of the people in that communi¬ 
ty, I might say almost without exception, are satisfied with it. 
Why I tell you that the Board of Aldermen receive censure be- 
cause they cannot proceed fast enough with the improvements 
demanded by the property owners. The property owners in a 
section of the city will come and demand a sewer, and in order 
to build that sewer we have to issue bonds, and then the property 
owner, if he chooses, may pay in cash his assessment, or he may 
pay it in annual installments for ten years. The city seeing the 
danger, declined to proceed further until the bonds to be issued 
upon the work should be sold. Then they came in many instances 
guaranteeing themselves to take the bonds, in order that the work 
might not be retarded. 

Now this provision would prevent all that. That bond is the 
indebtedness of the city, but it is secured to the city by a first 
lien upon the property improved by it. 

Can a city grow without sewers? Can a city thrive without 
streets and without sidewalks? I say no. I say that the people 
in Birmingham who are bearing the burden have not uttered a 
cry of complaint. There has not been the suggestion of com¬ 
plaint from them. I tell you, gentlemen, they are not only sat¬ 
isfied, they are more than pleased with the existing conditions 
and the laws under which those great works of public improve¬ 
ment are being carried on there. 

Why, our county is now engaged in building a sanitary sewer 
that will cost over five hundred thousand dollars and may be 
three times as much, but then we are building a great community. 

Gentlemen, this says “no city, town or other municipality 
shall become indebted in an amount exceeding five per centum of 
the taxable value of the property thereof.” Birmingham is now ex¬ 
ceeding it by ten per cent. Therefore you say to Birmingham, 
although our credit is still good, we are paying the interest on our 
bonds, we are maintaining our credit at home and abroad, and 
it becomes necessary sometimes in advance to discount incom¬ 
ing receipts from taxes in the course of current affairs, from 
day to day, or month to month, and we never have the slightest 
trouble.— 

MR. WHITE—Is it not the fact that we have the means of 
paying fthat other cities have not, by the means of the amend-* 
ment in the Constitution so as to allow us to levy a tax to pay it? 

MR. LOWE (Jefferson)—I answer the gentleman that we 
have the means of paying that no bankrupt city has. We have 
means of paying every dollar we owe, and we now have the 
means of going to the banks, when our accounts are falling due 



CONSTITUTIONAL CONVENTION, 1901 1541 

and the rates from taxes have not been received, and getting 
money at 4 and 6 per cent for sixty days, and ninety days, until the 
taxes come in. This would deny us that privilege. We would 
ave to issue script from the minute that became a law if we fell 
°J. e se we K would ha ^ to hound the tax payers from the 

, T eS ^ ecame , due - Now - 1 am in favor of the substi¬ 
tute offered by the gentleman from Lauderdale. The fact that 
he is a mayor of a city, and the fact that he has become from the 
very nature of his business, as an honest and industrious man, 
and a faithful public servant, an expert in municipal matters, ought 

"fY® dl u rCd u ^ ,S statenient here - His proposition is acceptable 
to me. It will be acceptable to my community. The proposi- 
lon reported by the Committee is destruction to the best interests 
of our community. It stops oyr streets where they are. It stops 
our sewers where they are, and our sidewalks— 

MR. WEAKLEY Will the gentleman allow a question? 

MR. LOW E (Jefferson)—Yes. 

MR YV EAKLE\ Would not the report of the Committee 
axation make it absolutely impossible under any circum¬ 
stances for the city of Birmingham to own its water works svs- 
tem ? - 

MR. LOWE (Jefferson)—I am glad that the gentleman has 
suggested it. I was going to refer to it later. Our water works, 
Mr. i resident are worth more than a million dollars. They are 
worth more than three per cent, we will say. of the taxable value 
ot the property. This makes it utterly impracticable for Birming- 
ham to ever own her water works, the matter that has been dear 
to the hearts of her people and under consideration for many 
years being the project for the purchase of the water works. 

f . WEATHERLY-I wish to know if it is absolutely clear 

that three per cent applies where the five per cent limit has been 
reached already? 

MR. LOWE (Jefferson)—I am not sure about that I don’t 
want to be techn cal about it. I want to take it in its broadest 
sense. I do not like to go into the details of figures in dealing 
with any broad constitutional question. This is no time for fig- 
uring* on that seems to me. s 

Now, I say to the gentleman from Mobile, as to the amend¬ 
ment suggested by him. His amendment savs certificates of in¬ 
debtedness issued in anticipation of the collection of taxes, are to 
be included in the estimate of seven per cent. Whv I say that 
would be ruin to Birmingham in a minute. We already owe fif- 
een per cent. We could not borrow a cent. We could not bor¬ 
row a dollar to tide us from day to day. As it is now we can 
easily go to the banks and borrow from fifty to a hundred thou- 



1542 


OFFICIAL PROCEEDINGS 


sand dollars for thirty, sixty or ninety days, on minimum inter¬ 
est, and yet if that provision was put in there, we would either 
have to grind the tax payer, or we would have to fail to pay the 
city employes, or issue script; practically be in a state of bank¬ 
ruptcy. Mr. President, what Birmingham asks of this Conven¬ 
tion is, largely, to be let alone. We have no objection to your 
putting the tax limit if you choose so that that limit is so liberal 
that it will never endanger the credit of one city, but this is a Con¬ 
stitution that is to guide us for half a century— 

MR. HARRISON—If we except Birmingham, are you will¬ 
ing to accept it? 

MR. LOWE (Jefferson)—No, sir; I will not desert those 
who have stood by Birmingham in this hour of her peril. The 
Convention may except Birmingham, but there are other towns 
in Alabama. Birmingham is merely typical. There is Florence, 
there is Tuscumbia, Sheffield, Anniston, Huntsville— 

MR. JONES (Montgomery)—Montgomery. 

MR. LOWE (Jefferson)—Montgomery and Mobile. 

MR. O’NEAL (Lauderdale)—Bridgeport and Decatur. 

MR. LOWE (Jefferson)—There is every progressive town 
in Alabama, every town that feels the thrill of life within her be¬ 
ing, is threatened by this legislation. 

Legislation, Mr. Chairman, that was suggested by a Com¬ 
mittee that did not call into consultation those most immediately 
concerned in the welfare of the communities with which they 
sought to deal. There is not a provision that is incorporated in 
section ten that is not disastrous to my community. It threatens 
every other town in Jefferson County. Why do you w r ant to put 
shackels on the limbs of your growing young giant? Do you 
want to put your thriving cities in a straight jacket? Are you 
content to dwell in a wilderness, and drive through prairie mud 
to your court houses? 

Mr. President, and gentlemen of the Convention, I agree with 
the distinguished gentleman from Greene that this is a serious 
question involved here. I tell you that I know my constituency, 
and they will rebel against the effort of this Convention, sent here 
to make a Constitution, undertaking to assume the functions of 
the General Assembly, and assume the functions of their immedi¬ 
ate municipality boards, selected immediately by them and their 
neighbors, and instructed by them as to their will and their 
wishes. You must take your hands off of your growing cities. 
You must let them alone. This is no place for local legislation. 
You have limited local legislation by the General Assembly. The 
reports of your committees will prevent local legislation and rele- 



CONSTITUTIONAL CONVENTION. 1901 


1543 


£ a * e u ^ t ^ le oca ^ boards, and yet this Convention proposes to 
tell the General Assembly what to do, and you undertake to tell 
the representatives of the people not only to he assembled in the 
General Assembly, but the representatives to be assembled in the 
municipal boards what to do, and you provide for what they shall 
do within the next fifty years. 

MR. HEFLIN (Chambers)—I move that the gentleman’s 
time be extended ten minutes longer. 

MR. LOWE (Jefferson)—I am very grateful for the offer, 
but unless some gentleman desires to ask some questions, I should 
not care to consume the time of the Convention longer. 

MR. O’NEAL (Lauderdale)—I desire to offer a resolution 
before I commence my remarks on this question. 

The resolution was sent to the clerk’s desk and read as fol- 
lows : 

Whereas, The Fourth of July is sacred to all who appre¬ 
ciate republican institutions, and is in all portions of the Republic— 

MR. REESE I rise to a point of order. The consent of this 
House has not been obtained to read that resolution. 

MR. O’NEAL—This is a privileged motion. A motion to 
adjourn. 

The clerk continued the reading—“all portions of the Re¬ 
public, wherever the flag waves,- 

MR. ROGERS (Sumter)—I make the point of order that is 
a motion to adjourn and it is not debatable. 

The reading continued—“a dav of rejoicing and thanksgiv¬ 
ing; and, whereas, the people of Alabama, in convention assem¬ 
bled. recognizing the glorious memories which this dav awakens 
and appreciating that brotherly feeling which now exists between 
the States, and to which we owe our beautiful Federal system. 

Therefore be it resolved, That in honor of Independence Day 
the Convention adjourn at its usual hour until Friday morning.” 

MR. WILLIAMS (Marengo)—I have a substitute— 

MR. O’NEAL (Lauderdale)—I have the floor. 

THE PRESIDENT —The gentleman from Lauderdale has 
the floor. 

MR. ONEAL (Lauderdale)—On that resolution I move the 
previous question. 

Mr. Burns of Dallas sought recognition. 



1544 


OFFICIAL PROCEEDINGS 


MR. REESE—I call for the ayes and noes on that resolution. 

Cries of “no, no.” 

THE PRESIDENT—The gentleman from Lauderdale has 
the floor, and moves the adoption of the resolution, and upon that 
demands the previous question. The question is shall the main— 

MR. REESE—I demand the ayes and noes. 

MR. BURNS—He announced that he offered a motion to 
adjourn, and that is not debatable. I desire to offer an amend¬ 
ment. 

The amendment was read as follows : 

“Resolved, That the report of the Committee on the Declara¬ 
tion of Rights be set as a special order for tomorrow at 11 o’clock.” 

THE PRESIDENT—The substitute is out of order. The 
question is upon the adoption of the resolution. As many as favor 
the motion- 


MR. REESE—I demand the ayes and noes. 

THE PRESIDENT—The ayes and noes are called for. 

There were cries of yes and no, and a division was called for. 
and upon a division the vote resulted 79 ayes and 49 noes. so the 
resolution was adopted. 

MR. COLEMAN (Greene)—I call for a verification of the 
vote. 

MR. CUNNINGHAM — We demand a verification of that 
vote by the ayes and noes of this Convention. 

Cries of “Too late.” 

MR. CUNNINGHAM—We demand it. We make the point 
of order that we have a right to a verification of the vote. 

Cries of “No, no.” 

MR. WHITE—I make the point of order that the demand 
comes too late. 

MR. REESE—I have been on my feet demanding the ayes 
and noes ever since the resolution was offered. 

THE PRESIDENT—There was so much confusion in the 
Convention that it was impossible for the Chair to hear what gen¬ 
tlemen were demanding. It seems every one was on his feet clam¬ 
oring for something, and it was difficult for the Chair to ascer¬ 
tain exactly what was demanded. 

MR. REESE—If there is anything now before the House I 



CONSTITUTIONAL CONVENTION. 1901 


1545 


demand the ayes and noes on that. (Laughter.) 

MR. O'NEAL — I desire to continue my remarks on this 
resolution. 

The clock struck 6, and the Convention was declared ad¬ 
journed until Friday morning at 9:30 o'clock. 


CORRECTION 

In remarks of Mr. Weakley on Cage 4, fourth column near 
the top, the sentence, “If the Constitution of 1875 had inserted in 
it some limitations upon the taxing power of the cities and coun¬ 
ties of this State to create debts, the present financial condition 
with which we are confronted would not exist today/* should have 
the word 'Taxing'* omitted. 


THIRTY-SEVENTH DAY 

MONTGOMERY, ALA.. 

Friday, July 5th, 1901. 

The Convention met at 9:30 a. m. pursuant to adjournment, 
was called to order by the President, and opened with prayer by 
the Rev. Mr. Patterson, as follows: 

O Lord how excellent is Thy name in all the earth. before 
the mountains were brought forth, or ever Thou didst form the 
world, even everlasting to everlasting. Thou are Cod. Thou art 
the same yesterday, today and forever. Because Thou changest 
not, in Thy mercy, and Thy love, therefore the sons of men are 
not consumed. Thy throne is the throne of glory : Thy place is 
the place of wisdom and of righteousness. Thou art worthy to 
be praised and to he held in reverence by all Thy people. As we 
Thy servants come into Thy presence this morning, we invoke 
Thy blessing and pray for Thy guidance. We thank Thee for 
all past blessings that Thou hast bestowed upon our country 
since the day of its birth, until the time when in strength and 
power it stands amid the nations of the earth, and we pray that 
Thy blessing may continue to rest upon it, and Thy presence go 
with us and Thy counsel and wisdom he given to direct. That all 
things that are done here and elsewhere in counsel and delibera¬ 
tion may be for the glory and honor of our God, and for the well 
being of all the citizens of this great Commonwealth. Be with 
us now we pray Thee as we wait before Thee and in the work of 
this day. Give us Thy presence and Thy blessing, and at last 
receive us to Thyself for the Redeemer's sake, Amen. 



1546 


OFFICIAL PROOF Ft) I N C. S 


Upon the call of the roll 116 delegates responded. 

Leaves of absence were granted to, Mr. Miller (Marengo) 
for today and tomorrow on account of sickness; Mr. Morrisette 
for Friday, Saturday, Monday and Tuesday next, on account of 
sickness; Mr. Boone for Tuesday. July 2nd and July 3rd, on ac¬ 
count of sickness in his family; Mr. Jackson for this mornings 
session on account of sickness: Mr. Sollie for today owing to 
sickness; Mr. Graham of Talladega for Wednesday last; indefi¬ 
nite leave for Mr. McMillan (Baldwin) on account of sickness in 
his family, commencing with today : Mr. Samford ( Pike) for to¬ 
day and tomorrow; Mr. deGraffenreid for Saturday and Monday, 
owing to sickness in his family; Mr. Thompson (Bibb) for last 
Wednesday; Mr. Howell for Wednesday last; and Mr. Freeman 
for Wednesday last. 

The report of the Committee on the Journal was read, stating 
that the journal for the thirty-sixth day had been examined and 
found to be correct, and the same was adopted. 


Ordinance No. 409 by Mr. Carmichael (Colbert). 


To provide for the filing and arranging of the papers and 
documents, pertaining to the Constitutional Convention, by the 
Secretary of the Convention; also to provide for the delivery by 
the Secretary of a correct copy of the journal of the Convention 
to the Public Printer with a proper index thereto; also to provide 
for the superintendence of the printing of said journal by the secre- 
tary , also to make appropriations for the compensation of said 
secretary for his services. 


, lt ordained by the people of Alabama in Convention as¬ 
sembled, I hat the Secretary of this Convention shall within fortv 
days after its adjournment file label and arrange the journal of 
said convention all the papers and documents pertaining to said 
convention in the office of the Secretary of State. He shall also 
copy and deliver to the public printer the journal of said Con- 
vention with a proper index thereto within said fortv davx H e 

oOaid journal" nte ' ld "" «* — 'proof 

Be it further resolved. That for the services herein required 
he shall receive the sum of five hundrtd dol¬ 
lars ($500) and upon the production bv the said Secretary of the 
receipt of the Secretary of State for' such papers joirna and 

XToLh 5 : S^iSer ^ 1 : 1 ^ ~ With “He 

vent.on, the State Auditor shall draw'his warranTupon'‘theYtaU 

shaH^e^ a i d f by & th e St ate V reastirer an< ' ^ saifl warrant 

Be it further resolved That u t 

’ nat there hereby appropriated 



CONSTITUTIONAL CONVENTION. 1901 


1547 


out of any money in the State Treasury not otherwise appropriated 
the sum of five hundred dollars ($500) for the compensation of the 
said Secretary for the said services herein required of him. 

Petition No. II by Mr. Murphree (Pike). 

The State of Alabama, 

Pike County, Brundidge. 

The Hons. Joel D. Murphree, J. C. Henderson and W. H. Sanford. 

Dear Sirs—We, the undersigned citizens of Pike County, pe¬ 
tition the Convention through you for the following items of in¬ 
terest to us to be incorporated into the Constitution. 

hirst—Me desire that the* Railroad Commission that we now 
have be abolished anel in lieu thereof create a commission to be 
elected by the people and paid out of the State Treasury as other 
officers are paid. 

Second—-We ask that the membership of the General As¬ 
sembly be not increased before the year 1920. 

M 7 e believe that the interest of the people and the State will 
be as safe in the hands of one hundred representatives and thirty- 
three Senators as with a greater number. 

Third—We wish to say to you, that we have at least 4.000 
farmers in Pike County, the greenest of whom know very well 
who pays the 50 cents per ton tax on guano. 

We protest against the action of the Convention last week on 
that matter and respectfully ask that the question be reconsid¬ 
ered and future legislatures be forbidden to levy a higher tax on 
fertilizers than the actual expense of analysis. 

If you will not do this please say in the organic law that 
coal, iron and other products may be taxed. 

Guano is used by one class; other products by all classes. 

We understand that a great lobby hovered about the Conven¬ 
tion while this question was pending who came from all parts of 
the State, from the University down to the guano school, who 
thought it would be very unwise to do anything that would stop 
the collection of this tax. 

We would respectfully submit to the Convention that but few 
of us down here knew that the Convention was doing about the 
tag tax and we were and are too busy with grass and weeds to 
journey to Montgomery to protest against an unjust tax. 

Respectfully submitted, 

O. E. Hightower, C. M. Swean. John A. McEachen. T. M ; . 



1548 


OFFICIAL PROCKKDINOS 


Griffin T. A. Collier, S. M. Waters, J. M. Logan. J. H. Lawson, 
J. B. Collier, J. E. Helms, W. 1). Lee, R. (> Lawrence, H \V. 
Catten, G. A* Griffin, \V\ B. Kimball, J. B. Colley, I >. C. Allen, 
J. W. Robinson, F. A. Waters. T. G. Carlisle. \\ \\ . Logan, J. 

F. Hightower, W. L. Fleming, I). J. Helm-. Jonathan Williams, 
J. E. French, F. C. Bass. H. F. Griffin, H. Franklin, I). I). Steph¬ 
ens, Fax French, E. A. Butter, A. S. Dickerson, \\ H. Bulger, 
N. W. Galloway, Jasper Johnson, J. H. Childer>. \\ . R. Fierson, 
James O. Ramsey, Joseph Shepherd. L. C. Blickin.-on, J. M. Con¬ 
ner, M. Lightfoot. 

Ordinance No. 410, by Mr. Reese: 

Be it ordained bv the people <>t Alabama, m Convention as¬ 
sembled : 


Sec. —. In all prosecution- for rape, adultery, fornication, 
sodomy or crime against nature, the court, may in its discretion, 
exclude from the court room all person- except such as mav be 
necessary in the conduct of the trial. 

Referred to the Judiciary Committee. 

Ordinance No. 411, by Mr. Reese: 

Be it ordained by the people of .Alabama, in Convention as¬ 
sembled : 

Article IV. 

Sec. —• The Legislature shall enact penal statutes to sup¬ 
press the evil habit ot using obscene and profane language in the 
hearing of children. 

Referred to Committee on Legislative Department. 

Resolution No. 222, by Mr. Reese: 

\\ hereas, the chief and most important purpose for which 
this Convention was called, was and is the revision of the pro¬ 
visions relating to Suffrage and Election, and 

Whereas, more than 46 days have passed since the assemblage 
ot this Convention without any consideration bv it of said pro¬ 
visions, therefore 

l>e it 1 esolved, that immediatelv after the conclusion of the 
consideration of the report of the Committee on Taxation the 
report of the Committee on Suffrage and Elections be and the 
same is hereby made the special order of the Convention, and 
former orders and resolutions of the Convention to the contrary 
are hereby revoked. 



CONSTITUTIONAL CONVENTION, 1901 


1549 


Resolution No, 223, by Mr, Mac A. Smith: 

Resolved, by the people of Alabama, in Convention assem¬ 
bled, that it is the sense of this Convention that the General As¬ 
sembly should, as early as practicable, so amend the laws of said 
State as to more certainly punish the offense of vagrancy, which 
is becoming such a common and alarming evil in many sections 
of Alabama. 

MR. SPRAGINS — I wish to offer this petition, and move 
that it be read and referred to the Committee on Corporations. 

The motion was carried. 

The petition was read as follows: 

Petition No. 12, by Mr. Spragins: 

Huntsville, Ala., June 12, 1901. 
To the Honorables A. S. Fletcher, R. W. Walker and R. E. 

Spragins, Emmett O’Neal and John W. Grayson, Members 

of Constitutional Convention, Montgomery, Ala.: 

Dear Sirs—This is to say to you that at the meeting here 
this evening of the Chamber of Commerce of this City, the fol¬ 
lowing resolution was introduced and passed unanimously, which 
expresses the wishes and views of our body on the question of 
having a Railroad Commissioner elected and paid for by the peo¬ 
ple, and you are hereby respectfully requested, as our representa¬ 
tives in the Constitutional Convention, to give this matter a thor¬ 
ough investigation and use your influence both inside and outside 
of the Convention, to secure a passage of an ordinance as will 
give us such a commission as we desire. We believe that after 
investigating the matter you will find that the relief which we 
seek from unjust taxations, that are now being imposed upon 
us by the railroads of this State, could best be relieved by a Rail¬ 
road Commission, elected and paid by the people. We herewith 
beg to give you the resolution as passed by our bod}' and as above 
referred to: 

“We respectfully represent that whereas the Railroad Com¬ 
mission appointed by the Governor and paid by the railroad has 
proven an entire failure, and whereas the shipper and consumer 
should have some representation in the naming of rates and mak¬ 
ing rules by what is otherwise alien and arbitrary power. That 
whereas, the express, telephone, telegraph and railroad franchises 
are given by the State, the power of these franchises to tax should 
be limited by the State. We therefore request that your honor¬ 
able body will give the State Commission, elected and paid by the 
people, and place all franchises, which have power to tax, within 
their review.” 



1550 


OFFICIAL PROCEEDINGS 


We, the undersigned, are authorized to transmit you the 
above, which is respectfully submitted. 

R. E. Pettus, President. 

F. J. Thompson, Secretary. 


On the call of the standing committees: 

MR. COLEMAN (Greene)—1 understand the report of the 
Suffrage Committee has been printed and is ready for distribu¬ 
tion. I desire to state that in the first line on page two of the re¬ 
port, not a part of the ordinance, but the report of the committee, 
the word “spent*’ has been used instead of the word "spare”. That 
is about the only defect I find in this copy, and I do not think it 
is sufficient to delay the distribution of the printed report. 

THE PRESIDENT—The Chair will call the attention of 
the delegates to the error in the printing of the report of the Com¬ 
mittee on Suffrage, on the first line on page two, where the word 
“spent” is used instead of the word "spare.” 

The Executive Department— 

Mr. Jones (Montgomery)—Submitted a report for the Com¬ 
mittee on the Executive Department as follows: 

Mr. President, the Committee on Executive Department di¬ 
rect me to return Resolution No. 200, with the recommendation 
that it do not pass. In view of the extensive and protracted de¬ 
bate over the matter to which it relates, the committee deems it 
entirely unnecessary to make any argument in support of their 
adverse report. 

I homas G. Jones, Chairman. 

Resolution No. 200, by Mr. Burns (Dallas): 

Whereas, this Convention has seen proper to reject all amend¬ 
ments to Article V, looking- to the relief of Sheriffs, and whereas 

as the Supreme Court has already been burdened with sufficient 
labors; and 

Whereas, local government should be maintained and for 
other valid reasons. 


Resolved That it is the sense of this Convention that Sec¬ 
tion 30, of Article V, should be stricken out and the Sheriffs should 
be left on the same footing as other county officers. 

Referred to the Committee on Executive Department. 

. ¥ R ' HEFLIN (Chambers)—I want to ask the chairman of 

MinSty reportr De » artme "< wha, has become of the 



CONSTITUTIONAL CONVENTION. 1901 1551 

MR. JONES (Montgomery)—The Minority report is on the 
ordinance offered by the gentleman from Chambers. The minority 
did not dissent as to this. They thought one was enough, I sup¬ 
pose. 

MR. HEFLIN (Chambers)—Wasn't your report and some 
amendments made on the ordinance? 

MR. JONES—No, sir; not on the ordinance offered by the 
gentleman from Dallas, or his resolution. 

The report of the Committee on Ordinance No. 408 was read 
as follows: 

Report of the Committee on Executive Department on Or¬ 
dinance No. 408: 

Mr. President, the Committee on Executive Department to 
whom was referred Ordinance No. 408, direct me to return the 
same with the recommendation that it do not pass. It proposes to 
change the present Constitution and the article on the Executive 
Department adopted by this Convention so as to make Sheriffs 
eligible as their own successors, and to change the provisions of 
the article adopted by the Convention to the mode of impeach¬ 
ments of Sheriffs. 

All these matters have been so frequently discussed before 
the Convention, and it has so frequently acted adversely to the 
principle sought to be enacted by the ordinance herewith return¬ 
ed, that the committee refrains from any argument in support of 
its adverse report. 

Thomas G. Jones, Chairman. 

The Minority report of the committee was read as follows: 

Minority report of Executive Department: 

We, the undersigned members of the Committee on the Ex¬ 
ecutive Department, do not concur in the Majority report on Or¬ 
dinance No. 408, introduced by Mr. Heflin of Chambers. 

We recommend the adoption of the ordinance as amended 
by us, which is as follows: 

An ordinance entitled Section 28 of Article V: 

Be it ordained by the people of Alabama, in Convention as¬ 
sembled : 

A Sheriff shall be elected in each county by the qualified 
electors thereof, who shall hold his office for the term of four 
years, unless sooner removed, and he shall be ineligible to such 
office as his own successor. Vacancies in the office of Sherill 



1552 


OFFICIAL PROCEEDINGS 


shall be filled by the Governor, as in other cases; and the person 
appointed, shall continue in office until the next general election 
in the county for Sheriff, as provided by law. 

The Sheriff may be impeached or removed from office in jhe 
manner and for the causes mentioned in Article VII of this Con¬ 
stitution. 

Be it further ordained that Section 28 of Article V which 
was finally passed on July 2, 1901, be and the same is herein re¬ 
pealed. 

T. W. Hodges, 

M. S. Carmichael, 

M. M. Smith. 

THE PRESIDENT—The ordinance will lie upon the table 
and be printed. Is it the pleasure of the Convention that the re¬ 
port of the Committee shall also be printed? The Chair has sev¬ 
eral times called attention to the fact that the rules provide only 
for printing the ordinances. 

MR. WILLIAMS (Marengo)—I move that the report of the 
committee be printed, along with the ordinance, including the 
minority and majority reports both. 

THE PRESIDENT—What is the pleasure of the Conven¬ 
tion as to the resolution? To take the same course? 

MR. JONES—Unless the gentleman from Dallas desires it, I 
do not see any need to print it at all, because it is the same old 
straw we have been threshing over for days. Does the gentle¬ 
man from Dallas wish to have his resolution reported back print¬ 
ed? 


MR. BURNS — I suppose it will be printed in the report. 
The stenographers take down everything, word for word, that is 
said, and it will be printed there. 

The motion to print the reports, minority and majority, and 
ordinances was carried. 

MR. JONES—There is one other matter that I forgot to re¬ 
port. The Committee requested me to return to the Convention 
the petition of the Sheriffs, Clerks and Registers. The commit¬ 
tee had already acted upon so much of the petition as referred to 
the article on Executive Department, and they ask me to return 
it and that it be referred to the Committee on the Judiciary. It 
seems to relate to matters coming up before that committee. 

The petition was received and referred to the Committee on 
Judiciary, as requested. 



CONSTITUTIONAL CONVENTION. 1901 


1553 


THE PRESIDENT—The next business before the Conven¬ 
tion is the consideration of the report of the Committee on Taxa¬ 
tion. 


MR. WALKER—I believe when the Convention adjourned 
day before yesterday it had under consideration the amendment 
offered by the gentleman from Lauderdale, to section 10 of the 
committee’s report. 

THE PRESIDENT—And there is an amendment pending by 
the gentleman from Mobile, an amendment to the amendment 
of the gentleman from Lauderdale. 

MR. WALKER—Two amendments being before the house, 

I understand another one is not now in order. Objection is made 
to the section as reported by the committee- 

THE PRESIDENT—The Chair will call the attention of the 
gentleman to the fact that the gentleman from Lauderdale has 
the floor on that proposition. 

MR. O’NEAL (Lauderdale)—I am willing to yield to the 
gentleman from Madison, provided I am recognized after the 
conclusion of his remarks. 

THE PRESIDENT—The Chair does not entertain any pro¬ 
viso. It will take into consideration the application of the gen¬ 
tleman when made. 

MR. WALKER—Objection was made to the provisions re¬ 
ported by the committee that the operation of the section would 
prevent the acquisition by muncipal corporations of public utili¬ 
ties, in reference to which the indebtedness would not bear upon 
the revenues of the city, because of the possibility of arrange¬ 
ments being made by which those utilities could be made to bear 
the burden. 

Objection on the other hand was made to the amendment 
offered by the gentleman from Lauderdale, on the ground it 
practically amounts to dispensing with all limitations upon the 
debt creating power of municipalities. It occurs to me in refer¬ 
ence to each of these objections there is considerable force. We 
do not want in the first place, to tie the hands of municipalities 
so that they will be unable to acquire certain conveniences of mu¬ 
nicipal life, that may be acquired in such a way as not really to 
create additional burdens upon the revenues from taxation of the 
municipality. On the other hand I take it this convention must 
recognize the necessity of fixing some limitation upon the power 
of municipalities to create debts in any direction, and the limita¬ 
tions which have been suggested before the Convention by each 
of these ordinances have in view really the limiting of the ca¬ 
pacity of municipalities to make debts, and I assume that it is not 



1554 


OFFICIAL PROCEEDINGS 


the purpose of this Convention to leave it free to the municipali¬ 
ties to create debts beyond their capacity to pay, and the argu¬ 
ment that this debt creating capacity should be left untrammeled 
because of the good things that might be acquired by the munici¬ 
palities, is no reason for leaving it without limit. The limitation 
upon municipalities should stand very much upon the footing that 
the limitation upon individuals creating debts, and that the limita¬ 
tion should be the capacity of the individuals or of the munici¬ 
palities to pay those debts. In order to meet, however, the ob¬ 
jections that have been suggested to the plan of the Committee on 
the one hand, and to the plan of the amendment on the other 
hand, I have undertaken to frame an amendment to the ordinance 
as reported by the Committee, which I propose to offer when the 
opportunity presents itself, or when the parliamentary situation 
is such that an amendment can be offered, and I desire now to 
have the proposed amendment read as a part of my remarks. 

The amendment was read as follows: 

Sec. 10. No city, town or other municipal corporation shall 
become indebted in an amount exceeding 5 per centum of the 
taxable value of the property thereof; Provided, that for the con¬ 
struction or purchase of waterworks, gas or electric light plants, 
sanitary sewerage, or street or sidewalk improvements, an addi 
tional indebtedness not to exceed 3 per centum of such taxable 
value may be created so as to be a charge upon the revenues from 
taxation of such city, town or other municipal corporation, and 
that any debts or liabilities in excess of such 3 per centum limita¬ 
tion incurred by such city, town or other municipal corporation 
in the construction or purchase of water works, gas or electric 
light plants, sanitary sewers, or street or sidewalk improvements, 
may be made charges upon or against, respectively, such water 
works, gas or electric light plants, and upon the liens in favor of 
or the liabilities to such city, town or other municipal corporation 
acquired in or by reason of the erection or construction of such 
sanitary sewers, or street or sidewalk improvements; Provided, 
further, That the limitations contained in this section shall not 
apply to any indebtedness in excess of such limitations already 
created or authorized by now existing law to be created. 

MR. WALKER (Madison)—The Convention will observe if 
the purport of that amendment has been understood from the 
reading of it, that the effect of it is to leave the 5 per cent limita¬ 
tion made by the Committee as it stands, to leave the 3 per cent 
additional power of contracting debt stand to the extent of limit¬ 
ing that power of contracting debts to those which will be a 
charge upon the tax revenues of the municipalities, but to re¬ 
move the limitation to the extent of allowing municipalities to 
pledge or make charges upon the properties or utilities that thev 
acquire in making a debt above that limitation. For instance, in 



CONSTITUTIONAL CONVENTION, 1901 


1555 


the case of the acquisition of a water works by a municipality, it 
would be competent to create a debt in addition to the 5 per cent 
limitation, to the extent of a 3 per cent limitation, which would 
bear upon the revenues from taxation of the municipalities, hut 
beyond that 3 per cent limitation, the debt for such water works 
would be chargeable, not upon the revenues from taxation of the 
municipality, but upon the water works plant, that they might 
acquire. 

MR. ROGERS (Sumter)—That they could mortgage their 
plant ? 

MR. W ALKER—Yes, so far as they have security to offer 
which is acceptable in commercial circles, that their powers shall 
not be restricted, but beyond the limits of such security, a prudent 
limitation upon its capacity to create debts shall be fixed bv this 
Constitution, and I conceive that it cannot be argued by any one 
that some such limitation as this should not be put upon the mu¬ 
nicipalities of this State. Municipalities should not be left in a 
position to commit financial suicide at any time for the creation 
of any kind of utilities for the municipalities. They should have 
thrown around them the safeguard and the protection which pru¬ 
dent individuals should throw around themselves, and debts in 
the case of municipalities no more than in the case of individuals 
should be created beyond the possibility of satisfying those debts. 

MR. WEAKLEY (Lauderdale)—Will the gentleman permit 
me to ask him a question? 

THE PRESIDENT—Will the gentleman consent to an in¬ 
terruption ? 

MR. WALKER—Certainly. 

MR. WEAKLEY—Suppose, for instance, the municipality 
has already incurred an 8 per cent, debt, what security has that 
municipality under that plan, to offer to the owner or owners of 
the water works plant for the payment of that, except the revenue 
from it? 

MR. WALKER—If it be a good plant as stated in the case 
of Montgomery, the mortgage upon the plant would be a good 
security. It was argued that Montgomery had recently acquired 
a plant that was in such a situation that the mortgage gi\en and 
the securities upon the plant were sufficient to float the bonds in 
the market and give security—as a matter of fact the revenues 
from the property were more than sufficient. 

MR. WEAKLEY—Did I understand the bonds issued by the 
city of Montgomery for the purchase of water works were not 
general obligations of the city? 

MR. WALKER — I did not say that, but in the argument 



1556 


OFFICIAL PROCEEDINGS 


made here, it was argued by the gentleman from Montgomery 
that the water works plant itself was sufficient to more than re¬ 
imburse the city for the liabilities incurred by it. 

MR. WEAKLEY—The gentleman did not understand the 
question. I asked if the city of Montgomery had no other security 
than the plant itself, which they were to buy, could they have 
bought that plant upon the faith of the revenues of the plant 
alone, without the endorsement and credit of the city of Mont¬ 
gomery. 

MR. WALKER—It seems to me they could if the statement 
made about the earning capacity of the plant is correct, but wheth¬ 
er it could or not if it has exhausted its power of creating debts 
which can in any view or probability be paid, it ought not to go 
any further. 

MR. OATES — I suggest to the gentleman from Madison 
that he was quite right, they knew that the income from it would 
be ample to more than pay it. 

MR. WALKER—I say that this additional security given a 
municipality in arranging to borrow money upon such plants as 
these, the securities will be so arranged as to secure the proper 
maintenance and the proper revenue producing capacity of the 
plants that are pledged as security, and not only the public officers 
but the persons from whom they acquire money will be interested 
in seeing that the arrangements are so made that the plants will 
be kept upon a revenue paying basis. 

MR. PILLANS—Wouldn’t the effect of the adoption of the 
plans suggested in your paper be such that no street paving could 
be made by any city which has reached the 7 per cent., unless it 
was by putting the whole burden of the paving on the adjacent 
property owners. In other words, whether the city could then 
pay one-half of the general assessment of paving and assess the 
other half on the abutting property owner, whether in other 
words you would not deprive the city of any credit for any part 
of a debt for paving except that part which was to be borne by 
the abutting owner? 

MR. WALKER—If the city had already gone beyond the 
limit of indebtedness where there was any probability of its being 
paid, that would be the situation, and I submit, gentlemen of the 
Convention, as I stated before, that inconveniences of that kind 
by municipalities are in the same situation as like inconveniences 
for individuals. There are a great many things individuals 
want and would like to get, but if their debt-contracting power 
and means are insufficient they ought to do without them, and that 
homely rule should apply to corporations as well as to individuals 
—they cannot eat their cake and keep it, and you cannot make for 
a public body, any more than for individuals, a rule that can get 



CONSTITUTIONAL CONVENTION, 1901 


1557 


around that homely expression. If they have already exhausted 
their debt-contracting power, they are not in a position to get the 
good things of the world that people can get who have good 
credit and are entitled to get credit. 

MR. PILLANS—Y ou mean that they have already exhaust¬ 
ed this arbitrary limit of debt? 

MR. WALKER—No sir, I do not think that is an arbitrary 
limit. I think there should be some reference, under the tax lim¬ 
itations which we have, and which we do not intend to abandon, 
to the capacity of municipalities to meet their indebtedness. 

I desire in discussing this matter and expressing my opposi¬ 
tion to the pending amendment to explain to the Convention that 
in event of its being voted down by the Convention that the sub¬ 
stitute that I have had read in their presence will be offered. 

MR. O’NEAL (Lauderdale)—Mr. President, I see no neces¬ 
sity for the passion and temper which has been displayed in this 
debate by those who oppose the substitute offered by the gentle¬ 
man from Lauderdale. Distinguished gentlemen on this floor 
have denounced the substitute as an effort to repudiate debts, and 
to involve the cities and towns of Alabama in bankruptcy and 
ruin. Those of us who favor the substitute are characterized as 
the advocates of increased burdens upon the people. This charge 
is wholly unfounded and I am sure would only be made in the 
heat of debate. What is the proposition that we are considering? 
It is simply a plain business proposition. The report of the Com¬ 
mittee on Taxation, in niy judgment, if adopted by this Conven¬ 
tion, would result in preventing any progress or improvement by 
the great industrial cities of this State. It says that no city or 
town shall go beyond a limitation of 5 per cent., and makes no 
exception for street improvement. No gentleman who has spoken 
has undertaken to answer the array of facts and figures offered 
bv the gentleman from Lauderdale. 1 he figures he has produced 
show beyond controversy that all of the principal towns and 
cities of this State have already a debt exceeding 6 to 7 per cent. 
Then if vou adopt the section as reported by the Committee on 
Taxation, you say to the city of Florence, to the city of Birming¬ 
ham, to the city of Decatur, and to all the great industi ial cities 
of the State, that you have already reached your limit, and you 
shall no longer continue the system of street impro\ emmt now 
prevailing. What is the system that prevails in most of the cities 
and towns in this State? On account of the limitation which now 
exists in the Constitution, the revenues derived from taxes are not 
more than sufficient to meet the ordinary expenses of a city gov¬ 
ernment Our cities are confronted with the necessity to secure 
streets and sidewalks, to levy a tax upon abutting property. That 
tax is paid by the city, and a lien enforced for its collection. In 
the city of Florence and in the other cities of this State, after the 



1558 


OFFICIAL PROCEEDINGS 


improvement is completed, the city issues to the contractor a bond 
payable in ten years. That bond is negotiated and the property 
owner can come up and pay it in ten annual payments with a low 
rate of interest. Under that system all of our great cities and 
towns have secured good streets and pavements. Now I am sure 
it is not the disposition of this Convention to prevent anv further 
improvement of that character. What is the substitute offered 
by the gentleman from Lauderdale? The first provision is that no 
city or town shall become indebted in an amount exceeding 7 per 
cent, of the assessed valuation of the property. W hat is excepted 
from that? First, Section A, is indebtedness in anticipation of 
collection of taxes. What objection can be made to that? The 
burden of taxation is not thereby reduced. If the city has anv 
revenue which it will receive at a particular time upon its taxes, 
what objection can there be in the case of an emergency to bor¬ 
rowing money in anticipation of the collection of such tax? Such 
emergencies occur in the life of every city in the State, and hence 
it would be manifestly unjust to call the temporary loan in antici¬ 
pation of taxes a debt upon the people of the city. Now, the next 
Section B, is bonds issued for the purpose of purchasing water 
works or the construction of sanitary sewerage. Lhiless vou 
adopt that provision, none of our great cities can purchase their 
water works, because they have already reached a 7 per cent, in¬ 
debtedness—with possibly one or two exceptions. I mean all 
cities over 5,000 inhabitants. And what is the difference between 
the water works and debt? When you purchase a water works 
system you purchase a property that yields a revenue, you increase 
the taxable value of your property. Now, the next is C, obli¬ 
gations incurred and bonds issued to procure means to pav for 
street or sidewalk improvements or storm water sewers, the cost 
of which is to be assessed against the property abutting the same. 
That ought not to be considered a debt of the city, unless the citv 
pays for the improvement, and here I am willing to accept some¬ 
thing on the line suggested by Judge Walker. But where the 
improvement is wholly paid by the abutting property owner, it is 
not a debt of the city, it is merely a debt which the city guaran¬ 
tees, and for which guarantee it has sufficient collateral. If I 
guarantee a debt, endorsing a note with collateral worth ten 
times the amount of the loan, I am not creating any debt, and 
unless that provision is incorporated in the section as reported bv 
the Committee on Taxation, as the gentleman from Jefferson has 
stated, it will result in checking forever the progress now made in 
all the great industrial cities of this State. I am sure that such 
is not the wish of this Convention. You would say to Birming¬ 
ham, Florence, Decatur, Huntsville, Dothan, Tuscaloosa and 
Montgomery, which have now reached the limitation provided for 
that when you undertake to negotiate bonds for street improve¬ 
ments, the Constitution forbids it, and hence the progress now 
being made in the great industrial cities of this State must cease. 



CONSTITUTIONAL CONVENTION, 1901 


1559 


MR. MACDONALD—I would like to ask the gentleman a 
question. 

THE PRESIDENT—Will the gentleman consent to the in¬ 
terruption? 

MR. O’NEAL—Certainly. 

MR. MACDONALD—Do you construe Subdivision C a bar 
to municipalities imposing the entire cost of street and sidewalk 
paving and the construction of sewers on abutting property own¬ 
ers? 


MR. O’NEAL—I do not. 

MR. MACDONALD—Your argument would seem to indicate 
to that. 

MR. O’NEAL-—I admit that local assessments of this char¬ 
acter sometimes work great hardships. I concede that there are 
ways in which the Legislature can remedy this evil, but that is 
a matter for the Legislature. We know that in all cities of the 
Union all improvements have been made by this system of local 
assessments. Shall this Convention say to the people of Ala¬ 
bama that that system which has prevailed in all the great cities 
of the Union, that system which has prevailed in Alabama, shall 
no longer continue, but by the fundamental law we will forbid 
you from ever making any debt even though that debt may be 
paid by the abutting property? 

MR. MACDONALD—May I ask another question? In that 
portion of this debt which is not covered by the assessment against 
the abutting land owner which is a general debt against the city, 
they would have no limit in the creation of that particular char¬ 
acter of debt. I contend that if Subdivision C of the substitute 
does not give the municipalities the power to assess the entire cost 
of improvements against the abutting property owners, then the 
excess of cost of construction over and above what is assessed 
against the abutting property owner would be a debt against the 
municipality generally and might be without a limit? 

MR. O’NEAL — I am in favor of limiting the power of a city 
to create a debt for streets or improvements of that kind where 
it comes out of the general revenue of the city, but where the 
improvements are taken from abutting property, there ought to be 
no limit. Of course we all agree that there should be some limit 
upon the debts of cities and municipalities in this State. We all 
agree that the unlimited power to tax is the power to destroy. 
The argument made on this floor against the dangers of unlimit¬ 
ed taxation meets the views of every gentleman in this Conven¬ 
tion. What have we done about this limitation on taxation. We 
say you shall not go beyond one-half of 1 per cent., and the re- 



1560 


OFFICIAL PROCEEDINGS 


port of the Committee on Municipal Corporations, has a Section 
in reference to this subject. Section 5. Now the trouble is that 
under the present system, any member of the Legislature can. 
without consulting' his constituents, come to Montgomery and 
impose a debt upon any community of this State. 1 hat is true 
without consulting his constituents, without asking their views 
or wishes in the matter. Now the Committee on Municipal Cor¬ 
porations has a Section which will prevent this in the future. 
Sec. 7. “No county, city, town, village, district or other political 
subdivision of a county shall have authority or be authorized by 
the General Assembly after the ratification of this Constitution, 
to issue bonds, unless such issue of bonds shall have first been 
approved by a majority vote by ballot of the qualified voters of 
such county, city, town, village, district or other political subdi¬ 
vision of a county, voting upon such provision. In determining 
the result of any election held for this purpose, no vote shall be 
counted as an affirmative vote which does not show on its face that 
such vote was cast in approval of such issue of bonds. This Sec¬ 
tion shall not apply to the renewal, refunding or re-issuance of 
bonds lawfully issued, nor prevent the issuance of bonds in cases 
where the same have been authorized by laws enacted prior to the 
ratification of this Constitution, nor shall this Section apply to 
obligations incurred or bonds to be issued to procure means to 
pay for street and sidewalk improvements, or sanitary or storm 
water sewers, the cost of which is to be assessed against the 
property abutting said improvements or drained by such sanitary 
or storm water sewers.” 

THE PRESIDENT—The time of the gentleman has expired. 

MR. WEAKLEY (Lauderdale) — I offered a substitute for 
Section 10 of the report of the Committee on Taxation, and an 
amendment was offered to the substitute, and I desire now with 
the consent of the gentleman offering the amendment to withdraw 
the substitute, and I offer to the Convention in lieu thereof, this 
substitute: 

Sec. 10. No city, town or other municipal corporation, shall 
become indebted in an amount, including present indebtedness, 
exceeding 5 per centum of the assessed value of the property 
thereof, except for the construction or purchase of water works, 
gas. or electric lighting plants and sewerage or for the improve¬ 
ment of streets for which purpose an additional indebtedness, not 
exceeding 3 per centum may be created, and excepting also tem¬ 
porary loans to be paid within one year, made in anticipation of 
the collection of taxes, not to exceed one-fourth of the general 
revenues of such cities and towns; Provided, however, that this 
limitation shall not apply to towns and cities having a population 
of 6,000 or more, nor to the City of Gadsden, which last described 
cities and towns shall not become indebted in an amount, includ- 



CONSTITUTIONAL CONVENTION. 1901 


1561 


in# present indebtedness, exceeding 7 per centum of the assessed 
valuation of the property thereof, and provided further, that there 
shall not be included in the limitations of the indebtedness of such 
last described cities and towns the following classes of indebted¬ 
ness, to-wit : Temporary loans to be paid within one year, made 
in anticipation of the collection of taxes, and not to exceed one- 
fourth of such taxes; bonds or other obligations already issued or 
which may hereafter be issued for the purpose of acquiring, pro¬ 
viding or constructing school houses, water works and sewers; 
and obligations incurred and bonds issued for street or sidewalk 
improvement, where the cost of the same, in whole or in part, is 
to be assessed against the property abutting said improvement. 

Nothing herein contained shall prevent the funding or re¬ 
funding of existing indebtedness. 

MR. WKAKLKY—After the presentation of the report of the 
Committee on Taxation and the substitute recommended by the 
Committee on Municipal Corporations, there developed such a 
contrariety of opinion upon the subject of debt limitation, that the 
representatives of nearly all the municipalities of the State set to 
work to frame a section which would meet as far as possible the 
objections that have been offered upon this floor. The Conven¬ 
tion will bear in mind the words of a distinguished statesman who 
said it was a condition and not a theory that presented itself. I 
will admit that if no city in the State of Alabama had a debt, that 
neither the proposition presented bv the Chairman of the Com¬ 
mittee on Taxation, nor the proposition presented by the distin¬ 
guished gentleman from Madison County would have my sup¬ 
port. 

MR. COLEMAN (Greene)—Has the delegate from Mobile 
accepted that in lieu of the amendment offered by him? 

MR. WEAKLEY—That is my understanding. 

MR. PILLANS—I will accept it. 

MR. COLEMAN—There is but one amendment offered to the 
report of the Committee on Taxation, and that is the one you have 
in your hand? 

MR. WEAKLEY—That is my understanding the Convention 
consented to the withdrawal of my original substitute. 

THE PRESIDENT—Does the gentleman from Mobile con¬ 
sent to the withdrawal and the introduction in lieu of it of the 
substitute of the gentleman from Lauderdale. 

MR. PILLANS—Yes sir. 

THE PRESIDENT—Leave has been granted to substitute 
the proposition offered by the gentleman from Lauderdale, and 
it is so ordered. 



1562 


OFFICIAL PROCEEDINGS 


MR. MACDONALD—What is the parliamentary situation of 
the question now? The substitute offered by the gentleman from 
Lauderdale is now before the house—this last substitute. If it 
were proper I would like to offer an amendment at this time to 
that substitute. 

THE PRESIDENT—The gentleman from Lauderdale has 
the floor. 

MR. WEAKLEY — Upon an examination of the financial 
condition of the various cities of Alabama and municipaltiies, the 
fact develops that certain cities of this State have exceeded the 
limitations proposed to be imposed upon them by the Committee 
on Taxation. That certain other towns in the State have not in¬ 
curred these debts, and desire the protection of that report. We 
now propose that the debt limitation fixed by the Committee on 
Taxation, with a slight modification, shall apply to all towns and 
cities in Alabama of less than 6,000 persons, and that the limita¬ 
tion with certain modifications proposed by the committee on 
Municipal Corporations shall apply to all the towns and cities in 
Alabama in excess of 600 people, except the city of Gadsden. This 
section which is now offered to the Convention has been arrived 
at after studying carefully the situation as pertains to every city 
in the State. This section puts a limitation upon the power of 
every municipality in the State of Alabama to contract debt in 
proportion to its ability to pay, and at the same time it does not 
put them into the hands of contractors and lobbyists, it does not 
take from them the power of constructing sewers and sidewalks 
and of acquiring a system of water works. The gentleman will 
understand that with the varying amount of debts, and the vary¬ 
ing needs of the cities of Alabama, that it is impossible to fix one 
limit which will apply to all municipalities. The report of the 
Committee on Municipal Corporations, as now amended, excepts 
from the limitation three different characters of debt. The first 
is temporary loans issued in anticipation of the collection of taxes. 
These loans are generally unnecessary. You will bear in mind 
that very few cities collect their revenues until almost the expira¬ 
tion of a year, in fact, we are compelled to run the cities for ten 
months in the year before receiving the taxes, and there are al¬ 
ways periods of depression and of dullness in the affairs of cities 
just like there are periods of depression and dullness in mercan¬ 
tile business. This provision enables the city to go to the bank 
and borrow not more than one-quarter of its revenue, the loan 
shall not extend longer than twelve months and must be paid when 
the taxes are collected. It enables the city to meet its obligations 
towards the police force, Fire department, etc., and at the same 
time preserve the credit of the city. The other exception is debts 
created for sewers and water works. I can conceive of no argu¬ 
ment which ought to prevent or preclude that a city should be 
prevented from acquiring a sewerage system and system of water 



CONSTITUTIONAL CONVENTION, 1901 


1563 


works after it has acquired a population of 6,000 people. Now, 
gentlemen, the other exception is the section which permits the 
city to incur obligations for street improvements or sidewalk im¬ 
provements, where the cost of such improvements is levied in 
whole or in part against the abutting property. We do not con¬ 
tend and ’tis not the purpose of the committee on this section to 
regulate how much or what part of that assessment should be 
paid by the property owners, but whatever part it may be we do 
not think that that ought to be included in the debt limit of cities. 
Now, gentlemen, just one word more. It does not occur to me 
that this Convention can afford to tie the hands of the municipali¬ 
ties of Alabama, for I say to you that the growth and prosperity 
of the State of Alabama is the growth and prosperity of the towns 
and cities of Alabama, and any restriction placed by this Conven¬ 
tion upon these cities in the proper exercise of their functions of 
preserving the life, the health, the safety and the comfort of the 
people is a restriction upon the State itself. We have heard a 
great deal said about the debt of the city of Montgomery, the city 
of Mobile and the city of Birmingham. I want to say to you that 
the creation of these debts has increased taxable values in Ala¬ 
bama by millions of dollars, that $2,000,000 of debt incurred by 
the City of Birmingham has added $40,000,000 to the taxable 
values of the State of Alabama, and the addition of this tremen¬ 
dous amount of wealth by these towns and cities in Alabama has 
made it possible by a system of taxation to largely increase the 
public school system of the State. You do not want to stop that 
source of revenue. 

THE PRESIDENT—The gentleman’s time has expired. 

MR. REESE—I yield my time to the gentleman. 

MR. WEAKLEY—I desire to say one word in regard to the 
amendment which has been proposed by the gentleman from 
Walker. I say under the operation of that section in the Consti¬ 
tution that it would be absolutely impossible for any city in the 
State of Alabama which had reached 8 per cent, of debt limit to 
contract any further debt under the plan which he proposes. The 
proposition which the city of Montgomery, when it desired to pur¬ 
chase the water works system, would have been able to make to 
the bond buyers would be simply this, that if you will sell us your 
water works system, we will give you a mortgage on the plant. 
Who ever heard of any man with money to lend, lending it upon 
such security? Isn’t it a fact gentlemen, that every man who 
lends money fixes a limitation upon the amount which he will 
lend upon a given piece of property, and is it not always the uni¬ 
versal rule that no man will lend money exceeding 50 per cent, or 
60 per cent, of the value of the property? Do you suppose that a 
different rule would prevail when you begin to deal with large 
figures. I say to you that it would have been absolutely impos- 



1564 


OFFICIAL PROCEEDINGS 


sible for the city of Montgomery to have constructed or purchas¬ 
ed its water works system, it would have been absolutely impos¬ 
sible for the city of Mobile to have constructed its water works 
system unless there had been given the city the power of endors¬ 
ing the obligation issued for the acquirement of those properties. 

MR. OATES—Permit me to ask a question. Which do you 
consider the most economic and best policy, to facilitate the ca¬ 
pacity for effecting loans, or rather to repress it, than to keep 
cities within their income? 

MR. WEAKLEY—I think the best policy is to put reasonable 
restrictions upon the power to create debt, but I consider it fatal 
to the growth or prosperity of any city, or to the growth or pros¬ 
perity of any State that puts restrictions upon the power of cities 
to build its water works, to improve its streets or construct its 
sewerage systems. The great cities of the world could not have 
been built under such laws as that. This is no new proposition. 
The gentleman talks about the question of street assessments. 
There is only one State in the United States that prevents the con¬ 
struction of streets like that, and that is the State of South Caro¬ 
lina, and if the gentleman will go to South Carolina he will not 
find a modern, well built, well constructed street in the whole 
State. 

MR. COLEMAN (Greene)—There are more factories there 
than anywhere else—great improvement in the establishment of 
manufacturies? 

MR. WEAKLEY—I will state this in answer to the propo¬ 
sition of the gentleman from Greene, suggested the other day by 
the Chairman of the Committee on Taxation, that on account of 
this restrictive rate of taxation that more manufactures and more 
industries would be located in Alabama. I say, gentlemen, that 
it is a proposition well known by everybody that more cotton 
manufacturies have been located in North Carolina and South 
Carolina than any other State in the South. In neither of those 
States are there limitations upon the debt-creating power or the 
taxing power, and I say further that the town of Charlotte, N. C., 
almost similar in its conditions and surroundings to the city of 
Huntsville, has been able to float its bond bearing 3 per cent in¬ 
terest, and the city of Huntsville and Selma cannot float theirs 
at all. That is the condition today. 

MR. OATES—Does my friend know how many cotton fac¬ 
tories there are in Charlotte? 

MR. WEAKLEY—My information is that in the neighbor¬ 
hood of thirty-eight or forty. I am not sure. I say, gentlemen, 
that it is absolutely impossible under the restrictions which are 
about to be thrown around the cities of Alabama for this State to 
prosper. The Committee on Municipal Corporations has report- 



CONSTITUTIONAL CONVENTION, 1901 


1565 


ed, and I favor, the proposition that no bonds shall be issued by 
any city of the State of Alabama, unless the proposition is first 
submitted to a vote of the people. We have restricted their power 
of creating debt. We have restricted their power of taxation, and 
certain distinguished gentlemen now want to restrict the power 
of cities in raising revenues by licenses. I say, gentlemen, it looks 
to me as if the Convention has set out with an avowed purpose 
of strangulating the towns and cities of Alabama, and, in the 
language of the distinguished gentleman from Greene, this is the 
most momentous question that has ever been brought before this 
Convention. If you make it impossible for the city of Birmingham 
to grow and prosper, if you tie the hands of the city of Montgom¬ 
ery, and Mobile, and Gadsden, and Anniston, and Huntsville, and 
Florence, and Tuscaloosa, you tie the hands of the most produc¬ 
tive towns in the State of Alabama. You gentlemen that have 
talked upon this floor about reduction in State tax rate will soon 
come to the proposition that there will be an amendment to the 
Constitution to increase the debt limit of the State because, just 
as sure as the policy now advocated upon this floor prevails, the 
increase in the taxable properties of this State will be very slight. 
There is a proposition in the amendment which I offer, excluding 
from the debt limit bonds issued for school houses. In answer 
to any objection that may be raised against that, I say that, 
framed as the section is now, after giving it all the care and 
thought that representatives of the various municipalities could 
give it, there was still a very decided limitation upon the power of 
these larger cities to contract debts, and it would have been ab¬ 
solutely impossible for a single one of them to construct another 
school house. If this Convention is not going to do anything for 
what are called the bare-footed boys of Alabama, then I beseech 
you, gentlemen, let the cities do it. I live in a town that has a 
school population of 2,000, and out of that 2,000 there is an en¬ 
rollment in the public school system of the city of Florence of 
1,033 pupils, and in addition to that in the State schools and pri¬ 
vate schools in my town there are in attendance 500 additional. 
Right now, when the schools are in session, they are filled to over¬ 
flowing, and the teachers are working there at a pitiful salary of 
$35 per month, teaching one-half of the class from 9 o'clock to 11 
o’clock and the other half from 11 until 2 o'clock, and even thus 
dividing up the work, the pupils are sitting in the windows, two 
on a seat, and others denied admission for want of room. Gentle¬ 
men, we want the permission of this Convention to build another 
school house, and we want to tax ourselves to do it. 

MR. WALKER—I desire to offer a substitute for the section 
reported by the committee and for the amendment of the gentle¬ 
man from Lauderdale. 

The substitute was read as follows: 



1566 


OFFICIAL PROCEEDINGS 


Section 10. No city, town or other municipal corporation 
shall become indebted in any amount exceeding 5 per centum of 
the taxable value of the property thereof; provided, that for the 
construction or purchase of water works, gas or electric light 
plants, sanitary sewerage, or street or sidewalk improvements, an 
additional indebtedness not to exceed 3 per centum of such tax¬ 
able value may be created so as to be a charge upon the revenues 
from taxation of such city, town or other municipal corporation, 
and that any debts or liabilities in excess of such 3 per cent lim¬ 
itation incurred by such city, town or other municipal corporation 
in the construction or purchase of water works, gas or electric 
light plants, sanitary sewers or street or sidewalk improvements, 
may be made charges upon or against, respectively, such water 
works, gas or electric light plants, and upon the liens in favor of 
or the liabilities to said city, town or other municipal corporation, 
acquired in or by reason of the erection or construction of such 
sanitary sewers, or street or sidewalk improvements; provided, 
further, that the limitations contained in this section shall not ap¬ 
ply to any indebtedness in excess of such limitations already cre¬ 
ated or authorized by now existing law to be created. 

MR. WALKER—I desire to offer a substitute for the Sec¬ 
tion reported by the Committee and for the amendment of the gen¬ 
tleman from Lauderdale. 

The substitute was read as follows: 

MR. WALKER—This discussion has developed the fact that 
it is recognized that the Convention has made up its mind to put 
some kind of limitation upon the debt creating power of munici¬ 
palities. That is recognized in the substitute that was offered a 
few moments ago by the gentleman from Lauderdale; but that 
substitute would really defeat that manifest purpose of this Con¬ 
vention because it established, in the first place, a limitation, and 
then selects the class of objects for which it is recognized the 
municipalities of Alabama are disposed to go into debt, and ex¬ 
cepts from the operation of the limitation each one of those ob¬ 
jects. So that in reference to the erection of gas and water works 
and electric light plants and sewerage systems and sidewalks and 
street improvements, the result will be that this Convention has 
made no limitation at all but that in reference to those matters, 
which are the only ones as to which there is any disposition on 
the part of the municipalities of the State to create debts and put 
themselves in the position of being unable to pay those debts, or 
still leave them without any limitation at all. 

Now I submit to the gentlemen of the Convention if we pro¬ 
pose to put a limitation upon the debt creating faculties of mu¬ 
nicipalities, we should put a real limitation and not a limitation 
which amounts to nothing, and if we are to accept from the con¬ 
stitutional provisions all these matters which alone are those mat- 



CONSTITUTIONAL CONVENTION, 1901 


1567 


ters in which municipalities are interested in tangling themselves 
up in, we really put no limitation at all and we had better leave 
the matter without remark in the Constitution and let the Con¬ 
stitution remain just as it is. 

MR. LOWE (Jefferson)—Will the gentleman permit me a 
question ? 

MR. WALKER—Yes. 

MR. LOWE — What effect will this amendment have upon 
the salable quality of the bonds to be issued where the city is pro¬ 
hibited from becoming security on those bonds? In other words, 
if a debtor offers a piece of property as security and declines 
himself to be liable over the value of the property, would not that 
minimize the market value of the property and thereby require 
a higher rate of interest? 

MR. WALKER—Yes, sir; it would operate on municipalities 
just like on individuals. If an individual has exhausted his com¬ 
petency tto pay debts except with the particular security offered, 
the security would be the only thing looked to. 

MR. LOWE—And would not that require a larger rate of 
interest ? 

MR. WALKER — No; if they had already exhausted their 
credit, my contention is they should not be allowed to go farther. 

MR. LOWE—If they have exhausted their credit, how can 
they go farther? It requires two persons to create a debt, a debt¬ 
or and creditor. 

MR. WALKER—Yes, but the State of Alabama has in its 
power the right to determine the limits beyond which a munici¬ 
pality cannot create indebtedness and to have regard to the ca¬ 
pacity of that municipality to pay the debt, whether or not they 
would be able in a particular circumstance to float bonds or not. 
They should look to the question of the tax limit being such that 
there will be the capacity in the municipalities to pay the debts 
they contract. 

MR. LOWE—Is it not true that the debt limit which you 
seek to fix is for the protection of the creditor and not of the 
debtor? 

MR. WALKER—Yes, and for the good name of the mu¬ 
nicipality. 

MR. LOWE—But it is for the protection of the moneyed in¬ 
terests—the creditors. 

MR. WALKER—No, sir, it is for the protection of both. It 
is for the protection of the municipality and for the protection of 



1568 


OFFICIAL PROCEEDINGS 


the good name and the credit of the people of Alabama. 

MR. PILLANS—Are we to understand that the gentleman 
apprehends the amendment offered by the gentleman from Lau¬ 
derdale is putting lighting plants in this class of objects for which 
there is no limitation? 

MR. WALKER—That was my impression. 

MR. PILLANS—I want to call the gentleman’s attention to 
the fact that lighting plants are expressly cut off. It is only 
sewers, water works and street improvements. 

MR. WALKER — Now, the gentleman from Lauderdale 
speaks of strangulating the municipalities of Alabama. Alabama 
has had some experience in strangled municipalities and counties 
and how have they been strangulated? By the possession of an 
unlimited power to create debts. Have you ever heard of a mu¬ 
nicipality, county, city, town or village, being strangulated by 
not being permitted to go into debt? I have not. Look at the 
history of Alabama and you see strangulated communities but 
iyou will see that you have tied the rope around their necks with 
an unlimited power to create debts. That is the way to strangu¬ 
late the communities and municipalities of the State, to allow the 
present to mortgage the future beyond the capacity to pay. I 
submit this is an important question and that this Convention 
should lift its hand and prevent the possibility of that which has 
been done in the past being done in the future. 

MR. MACDONALD—I do not know whether the proposi¬ 
tion I propose to make is in order at present. As I understand 
there is the Section as reported by the Committee and a substi¬ 
tute offered by the gentleman from Lauderdale to the report of 
the Committee and an amendment to that offered by the gentle¬ 
man from Madison. Is that the situation of affairs? 

THE PRESIDENT PRO TEM (Mr. Cunningham) — The 
parliamentary status is this: The original substitute of the gentle¬ 
man from Lauderdale by unanimous consent of the Convention 
has been withdrawn and in lieu thereof he offered a substitute, 
which has been read. To that substitute there was an amend¬ 
ment offered by the gentleman from Madison, which is the pend¬ 
ing question. 

MR. WALKER—Mine was offered as a substitute for the 
Section as reported by the Committee and all amendments. 

THE PRESIDENT PRO TEM—And further amendment is 
not in order. 

MR. MACDONALD—Briefly I propose to address myself 
to and hereafter to offer another amendment to the substitute 
offered by the gentleman from Lauderdale. 



CONSTITUTIONAL CONVENTION. 1901 


1569 


The special objection I had to the original substitute and 
which has not been obviated or to the slightest degree changed by 
this new substitute is the tacit—I might say direct—permission to 
municipalities to place upon property abutting upon streets upon 
which sidewalks have been made or sewers constructed, the en¬ 
tire cost of these alleged improvements. 

On Wednesday my friend from Montgomery (Mr. Graham), 
in a rather heated speech, called the attention of the Convention 
to what he was pleased to term my unavailing attempts to fight 
such assessments in the courts of this State, and in the course of 
his remarks he fell into an error, unintentionally, I suppose, in 
stating that the Supreme Court of this State and of other States 
in which this matter had come up, had lately decided the ques¬ 
tion adversely to the contention I had made. Now this is not the 
fact. The cases that he alluded to began in the City Court of 
Montgomery on the equity side of the court. The judge of that 
court, in a decree rendered in the Birdsong case, which was the 
first case brought in that court, decided in my favor. That judge, 
than whom no wiser, abler or more learned judge sits upon the 
bench in Alabama or in the United States, for that matter, de¬ 
cided every proposition in favor of the taxpayer. He decided that 
such assessments for sidewalk purposes, the entire cost of which 
was assessed against abutting property owners, were invalid. He 
furthermore decided that all assessments predicated on an arbi¬ 
trary basis of front footage of property were null and void under 
the charter of Montgomery and under the general law of the land. 
An appeal was taken by Montgomery to the Supreme Court, and 
that court held that the court below erred only in one respect, 
and that where it held that the charter of Montgomery did not 
predicate those assessments on any benefit derived therefrom. The 
Supreme Court said the charter was susceptible of that construc¬ 
tion, and, therefore, the assessment was valid. The upper court 
held as has always been held by every intelligent court in the land, 
that the only just basis of such assessment was the benefit the 
property derived therefrom, and whenever these assessments ex¬ 
ceeded the benefit the property derived, it became confiscation 
and not taxation, and it cited with approval Dillon on Corpora¬ 
tions and a number of decisions to like effect in the State of Ala¬ 
bama. That case came back to the City Court in Equity, and an¬ 
other suit of a like character was tried before that same able judge, 
and the point was raised that the ordinance of Montgomery mak¬ 
ing the assessment predicated it solely on the front footage and 
without reference to benefits derived, and that same able judge 
repeated his decree and held that the assessment was void, and 
that question is now up before the Supreme Court of Alabama, 
not on appeal by the taxpayers, as the gentleman would have 
you believe, but on an appeal taken by the municipality of Mont¬ 
gomery. 



1570 


OFFICIAL PROCEEDINGS 


The gentleman said further that I had been to the Supreme 
Court of the United States on the matter. I have never been to 
the Supreme Court of the United States on this proposition, but 
will certainly go there if the decision of the Supreme Court of 
Alabama is adverse to the uniform rule, based on justice and com¬ 
mon sense, that wherever an assessment exceeds the special bene¬ 
fit the property derives from the improvement, it is void. 

It was my purpose, and I propose later to introduce an amend¬ 
ment to this substitute, which, if adopted, will provide that no 
city or other municipality shall make any assessment upon prop¬ 
erty abutting on streets so improved in excess of the actual in¬ 
crease in value of that property by reason of such assessment, and 
that is the only just and honest rule for the imposition of such 
assessment. 

My friends here, and especially my friend from Jefferson 
(Mr. Lowe), entertained this Convention day before yesterday 
with a remarkable history from the paradoxical condition of af¬ 
fairs in the city of Birmingham. Birmingham has always been 
more or less of a paradox in many respects. We have heard in 
olden times of martyrs in will and not in deed, and of martyrs in 
deed and not in will. We also know it is a common axiom that 
there are two certain things, death and taxation, and we also 
know that mortals are prone to avoid both of these. And yet, 
in Birmingham, we are told by the learned gentleman from Jef¬ 
ferson (Mr. Lowe), that people are so clamoring for the oppor¬ 
tunity of paying taxes for sewers and streets, that they absolute¬ 
ly break down the cordon of police they have put around the City 
Council so that they may have the opportunity to impose taxes. 
That may be true as to Birmingham, but that is not so in other 
municipalities. The tax-gatherer in Montgomery is not earnestly 
sought after, nor is the City Council clamorously importuned to 
impose taxes. 

Gentlemen speak of strangulating municipalities, stopping 
them in their march of prosperity and progress. They seem to 
forget that there are other objects of strangulation that these mu¬ 
nicipalities are engaged in strangulating and bankrupting taxpay¬ 
ers. 


We have a remarkable picture of that in this city. We have 
contracted a debt in this city since 1875 of over $1,750,000- 

MR. SANFORD—$1,900,000. 

MR. JONES (Montgomery)—$1,879,000, not including the 
baby bonds, from the official reports. 

MR. LOMAX—What about the L. and N. Railroad and the 
market bond tax? 



CONSTITUTIONAL CONVENTION, 1901 


1571 


MR. MACDONALD (Montgomery) — And thereby hangs 
the tale. This city issued bonds to aid in the construction of the 
South and North Alabama Railroad, and, as I am reliably inform¬ 
ed, has been collecting for fifteen or twenty years $10,000 a year 
more than enough to pay the interest on those bonds, and has 
not paid one of those bonds and has never used the excess for the 
purpose of creating a sinking fund for the payment of those 
bonds, but has absolutely been using it in violation of constitution 
and law for their own purposes. 

Mr. President, I received this morning a communication from 
a gentleman in this city who is perfectly familiar with the facts 
he states, and I would like to have it read by the clerk as a part 
of my remarks, and read with that power of voice and excellence 
of enunciation for which he is known. 

The communication was read by the clerk as follows: 

Montgomery, Ala., July 4, 1901. 
Hon. Gordon Macdonald, City, Dear Sir: 

I notice that in considering the question of a debt limit of 
cities, the status of local assessments for street and sidewalks 
was the subject of discussion at the evening session of the Con¬ 
vention. Under the amendment offered by Mr. Weakley the ob¬ 
ligations or bonds issued for raising “means to pay for street and 
sidewalk improvements, or storm water sewers/' the cost of which 
is to be assessed against adjoining property, is not to be included 
in computing the debt of a city. 

It seems to be a curious fact that most of the gentlemen who 
spoke for the amendment have at one time or another been 
Mayors, City Attorneys or Aldermen of some city and it may be 
that Col. Sanford was not altogether wrong in saying “that you 
could not find an ex-Alderman or an ex-Mayor or an ex-City At¬ 
torney who is not in favor of all these exactions in favor of mu¬ 
nicipalities. The Convention certainly furnished no examples. 
Members who seek to limit the right to contract debts by the city 
for the citizens to pay are said by Mr. Graham to be “having their 
hands upon the throat of the municipalities of this State and at¬ 
tempting to choke the very life out of them,” though he admits 
further on that the city of Montgomery under the beneficient ad¬ 
ministrations of the local authorities is in debt two and a half mil¬ 
lions and “unless relieved by legislation in this Constitution will 
go to the wall.” 

THE PRESIDENT—The gentleman's time has expired. 

MR. LOMAX—I move that the gentleman's time be extend¬ 
ed to permit him to finish his remarks. 

MR. OATES—I will yield my time to the gentleman. 



1572 


OFFICIAL PROCEEDINGS 


THE PRESIDENT PRO TEM.—The Chair had not recog¬ 
nized the gentleman from Montgomery and he has no time to 
yield. 

MR. OATES—If it is admissible I thought it would be a sav¬ 
ing of time rather than having a vote to extend the time. 

THE PRESIDENT PRO TEM.—The Chair will hold that 
the gentleman from Montgomery not having been recognized has 
no time to yield. 

A vote being taken the motion to extend the time was car¬ 
ried and the reading was continued as follows: 

I respectfully suggest that the local authorities who are re¬ 
sponsible for this condition should not be allowed to continue in 
the debt contract business. I notice also that none of the gen¬ 
tlemen have any provision for preventing all the cost of these so- 
called improvements from being assessed against the propertv of 
the citizen. Mr. Watts blandly remarks that this section does 
not make any assessments against property, but any man who 
reads the section will know that there is enough sanction in the 
section for that practice to have every city official claim full power 
to do so, under it. 


It is well to consider the history of these municipal authorities, 
since 1875 and note their attitude toward the Constitution of the 
State. Our city had a debt of almost $750,000 at the adoption of 
that Constitution and it has created about $1,750,000 since. By 
that instrument the city was allowed 50 cents on the $100 for 
general expenses and allowed in addition to lew sufficient to pav 
the debt it owed when it was adopted. For the last twentv years 
the beneficent municipal authorities have levied 62 I-? cents os¬ 
tensibly to pay the interest on the debt existing in 1875. when it 
was not needed for that purpose, and in defiance of Constitution 
and law have used it at their own sweet will. For the last fifteen 
years there has been collected in excess of what was paid on inter- 
est on the debt at least $10,000 a year and the fact remains that the 
debt has not been reduced a single cent. It is justified or condoned 
on the plea of necessity. Ibis course was pursued when Mr. 

a " A . k ' e r rm tv anC Was so plainl - v and palpablv in vio¬ 
lation of law that Mr Watts protested and voted against'the lew 

while a member of the Council. Can it be said tlfat a necessity 
created by the municipal authorities is a valid excuse for a pla n 
violation of the Constitution and that a municipal corpom fon 
which persists for twenty years in such violation is K 

tod.an of power to contract debt for its citizens to pav. This has 
been the course of the City Council on the subject of taxation and 
ts course on the paving question is marked by the same assumo 
tion of power to do as it pleased with the propertv of the Sizes' 
I will state its action on the paving of Madison Avenue \ A ' 



CONSTITUTIONAL CONVENTION. 1901 


1573 


derman lived at the head of the street and at his request an or¬ 
dinance was passed to pave the street under the baby bond act 
and assess the entire cost against the abutting property. 

MR. REESE—I rise to inquire what part of that is pertinent 
to the pending question? 

MR. MACDONALD—It is all pertinent. It shows the effect 
of unlimited power on the part of a municipality. 

The reading was continued. 

It was protested under the terms of that act, and on the very 
night the protest was presented to the Council, that body in de¬ 
fiance of the protest, again passed an ordinance to pave the street 
under the provisions of the same act. A second protest defeated 
this ordinance, but the Council still knew better than the people 
who lived on that street that it ought to be paved and having, as 
they thought, found out that the elimination of two blocks would 
enable them to pave the balance of the street under the baby bond 
act, they ordered the pavement of these two blocks under the 
general paving law under which the citizen has no voice, though 
the property is assessed one-half the cost of the street and he must 
pay his part in a single payment. Having paved these two blocks 
in this manner, the Council again gave the inhabitants a chance 
to see the error of their way and passed the baby bond ordinance 
for the balance of the street, but the people again protested, and 
again the Council resorted to its power under the general paving 
act and forced the paving of three more squares. The stubborn 
fact remains that not a block has been laid on this street from 
Perry Street east which was not laid against the protest of the 
property owners on it. 

It is likewise true that in order to pave Lawrence Street 
under this baby bond act the frontage of churches, and of the 
Government Building and the County Court House were counted, 
to escape the force of a protest of a majority of the people who 
paid taxes on that street. 

This then is the spirit that the municipal authorities have ad¬ 
ministered the powers they now have in regard to assessments for 
street improvements and no stronger case could be made to show 
the absolute necessity of curbing that power. I earnestly urge 
that you insist on some limitation being put upon the amount of 
such assessments. On this Madison Street property the assess¬ 
ments for the so-called improvement amount to about 15 per cent, 
of the value of the property, and with the 16 per cent, bonded 
debt of the city constitute a charge of above 30 per cent, of its 
value. 

MR. PILLANS—I protest that this is not a part of the re¬ 
marks of the gentleman. 



1574 


OFFICIAL PROCEEDINGS 


MR. MACDONALD—I have offered this as part of my re¬ 
marks and the clerk is reading it as such. 

MR PILLANS — This seems to me to he in the nature of 
dealing with the local a parochial quarrels of Montgomery with 
which we have no concern here. 1 make that point of order. 

THE PRESIDENT PRO TKM- 
ruled. 


The point of order is over- 


The reading* was continued. 

I simply call vour attention to these facts, and the further 
fact that this propertv has paid taxes to the city of Muntgomer\ 
of $1.12 1-2 on the $100 for twenty years, and. hv the beneticent 
rule of the municipal authorities, is now subject to charge> which 
aggregate a third of its value. 

I think the citizen has some right to say when such improve¬ 
ments shall be made and that it is time that the hands of these 
municipal authorities be taken from the throat of those who hap¬ 
pen to own property in the city of Montgomery, before the very 
life is choked out of them. 


Yours truly, 

Edwin F. Jones. 


Now I can add but little to what Mr. Jones has said. 

My friend from Montgomery (Mr. Graham) on day before 
yesterday made some allusion to a decision of the Supreme Court 
on this paving question wherein he stated what was a fact that 
the latest announcement by that court was that the entire cost 
of such improvements might be assessed against abutting property 
owners if the Legislature so provided and the Constitution of our 
State did not prevent. That decision was absolutely contrary to 
the decision in Norwood vs. Baker, although the ingenuity of the 
court was strained to show that thev were not in conflict. But 
conceding that to be the law, it shows the further wisdom of in¬ 
corporating in the organic law of the State such limitations so 
that the Legislature cannot grant to a municipality the power of 
putting unlimited burdens on taxpayers. The Supreme Court of 
the United States has on more than one occasion indulged in simi¬ 
lar assaults more or less seemly and the last devision referred to 
by the gentleman of Montgomery is on a par with the income 
tax decision and the Porto Rican absurdity and I think a majority 
of this Convention will agree with me in insisting that a limit 
should be put on the powers of municipalities to assess their citi¬ 
zens for improvements which are for the benefit of the whole 
public. 

MR. WEATHERLY Mr. President and gentlemen of the 



CONSTITUTIONAL CONVENTION, 1901 


1575 


Convention, I know it is not the desire of this Convention to work 
any wrong or injustice upon any of the cities of the State. 

I believe that the committee in making its report and that 
the gentleman from Madison in offering his substitute are acting 
with the sincere desire and purpose of doing what they think 
would be for the best welfare of ail the cities of the State, and yet, 

I think it is manifest at the outset that the general regulations 
which they propose may work great injustice to at least shall ap¬ 
ply to all the cities of the State. They propose an arbitrary rule 
which shall apply to all the cities of the State without reference 
to population, without reference to the peculiarities of any city, 
without reference to the desires of its citizens, and really in op¬ 
position to the modern rule with regard to the regulation of cities, 
which admit that cities should be classified for the express pur¬ 
pose of applying rules to the government of such cities, based upon 
the pecularities which mark one class of cities from another. It 
is generally unsafe in the matter of the government of cities to 
lay down one rule for them all which shall disregard the char¬ 
acteristics of any. Now, I am sure that the committee in making 
this report could not have considered, for instance, the peculiar 
situation and demands of the city of Birmingham. Indeed, I do 
not know that the members of the committee consulted a single 
representative from the county of Jefferson and therefore a repre¬ 
sentative of the city of Birmingham. 

MR. BROWNE—I will just rise for the purpose of inform¬ 
ing the gentleman that one of the representatives from Jefferson 
county was a member of that committee. 

MR. WEATHERLY—Then I take it for granted he was not 
consulted, though I do not know who the member was—Yes, I do 
know. I beg pardon of the Chair (Mr. Cunningham), but I can 
state to the Convention now that the delegate from the county 
of Jefferson is unanimously opposed to the report of the commit¬ 
tee as it now stands. 

MR. JONES (Montgomery)—Does that include the commit¬ 
teeman? 

MR. WEATHERLY—Including the committeeman. 

Now will this Convention hasten on to the adoption of a re¬ 
port not specifically devised to suit the conveniences or the wel¬ 
fare of the city of Birmingham and in opposition to the wishes of 
her citizens merely to satisfy some general theory of construction 
whereby the committee thinks it has dealt satisfactorily with the 
debt proposition. The mere fact, as I think I can show, that the 
report of the committee is totally out of harmony with the demand 
and requirements of Birmingham will show to the members of 
this Convention that this report should not be adopted as it is. I 



1576 


OFFICIAL PROCKKL >IN<»S 


am sure there is no cautious, conservative member of this Conven¬ 
tion who would here in the course of this morning hour adopt 
an ordinance which is to last for a quarter of a century, the effect 
of which will be, in our opinion, to blast the prospects of one of 
the chief cities of the State. 

MR. PILLANS—You may add Mobile to your remarks The 
situation w r ould be the same there or worse. 


MR. WEATHERLY—And by consent Mobile i> added. 

MR. COLEMAAN (Greene) — Why not except your citie>. 

MR. WEATHERLY—There might be too manv of them. 

MR. COLEMAN (Greene)—Perhaps if vou trv volt will find 
that the Convention is willing to except your citv. 

^^^ EATHERLA I believe it there were onlv tnie or two, 
we might do it, but the Convention will concede that it lot>k> 
like a crude performance to put at the end of an ordinance like 
tins a lot of exceptions. 


The delegate from Lee (Mr. Harrison) and 
from Montgomery (Mr. Macdonald) each desired 
speaker. 


the gentleman 
to interrupt the 


for ,,R ° ... 

MR. WEATHERLY—Certainlv 

*«"> ''on,- 


Lee. 


MR. WEATHERLY—I had recognized the gentleman from 


. TH E PRESIDENT PRO TEM-Hm the Ch-nV . , 

mzed the gentleman from Montgomery. ° 1 TCCu *' 

case “havelhe^'n™ a^eTl Z'bTr 

MR. WEATHERLY"_Ye*. T .... 

mingham is an exceptional case.’ J W ' mSr to af, ' nit that Rir ' 

THE PRESIDENT PRO TKM_The 

ts recognized to ask his question. “ ' ffentleman from Lee 

MR. HARRISON—The gentleman f rn . Ar 
the question that I desired to put. ° m ^ Iont gomery asked 

MR. LOWE (Jefferson) _ T ■>. 

fron, Montgomery and the 



CONSTITUTIONAL CONVENTION, 1901 


1577 


rate in Montgomery under the Constitution is higher than the tax 
rate in Birmingham? 


MR. MACDONALD—To our sorrow, we know it. 

MR. WEATHERLY Now this ordinance, as reported, and 
the substitute of the gentleman from Madison fixing the limit at 
J per cent on taxable values for ordinary purposes, allows 3 per 
cent additional for certain other purposes. Birmingham at present 
has gone up to 14 per cent. Our debt is $2,124,000. Our taxable 
values are something in excess of $15,000,000. She has gone be¬ 
yond the limit. As I construe this ordinance and the proposed 
substitute, she will be deprived of the 3 per cent additional. She 
has already, by ordinance, proposed the construction of $586,000 
of street improvements, most of which will be assessed against 
the property owners, but for which her bonds will be outstand- 
* n g> guaranteed by a lien upon the property. I do not know that 
I state the figures accurately, but $270,000 and odd have been 
contracted for, leaving $280,000 and odd which have been au¬ 
thorized by ordinance but not contracted for. 

1 he time of the gentleman here expired, and, on motion, was 
extended. 

MR. WEATHERLY—As I was saying, Birmingham has just 
started upon a career of street improvement. She has started upon 
a system of general improvement. She is a city in a beautiful 
valley called Jones valley, and anyone who stands upon the top 
of Red Mountain and looks down upon her as she nestles in that 
beautiful valley, and sees her stretching her limits up and down 
the valley, almost growing while you look at her, would be an 
unworthy citizen of Alabama if his heart did not swell with pride 
and enthusiasm at the sight, and if he would wish to do one thing 
that would check the onward movement of her citizens. Around 
and about her now are growing smaller towns which might be 
called her satelites—Woodlawn, Avondale, East Birmingham and 
a number of others I might mention, all of which will sooner or 
later be incorporated into this great town. We hope in the fu¬ 
ture, under this Constitution, to have more than a hundred thou¬ 
sand population; indeed, her population will be only limited by 
the confines of that valley and the absence of a water course 
through the valley. These little towns will be taken in, neces¬ 
sitating further street extensions and improvements of sewers and 
other sanitary improvement. We propose that all of these shall 
be paid for in the manner in which the improvements have al¬ 
ready been made, as authorized by a recent act of the Legisla¬ 
ture by assessment against the property owner. Our citizens do 
not object. I am proud to say to the gentleman from Montgom¬ 
ery that the citizens of Birmingham do not fear either death or 
taxation when they know it is not all of life to live, and when 



1578 


OFFICIAL PROCKKDINViS 


they know by the payment of taxes, under a faithful administra¬ 
tion, they will get full benefits therefrom. 

I Now, as I say, gentlemen of the Convention, we have au¬ 
thorized $586,000 of street improvements for the immediate fu¬ 
ture, $79,000 of which have been built and about one-half of the 
remainder already contracted for. The report of the committee 
and the substitute of the gentleman from Madison will stop that 
immediately. We have gone beyond our limit. Our hands are 
tied, and we can do nothing else. 

Not only that, but you must remember that this is not mere¬ 
ly an act of the Legislature, but you are putting it in your organic 
law. Now, it has been suggested to me that there are 20^ mu¬ 
nicipal corporations in Alabama. The report of the committee and 
the substitute of the gentleman from Madison will bear equally 
upon all of these corporations without exception and without re¬ 
gard to the peculiar needs of any of them and without regard to 
the wishes and desires of their citizens. The limitation in the 
first part of the amendment proposed by the gentleman from 
Lauderdale, which is practically as reported by the committee, 
will control 194 of these corporations, and to that extent that sub¬ 
stitute will adopt the general system reported by the committee; 
but the virtue and efficacy and equity and reason of the substi¬ 
tute of the gentleman from Lauderdale lies in the fact that it con¬ 
tains some exceptions which apply only to the eight chief cities of 
Alabama. They apply to Mobile, Birmingham, Montgomery, 
Huntsville, Florence, Bessemer and Gadsden—those are nine, I 
believe. The virtue of the proposed substitute of the gentleman 
from Lauderdale is that it does not lay down a blind rule against 
the chief cities of Alabama, because most of the smaller towns 
demand that rule, but it concedes the rule established by the com¬ 
mittee to the small towns and excepts from it the cities which do 
not require the application of that rule but demand something- 
better. * 


Now, I will conclude my remarks by appealing to von not to 
apply this hard and fast rule to these growing cities/these pro¬ 
gressive cities, these cities that are constantlv expanding, and 
whose needs are constantly increasing. Don’t apply this hard and 
fast rule to those cities without further deliberation, and don't 
apply it at the close of a debate which, perhaps, has not afforded 
opportunity to instruct the members as to the real needs of these 
a .es I know no member of this Convention would feel that he 
ought to apply a rule, for instance to Birmingham, which her 
representatives tell you with unanimous voice will hurt and in¬ 
jure and cripple her in the modern race for success. 

Rather than have such action, we would ask that this matter 
be recommitted. We would rather have the substitute of thT gen- 
tleman from Lauderdale, but if that cannot be done, we ask that 



CONSTITUTIONAL CONVENTION. 1901 


1579 


Birmingham be excepted, and if that cannot be done, we ask that 
this matter be re-referred to the committee and some broad, lib¬ 
eral, considerate and able scheme be devised and laid down that 
will not work inequality and injustice to some of your most im¬ 
portant cities, and which will really and indeed be so well found¬ 
ed in reason, that you may afford to put it in your organic law. 

MR. JONES (Montgomery)—Mr. President, if the city which 
I have the honor in part to represent, were not vitally interested 
in this question, I would not trespass upon the time of the Conven¬ 
tion. 


It seems we have mixed in the discussion of this question two 
propositions. One is whether the rate for local benefits ought 
to be curtailed and the powers of municipal bodies as to that, lim¬ 
ited. As to this last proposition, I am in hearty accord with the 
gentleman from Montgomery (Mr. Macdonald) upon my right. 
But it seems in order to force favorable action on that proposi¬ 
tion; some of our friends, to my apprehension, have unwisely 
combatted the right of a city to go in debt for other purposes, and 
seek to confine them to narrow and unsafe limitations. 

What is the condition of Montgomery? I am satisfied nobody 
here wants to “throttle” anybody if they know it. It is because 
I believe some of the delegates do not know that they will choke 
Montgomery if they adopt the substitute of the gentleman from 
Madison, that I call their attention to these figures. 

The city of Montgomery has an assessed value of real and 
personal property of $12,555,000. It has a total debt of $1,879,000 
in round numbers, not including therein, approximately $100,000 
of what are called “baby bonds.” Of that indebtedness $600,000 
is for water works, and that debt will take care of itself. The 
other indebtedness is $1,279,050 or about 10 per cent of the as¬ 
sessed value of all of the taxable property in the city. 

If the substitute offered by the gentleman from Madison is 
adopted, what becomes of Montgomery? I have great reluctance 
to differ from the gentleman from Madison, for I have often 
avowed my admiration for his common sense and honesty of pur¬ 
pose. I think, however, in that substitute, he has, unintentionally, 
struck a blow at cities in the condition of Montgomery. 

Now let us take an account and see where we are, what has 
this debt been contracted for, outside of the water works debt? 
Five hundred thousand dollars was to build a railroad years ago, 
the completion of which prevented the town from drying up and 
getting in the condition of the town of Cahaba. Whatever may be 
said about that debt and the taxation for it, it was a beneficial 
investment, I will further say that it was voted by the people, 
sometime before the city actually incurred the debt. I believe the 



1580 


OFFICIAL PROCEEDINGS 


Supreme Court declared the act, under which the election was 
held, to be unconstitutional. The balance of the debt is for sani¬ 
tary sewers, street paving, storm sewers and school bonds, in 
round numbers about $600,000. It is to this expenditure and our 
magnificent sewers that the city is indebted to its practical escape 
three years ago from yellow fever, which was confined practically 
to one part of the city, and which outside of the alarm and the 
death of a few good men, did no real damage to the city. \\ e have 
a death rate, I believe, as low as any city on the continent. This 
is due to our expenditure for water and sewerage. We have a 
growing city. We need to extend our system of sanitary sewers 
and under this limit we cannot do it. Our people are proud of 
our school houses. They are a good investment, and if we want to 
put up more we can't do it. I ask the Convention if it is wise, if it 
is right, if it is just, especially in view of the fact that we may 
take it for granted that hereafter all debts will be required to be 
approved by a majority vote of the tax payers, to put the city of 
Montgomery in a condition where she must stand still, and can 
not extend its sewerage when needed, and may, perhaps, be com¬ 
pelled to go backwards. 

MR. SANFORD—When you pay your debts you can go for¬ 
ward. 

MR. JONES (Montgomery)—Sometimes a man is not able 
to pay debts, although he can pay interest, and sometimes if he is 
honest and wants money and needs bread and meat, and has a 
family which will starve without it, it is wise to leave it to the 
people he deals with to determine whether to credit him. He ought 
not to be cut off from the use of his creditors. 

MR. WALKER—May I interrupt the gentleman? 

MR. JONES (Montgomery) — Will that come out of my 
time? 

THE PRESIDENT PRO TEM—Yes. 

MR. JONES—Then, I hope he will make it short. 

MR. WALKER—The suggestion in behalf of Montgomery, 
Birmingham and perhaps some other cities in the State goes to 
show that they are not in position to stand this kind of a limita¬ 
tion, because of what they have done in the past. Would not 
that objection be obviated by adopting the scriptural example 
and excepting the prodigal sons from this limitation? 

MR. JONES (Montgomery)—Unquestionably it would, but 
we cannot tell whether this Convention will accept that mode of 
relief. ^Ve have had these propositions up for several days, and 
we do not know what the Convention will do. So we must fight 
for an acceptable proposition at all points. 



CONSTITUTIONAL CONVENTION, 1901 


1581 


Now, I wish to state another fact about the city of Montgom¬ 
ery which illustrates the unwisdom of cast iron constitutional 
provisions in regard to municipalities. We are restricted to one 
half of one per cent for current expenses. It is the universal ex¬ 
perience of every one connected with the city government that 
they cannot do it. Although I fall in that class to which allusion 
was made by my distinguished friend from Montgomery and no 
man loves him better, an ex-alderman, I desire to give my experi¬ 
ence and to say that during ten years in the City Council with 
such men as George W. Stone, Jno. W. Durr, we found the city 
could not live on the fifty cents. What is the result? It drives 
these corporations to do many of the things of which such just 
complaint is made. They are bound to have revenue and they 
reach out everywhere for it, and compel individuals to bear bur¬ 
dens, which should be borne by the city. I appeal to my friend, 
who wants to cut down the unbridled power of local assessments, 
not to cut down the debt limitation to such an extent that the 
municipalities will be forced to do what they have been doing, go 
out in the highways and under the claim of police power take 
up a bootblack and make him pay $10 of license, take a contract¬ 
or working two or three hands and make him pay a heavy license, 
and put unwarranted burdens on even the smallest kinds of busi¬ 
ness. It is most unjust to pay in this way things that should be 
paid by general taxation. 

The time of the gentleman here expired and on motion of the 
delegate from Walker (Mr. Long) was extended. 

MR. JONES—I am obliged for the courtesy of the Conven¬ 
tion and will detain the Convention but a few moments longer. 

I was about to call attention to the patriotic attitude of the 
people of Montgomery to this illegal taxation of about $20,000 a 
year, which has been collected for years to keep our heads above 
water, to preserve our health. Although it is a matter of common 
knowledge that the tax is illegal, and at any moment could be 
stricken down by an injunction, there has never been in the his¬ 
tory of the city but once, when any citizen raised that point, and 
what was at a time when our people did not control Montgom¬ 
ery. Ever since 1875 the people have gone on submitting to what 
was a notoriously illegal burden, because they were willing to 
make sacrifices for the growth and honor of their city, and to pro¬ 
mote the welfare and prosperity of the Capital of Alabama. 

Now that is our condition, and we appeal to the delegates 
who represent the sovereign power of Alabama not to put the 
people of its Capital in a position which they will hereafter regret. 

MR. WEAKLEY—In order to meet the wishes of a num¬ 
ber of gentlemen on this floor, I ask unanimous consent of the 



1582 


OFFICIAL PROCEEDINGS 


Convention to amend the substitute offered b) me by adding cer¬ 
tain words which the clerk will read. 

The amendment was read as follows: Amend by' adding after 
the word “improvement,” “provided, that the proceeds of all ob¬ 
ligations issued as herein provided in excess of said seven per 
centum shall not be used for any purpose other than that for which 
said obligations were issued.” 

There was no objection and the amendment was made. 

MR. BROWNE—I have no particular objection that this 
Convention should place no limit whatever upon the capacity' of 
debt of municipalities, but if it does undertake to put a debt limit, 
it should be a reasonable one. The substitute of the delegate from 
Lauderdale is 10,000 times worse than no debt limit, because it 
invites extravagant expenditures of money'. If a man owns a plan¬ 
tation and has an honest overseer upon it and goes away allow¬ 
ing him to expend money as needed, he will probably, being an 
honest man, only expend a reasonable amount, but if, when he 
leaves he tells him “I limit you to $100 to buy feed for the mules, 
but for all other purposes spend as much as you please/’ no mat¬ 
ter how honest that man may be, when you come home you will 
find he has made extravagant expenditures. 

This substitute says you can expend / per cent, for general 
purposes, but for waterworks that ought to come under general 
expenses, for sewerage and for street and sidewalk improvements 
of all kinds, you may spend whatever you mav see fit to. After 
carefully studying this, I say that the debt limit is not for the 
benefit of the people, but for the benefit of the bondholders, and 
I say that for this reason: Our courts have a way of holding that 
you cannot mandamus a city and make it appropriate its general 
fund or the money it derives from taxation for the payment of 
interest on a bonded debt until it shall have expended whatever 
money was necessary for general expenses. Suppose 7 per cent 
is not enough for the general expenses. Suppose, in other words, 
a city becomes indebted in an amount greater than 7 per cent/, 
and a bondholder comes up and says “you cannot pay one dime of 
that debt you have created for general purposes, we will go to the 
courts and mandamus you against paying the debt created for 
general purposes and force you to apply it to the payment of in¬ 
terest on the bonded debt," and Mr. Bondholder says allow an 
unlimited bonded debt of the character we deal in. I sav it would 
be better to lay the whole matter on the table than to let this sub¬ 
stitute become the law. 

I am entirely impartial in this matter and I am willing to ad¬ 
mit there is no provision in the Section as reported to meet the 
necessities of Montgomery, Birmingham and other towns, and that 
there ought to be some provision and that if you want to put a 



CONSTITUTIONAL CONVENTION, 1901 


1583 


debt for paving streets on abutting property holders and let the 
city endorse that, that there should be some power to do it but 
not to this extent. There are smaller cities in Alabama who are 
not entitled to the luxury of water works, and gas, and electric 
light plants and paved streets and they ought not to be allowed 
to float bonds for these purposes. Such expenditures would be 
pure extravagance. The smaller towns do not need these things. 

I made the proposition to the gentleman from Lauderdale 
awhile ago and you heard it made by the gentleman from Greene, 
why not make an exception to your cities? Why not? These 
cities have a right to levy taxes to 1 per cent, of the taxable value 
where the other towns have only a right to levy one-half of 1 per 
cent. Their income per $100 of the taxable property is double 
that of other cities and they should have a right to create a larger 
bonded indebtedness. If your income is $2,000 and mine is $1,000, 
you can safely incur a greater debt than I can, but, gentlemen, I 
propose to leave this Section just as reported, which will suit the 
larger number of cities and then if these other cities want to be 
excepted, we can except them. You have it now because it pro¬ 
vides that the Section shall not apply to cities over 6,000 inhabi¬ 
tants, but there are a number of cities under 6,000 that long before 
another Constitution will be over 6,000, and who don’t want any 
such provision. 

MR. HARRISON—Are there seven cities in Alabama that 
have the right to levy one-half additional tax? 

MR. BROWNE—No, sir. I have said to the gentleman like 
the gentleman from Greene said, why not make exceptions to 
their cities. The truth is they don’t want to call attention to their 
adversities. There is the milk in the cocoanut. They recognize 
that it makes against the city to have it known that they have a 
right to create an enormous debt. 

MR. PILLANS—We have no such feeling in the world. 

MR. WEATHERLY—The gentleman can except us also. 

MR. BROWNE—Then we have it down to the gentleman 
from Lauderdale and we can compromise in a moment. We have 
it in here cities over 7,000. There may be a city over 6,000 that 
don’t want the limit. If we have this shall not apply to the city of 
Mobile, and Birmingham, which can do so and so, that looks to 
me like it would end the matter. And I understand Montgomery 
wants to come in and be allowed to levy a greater amount. 

MR. SANFORD—Montgomery is not willing to it, whatever 
may be the views of some of the delegates. 

MR. BROWNE—If the Convention wants to give to these 
cities the right they ask, don’t put it on every other city in Ala- 



1584 


OFFICIAL PROCEEDINGS 


bama when they are not asking for it—don t allow them to create 
tremendous debts when they are not requesting it. I am opposed 
to reckless and extravagant expenditures. My town ha* been 
burnt and I am one of the children who dread the tire. 1 am 
willing' for any city which desires to have what it wants in this re¬ 
gard, but I don’t want to put in a general limit that may cover 
some towns that don’t want it. 

MR. REESE—What objection will there be to saying a city 
of 6,000 according to the last census? 

MR. BROWNE—That would satisfy me. 

MR. HARRISON—Don’t you carry out the spirit of the pro¬ 
posed limit if you allow those cities and towns a greater rate 
that they ought to levy a greater rate of taxation so as not to con¬ 
tract a debt without a reasonable probability of paying.'' 

MR. BROWNE—I think so. No city that levies a tax of 
one-half of 1 per cent, can pay a debt greater than 5 per cent, of 
its taxable value, or pay the interest on it. ()f course there is 
allowed by the Committee’s report 3 per cent, for waterworks and 
electric light and gas plants which are of course sources of rev¬ 
enue but whenever a city goes in debt to a greater extent than 
5 per cent, of the taxable value it is bound to default in payment 
of interest if it cannot levy a greater rate than one-half of 1 per 
cent. 


MR. PILLANS—If a city buys waterworks with which it in¬ 
creases its revenue, would that be lessening the ability to pay? 

MR. BROWNE—I answered that before you asked it. 

MR. PILLANS—I beg pardon. Or if the cost or a great part 
of it, of payments is paid by the abutting property owner, is that 
a permanent charge against the city? 

MR. BROWNE—I thank the gentleman for the suggestion. 
I for one care not what Montgomery has, if you want to con¬ 
fiscate the property of your citizens as it is charged upon the floor 
of this House you are engaged in doing now to some extent; you 
may go on and do it, but we do not want that law to be enforced 
all over the State of Alabama. I drew up an amendment to this 
section, but it was not acceptable, providing that there should not 
be assessed against abutting properties for street, sidewalk and 
sewerage improvements a greater amount than 10 per cent, of the 
property, and they said that was not enough. 

MR. PILLANS—May I ask a question? 

MR. BROWNE—Yes. 

MR. PILLANS — Do you not recognize that non-resident 



CONSTITUTIONAL CONVENTION. 1901 


1585 


owners of vacant lots ought to pay, not according to a percentage 
of the value of the property, but according to the front foot, when 
the people on each side by heavy expenditures in building have in¬ 
creased the value and usefulness of such vacant lot? 

MR. BROWNE—I do not know how that is. I know in some 
towns they will build a sidewalk for you, and in less than two 
years will tear it up and build another. It always did seem to 
me there was a job in it, but I have known it to be done. 

Now, no doubt upon one proposition, under the recent de¬ 
cisions of the Supreme Court of the United States it has become 
the law of the land, not of the State of Alabama, but it probably 
would be in case they sued in the Federal Court, that you can 
absolutely confiscate property for street improvement. 

MR. MACDONALD — You mean only in cases where the 
Legislature permits such a thing to be done, not that it is the law? 

MR. BROWNE—Yes. Under the decision of the Supreme 
Court, the Legislature of Alabama can pass a law that will allow 
a city to confiscate the property, and there is nothing in our Con¬ 
stitution to justify the court in holding it unconstitutional, and 
certainly the Supreme Court of the United States, under their 
last two utterances on this subject, would hold that it is perfectly 
right and proper. They undertook in overruling the Norwood 
case, to say they did not overrule it, but in effect they did, be¬ 
cause one of those cases is where they assessed suburban prop¬ 
erty going out to a park, for street improvement, for the benefit 
of all citizens and visitors, and after the assessment was made they 
had to sell the property, and the proceeds of the sale did not pay 
the assessment, but the Supreme Court said it was not a confis¬ 
cation of that property. They had to explain that they did not 
overrule the Norwood case. In effect they did, but they said they 
did not. So, when the courts have come to that pass, where they 
uphold the absolute confiscation of property, I do not want the 
town that I represent, or the town that I live in, to have the right 
to go in debt to an unlimited amount and confiscate the property 
of its citizens. 

I am not opposed to improvements. It has been said by the 
gentleman from Mobile that he wants them to assess his property- 
I will state, Mr. President, that on the street where I live in Talla¬ 
dega, the owners for two blocks there have offered to pave the 
street entirely free of any cost to the city, if the city would make 
the owners from there to town pave theirs, by charging them 
one-half the cost and the city paying the other half. I am in favor 
of this kind of improvement, but I am not in favor of allowing it 
to be done under the guise of law. 



1586 


OFFICIAL PROCEEDINGS 


MR. PILLANS—Did the other people agree to do that." Those 
outside of the two blocks named? 

MR. BROWNE—The city has not yet done it, but we think 
they will. 

MR. PILLANS—But if the others do not agree, and it is not 
made compulsory on them, and you pave your two blocks you can 
never make the others pave. 

MR. BROWNE—There are some poor people living between 
ourselves and town. One case of two orphan girls, and another 
case of a w T idow, and we do not want to confiscate their property. 

And another thing, the town of Talladega can get along with 
5 per cent., and 3 per cent, for its water works, and then pav one- 
half for street improvements, but we do not propose to pave our 
streets in an expensive manner. The town of Talladega has no 
right to pave as the streets are paved here in Montgomery. A 
brick sidewalk is all that they ask for. 

Now in conclusion we ought not to spend so much time 
looking at this question from two different standpoints. I admit 
Montgomery and Birmingham should have relief, but I submit 
they ought not to say we will take it, and take it in a way that 
will hurt the other cities and towns in Alabama, or not take it at 
all. 


MR. KNOX—I have supported the Committee on Taxation 
I believe in every proposition that they have submitted to the 
Convention, and I have the greatest respect for the ability and 
wisdom of that committee, but it seems to me that in considering 
a matter having reference directly to the interest of the cities of 
the State, we ought to give weight to the committee which has had 
this matter specially in charge; we ought to consider carefully 
the recommendations of the Committee on Municipal Corpora¬ 
tions, when we come to deal with the delicate questions of mu¬ 
nicipal taxation. 

Now, the argument of the distinguished gentleman, the Chair¬ 
man of the Committee on Taxation, suggesting that this whole 
matter will be relieved by exempting the cities of Montgomery, 
Mobile and Birmingham, from the operation of the law, assumes’ 
Mr. President, that we are not going to have any more cities in 
Alabama. Why, the State is undergoing a rapid development. 
We have coming on the cities of Anniston, Huntsville, Florence 
and Decatur. All of these cities are receiving an impetus of 
growth, and we hope within a few years we will have many cities 
like Birmingham, Mobile and Montgomery! And why is it, Mr. 
President, that these cities are here asking for more latitude in 
the matter of taxation? It is because, when you build a great citv, 
you must have revenues. This condition is not confined to the 



1587 


CONSTITUTIONAL CONVENTION, 1901 


feu cities in Alabama. If you will go into Georgia and consider 

cides C °and if” 8 pl j ev * ,Im £ [ n Atlanta and Savannah and other 
cities, and if you look at other cities in other States, you will find 

they require ample revenues. You cannot pave streets, you can- 
no a) sewers, you cannot establish water works without rev- 
enues. It seems to me that we ought to go cautiously in this 
matter. W e are establishing a Constitution here that may last for 
fifty years or may last for a hundred years, and we do not know 
in that time how many cities in Alabama will be circumstanced 
just like these cities that the Chairman of the committee now pro¬ 
poses to except from the provisions of the article. 


I turn the gentleman s argument back upon him when he 
suggests here that we except Mobile, Birmingham and Montgom¬ 
ery from the operation of this law, and ask him why he does not 
instead except alladega from the operation of the law, which is 
limited by its terms to cities of over six thousand inhabitants? It 
seems to me, Mr. President, that the terms of the amendment pro¬ 
posed by the gentleman from Lauderdale sufficiently cover the 
question and ought to be adopted. 

The gentleman from Lauderdale is the author in this Con¬ 
vention of this proposition of limiting the right of cities to create 
debts. I think he first suggested it. I advocated it in the opening 
remarks that I made before the Convention, and my mind was 
prompted to investigation along this line by hearing him discuss 
the question, and reading several papers on the subject which he 
had delivered in other cities in this country. He has advocated 
this restriction, but it seems that when he has sought to enforce 
his views along that line, some delegates have thought it such a 
good thing that they want to make the restrictions greater than 
seem prudent. It seems to me, Mr. President and gentlemen of 
the Convention, that we should adopt the substitute proposed by 
the gentleman from Lauderdale, and upon that I move the previous 
question. 


Mr. Coleman (Greene) rose for recognition. 

MR. KNOX—If the gentleman from Greene desires to dis¬ 
cuss the question I will withdraw the motion. 

MR. SANFORD—Would not it necessarily increase taxation 
if you have no limitation upon the amount of indebtedness which 
they can contract? Will they not have to increase taxation to 
meet that larger indebtedness, or go into bankruptcy? 

MR. KNOX—I reply to that, Mr. President, by saying that 
the amendment offered by the gentleman from Lauderdale does 
limit the power to create debts except that it does not limit it with 
reference to laying sewers, purchasing water works, and with 
reference to street improvements, and it seems to me that the 



1588 


OFFICIAL PROCEEDINGS 


people of these different cities will be able to place sufficient 
limitation upon the law-making- power to protect themselves on 
that point. When the city of Montgomery purchased the water 
works here, it was competent for the people of Montgomery to 
have expressed their views on that question, and had it been con¬ 
trary to the wishes of the city of Montgomery and its people, 1 
doubt not the purchase would not have been made. 

MR, JONES (Montgomery) — Nearly all expressed them¬ 
selves as in favor of the purchase. 

MR. SANFORD—They were in favor of that because it was 
no burden. 

MR. KNOX—There is another clause in the Article reported 
by the Committee on Municipal Corporations which restricts the 
issue of bonds, except by a vote of the city that makes it. That 
is a sufficient limitation, and we should not make an iron-clad rule 
that will hamper our cities in the future. I move the previous 
question. 

THE PRESIDENT PRO TEM.—Will the gentleman from 
Calhoun allow the present presiding officer to retire to his desk to 
offer a little short amendment before that is done. 

The President resumed the chair. 

MR. CUNNINGHAM—I ask unanimous consent to offer this 
little bit of an amendment to the original proposition offered In- 
Mr. Weakley. It will cause no debate, but it is pregnant with facts 
and prospects. “Amendment—After the words Gadsden, insert 
the word Ensley.” 

MR. CUNNINGHAM—I hope there is no objection. 

There being none, the amendment was allowed. 

Mr. Cunningham took the chair. 

MR. COLEMAN (Greene)—The honorable President of this 
Convention commended the delegate from Lauderdale for having 
been the first person to suggest a limitation upon the tax rate of 
the cities. We accepted that suggestion with great applause, but 
the amendment now offered by him shows that suggestion was a 
promise made but to be broken in performance. 

Under the statement of the delegate who last addressed you. 
he says we ought to assume that there are going to be other cities 
in the State of Alabama, and that they should be provided for 
Mr. President and delegates of the Convention, it is in anticipa¬ 
tion that those cities will grown up in our State that we resist 
this unlimited power of taxation. We have heard from delegates 
from these cities the condition that they are in, and what need 



CONSTITUTIONAL CONVENTION, 1901 


1589 


they have for greater taxation, and it is to provide against that 
emergency and that contingency that we wish to place a limit up¬ 
on the power of taxation for cities hereafter to come. It seems to 
me it will not be out of place at this time to explain what perhaps 
is not realized by every member of this Convention as to these 
arguments which have been made in favor of taxing property own¬ 
ers abutting sidewalks and streets. Under the law which pre¬ 
vails in this State the rate of taxation could not exceed the value of 
the improvements added to the abutting owners. You could assess 
the abutting owners, but you were controlled by the increased 
valuation made by the improvements, and there was equity in 
that provision and I have heard no voice against it, but when the 
argument is made before this Convention that we should stand by 
the decisions of the courts, and that legislators should always 
recognize the decisions of the courts, it suggests a very dangerous 
proposition. To my mind, courts should be governed by the Leg¬ 
islators, and by conventions, and whenever the court detects a 
deficiency in the law, and points out the hardships that may op¬ 
erate against the citizens of a State by reason of the defect in the 
law, it becomes the duty of the Legislature, or body creating the 
organic law, to provide against the defect, and protect the citizen 
from imposition and unjust burdens. 

Under the late decision of the Supreme Court, it has been said 
that you may sell all the property adjoining these improvements 
for the cost. That is the proposition you are now confronted with. 
Not the one which we supposed prevailed in Alabama, that you 
could increase the tax up to a point that it enhanced the value, 
but the whole property may be subjected to the cost. Now, when 
the courts announced the proposition of that kind, it behooves the 
legislative powers to interfere and restrain the courts and impose 
restrictions which will prevent any such unjust exactions. The 
reason why those decisions are made, is because in the Consti¬ 
tution or in the statutes, there is no legislation respecting the 
power of the Legislature to confiscate or appropriate property in 
favor of abutting improvements. 

It seems to me when I take occasion to state on behalf of the 
committee, that the committee has been anxious to meet the views 
and conditions of the towns in the State, we propose, as a com¬ 
mittee, to except these towns, if they desire to be excepted, and 
they decline to do so, and when the suggestion has been made 
here, time and again, are you willing to have your town or city 
excepted, we have been met with a refusal. Now, will the dele¬ 
gates to this Convention consider whether it is right or not for the 
remainder of the State to have a burden placed upon it, in order to 
accommodate the cities mentioned, rather than relieve the bal¬ 
ance of the State, and except those cities? I judge there is not a 
man in this Convention who will object to excepting the cities 
named, except perhaps the city of Montgomery. There the dele- 



1590 


OFFICIAL PROCEEDINGS 


gates seem to be divided, and it becomes the duty of this Con¬ 
vention to determine as between the two parties representing 
Montgomery which is the better plan, and to decide according to 
law, but as for the other cities, I venture to assert there is not one 
single objection, and why should they insist upon driving the bal¬ 
ance of the State down, in order to pass us along with them? 
What injustice is it to except them by name and relieve the bal¬ 
ance of the State? What unfairness is there in it? Why should 
not they be named, and if they desire to be excepted, give them 
all the latitude they want? This Convention will no doubt accept 
that proposition. We have made it time and again, but if, as 
intimated on the floor, these cities have formed a combination 
and will not desert each other, then I say to the delegates of the 
Convention, you who represent the taxpayers of this State, it be¬ 
comes you to look well to your own interests and to their interests. 
We should protect the people whom we represent, and if these 
cities are not willing to be excepted, they should abide the con¬ 
sequences. 

MR. KNOX—I move the previous question upon the origi¬ 
nal section and pending amendment. 

Mr. Lowe (Jefferson) sought recognition. 

THE PRESIDENT PRO TEM—For what purpose does the 
gentleman rise? 

MR. LOWE (Jefferson)—I rise to suggest to the gentleman 
who made the motion, that an amendment is to be offered now, 
providing for the contingency of excepting certain cities. 

MR. KNOX—Then I suggest that the previous question be 
restricted to the amendment. 

MR. BROWNE—To the two amendments—limit it to both. 

THE PRESIDENT—The previous question has been called 
on the amendment offered by the gentleman from Madison, and 
the amendment offered by the gentleman from Lauderdale. ’ The 
question is shall the main question be ordered on the two amend¬ 
ments offered to the report of the Committee on Taxation? 

The main question was ordered. 

The clerk was directed to read the amendment by Mr. Walker. 

MR. JONES (Montgomery)—I rise to a point of order. There 
was a substitute offered— 

THE PRESIDENT PRO TEM—The substitute was offered 
by the gentleman from Lauderdale, and to the substitute the gen¬ 
tleman from Madison offered an amendment, which is now the 
pending question. 



CONSTITUTIONAL CONVENTION, 1901 


1591 


The amendment to the substitute was read. 

MR. SANFORD—I call for the ayes and noes. 

MR. WATTS—I move to lay the amendment on the table. 

THE PRESIDENT PRO TEM—The motion is out of or¬ 
der, the previous question having already been ordered. 

The call for the ayes and noes was sustained by the requisite 
number rising. 

THE PRESIDENT PRO TEM. — The question is on the 
adoption of the amendment. Those in favor of the amendment 
will vote aye, and those opposed, no, when your names are called. 

MR. PILLANS—I suppose it is perfectly well understood 
that the amendment now being voted on is the amendment of¬ 
fered by the gentleman from Madison. 

THE PRESIDENT PRO TEM—It is. 

During the call of the roll. 

MR. BAREFIELD—I am paired with Mr. Miller of Maren¬ 
go. If he were here he would vote aye and I would vote no. 

MR. deGRAFFENREID—I am paired with the gentleman 
from Dallas, Mr. Craig. If he were here he would vote aye and 
I would vote no. 

MR. STEWART—I am paired with some gentleman whose 
name I cannot now recall. I would vote no, but I do not know 
how the other gentleman would vote. 

The call of the roll resulted as follows: 


AYES 


Beavers, 

Browne, 

Bulger, 

Byars, 

Carnathon, 

Chapman, 

Cobb, 

Cofer, 

Coleman, of Greene, 
Espy, 

Fitts, 


Fletcher, 

Foshee, 

Freeman, 

Glover, 

Grayson, 

Kirk, 

Leigh, 

Lowe, of Lawrence, 
Malone, 

Maxwell, 

Moody, 


Oates, 

O’Rear, 

Palmer, 

Phillips, 

Rogers (Sumter), 
Sanford, 

Smith, Morgan M 
Spragins, 

Walker, 


TOTAL—31. 



1592 

OFFICIAL PROCEEDINGS 

NOES 

Messrs. President, 

Hood, 

Pettus, 

Ashcraft, 

Howell, 

Lilians, 

Banks, 

Howze, 

Pitts, 

Beddow, 

Inge, 

Porter, 

Bethune, 

Jenkins, 

Proctor, 

Blackwell, 

Jones, of Bibb, 

Reese, 

Boone, 

Jones, of Hale, 

Renfro, 

Brooks, 

Jones, of Montgomery, 

Reynolds (Chilton), 

Burnett, 

Jones, of Wilcox, 

Reynolds, of Henry, 

Burns, 

Kirkland, 

Rogers (Lowndes), 

Cardon, 

Knight, 

Sanders, 

Carmichael, of Colbert, 

Kyle, 

Searcy, 

Carmichael, of Coffee, 

Locklin, 

Selheimer, 

Cornwall, 

Lomax, 

Sentell, 

Cunningham, 

Long, of Walker, 

Sloan, 

Davis, of Etowah, 

Lowe, of Jefferson, 

Smith (Mobile), 

Dent, 

Macdonald, 

Smith, Mac. A., 

Duke, 

McMillan (Wilcox), 

Sorrell, 

Eley, 

Martin, 

Stoddard, 

Eyster, 

Miller (Wilcox), 

Thompson, 

Ferguson, 

Mulkey, 

Waddell, 

Foster, 

Murphree, 

Watts, 

Graham, of Montgomery, NeSmith, 

Weakley, 

Graham, of Talladega, 

Norman, 

Weatherly, 

Haley, 

Norwood, 

White, 

Harrison, 

O’Neal (Lauderdale), 

Williams (Barbour), 

Heflin, of Chambers, 

O’Neill, of Jefferson, 

Williams (Marengo), 

Heflin, of Randolph, 

Opp, 

Wilson (Washington), 

Henderson, 

Parker (Cullman), 

Winn, 

Hodges, 

Parker (Elmore), 

TOTAL—89 

ABSENT OR NOT VOTING 

Altman, 

Greer, of Perry, 

Robinson, 

Almon, 

Handley, 

Sam ford, 

Barefield, 

Hinson, 

Sollie, 

Bartlett, 

Jackson, 

Spears, 

Case, 

King, 

Stewart, 

Coleman, of Walker, 

Ledbetter, 

Tayloe, 

Craig, 

Long, of Butler, 

Vaughan, 

Davis, of DeKalb, 

McMillan, of Baldwin, 

Whiteside, 

deGraffenreid, 

Merrill, 

Willet, 

Gilmore, 

Miller (Marengo), 

Williams (Elmore), 

Grant, 

Morrisette, 

Wilson (Clarke), 

Greer, of Calhoun, 

Pearce, 



CONSTITUTIONAL CONVENTION. 1901 1593 

MR. OATES—I am paired with Mr. Morrisette, the dele¬ 
gate from Monroe, but not knowing how he would vote if he were 
present, I voted. 

By a vote of eighty-nine noes and thirty-one ayes, the amend¬ 
ment to the substitute was lost. 

THE PRESIDENT PRO TEM — The question is on the 
adoption of the substitute offered by the gentleman from Lauder¬ 
dale. 


MR. deGRAFFENREID — I have a substitute I desire to 
offer. 

THE PRESIDENT PRO TEM — It is out of order. The 
previous question has been ordered on both amendments. 

MR. HARRISON — I demand the ayes and noes on that 
amendment. 

THE PRESIDENT PRO TEM — The question is on the 
adoption of the substitute offered by the gentleman from Lauder¬ 
dale. As many as favor the adoption will say aye, and those op¬ 
posed no, as your names are called. 

A reading of the substitute was called for, and the clerk read 
the substitute, and before the reading was concluded the clock 
struck one. 

MR. WATTS—I move that we remain in session until this 
vote is taken. 

THE PRESIDENT PRO TEM—The gentleman moves that 
the rules be suspended. 

MR. deGRAFFENREID — I rise to a point of order. The 
hour of one has struck and this Convention is adjourned. 

THE PRESIDENT PRO TEM—It seems to the chair that 
the point of order is well taken. 

And thereupon the Convention adjourned until 3:30 p. m. 


AFTERNOON SESSION 

The Convention reconvened at 3:30 p. m. 

THE PRESIDENT—The question before the Convention 
will be on the adoption of the substitute proposed by the gentle¬ 
man from Lauderdale to Section 10, reported by the Committee 
on Taxation. The ayes and noes have been called and the call 



1594 


OFFICIAL PROCEEDINGS 


sustained. As many as favor the adoption of the substitute will 
say aye, and those opposed no, as your names are called, 

MR. OPP—I desire to obtain unanimous consent to amend 
the substitute of the gentleman from Lauderdale by adding the 
words “town of Andalusia” after the word “Ensley.” 

There being no objection the amendment was incorporated 
into the substitute as requested. 

MR. REESE—I ask that the substitute be read. 

The substitute was again read. 

MR. WEAKLEY—Before proceeding with the vote, it ap¬ 
pears in the draft of the bill, one Section was omitted which was 
intended to go in there, and it has been called to my attention 
by the Chairman of the Taxation Committee. I ask unanimous 
consent that the substitute be amended in that respect. 

MR. SANFORD—I make a point of order that it is too late 
to make amendments. 

MR. BULGER—Read it. 

The amendment was read as follows: 

Insert after the words “may be created” where they first ap¬ 
pear in the substitute “provided this limitation shall not apply to 
any debt now authorized by law to be created. 

There being no objection, the amendment was incorporated 
into the substitute. 

MR. EYSTER—I ask unanimous consent to add a couple of 
words. Add the words “Decatur and New Decatur” after the 
words “town of Andalusia.” 

There being no objection, the substitute was amended by 
making the addition as requested. 

Thereupon during the call of the roll: 

MR. BAREFIELD—I am paired with Mr. Miller of Maren¬ 
go, if he was here he would vote no and I would vote aye. 

MR. GLOVER—I am paired with Mr. Mulkey. If he were 
here he would vote aye and I would vote no. 

And the call of the roll resulted as follows: 



1595 


CONSTITUTIONAL CONVENTION, 1901 
AYES 


Messrs. President, 
Ashcraft, 

Banks, 

Beddow, 

Blackwell, 

Boone, 

Brooks, 

Bulger, 

Burns, 

Cardon, 

Carmichael, of Colbert, 
Carmichael, of Coffee, 
Cornwall, 

Cunningham, 

Davis, of Etowah, 

Dent, 

Eley, 

Eyster, 

Ferguson, 

Fletcher, 

Foster, 

Freeman, 

Graham, of Montgomery, 
Graham, of Talladega, 
Grayson, 

Haley, 


Browne, 

Burnett, 

Byars, 

Carnathon, 

Chapman, 

Cobb, 

Cofer, 

Coleman, of Greene, 
Fitts, 

Foshee, 

Harrison, 

Hodges, 

Jackson, 


Heflin, of Randolph, 
Hood, 

Howell, 

Howze, 

Inge, 

Jenkins, 

Jones, of Bibb, 

Jones, of Hale, 

Jones, of Montgomery 
Jones, of Wilcox, 
Kirkland, 

Knight, 

Kyle, 

Locklin, 

Lomax, 

Long, of Walker, 

Lowe, of Jefferson, 
McMillan, of Wilcox, 
Martin, 

Merrill, 

Miller, of Wilcox, 
Norman, 

Norwood, 

O’Neal, of Lauderdale, 
O’Neill (Jefferson), 
Opp, 


NOES 

Kirk, 

Leigh, 

Lowe, of Lawrence, 
MacDonald, 

Malone, 

Maxwell, 

Moody, 

Murphree, 

Oates, 

Phillips, 

Reese, 

Renfro, 

Reynolds (Henry), 


O’Rear, 

Palmer, 

Parker, of Cullman, 
Parker, of Elmore, 
Pettus, 

Pillans, 

Pitts, 

Porter, 

.Proctor, 

Rogers, of Lowndes, 
Sanders, 

Selheimer, 

Smith, of Mobile, 

Smith, Mac. A., 
Thompson, 

Waddell, 

Watts, 

Weakley, 

Weatherly, 

White, 

Williams, of Barbour, 
Williams, of Marengo, 
Wilson, of Clarke, 
Wilson, of Washington, 

TOTAL—77 


Rogers, of Sumter, 
Sanford, 

Searcy, 

Sentell, 

Sloan, 

Smith, Morgan M., 
Sorrell, 

Spragins, 

Stewart, 

Walker, 

Winn, 


TOTAL—37 



OFFICIAL PROCEEDINGS 
ABSENT OR NOT VOTING 


Almon, 

Altman, 

Barefield, 

Bartlett, 

Beavers, 

Bethune, 

Case, 

Coleman, of Walker, 
Craig, 

Davis, of DeKalb, 
deGraffenreid, 

Duke, 

Espy, 

Gilmore, 


Glover, 

Grant, 

Greer, of Calhoun, 
Greer, of Perry, 
Handley, 

Heflin, of Chambers, 
Henderson, 

Hinson, 

King, 

Ledbetter, 

Long, of Butler, 
McMillan (Baldwin), 
Miller, of Marengo, 
Morrisette, 


Mulkey, 

NeSmith, 

Pearce, 

Reynolds, of Chilton, 
Robinson, 

Samford, 

Sollie, 

Spears, 

Studdard, 

Tayloe, 

Vaughan, 

Whiteside, 

Willet, 

Williams, of Elmore, 


MR. WEAKLEY—I move the previous question upon the 
Section as amended. 

MR. MACDONALD—I would ask the gentleman to with¬ 
draw that, as I desire to present an amendment. 

THE PRESIDENT PRO TEM (Mr. Cunningham)—Does 
the gentleman withdraw the call for the previous question? 

MR. WEAKLEY—No sir. 

MR. BROWNE—I move to lay the Section on the table. 

MR. LOWE (Jefferson)—I rise to a point of order. 

THE PRESIDENT PRO TEM—The gentleman will state 
the point of order. 

MR. LOWE (Jefferson)—The previous question has been 
ordered. 

THE PRESIDENT PRO TEM—The previous question hav¬ 
ing been moved, not ordered, the point of order is not well taken 
and the question is on the motion to table. 

A vote being taken the Convention refused to table. 

THE PRESIDENT PRO TEM—The question recurs on the 
call for the previous question and the question is shall the main 
question be put? For what purpose did the gentleman from Mo¬ 
bile (Mr. Pillans) rise? 

MR. PILLANS—I thought the question had lapsed and I 
was going to renew it. 

A vote being taken, the previous question was ordered, and 
a further vote being taken the Section as amended was adopted. 



CONSTITUTIONAL CONVENTION, 1901 1597 

MR. BROWNE—I offer an additional Section. 

The Section was read as follows: 

Amendment to Article XL: 

Add an additional Section and number the same Section 5 as 
follows: 

Sec. 5. No county in this State shall be authorized to levy 
a larger rate of taxation in any one year, on the value of the tax¬ 
able property therein, than one-half of 1 per centum. Provided, 
that to pay debts existing at the ratification of the Constitution 
of 1875, an additional rate of one-fourth of 1 per centum may be 
levied and collected which shall be exclusively appropriated to 
the payment of such debts or the interest thereon: Provided fur¬ 
ther, that to pay any debt or liability now existing against any 
county, incurred for the erection, construction and maintenance 
of the necessary public buildings or bridges, or that may hereafter 
be created for the erection and maintenance of necessary public 
buildings, bridges or roads, any county may levy and collect such 
special taxes, not to exceed a rate of one-fourth of 1 per centum, 
as may have been or may hereafter be authorized by law, which 
taxes so levied and collected shall be applied exclusively to the 
purpose for which the same were so levied and collected; pro¬ 
vided further, that for additional aid to the public schools any 
countv may levy and collect such special tax as may be authorized 
by law. provided such tax, at the time it is to continue, and the 
purpose thereof, shall have been first submitted to a vote of the 
qualified electors of the county and voted for by a three-fifths ma¬ 
jority thereof voting at such election; but the rate of such special 
tax shall not increase the rate of taxation in any one year to more 
than $1.25 on every $100 worth of taxable property, for all State 
and countv purposes, excluding special taxes for necessary public 
buildings, roads, bridges and payment of debts existing at the 
ratification of the Constitution at 1875; and provided, further, 
that such tax for schools shall be apportioned equitably and paid 
through the proper school officials to the public schools for white 
and those for colored pupils respectively, by the Court of County 
Commissioners or Board of Revenue, and that the amount appor¬ 
tioned to white schools shall be paid to each in proportion the 
number of pupils therein bears to the total number in all such 
white schools, and the amount apportioned to colored schools 
shall be paid to them in like manner. 

MR BROWNE—It is proposed that this amendment shall be 
incorporated in the Article as Section 5. Section 5 as reported by 
the Committee was laid on the table. 

MR FOSTER—Was not that Section laid on the table the 
other day to be taken up and considered with the report of the 
Committee on Education? 



1598 


OFFICIAL PROCEEDINGS 


MR. BROWNE—No, sir. I will state to the Convention and 
to the President if they will listen, how that matter stands. 

Section 5 as reported by the Committee was laid on the table. 
The gentleman from Tallapoosa first moved to lay on the table 
certain amendments and the proviso to the Section. The Chair 
started to put the question and a point of order was made that 
the gentleman from Tallapoosa could not move to lay part of a 
Section on the table. That point of order was sustained and the 
gentleman from Tallapoosa thereupon moved to lay the section 
as amended on the table, without anything further. This Section 
proposed has some features like Section 5 as originally proposed, 
but it is different. I could move to take Section 5 from the table— 

MR. KIRKLAND—I rise to a point of order. 

THE PRESIDENT PRO TEM—The gentleman will state 
his point of order. 

MR. KIRKLAND—If I understand it, the Section the gen¬ 
tleman now promises to amend is now on the table to await the 
pleasure of the Convention, to be considered along with the like 
Section of the Committee on Education. If this is so, the Section 
cannot be amended and I make that point of order. 

MR. BROWNE—But that is not so. 

MR. KIRKLAND—The record will show it; and if the record 
shows differently I will abide by it. 

MR. BROWNE—This is not the section as laid on the table. 
I would like to know how the chair can rule unless the chair will 
give attention to what is in the other section and in this. 

THE PRESIDENT (Mr. Knox)—The Chair will hear from 
the gentleman from Talladega and will then hear from the gen¬ 
tleman from Dale if he desires further to address the Chair on the 
point of order. 

MR. KIRKLAND — I only want to know what the record 
shows. If the record shows that I am right I shall insist on my 
point of order. 

THE PRESIDENT—Does the gentleman desire the section 
that was laid on the table read. 

MR. BROWNE—I object. I did not yield for any such pur¬ 
pose. The gentleman has no right to interrupt a gentleman by 
referring to the record of several days ago for the purpose of hav¬ 
ing it read. I object, and insist that the Chair should hear an 
explanation of the difference between this section and the section 
that was laid on the table. 



CONSTITUTIONAL CONVENTION, 1901 1599 

THE PRESIDENT—The Chair is of the opinion that the 
gentleman would not have the right to amend a section upon the 
table but he would have a right to add to the article as reported 
an additional section. Now whether this is the same article that 
was laid on the table it is difficult to determine, but from the 
statement of the gentleman from Talladega it seems to the Chair 
it is not. 

MR. LOMAX—I submit that the section now offered by the 
gentleman from Talladega is nothing but a substitute for Section 
5 which was laid on the table and consequently is an amendment 
to that section and unless that section is taken from the table this 
proposition cannot be considered. 

MR. BROWNE—I would like to be heard on that section. 

THE PRESIDENT—The gentleman can make his state¬ 
ment. 

MR. BROWNE—Section 5 was laid on the table. 

MR. O'NEAL (Lauderdale)—No, sir; it was postponed. 

MR. BROWNE—It was laid on the table, not postponed as 
the gentleman asserts, until some other committee reports- I will 
state again exactly how it occurred. 

MR. KIRKLAND—I call for the reading of the record on my 
point of order. 

THE PRESIDENT—The Chair will direct the Clerk to read 
the section that was laid on the table and will then hear from 
the delegate from Talladega. 

MR. BROWNE—I desire to state that the gentlemen are en¬ 
tirely misinformed as to what was done with that section. The 
gentleman from Tallapoosa moved to lay the pending amendments 
and a proviso of that section upon the table— 

MR. BOONE—The record is the best evidence and that has 
been called for. 

MR. BROWNE—I am speaking to a parliamentary inquiry. 
The gentleman from Tallapoosa moved to lay the pending amend¬ 
ments and a proviso of the section upon the table. The point of 
order being made, the Chair held it was not in order to lay on the 
table a portion of a section that was under consideration and the 
gentleman from Tallapoosa then moved to lay the section and 
amendments on the table. 

MR. KIRKLAND—I hope the Chair will pardon me, but I 
call for the reading of the record in regard to this matter. The 
gentleman says I am misinformed. The record will determine 
that fact. 



1600 


OFFICIAL PROCEEDINGS 


THE PRESIDENT—The Chair wishes to hear the state¬ 
ment of the gentleman from Talladega in order to rule intelligent¬ 
ly upon the point of order, and the Chair will direct a reading of 
the section which was laid on the table and after hearing both 
sides of the question will endeavor to rule as best he can. 

MR. BROWNE—The gentleman from Tallapoosa moved to 
lay the amendments to this section and a proviso to this section 
upon the table. The Chair, upon a point of order being made, 
held that that motion could not be made to lay part of a section 
on the table. The gentleman’s motion at that time was that it 
be taken up and considered at the time the report of the Educa¬ 
tional Committee was considered. That was ruled out of order 
and the gentleman from Tallapoosa then moved that the pending 
amendments and the whole section be laid upon the table and he 
did not include in that motion that it should never be taken up 
again- That motion carried. Now the section that was laid upon 
the table was Section 5. I do not care whether you call this Sec¬ 
tion 5 or any other section, but as there is no Section 5 and as there 
is a blank between Sections 4 and 6, I offer this as Section 5. The 
section that was laid upon the table provided for a vote of a tax 
for educational purposes by the qualified electors who were prop¬ 
erty tax payers, and further provided it must be by a majority 
of the tax payers in number and representing a majority of the 
property. It provided further that the fund so created should be 
apportioned equitably by the court of County Commissioners and 
paid to all the schools in the county. This one provides that it 
may be voted for or against by all the qualified electors of the 
county—that before taking effect it shall be voted for by three- 
fifths majority of the qualified electors. It provides that the tax, 
if levied, shall be by the Commissioners’ Court apportioned be¬ 
tween the schools for white and those for colored in the county. 
It is entirely and essentially different in that it provides that the 
Commissioners shall divide the tax into two funds, one for white 
schools and one for colored schools. There is no such provision 
in the other section which was laid on the table. It further pro¬ 
vides (whereas in the other it was left to the Commissioners’ 
Court to equitably divide it between the schools), that after this 
fund shall have been so apportioned between the two races the 
amount apportioned to the white schools shall be paid to each 
of such schools within the county in the proportion that the num¬ 
ber of pupils in that school bears to the whole number of pupils 
in !the white schools in the county, and that the amount appor j 
tioned to the colored schools shall be divided among the colored 
schools in like manner. A further difference is this: The section 
laid on the table provided that to pay any debt or liability now 
existing against any county incurred for the erection, construc¬ 
tion or maintenance of the necessary public buildings or bridges, 
or that may hereafter be created for the erection of necessary 



CONSTITUTIONAL CONVENTION, 1901 


1601 


public buildings or roads, shall not exceed one-fourth of one per 
cent, as may have been or may hereafter be authorized by law. 
While in this section the word “maintenance” is put in after the 
word “erection.” The section laid on the table provides “but 
the rate of such special tax shall not increase the rate of taxation 
in any one year to more than $1.25 on every $100 worth of tax¬ 
able property for all State and county purposes, excluding any 
special tax for the erection, construction and maintenance of 
necessary public buildings, bridges and roads.” This one says 
“excluding special taxes for necessary public buildings, roads and 
bridges, and the payment of debts existing at the ratification of 
the Constitution of 1875.” These are the essential differences be¬ 
tween the two sections and the system is entirely different. I 
would like to state further that I do not know why gentlemen 
object, but the gentleman from Lauderdale (Mr. Ashcraft) at 
whose instance the other section was laid upon the table- 

MR. LOWE (Jefferson)—I rise to a point of order. A point 
of order has been made and the gentleman is discussing other 
matters. 

MR. BROWNE—I was just further explaining, but if gen¬ 
tlemen do not wish to be informed- 

MR- BULGER—How much may be levied under that section 
for school purposes? 

MR. LOWE (Jefferson)—I rise to a point of order. The in¬ 
quiry is not germane to the point of order submitted to the chair. 

THE PRESIDENT—The gentleman from Tallapoosa is ask¬ 
ing the gentleman from Talladega to explain the proposition that 
he offers now as an additional section, and it seems to the chair 
it would be permissible for him to do so, and for us all to under¬ 
stand what it is to see whether this section offered is the same as 
the one laid on the table. The point of order is not well taken. 

MR. BROWNE — Under this amendment, a county could 
levy the difference between one dollar and fifteen cents and one 
dollar and a quarter, which is ten cents on the $100, notwithstand¬ 
ing that a county may be levying one-fourth or one-half per cent 
to pay debts created prior to 1875. 

MR. BULGER—Under that provision, can any county levy 
more than one mill? 

MR. BROWNE—Not unless the Legislature should levy a 
lower rate than 65 cents. If the Legislature, at any time in the 
future levies less than 65 cents, the county, by a three-fifths vote 
of the’ qualified electors voting at an election thereon, can levy 
the difference between 65 cents and the rate levied by the Legisla¬ 
ture, in addition to the one mill. 



1602 


OFFICIAL PROCEEDINGS 


MR. KIRKLAND—I insist on my point of order. I want 
the record read. 

The clerk read the journal of the thirty-fifth day as follows: 
“Unfinished business.—The Convention proceeded to the consid¬ 
eration of the unfinished business, which was the consideration 
of the report of the Committee on Taxation. The question was 
upon the substitute offered by Mr. Merrill for the amendment 
offered by Mr. Cunningham to Section 5 of Article XI of the re¬ 
port by the Committee on Taxation. Mr. Bulger moved to table 
Section 5, and the pending amendments thereto, to be taken from 
the table, and be considered with the report of the Committee on 
Education. The motion prevailed, and Section 5 and pending 
amendments were laid upon the table ” 

MR. KIRKLAND—I do not care for the reading of Section 
5. I think every member in this Convention knows that this sec¬ 
tion now offered is simply a substitute for Section 5. 

MR. BROWNE—I call for a reading of Section 5 as laid on 
the table, and I ask the President to read the section now offered 
and to note the difference. 

Section 5 of the report of the Committee on Taxation was 
read as follows: 

Sec. |5. No county in this State shall be authorized to levy 
a larger rate of taxation in any one year, on the value of the tax¬ 
able property therein, than 1-2 of 1 per centum. Provided, that 
to pay debts existing at the ratification of the Constitution of 
1875, an additional rate of 1-4 of 1 per centum may be levied and 
collected, which shall be exclusively appropriated to the payment 
of such debts or the interest thereon; provided, further, that to 
pay any debt or liability now existing against any county, in¬ 
curred for the erection, construction and maintenance of the nec¬ 
essary public buildings, or bridges, or that may hereafter be cre¬ 
ated for the erection of necessary public buildings, bridges or 
roads, any county may levy and collect such special taxes not to 
exceed a rate of 1-4 of 1 per centum, as may be authorized by law, 
which taxes so levied and collected shall be applied exclusively to 
the purposes for which the same were so levied and collected; pro¬ 
vided, further, that for the maintenance of public schools any 
county may levy and collect such special tax as may be authorized 
by law; provided, such special tax, the time it is to continue and 
the purposes thereof, shall have been first submitted to a vote of 
the property tax payers who are qualified electors in said county, 
and voted for by a majority thereof in numbers, and in value of 
taxable property, voting at such election; provided, that the rate 
of such special tax for maintenance of public schools shall not in¬ 
crease the rate of taxation in any one year to more than $1.25 on 
every $100 worth of taxable property, for all State and county 



CONSTITUTIONAL CONVENTION, 1901 


1603 


purposes, excluding any special tax for the erection, construction 
and maintenance of necessary public buildings, bridges and roads, 
and, provided, further, that such special tax for schools shall be 
apportioned equitably and paid to the public schools of such coun¬ 
ty, by the Court of County Commissioners or Board of Revenue 
thereof. 

The amendment offered by the delegate from Jefferson (Mr. 
Cunningham) was read as follows: 

Amend Section 5 by striking out in the fifteenth line the 
phrase, “property tax payers who are” and in the sixteenth an 
seventeenth lines the following words “in numbers and value of 
taxable property.” 

The substitute offered by the delegate from Barbour (Mr. 
Merrill) was read as follows: 

Substitute for the amendment to Section 5 of the Article 5 
of the Article on Taxation, in line sixteen, after the word by 
insert the letter “a,” and after the word majority, insert of two- 
thirds,” and strike out of lines sixteen and seventeen the words 
“in number and in value of the taxable property. 

THE PRESIDENT—Does the gentleman from Dale desire 
to say anything further? 

MR. KIRKLAND—No, sir. 

THE PRESIDENT—It seems to the chair that the Section 
now offered is materially different from that which was laid on 
the table and that the Committee may, if it desires, abandon that 
section and go ahead and add an additional section and that i 
would not be necessary for the Committee to wait unti the Sec¬ 
tion is taken from the table before completing the Article. They 
may go ahead and add an additional section and if delegates de¬ 
sire to incorporate into this section the same materials embodied 
in amendments to the old section which was tabled they can offer 
them as amendments to this additional section. 

MR. LOMAX—I rise to a parliamentary inquiry. 

THE PRESIDENT—The gentleman will state the inquiry. 

MR LOMAX— Has this Committee or any Committee of this 
Convention, the right to take from the Convention al! artic e or 
section which the Convention has laid upon the table for future 
consideration by proposing, previous to the time the C on vention 
has shown a willingness to take that section from the table another 
section, which is merely a substitute for the section that has been 
tabled? I submit that would be the effect of allowing the com- 
mittee to offer this section now. 



1604 


OFFICIAL PROCEEDINGS 


THE PRESIDENT—The Chair is of the opinion that the 
Convention may now, if it desires, take the section from the tab e 
and substitute it for the section proposed by the Committee, that 
it is in the pleasure of the Convention whether it will tjake this 
section from the table or let it lie there, but the Committee would 
not have to await the completion of its work and the completion 
of the Article, it may go on and propose an additional section 
which is materially different from the section on the table. The 
Chair will recognize the gentleman from Dale. 

MR. KIRKLAND — I move that the substitute or amend¬ 
ment or whatever it is, be laid on the table. 

THE PRESIDENT—The Chair recognized the gentleman 
to discuss the point of order. The gentleman from Talladega has 
the floor. 

MR. KIRKLAND—I understood the Chair recognized me. 
The Chair had ruled on my point of order and against it, and I 
did not rise to discuss the point of order at all. 

THE PRESIDENT—While the gentleman from Talladega 
has the floor the Chair could not recognize any other delegate 
except on a point of order or parliamentary inquiry. The Chair 
could not displace the gentleman from Talladega. 

MR. KIRKLAND—Then I raise the point of order on the 
gentleman from Talladega that his time is out. He has occupied 
the floor for more than ten minutes. 

MR. BROWNE—That is a daisy. I have not occupied the 
floor ten minutes, but the gentleman interrupting have. I do 
not want but my ten minutes, but the amendment has just been 
read and I have barely started. 

THE PRESIDENT—The Chair is embarrassed in ruling on 
that, because the Chair has been so interested on the point of 
order of the gentleman from Dale that he has not kept the time 
of the gentleman from Talladega. The gentleman from Talla¬ 
dega will proceed. 

MR. BROWNE—Before I say anything on that subject I 
want to commend the gentleman from Dale for his energy and 
activity in trying to defeat any measure that may be proposed to 
this Convention looking towards the education of the boys and 
girls, not only barefooted ones, but boys and girls with shoes on 
as well. 

MR. KIRKLAND—Will the gentleman please speak louder. 
We are at least entitled to hear what he is saying. 

MR. BROWNE—Come farther front, then. 



CONSTITUTIONAL CONVENTION, 1901 


1605 


The Suffrage Committee has reported an Article on Suffrage 
that will, after three years, disfranchise thousands of white boys 
in the State of Alabama unless ample school facilities are provided 
for them. We have now in Alabama but three to four months 
public schools; under the provision of this Section we can add to 
the school fund of the State of Alabama $250,000. 

MR. CORNWELL—Will the gentleman permit an interrup¬ 
tion? 

MR. BROWNE—Certainly. 

MR. CORNWELL—The gentleman seems so much interest¬ 
ed in the education of our boys I would like to inquire why he 
don’t say a majority of the qualified voters shall pass on this ques¬ 
tion instead of three-fifths? 

MR. BROWNE—I have been working all my life to be a 
millionaire and I have made only a few hundred dollars, but I don’t 
propose to throw that away because I cannot get the million. If 
the gentleman has the capacity to get this Convention to adopt an 
amendment providing for a bare majority, I will be well satisfied. 

Under this section if adopted the State will have an additional 
$250,000 for the public schools, provided the counties see fit to 
levy the tax. It may be and probably is true that some counties 
of the State of Alabama will not even endeavor to levy this tax, 
but numerous counties will levy it and supplement the school fund. 
I do not know how statistics show up in other counties but in my 
county this tax being levied would result in giving about from 75 
cents to 90 cents additional to every pupil., I believe the rate 
now, property, poll tax and all is about $1.60. 

Something has been said and will be said with respect to 
levying this tax by school districts or townships. That is not 
practical in the State of Alabama- It would be very unpopular 
in counties like mine. I will not discuss the counties of other gen¬ 
tlemen. In the county of Talladega we have about seven town¬ 
ships in which are railroad centers, iron furnaces, cotton factories 
and large mercantile houses and the like. Those townships levy¬ 
ing this tax and appropriating it all to their own use would have 
magnificent schools; all the corporation taxes in the county would 
be paid to them and the outlying townships would get no benefit. 
Therefore, throughout the State of Alabama the county unit is 
much preferable to the township unit. 

MR. WHITE—The gentleman says the county unit is better 
than a township unit, how about the State unit? 

MR. BROWNE—The State unit is bad enough, but it has 
come to stay. The State of Alabama appropriates $1,200,000. That 
comes out of the general tax. That is divided as everyone knows 



1606 


OFFICIAL PROCEEDINGS 


in proportion to the number of children of school age in each 
county, without regard to whether or not they attend the schools. 
This proposed section provides after it is apportioned equitably 
between the two races, that the part apportioned to the white 
race shall be paid to each school in the proportion that the num¬ 
ber of pupils in that school bears to the total number in attend¬ 
ance in all the white schools. If any one desires to get the bene¬ 
fit of this fund he must send his children to the public schools, and 
he cannot draw the money out and spend it for groceries as has 
been done in many instances under the present State system. 

MR. ROGERS (Sumter)—Will the gentleman allow me to 
ask a question? 

MR. BROWNE—Certainly. 

MR. ROGERS (Sumter)—The law requires a certain num¬ 
ber of children before there can be a school? 

MR. BROWNE—Yes sir. 

MR. ROGERS (Sumter)—There are some beats in the Black 
Belt that have not enough children of school age to make up that 
number. What would you do with that? 

MR. BROWNE — There is a statute that allows them to 
draw their money out or attend a school in another precinct and 
get it that way. But that law is not constitutional and could be 
changed. 

MR. ROGERS (Sumter)—And you propose to destroy that? 

MR. BROWNE—If you live in a precinct where there are 
not enough children to have a school you may send them to any 
public school in that county and your child gets its pro rata share 
in the other school. That is one of the main advantages of this 
law over the State system. Under this it makes no difference 
where your child goes to school so that it is within the county and 
the child gets its share of this fund. 

MR. ROGERS (Sumter)—But in some sections the school 
houses of another precinct would be so far away that the child 
could not walk and the parents are not able to buy a carriage for 
it. In such a case how would the child get the benefit? 

D ° yOU mean where the child is not sent 

to school ? 


MR. ROGERS — I mean where the child would be so far 
from the school house in another beat that it could not walk there 

wu parents are not t able to Pay its board to send them there’ 
What do you propose there? 



CONSTITUTIONAL CONVENTION, 1901 


1607 


MR. BROWNE—Do you mean what do I propose where the 
child won’t go to the public school? 

MR. ROGERS—I don’t want you to put my question in any 
such light. The child is anxious to go- 

MR. BROWNE—But does not go in reality? 

MR. ROGERS (Sumter)—He cannot go because there is 
not the requisite number in his beat to make up a public school. 

MR. BROWNE—And on account of that, he does not go to 
any school? 

MR. ROGERS—Yes. 

MR. BROWNE—Then he gets nothing and ought not to. 

MR. ROGERS—Why should he not when his father is con¬ 
tributing as much as any man in the county? 

MR. KIRKLAND—I raise the point of order that the gentle¬ 
man’s time has expired. 

THE PRESIDENT PRO TEM (Mr. Cunningham) — The 
present presiding officer does not know when the gentleman be¬ 
gan. The gentleman has been speaking five minutes since the 
present presiding officer took the chair. 

MR. BURNS—He is the chairman of a committee. His time 
is not limited to ten minutes. 

THE PRESIDENT PRO TEM.—The chair is of the opinion 
that this is an amendment and the gentleman is not in the position 
of a chairman of a committee on that. 

MR. FOSTER—Does this section contemplate that the fund 
shall be divided equally between white and black? 

MR. BROWNE—It says it shall be apportioned equitably 
between them. 

MR. FOSTER—Does the gentleman think it is legal to divide 
it unequally? 

MR. BROWNE—Yes; under the Federal decisions. 

MR. FOSTER—Do you think that section is legal? 

MR. BROWNE—Yes, sir; I know it is, if the judges of the 
Federal Court know what they are talking about. 

MR. FOSTER—You think it is legal to divide it unequally 
between the races? 

MR. BROWNE—Yes, sir; but it cannot be divided arbitrarily 
according to the amount paid by each race. 



1608 


OFFICIAL PROCEED!NOS 


MR. FOSTER _ Does not this leave it to Commissioners* 

Courts to divide it as they please 

MR. BROWNE—No, sir; to divide it equitably. 

MR. FOSTER—What does “equitably” mean? 

M R. B ROWN E—Some Com miss ioners * Con rt s wo u Id con¬ 
strue it one way and some another. The Circuit Court of the 
United States in Claybrooke vs. Owensboro (lb bed. Rep., 302) 
held, “The equal protection of the law guaranteed by this amend¬ 
ment must and can only mean that the laws of the States must 
be equal in their benefit as well as equal in their burdens, and 
that less would not be 'the equal protection of the laws/ This! 
does not mean absolute equality in distributing the benefits of 
taxation. This is impracticable; but it does mean the distribution 
of the benefits upon some fair arid equal classification or basis/’ 
In other words, they hold that it can be divided equitably, that 
it is not necessary to divide it according to the number of >chooI 
children; but it is held in this decision and in other cases, that 
you cannot divide it according to the amount paid in each race. 

Now it is proposed by this section or contemplated that the 
Boards of Commissioners will supplement the State public school 
fund with this special tax in such a wav as to allow or provide 
for school terms of equal length for both white and black. And 
that is certainly equitable. There is no necessitv for paving a 
teacher for a colored school the same amount vou pay to white 
school teachers, because you can get them at much less salary. 
Under the present laws of Alabama, if the law is carried out, the 
colored pupil gets the same amount of money per capita as the 
white pupil, and that is not justice. 

MR. ASHCRAFT—I desire to offer a substitute for the 
amendment offered by the gentleman from Talladega It is only 
a substitute for the last provision. 

THE PRESIDENT PRO TEM - In other words, it is an 
amendment. 


whicl 1 ?, :p P tr The B ' ntleman wi " have tn ,di "««* ^ «<> 

MR. ASHCRAFT—It takes the place of the last section. 

The amendment was read as follows: 

Amend Section 5 of Article IX. as proposed bv the amend 
ment by striking- out the last nrovisirm A - , r , e arne . 

SetS Hne ,h£r£0f ’ an<1 inSCTti "* " MS 

o, 



CONSTITUTIONAL CONVENTION, 1901 


1609 


of the Court of County Commissioners, or body of like jurisdic¬ 
tion, to organize the white people of the county into white school 
districts, and the colored people of the county into colored school 
districts, according to their respective needs and advantages with¬ 
out reference to each other as to territorial boundaries. 

Seventh—A trustee, or trustees, or Board of Education, as 
may be provided by law, shall be elected for white school dis¬ 
tricts from the white residents of such districts and for the col¬ 
ored school districts from the colored residents of such district; 
provided, no incorporated town or city maintaining a system of 
public schools as provided by law, shall be separated into dis¬ 
tricts without the consent of the Mayor and Board of Aldermen of 
such town or city. 

Eighth bor the purpose of building, enlarging, improving 
or furnishing school houses in any district, or for the purpose of 
supplementing the general school funds from Federal, State, coun¬ 
ty. municipal and other sources, the Court of County Commis¬ 
sioners, or body of like jurisdiction, shall, as hereinafter provided, 
levy a special assessment of not more than one-tenth of one per 
centum in any one year upon the property of white persons sit¬ 
uated in one white district, or upon the property of colored per¬ 
sons situated in a colored district; provided, no such levy shall 
be made except upon the request of the qualified voters residing 
in the district, expressed at an election held for that purpose, at 
which election two-thirds of those voting must favor the special 
lev} . At such election in a white school district only qualified 
white electors shall be permitted to vote, and in colored school 
districts only qualified colored electors shall be permitted to vote. 
It shall be the duty of the Probate Judge to order such an election 
upon the petition of not less than one-fourth of the voters who 
will be entitled to vote at such election. The order for such an 

election shall state the purposes for which it is proposed to make 

the assessment, the rate of the proposed assessment, and the num¬ 
ber of years during which such assessment is proposed to be made. 
Notice of such election shall be given and the election held in 
such manner as may be provided by law for such special elections. 
No proposition shall be made at any such elections to levy such 
special assessments during a period of more than four years. 

9. When any property belonging to a corporation is situated 
in a white school district where a special assessment is to be made 
as herein provided, such assessment shall be levied upon such pro¬ 
portion of the value of such property as the number of white chil¬ 
dren of school age in the county bears to the whole number of 

children of school age in the county. When such property is 

situated in a colored school district where such assessment is to 
be made, it shall be levied upon such proportion of the value 
thereof as the number of colored children of school age in the 



1610 


OFFICIAL PROCKFDIW.S 


county bears to the whole number of childien ot mIiooI age in the 
county. 

10. The foregoing' sections of this Article numbered 6. 7. X 
and 9 are intended and are herein - declared to constitute an indi¬ 
visible plan for permitting local special assessments in aid ot public 
schools maintained bv the State. 

THE PRESIDENT PRO TKM—Does the gentleman offer 
that as a substitute to the section 

MR. ASHCRAFT—As a substitute for the last provision. 

MR- COLEMAN (Greene) — The purpose of having these 
things laid on the table and printed i> so that delegates may inform 
themselves as to what is to come up before them. It i> impossible 
for the delegates to the Convention to keep in mind long amend¬ 
ments and sections such as these two. 1 would like to have this 
amendment and the substitute laid on the table and printed. 

THE PRESIDENT PRO TKM—The gentleman from Lau¬ 
derdale has the floor. 

MR. ASHCRAFT — Mr. President, the importance of this 
measure is the reason why some of the friends of the public schools 
in this State desire the postponement of the consideration of this 
question until the report of the Committee on Education should 
come in. When that report was made, the two phases of the ques¬ 
tion could be presented by a majority and a minority report, and in 
that way those provisions would be printed so the membtrs of 
this Convention might be properly informed about what plan was 
proposed for local assessments. It is a matter of the highest im¬ 
portance for this Convention to understand this proposition. The 
great issue in this State, the purpose for which this Convention 
was called, was to settle upon some just and equitable basis the 
relation which should exist between the white and colored people 
in this State. That is the one great question which lies at the 
heart of the people of Alabama today, and for which thev are 
calling upon us to present a solution. The proper relation which 
should exist between the two school systems, between the system 
for educating the colored, and the system for educating the white 
people, is a matter of as grave concern to the people in this State 
as the question of the suffrage. I know, sir, that there is no^ub- 
ject which lies so near to the hearts of the people of North Ala¬ 
bama as this great question which is presented bv mv amend¬ 
ment. It has been wrought out with care, it has been wrought 
out in the light of the decisions— 


47 nEh‘ L ? NG (Walker)—I nse to a point of order. Section 
47 of the rules provides that all ordinances be read and referred 
to the different committees and that they be printed I mvself 
might favor it, but I cannot tell what it is. I make the point of 



CONSTITUTIONAL CONVENTION, 1901 


1611 


order that it should be referred to a committee and printed, and 
also make the point of order on the substitute offered by the 
Chairman of the committee under Rule 47. 

Rule 47. When any ordinance is introduced it shall be read 
at length and be referred by the President without a vote being 
taken, unless otherwise ordered by a two-thirds vote of the Con¬ 
vention, to the appropriate committee. No ordinance shall be re¬ 
ported back from any committee until after the lapse of one entire 
legislative day. When any committee shall have reported to this 
Convention any article or section of the proposed Constitution, 
said article or section shall again be read at length and three hun¬ 
dred copies thereof printed for the use of delegates; and such 
article or section shall lie on the table at least one day and until 
in regular order it shall be taken up for consideration by the Con¬ 
vention. 

THE PRESIDENT PRO TEM—Ruling upon the point of 
order made by the gentleman from Walker, the Chair is not at 
liberty to limit the length of substitutes offered as amendments to 
pending questions, and therefore overrules the point of order. 

MR. LONG (Walker)—Then I make the point of order that 
there is no original section before the Convention. The original 
section is on the table and how can you offer a substitute or an 
amendment to something that is not in existence? 

THE PRESIDENT PRO TEM.—The gentleman from Tal¬ 
ladega offered his as an original section. 

MR. LONG (Walker)—Then Rule 47 covers it. 

THE PRESIDENT PRO TEM.—The gentleman from Lau¬ 
derdale moves as an amendment to that the amendment that has 
been read in the hearing of the Convention, and therefore the 
point of order is not well taken. 

MR. ROGERS (Sumter)—The ruling of the Chair in refer¬ 
ence to the section offered by the gentleman from Talladega, and 
the ground he gave for allowing this to come up, was that it was 
entirely different from that laid on the table. I want to know 
whether it is a different or the same order? If it is a different 
one under Rule 47 it must be printed and laid upon the table, if 
the same one then a vote must be taken to take the original from 
the table and substitute this one under the rules by which we are 
operating. 

THE PRESIDENT PRO TEM—The Chair rules that the 
point of order is not well taken, inasmuch as the section offered 
by the gentleman from Talladega was offered as an amendment 
to the Article on Taxation. Now the pending question is the 
amendment of the gentleman from Lauderdale. 



1612 


OFFICIAL PROCHKDINC.S 


MR. ROGERS—With the consent of Mr. Ashcraft, I move 
that the two amendments be laid upon the table for the purpose 
of having them printed. 

THE PRESIDENT PRO TEM The Chair would be de¬ 
lighted to put that motion, but the gentleman from Lauderdale 
has the floor. 

MR. ROGERS—The gentleman yielded to me for that pur¬ 
pose. 

THE PRESIDENT PRO TEM.—Does the gentleman from 
Lauderdale yield? 

MR. ASHCRAFT—I yield for that purpose. 

THE PRESIDENT PRO TEM. -The gentleman yields the 
floor to the gentleman from Sumter for the purpose of making a 
motion. 


MR. ROGERS—I move that both sections be laid upon the 
table for the purpose of having them printed for the benefit of this 
Convention to pass on wisely, arid upon that, Mr. President, 1 call 
for the previous question. 

THE PRESIDENT PRO TEM—The gentleman from Lau¬ 
derdale had the floor, his time had not expired, he yielded the floor, 
which he had a right to do, during hi> time to the gentleman 
from Sumter. The gentleman from Sumter moves that the pend¬ 
ing amendments be laid upon the table and ordered printed and 
upon that he moves the previous question. 

MR. LOMAX—I rise for the purpose of amending the resolu¬ 
tion, that, it lie upon the table until the report of the Committee 
on Education comes in. 


MR. ROGERS I withdraw the call lor the previous question 
for the purpose of accepting the amendment of the gentleman 
from Montgomery. 


MR. BROWNE—I rise to a point of order 
on the table is not debatable. 


A motion to lay 


THE PRESIDENT PRO TEM.—Does 
Sumter withdraw the motion for the previous 

MR. ROGERS—No, sir; let the matter 
other question can be arranged later. 


the gentleman from 
question ? 

go as it is, and the 


M , R - O’NEAL—If the motion of the gentleman from Sumter 
prevails, the original section offered by the gentleman from T-d 
'adega and the substitute or amendment be pr „,ed i , ,a V ' 
upon the table to await the action of the Convention? 



CONSTITUTIONAL CONVENTION, 1901 


1613 


PRESIDENT PRO TEM—Any proposition before a parlia¬ 
mentary body laid upon the table can be taken up at any time. 
I he motion of the gentleman from Sumter is, that the pending 
amendments be printed and laid upon the table. 

MR. BROWNE—Indefinitely? 

MR. ROGERS—Be printed and lie upon the table, it is in the 
pleasure of the Convention to take it up whenever they want to. 

MR. BROWNE—Upon that I call for the ayes and nays. 

MR. HEFLIN (Chambers)—I understood the motion of the 
gentleman from Sumter to be that the substitute and amendments 
to be laid upon the table to be taken up at the time the Committee 
on Education’s report is considered? 

I HE PRESIDENT PRO TEM—The chair did not so under¬ 
stand the motion of the gentleman from Sumter. Is the call for the 
ayes and nays sustained? 

1 he call for the ayes and noes was not sustained, and the ques¬ 
tion recurred upon the adoption of the motion of the gentleman 
from Sumter which was carried. 

MR. LOMAX—I move that that proposed new section offer¬ 
ed by the Chairman of the Committee and the substitute or amend¬ 
ment thereto offered by the gentleman from Lauderdale lie upon 
the table until the coming in of the report of the Committee on 
Education, and that it be considered along with that report. 

PRESIDENT PRO TEM—The gentleman is out of order. 
It is not before this Convention, you will have to move to take 
from the table. 

MR. BROWNE—All of this Article has been adopted except 
the one that has just been laid upon the table. There was an¬ 
other laid upon the table at the instance of the gentleman from 
Lauderdale, Mr. Weakley. It is agreed between the Chairman of 
the Committee on Municipal Corporations and myself that that 
section be now taken up and considered. I therefore move to 
take section 7 from the table. 

MR. WEAKLEY (Lauderdale)—The Chairman of the Com¬ 
mittee on Taxation has stated to the Chair that an agreement has 
been made that that section shall be taken up. I rise to state that 
I did not understand that any such agreement had been made. 

MR. BROWNE—Was it not understood that when we got 
through with the other sections we would take this up and adopt 
this substitute? As there is nothing else to do with this report 
except to adopt a section of some kind upon this taxation, and 
the Committee on Taxation is through, I move to take Section 7 
from the table in order to dispose of it in some way. 



1614 


OFFICIAL PROCEEDINGS 


MR. HARRISON—I would inquire of the Chairmen of the 
Committees on Taxation and on Municipal Corporations if it 
would not save time for this matter to be taken from the table and 
referred to a special committee consisting’ of the Committee on 
Taxation and that on Municipal Corporations, and see if they 
cannot agree? 

MR. BROWNE—I would like to state that there is no dis¬ 
agreement between them. It seems the Committee on Municipal 
Corporations have incorporated a few towns that desire to come 
in under the Birmingham amendment. 

MR. HEFLIN (Chambers)—I rise to a point of order. A 
motion to take from the table is not debatable. 

PRESIDENT PRO TEM.—The point of order is well taken, 
the chair was indulging the gentlemen so they could come to some 
agreement. 

MR. JONES (Montgomery)—What is Section 7? 

MR. BROWNE—The section with regard to municipal taxa¬ 
tion. 


MR. LOMAX—And also about educational taxation? 

MR. LOWE—Does not Section 7 deal with schools? 

MR. BROWNE—It is proposed to take it out. 

PRESIDENT PRO TEM.—The question is, Shall Section 7 
be taken from the table? 

Request was made that the section be read. 

Objection was made to the reading of the section. 

, PRO TEM.-The chair will hold that any gen- 

„ ° , thls c ° nv ention has a right to ask for the reading, and 

the Secretary will read the Section. 

Sec. 7. No city town or other municipal corporation other 
than provided for m this Article, shall levy or collect a larger rate 
of taxation, in any one year, on the property thereof than one! 

for S 0 ta°e n !axatio e „ n, dri„ 0 <r fo' SUch P™P«y, « assessed 

the payment debtslifting ,h “, 

Constitution of 1875 and the interest thereon, an additionTra e of 
one per centum may be collected, to be applied evH„J! Ji Y * v 
indebtedness; provided, further that fnr the • . sivel> to such 

schools, such city, town or other municipal orT^ ° f ^ 
and collect such special tax as may be authorized hf* ° n may 
such special tax shall not be levied and cn w. b ? 1 u' prov,ded 
cause a greater rate of taxation in'lTtne^h^r'dS 



CONSTITUTIONAL CONVENTION, 1901 1615 

ertt CCntS ° n every hundred dollars of taxable prop- 

tion' construin’ c °V nt y. and muni c'Pal purposes, except the erec- 
hnildiW*k•!, and ma,n tenance by counties of necessary public 
thnnlTth b " dges . or roads > and provided such special tax for 
scnools, the time it is to continue and the purposes thereof, shall 
ave been first submitted to a vote of the property taxpayers who 

oorations ^ f ecto ‘. s m said cit y> town or other municipal cor- 
and voted for by majority thereof, in number, and in 
. taxable property, voting at such election, and provided 
S. for , sch , ools r sha11 be apportioned equitably and paid to 

t e public schools of said city, town or other municipal corpora- 
tion by the municipal authorities thereof; and provided, this sec- 
ion s all not apply to the city of Mobile, which city may levy a 
tax not to exceed the rate of three-fourths of one per centum to 
pa> the expenses of the city government, and may also levy a tax 
not to exceed the rate of three-fourths of one per centum to pay 

£\u? e n edn A S \ 0i Sa 'r d fo/rexisting at the time of the ratification 
of the Constitution of 1875 and the interest thereon; provided, 
urther, that this section shall not apply to the city of Birming¬ 
ham, which city may levy and collect a tax not exceeding one- 
half of one per centum, in addition to the tax of one-half of one 
per centum hereinabove allowed to be levied and collected, such 
special tax to be applied exclusively to the payment of the interest 
on the bonds of the said city of Birmingham heretofore issued 
by said city in pursuance of law, and for a sinking fund to pay off 
said bonds at the maturity thereof. 

A vote being taken, the Convention refused to take the Sec¬ 
tion from the table. 


MR. CORNWELL—I have an amendment to that Section 
which I will ask to have read. 

The Clerk read the amendment as follows: That all coun¬ 
ties, cities, towns or other municipal corporations, shall create a 
sinking fund on the issue of any bonds for their redemption by 
raising annually a sum which will produce an amount equal to 
the principal and interest of the bonds at their maturity. Pro¬ 
vided, that this section shall apply to the issues of bonds for the 
purpose of refunding the present bonded indebtedness of counties, 
cities, towns or other municipal corporations. 

MR. CORNWELL I move that that be printed and laidf 
upon the table. 

A vote being taken, the amendment was ordered printed and 
laid upon the table. 

MR. MACDONALD—I have an additional section to offer 
by way of amendment. I do not wish to make any statement in 
regard to it. 



1616 OFFICIAL PROCEEDINGS 


The Clerk read the amendment as follows: 

Amend Article reported by the Committee on Taxation In- 
adding the following as an additional Section No. 11. 

No city, town or other municipality shall make any assess¬ 
ment for the cost of sidewalk or street paving, or for the cost of 
the construction of any sewers, against property abutting on such 
street or sidewalk so paved, or drained by such sewers in excess of 
the actual increased value of such property by reason of such side¬ 
walk or street paving, or bv the construction of such sewers. And 
the burden of proving such increased value of said property >hall 
be on the city, town or other municipality in all proceedings brought 
to enforce the collection of such assessments. And such assess¬ 
ments shall in no case exceed five per cent of the assessed value 
of said property. 

MR. WEAKLEY-—I move that the Section just read be laid 
upon the table to be considered along with the report of the Com¬ 
mittee on Municipal Corporations bearing upon the same subject. 

MR- MACDONALD—I agree to that. 

MR. BROWNE—I submit the point of order that he cannot 
offer an amendment for municipal corporations on an article of 
the Committee on Taxation. The motion was that it be taken up 
by the Committee on Municipal Corporations. 

MR. MACDONALD—Yes, by either one of the Committees. 

I don t suppose the Convention will have anv objection to that— 
to be considered along with the report of the Committee on Munici¬ 
pal Corporations. 


Mr. Knox took the Chair. 

MR. BROWNE—I make the point of order that the gentle¬ 
man cannot introduce an amendment while the consideration of 

J" ^ 6 ° n ta "? tlon 1S U P’ and move that it be printed and taken 
up with some other report. 

MR. LONG (Walker)—I raise the point of order that that is 
an ordinance and should be referred to the proper committee 

THE PRESIDENT-The Chair understand, the gentleman 
destres to amend by adding an additional Section and the gentle 

pr?ntetj° m La “ derdal£ pr ° pOS « on the tide' 


MR. MACDONALD—And be printed 

to Ii J„ H „ E ,h P e R ,?h S , I e? ENT - What ™ '■« -ion of the gentleman. 


MR. WEAKLEY—Yes. 



CONSTITUTIONAL CONVENTION, 1901 


1617 


The vote being taken, the amendment was laid upon the table. 

MR. COBB I wish to offer a resolution to be put upon its 
passage, and for that reason, I move a suspension of the rules. 

T he Clerk read the following resolution: 

Resolution 224, by Mr. Cobbs: 

Resolved, That the reports of the Committee on Suffrage and 
Elections be taken up at 11 o’clock on Tuesday next for consid¬ 
eration to the exclusion of all other business. 

MR- WADDELL—I rise to a point of order. The resolution 
sent forward by the gentleman requires unanimous consent for 
suspension of the rules to have it read. 

THE PRESIDENT—The Chair has just stated that the mo¬ 
tion of the gentleman from Macon was that the rules be suspended 
and that the resolution be placed upon its immediate passage. 

MR. REESE—On the motion made to suspend the rules, I 
demand the ayes and noes. 

The call for the ayes and nays was not sustained. 

MR. OATES—The motion as I understand it is to suspend 
the rules with a view to putting the resolution upon its passage. 
I desire to be heard for a short time on that if it is debatable. 

THE PRESIDENT—A motion to suspend the rules is not 
debatable. 

MR. OATES—Then I desire to be heard after that is acted 
upon—provided it is carried. 

The vote being taken, the motion to suspend the rules was 
defeated and the resolution was referred to the Committee on 
Rules. 

MR. O’NEAL (Lauderdale)—I have a resolution that I desire 
to offer. 

THE PRESIDENT—The gentleman from Lauderdale asks 
unanimous consent to introduce a resolution. Is there objection? 

MR. O’NEAL—I will state to the Convention it is with ref¬ 
erence to the ventilation of the hall. 

MR. HOWZE—I object. 

MR. BROWNE—The last section of the report of the Com¬ 
mittee on Taxation has now been considered and laid upon the 
table— 



1618 


OFFICIAL PROCEEDINGS 


THE PRESIDENT—The gentleman from Talladega will sus¬ 
pend a moment, the Chair has not ascertained the will of the Con¬ 
vention whether the gentleman from Lauderdale will be granted 
leave to introduce a resolution. 

Objection was made to the introduction of the resolution. 

MR. BROWNE—I now move, so many of the sections of the 
report of the Committee on Taxation having been adopted, all of 
them except the two sections laid upon the table-—that the section> 
adopted be engrossed. It is necessary to have it engrossed, arid 
we have an Engrossing Clerk here doing nothing and I call for 
the engrossment of all the sections that have been adopted, so 
that when the report comes up on its final passage that the work 
will have been done. 


MR. HOWZE—I dislike to do so, but I rise to a point of order. 
Rule 52 says after these articles have been passed that they shall 
be engrossed. I submit that the whole article is not passed and 
under this rule it cannot be engrossed until it is passed. 

THE PRESIDENT—The point of order is well taken. 

MR. MACDONALD—I rise to a question of privilege in re¬ 
gard to the amendment proposed by me to the article on taxation. 

THE PRESIDENT—The next special order is the considera¬ 
tion of the report of the Committee on Preamble and Declara¬ 
tion of Rights. The gentleman from Montgomery has the floor. 

MR. MACDONALD—I wish to state so that the Conven¬ 
tion can hear me something in regard to the section which 1 sug¬ 
gested as an amendment to the report of the Committee on Taxa¬ 
tion. There has been some little misunderstanding between mv- 
self and Mr. Weakley. Mr. Weakley’s agreement with me in re¬ 
gard to that section was that it should be laid on the table and 
printed. 


MR. KIRKLAND—I 
before the House. 


rise to a point of order. I here is nothing 


THE PRESIDENT—The point of order is well taken. 

MR. MACDONALD—I move that the section offered bv me 
as an amendment to the report of the Committee on Taxation be 
taken from the table so that I can make a motion with reference 
to its disposition, to table it and have it printed and be taken un 
alonsr with the report of the Committee on Municipal Corpora 
tions, which was Mr. Weakley s agreement with me. 

to ha^e V it te bdng taken the Chair announced that th e noes seemed 



CONSTITUTIONAL CONVENTION, 1901 


1619 


MR. OA FES—My colleague could reach the matter by moving 
to have it printed. 

MR. MACDONALD—But I also desire to have it printed 
and taken from the table at the time the report of the Committee 
on Municipal Corporations is considered. 

A division was called for on the motion to take from the table 
and the motion was carried by a vote of 53 ayes and 21 noes. 

MR. MACDONALD—I move that this section be printed and 
lie on the table to be taken when the report of the Committee on 
Municipal Corporations comes before the Convention. 

MR. KIRKLAND—I make the point of order that the ques¬ 
tion before the House according to the announcement of the Chair 
is the consideration of the report of the Committee on Preamble 
and Declaration of Rights. 

THE PRESIDENT—The Chair thinks the point of order 
would have been well taken had the gentleman made it before the 
Convention took tip the question of this amendment and took it 
from the table, but no point was made at that time on that score 
and the Convention now has the matter up before it for considera¬ 
tion, and the motion is that this amendment be printed and laid on 
the table, to be taken up and considered along with the report of 
the Committee on Municipal Corporations. 

MR. OATES—The latter part of that is not in order. The 
gentleman can offer it as an amendment to the report of the Com¬ 
mittee on Taxation but he cannot direct that it shall be taken up 
and considered with the report of the Committee on Municipal 
Corporations. 

THE PRESIDENT—In the opinion of the Chair this amend¬ 
ment is to the article proposed by the Committee on Taxation and 
it does not seem that it is in order. 

MR. CUNNINGHAM — I rise to a point of order. The 
amendment was offered as a new section of the report of the Com¬ 
mittee on Taxation. As such the Convention has taken it from 
the table and it is now before the Convention and the point of 
order I make is that the motion of the gentleman is in order to 
have it printed and have it come up when the report of the Com¬ 
mittee on Municipal Corporation is considered. It has been taken 
from the table and is therefore new business. 

MR. JONES (Montgomery)—It is perfectly competent for the 
Convention to say when it will consider anything, whether it is 
part of one article or of another. 

THE PRESIDENT—The Chair has ruled heretofore that the 
Convention may lay any proposition on the table to be taken up 



1620 


OFFICIAL, PROCEEDINGS 


at pleasure, but it does not seem that it would be proper to state 
the specific time to take it up. The Convention takes it up when 
it sees proper. 

MR. PETTUS—The motion of the gentleman was to post¬ 
pone until the report of the Committee on Municipal Corporations 
was considered. 


THE PRESIDENT—The motion was to lie on the table and 
be printed, and the gentleman added the additional proposition. 

MR. MACDONALD—If it is necessary to put the motion in 
other phraseology I move that the amendment lie on the table and 
be postponed until the report of the Committee on Municipal Cor¬ 
porations is considered, and that the amendment be printed. 

THE PRESIDENT—The gentleman moves that the further 
consideration of the amendment proposed by him lie postponed 
until the consideration of the report of the Committee on Munici¬ 
pal Corporations, and that the same be printed. It seems to the 
Chair that in its present form of amendment is not in order. It 
is an amendment to the report of the Committee on Taxation. 

MR. REESE—I call for the regular order which is the con¬ 
sideration of the report of the Committee on Preamble and Declar¬ 
ation of Rights. 


THE PRESIDENT—I will put the question on the motion 
of the gentleman from Montgomery. 

A vote being taken the motion of Mr. Macdonald was carried. 

MR. HOWELL—Mr. President, I move to reconsider the 
vote by which the Convention refused to order the report of the 
Committee on Taxation engrossed- I think if the Convention un¬ 
derstood the question they would allow it to be engrossed Tlu»re 
has been some amendment to it, and the engrossment of the bill 
don t take it out of a condition where it can be amended and we 
have an officer that is on the pay roll whether she works or not 
and we should have it engrossed. I move that we reconsider the 
vote by which the House refused to order that article to be en¬ 
grossed, and then I will move that we order it to be engrossed. 

• MR f‘ PETTUS—1 make the point of order that the motion 
is out of order, because under Rule 52 it cannot be engrossed until 
completed. 


THE PRESIDENT—In the opinion of the Chair the point 
of order is well taken. The special order for this time is the con¬ 
sideration of the report of the Committee on Preamble and Dechr 
ation of Rights. <u 



CONSTITUTIONAL CONVENTION, 1901 


1021 


MR. LONG (Walker)—Before we get into that, I have a 
short resolution and I wish unanimous consent to have it read 
and referred. 

To which no objection was made. 

MR. LONG (Walker)—1 move to suspend the rules, that I 
may introduce the resolution. 

A vote being taken, the rules were suspended and the resolu¬ 
tion read as follows: 


Resolution No. 225, by Mr. Long (Walker) : 

Be it resolved by this Convention, That in view of the epidemic 
which has prevailed since the passage of the “no per diem” resolu¬ 
tion in the event of absence, except in cases of sickness a camp of 
detention or quarantine station is hereby established, wherein sick 
members may be detained until their respective ailments may be 
discovered or their cases diagnosed. 

Be it further resolved. That the distinguished delegate and 
phvsician who is the author of Number 184 Per Diem Resolution, 
be and is hereby placed in charge of said camp of detention, or 
quarantine station, without pay. (Laughter). 

THK PRESIDENT—The resolution is out of order. There 
are two minority reports accompanying the report of the Com¬ 
mittee on Preamble and Declaration of Rights, but they relate to 
the amendment of special sections. 

MR. LOMAX—I suggest that those minority reports be taken 
up when those particular sections of the report of the Committee 
are reached. 

THE PRESIDENT—Does that meet with the approval of 
the gentlemen taking the reports? 

MR- WILSON (Washington)—That meets with my approval. 
I am on one of the minority reports. 

MR. BLACKWELL—It meets mine. 


MR. BAREEIELD—That is acceptable to me. 

MR WILSON (Washington)—To meet the suggestion of 
the gentleman from Montgomery, that is the regular order. In 
othef words, it is the regular order to proceed as suggested by the 
gentleman from Montgomery. 

The Preamble was thereupon read as follows: 



1622 


OFFICIAL PROCEEDINGS 


PREAMBLE. 

We, the people of the State of Alabama, in Convention as¬ 
sembled, in order to establish justice, ensure domestic tranquilit\ 
and secure the blessings of liberty to ourselves and our posterity, 
invoking the favor and guidance of Almighty God—do ordain and 
establish the following Constitution and form of Government for 
the State of Alabama: 

MR. LOMAX—On behalf of the Committee on Preamble and 
Declaration of Rights, I move to strike out the words ‘‘in Con¬ 
vention assembled” in the first line. I will state our reason for 
doing so is that an examination of the majority of the Constitu¬ 
tions of the States in the Union show that those words are not 
used in the preamble of those Constitutions. 

Upon a vote being taken the amendment was adopted. 

MR. LOMAX—I now' move the adoption of the Preamble. 

MR. CUNNINGHAM—I move that the vote on the Preamble 
be taken by a rising vote. 

And by a rising vote the Preamble w r as unanimously adopted. 

Subdivision 1 of the Article was read as follows: 

DECLARATION OF RIGHTS. 

That the great, general and essential principles of liberty and 
free government may be recognized and established, we declare: 

First—That all men are equally free and independent; that 
they are endowed by their Creator with certain inalienable rights; 
that among these are life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness. 

MR. LOMAX—I will state that the Committee has made 
no change in that Section of the Declaration of Rights- I move 
its adoption. 

Upon a vote being taken the subdivision was adopted. 

Subdivision 2 of the Article was read as follow's: 

Second—That all persons resident in this State, born in the 
United States, or who shall have legally declared their intention 
to become citizens of the United States, are hereby declared citi¬ 
zens of the State of Alabama, possessing equal civil and political 
rights. 

MR. LOMAX—I move the adoption of that Section of the 
bill of rights. 



CONSTITUTIONAL CONVENTION. 1901 


1623 


MR. SANFORD (Montgomery)—I move to amend that Sec¬ 
tion by striking out the words “persons who have legally declared 
their intention of becoming citizens.” 

THE PRESIDENT—The gentleman will have to reduce his 
amendment to writing. 

MR. SANFORD—I will do it in a moment. 

MR. BURNS—While we pause in the proceedings, I desire 
to ask this Convention to extend the privileges of the floor to the 
Hon. S. S. Scott, scholar, statesman and poet, and a member of 
the last Constitutional Convention of Alabama. 

There being no objection, the privileges of the floor were ex¬ 
tended Mr. Scott. 

MR. COLEMAN (Greene)—It seems that Section 2 is rather 
in conflict with the provision of the Committee’s report on Suffrage 
and Elections. 

MR. LOMAX—The Committee apprehended there might be 
some conflict perhaps between this provision and the Suffrage 
Article, after it was adopted, but we thought the Committee on 
the Order, Consistency and Harmony of the Constitution could 
reconcile those questions without any trouble. 

MR- COLEMAN—I hold to the view that the Committee on 
Harmony cannot change the sense of an enactment of the Con¬ 
vention. It can only harmonize- 

MR. LOMAX—Inconsistent provisions. 

MR. COLEMAN (Greene)—I move to strike out Section 2. 

MR. LOMAX—One moment. I would like to direct the at¬ 
tention of the gentleman from Greene to this proposition; I pre¬ 
sume the part of the Section he refers to is the last paragraph 

MR. COLEMAN—It reads that “all persons resident in this 
State, born in the United States or naturalized, or who have legally 
declared their intention to become citizens of the United States, 
are hereby declared citizens of the State of Alabama. Now the 
Committee on Suffrage declare that it requires a two years resi¬ 
dence— 

MR. LOMAX—Does being a citizen of Alabama necessarily 
give him the right to vote? He might be a citizen and still not 
have the right to vote, and, consequently, there would be no con¬ 
flict between the section and the suffrage amendment. 

MR. JONES—I would like to inquire of the chairman of the 
committee if a woman is not a citizen? 

MR. LOMAX—Yes. 



1624 


OFFICIAL PROCEEDINGS 


Mr. Sanford’s amendment was here read as follows: 

Amend Section 2 by striking out the words “those who have 
legally declared their intention to become citizens of the United 
States.” 

MR. SANFORD—I make that motion from the fact that who¬ 
ever has declared his intention to become a citizen of the United 
States possesses all the rights of those that are born here, so that 
a man may owe allegiance to King Edward, or the Emperor of 
Germany, and hold the office of Chief Executive of this State, or 
Chief Justice of this State, or any other high and responsible office 
when he owes allegiance to some foreign power. When he be¬ 
comes a citizen of the United States, my objection of course dis¬ 
appears, but until he is a citizen, he should not have the right to 
be the Governor of Alabama, the Chief Justice or Justice of our 
Supreme Court, or hold any other position in the State of Alabama, 
and, therefore, I move to strike out those words, where he has sim¬ 
ply declared his intention to become a citizen of the United States. 
There is nothing in that section that will prevent his holding any 
office in the State of Alabama, unless that be stricken out. 

MR. PILLANS—I entirely and heartily concur with the 
amendment offered, and hope the Convention will vote for it, and 
will call special attention to the fact, as Judge Dargan said, after 
the adoption of the Constitution of 1875, with that same clause 
in it, that the Alabama Constitution had an unconstitutional clause 
in it- By the powers conferred by the Federal Constitution upon 
the Federal Congress, it alone can create citizens out of foreign 
material, and we undertook to create citizens of Alabama, which 
Congress alone can do by the passage of uniform naturalization 
laws. It has done so. Its naturalization laws do not make citizens 
of those persons who have declared their intention to become 
citizens. However, in this clause, if we should adopt it, as we 
unwittingly did heretofore, we override the Constitution of the 
United States, or at least, attempt to do so, and that we ought 
not to do. No man should be made a citizen of Alabama who is 
an alien, and has not been naturalized under the uniform naturali¬ 
zation laws of the United States. 

MR. O NEAL (Lauderdale)—I think this section is in con¬ 
flict with the provisions in reference to Suffrage and Elections. 

THE PRESIDENT—The question before the Convention is 
the amendment proposed by the gentleman from Montgomery to 
Section 2. 

MR. O’NEAL (Lauderdale)—I understand that, and I think 
the amendment of the gentleman from Montgomery should be 
adopted for that reason. The Committee on Suffrage gave very 
careful consideration to the question whether those who had de- 



1625 


CONSTITUTIONAL CONVENTION, 1901 


chired their intention to become citizens of the United States 
should be classed as citizens of Alabama, and after careful con¬ 
sideration and discussion of that subject, we omitted it from the 
section o su ra f? t ; 'vhich declares “that every male citizen of this 
State, who is a citizen of the United States/’ 


Now. under the old provision on suffrage and elections, found 
in the present Constitution, it provided “every male citizen of the 

State, or who had declared his intention/’ That is also found in 

the old section in reference to suffrage, and there would be a 
manift st coni lit t between these two provisions, unless the amend- 
nient suggested by the gentleman from Montgomery is adopted, 
and I call the attention of the chairman of the committee to the 
conflict and hope that he will agree to the amendment. 

^ I hS—I desire to suggest that the amendment offered 
by uiv colleague (Colonel Sanford) is not exactly in the language 
of the section. He uses the word “those.” The words that ought 

to be stricken out are “or who shall have legally declared their 

intention to become citizens of the United States.” 


THK PRESIDENT—'That is manifestly the intention of the 
gentleman. 

MR. OATES—That is the intention but not the words. 


MR. SANFORD—I will make it exactly in the words- I did 
not have the section before me. 


MR. O’NEAL (Lauderdale)—Will the chairman let me call 
his attention to the old Constitution before he concludes his re¬ 
marks? The old Constitution provides: “Every citizen of the 
United States and every person of foreign birth who may have 
legally declared his intention to become a citizen of the United 
States.” Now we omitted that intentionally, and it seems to me 
there would be a conflict there. 

MR. LOMAX—I submit that there is nothing in this pro¬ 
posed section of our bill of rights which has anything to do with 
the privilege of suffrage. The fact that we declare in our bill of 
rights that any person who shall have legally declared his inten¬ 
tion to become a citizen of the United States, shall be a citizen 
of Alabama, does not and cannot confer upon that man the privilege 
of suffrage, and the fact that we have further declared in this sec¬ 
tion that they are citizens of Alabama, possessing equal civil and 
political rights, does not confer upon any person named in the 
section the privilege of suffrage. W e make them citizens whether 
they have been in the State the time required for naturalization, 
when they have declared their intention. W e confer upon them 
all civil and political rights, but we still retain the power and exer- 
cise the power to keep from them the privilege of suffrage. And 



1626 


OFFICIAL PROCEEDINGS 


there is no better drawn nor better recognized distinction. It is 
directly and distinctly, and in terms, recognized by our own court, 
that suffrage is not a right but a privilege. Now the declaring that 
a person shall have equal political and civil rights, does not de¬ 
clare that he shall exercise the privilege of suffrage. 

MR. PETTUS—May I ask the gentleman a question? 

MR. LOMAX—Certainly. 

MR. PETTUS—For information, would holding office be a 
political right under that section? 

MR. LOMAX—No, he could not hold office under the suf¬ 
frage clause, unless he was a voter I take it. 

MR. JONES—I would like to ask the gentleman, is not a 
woman a citizen of Alabama? 

MR. LOMAX—Certainly she it- 

MR. JONES (Montgomery)—And a minor. 

MR. LOMAX—And a minor. 

MR. JONES (Montgomery)—And none of them can vote? 

MR. LOMAX—None of them can vote, but they have civil 
and political rights in the State. Now what would be the effect 
of adopting the amendment of my distinguished friend from Mont¬ 
gomery, Mr. Sanford? The result of that would be to say to any 
foreign-born person who desired to come to the State of Alabama, 
you must live in this State for five years before you can become 
a citizen thereof. 

The result of that would be we would exclude from coming 
to the State of Alabama the most desirable class of foreign citizens 
that come into this country and we would simply have come in 
amongst us people who dild not care whether they had secured the 
rights of citizenship in one or five years. 

MR. WADDELL—Will the gentleman allow a question? 

MR. LOMAX—Yes. 

MR. WADDELL—What does political rights mean then? 

MR. LOMAX—It don’t mean suffrage, and that is the ques¬ 
tion here. 

MR. WADDELL—What does it mean? 

MR. LOMAX—Suffrage is a privilege and not a right. 

MR. O’NEAL (Lauderdale)—Will the gentleman permit a 
question. Under this section “any person who has legally declared 



CONSTITUTIONAL CONVENTION, 1901 1627 

his intention to become a citizen of the United States” is declared 
a citizen of Alabama? 

MR. LOMAX—Yes, sir. 

MR. O NLAL (Lauderdale)—Now, section 1, of the report of 
the Committee, on Suffrage, provides that every male citizen of 
tins v. tate who is a citizen of the United States, shall be an elector. 

Now, I ask^this question; If section 1 of the ordinance sub¬ 
mitted by the Committee on Suffrage is adopted, would not any 
man then who had declared his intention to become a citizen of 
the United States thereby being a citizen of Alabama? 

MR. LOMAX No, sir, he would not, because it is conferred 
upon the citizens of the United States and not upon the citizens 
of Alabama. 

MR. O'NEAL (Lauderdale)—Oh, no, it says citizens of Ala¬ 
bama. 

MR. PILLANS—Do I understand if a person, an alien, came 
to Savannah, Georgia, and resided there four years after declaring 
his intention, and then moved to Alabama, he could not, if these 
words were stricken out, at the end of five years in the United 
States, though not in the State, claim his citizenship? 

MR. LOMAX—I hope the gentleman did not so understand 
me. My proposition was simply this: That by saying in our Con¬ 
stitution that a man could not acquire the rights of citizenship 
until he had been here five years, we would keep out of our State 
a most desirable class of emigrants; and get in those people who 
did not care whether the right of citizenship was conferred upon 
them or not, and therefore I do not think that the amendment of 
the gentleman from Montgomery ought to be adopted. 

Now, I do not propose, and do not know that I am prepared 
at this time, to go into an elaborate discussion of what is meant by 
civil and political rights. I have not the authorities before me, but 
I am very sure that neither the word civil rights, or political rights 
have any reference to the privilege of suffrage. Consequently, the 
adoption of this amendment would not have any effect upon the 
suffrage article. 

MR. HOOD—I would like to ask the delegate from Mont¬ 
gomery if political rights would include the right to hold office? 

MR. LOMAX—No, sir; not if the suffrage article requires a 
person to be a legal voter, it would not. 

MR. HOOD—If it does not include any political rights, or 
the right to hold office, what does it mean? 



1628 


OFFICIAL PROCEEDINGS 


MR. LOMAX—I just stated that I am not in a position at 
this time to go into a definition of what political rights mean, but 
they do not mean or include the right to hold office, or the privilege 
of suffrage, if a right to hold office is dependent upon the persons 
being a legal voter within the State. 

MR. BURNS—Will the gentleman allow a question? 

MR. LOMAX—I will, with pleasure, if I can answer it. 

MR. BURNS—Suppose a foreigner comes over here, and 
belongs to the Mafia or some such crowd, and comes to one of our 
cities, New Orleans we will say, and remain in statu quo until 
they perhaps elect Aldermen, or at the election of a Mayor, or 
some other officer in this State, and he should not become natu¬ 
ralized until he saw that he could get the position. You under¬ 
stand, suppose that was a fact; that the time he saw he was going 
to get a position, then he became a citizen of the United States, but 
at the same time he might stay here and belong to the Mafia in 
New Orleans, or somewhere else, and still be a subject of a foreign 
country. Now, do you suppose that he shall stand upon the same 
footing and have the same political rights as any other citizen of 
the United States? 

MR. LOMAX—We propose to give him exactly the rights 
he has had for twenty-five years in Alabama and no more. 

MR. BURNS—Then we will endorse that amendment. 

MR. COLEMAN (Greene)—Delegates of the Convention, it 
seems to me this Section 2 of the Declaration of Rights is out of 
place in the Constitution of the State of Alabama. The Fourteenth 
Amendment to the Constitution of the United States protects all 
citizens in their privileges and immunities equally, and if these 
words have no meaning at all, the words “privileges and immuni¬ 
ties” cover everything proposed to be covered or protected or made 
by the argument of the delegate from Montgomery, the Chairman of 
the committee. Now, when a question comes up that admits of 
so much debate, as to which there is such a contrariety of opinion 
has arisen upon the subject of this question, it seems to me that 
the Convention ought not to adopt it. In view of the fact that all 
citizens of the United States have equal rights, privileges and 
immunities in Alabama, as much as according to his own argu¬ 
ment the words have no force, I move to lay the section on the 
table. 

MR. LOMAX—And on that I demand the ayes and noes. 

THE PRESIDENT—The pending question is on the amend¬ 
ment offered by the gentleman from Montgomery, 

MR. COLEMAN (Greene)—I move to lay that on the table 
because if my motion prevails it reaches the purpose intended by 



1629 


CONSTITl TIONAl, CONVENTION, 1901 


the gentleman from Montgomery, and I move to lay the whole 
section on the table. 


THh PRESIDENT—It is moved that Section 2, with the 
pending- amendment, be laid upon the table. 

MR. LOMAX—I ask for the ayes and noes on that proposition. 
It is the same provision as in the Constitution of seventy-five and 
in two-thirds of the Constitutions of the States of the Union. 


The call for the ayes and noes was not sustained. 


MR. OATES--! am heartily in favor of the amendment for 
the reasons, in addition to the reasons already given that this is 
exceptional in the Constitution of Alabama. Scarcely any Con¬ 
stitution of any State in the Union has such a provision. New 
York, which has a much greater number of foreigners in it than 
anv other one. or two, or three States, has no such provision in its 
Constitution. This seems to have been adopted and incorporated 
into the Constitution made by the Convention in 1875, without 
ever having been fully considered. Another thing, at that time 
one reason for it. was that in their provisions in regard to the suf¬ 
frage. those who had legally declared their intention to become 
citizens were allowed to vote and hence it was in harmony with 
that provision. 


Now, sir. a> we are making a Constitution, not for today, nor 
for tomorrow, but one perhaps for forty or fifty r years, we cannot 
tell just exact!v what will occur. Why, sir in the service that I 
rendered upon Committee of Investigation in the Congress of the 
United States in regard to the "suffrage mills” you might call 
them, established in New York and Boston, for the purpose of 
manufacturing citizens out of foreigners who had just arrived, we 
looked vcrv closelv into a business, which was most extensive. 
Evasions of the laws of the United States, processes by which, in 
iwentv-fotir hours after one’s arrival, if he had the money to pay 
tor it he would become a full-fledged citizen and have his papers 
dulv stamped. Those people up there in those cities have had a 
great deal of trouble with the foreign element. We do not reject 
them We welcome them to our shores. We want them to come 
and live among us. But we have a law of the United States, very 
liberal in its terms to allow them, when they arrive to make their 
declaration of intention to become citizens of the United States, 
and within a reasonable time, five years they can perfect their 
citizenship, and sir. before they do that what is the nature of the 
declaration of intention? That of itself does not throw off their 
obligations, nor completely relieve them from their obligations of 
loyalty to the government from which they come. It is necessary 
that they be declared citizens of the United States, to take the oath 
when they are entirely freed from all obligations to any foreign 
prince or potentate, and become full-fledged citizens here- Prior 



1630 


OFFICIAL PROCEEDINGS 


to that time there is no difficulty, as has been insinuated, because 
they are not declared to be citizens entitled to all the rights. Our 
laws, sir, protect all foreigners that come in here. They have in 
their rights in the ownership of property, as well as any other 
person, and all the rights that are extended to our citizens, and 
there is no just complaint on that ground. It simply postpones 
them according to the laws of the United States until they have 
thrown off their allegiance to the country from which they come 
and become citizens of the United States, and therefore 1 think it 
is wholly unnecessary, in view of what perhaps this Convention 
will do on the suffrage question, to retain this language in the 
Constitution. 

MR. O’NEAL (Lauderdale)—Will the gentleman allow a 
question? 

MR. OATES—Certainly. 

MR. O'NEAL (Lauderdale)—Is it not a fact that this pro¬ 
vision was not contained in any Constitution in Alabama, until 
after the civil war? 

MR. OATES—No; and it is not contained in one Constitu¬ 
tion in twenty of the States of the Union. 

MR. O'NEAL (Lauderdale)—Is it not a fact that it is not 
in the Constitution of 1819, and was not incorporated in any other 
Constitution? 

MR. OATES—Never, in any, until 1875. 

MR. O NEAL (Lauderdale)—I will ask you a further ques¬ 
tion. If making all persons who declare their intention to become 
citizens of the State of Alabama, would not make them electors 
under the first section of the suffrage provision, as reported by 
the committee? 

MR. OATES—Well, probably not. 

MR. O NEAL (Lauderdale)—Why not? 

MR. OATES—But it might give rise to confusion, and there 
is no necessity of retaining it as it is. 

MR. O NEAL If they are citizens of the State of Alabama, 
would they not be electors, if they had resided here two years? 

MR. OATES—That is what it might do, because it confers 
upon them all rights- 

MR. O'NEAL (Lauderdale)—It says if they are citizens of 
Alabama- 

MR. OATES—But I think the court, considering the whole 
instrument, together, he would not be held to be entitled to the 



CONSTITUTIONAL CONVENTION, 1901 


1631 


rights of suffrage under the report of the committee, but as there 
is no use for this language, and it does not impair the rights of the 
people when they are not electors, it ought not to be retained, and 
I am in favor of the amendment. 

MR. SORRELL—-I move the previous question on the amend¬ 
ment of the gentleman from Montgomery and the section. 

MR. PETTUS—I will ask the gentleman to withdraw it. 

MR. SANFORD—I hope the amendment suggested will be 
adopted. We know that all the questions- 

THE PRESIDENT—The gentleman from Tallapoosa has 
moved the previous question upon the section and the amendment. 

The main question was ordered. 

MR. SANFORD—Now, Mr. President, of all the questions 
that have disturbed Christendom, that of citizenship has been the 
most universal- 

THE PRESIDENT—The chair will state to the gentleman 
from Montgomery that the previous question has been ordered. 

MR. O’NEAL—I rise to a point of order. The gentleman in¬ 
troduced the amendment, and has the right to conclude the argu¬ 
ment, even after the previous question is ordered. 

MR, SANFORD—It has always been done- 

THE PRESIDENT—The previous question has been ordered 
upon the proposed amendment and the section proposed by the 
committee, and the gentleman from Montgomery (Mr. Lomax) 
chairman of the committee, has the right to conclude, unless he 
yields to the gentleman. 

MR. LOMAX—I do not care to say anything. 

MR. SANFORD (Montgomery)—As I remarked, you re¬ 
member, and this Convention remembers, that in 1850 or ’51, 
Coster, an Austrian citizen, had declared his intention to become 
a citizen of the United States, or had become one. He was in the 
East. One of the Austrian vessels seized him as a citizen of 
Austria, and then it was that Lieutenant Ingram told them unless 
they released him that he would blow their ships out of the water. 
I mention that incident to show that the fact that a man may 
declare his intention does not make him a citizen. There was a 
long controversy between Chevalier Houselman and Mr. Webster, 
then Secretary of State, upon the subject. We remember also 
until since the war in Alabama, no man who was not a naturalized 
citizen could hold real estate in this commonwealth. 



1632 


OFFICIAL PROCEEDINGS 


MR. OATES— Allow me to call your attention to another fact, 
that this provision which gives full citizenship to those who ha\e 
legally declared their intention, has given rise to controversies be¬ 
tween this Government and foreign Governments about the re¬ 
lations they hold to it. 

MR. SANFORD—Time and again, until many Germans are 
afraid to go to Germany today, where they have simply declared 
their intention, unless they be seized and placed in the army. 

So I say they are not citizens of this country. They are citi¬ 
zens of their native places, and you know’ that as a general principle 
nothing reverts so soon to its original condition as citizenship, and, 
therefore, it has been the cause of much negotiation and some 
hostile feelings between the different nations. W hy should a man 
who is not a citizen of Alabama, or, rather, of the United States, 
enjoy the rights and privileges which only citizens enjoy? Citizen¬ 
ship is a high privilege. It is a great distinction to be an American 
citizen. He becomes a sovereign power in this land when he is a 
citizen, and why we should seek to confer the great rights upon 
men who owe their allegiance to Turkey, to China, to England, to 
France. Belgium and all the foreign countries, and put them upon 
an equality with our own native horn and naturalized citizens. I 
am at a loss to know. 

The fact that it never existed in this State until within the 
last twenty-five years is a good reason for recurring to the former 
basis. Therefore, I hope that the amendment will prevail. 

MR. COLEMAN (Greene)—I hope that the gentleman will 
withdraw his motion for the previous question. 

MR. PETTUS—I rise to a point of order. 

MR. HEFLIN (Chambers)—I make the point of order that 
the previous question has been ordered. 

THE PRESIDENT—The previous question has been ordered. 
It can only be taken up on a motion to reconsider. 

MR. O'NEAL (Lauderdale)—Can that be taken up now? A 
motion to reconsider? 

THE PRESIDENT—It might, by a suspension of the rules. 

MR. O NEAL (Lauderdale)—I move that the rules be sus¬ 
pended, and that the Convention reconsider the vote by which the 
previous question was ordered on this Section. 

Upon a vote being taken the rules were suspended. 

THE PRESIDENT—The question is on the motion to re¬ 
consider the vote whereby the previous question was ordered on 
Section 2 of the Article, and the pending amendments. 



CONSTITUTIONAL CONVENTION, 1901 1633 

MR. LOMAX—A parliamentary inquiry. Can you reconsider a 
motion ordering the previous question? 

MR. PETTTJS—I will ask the gentleman from Greene if he 
will yield to me to offer a substitute for the amendment offered by 
the gentleman from Montgomery. 

MR. COLEMAN—If I am to have the floor in the morning. 

The amendment was read as follows: 

Amend by striking out the words “and political” in line three 
of Section 2, Article I. 

MR COLEMAN—Whatever may be the final determination 
as to the meaning of those words, it is very clear some courts hold 
that “political privilege” does include the right of franchise. I 
have a decision of the Supreme Court of California in my hands, 
holding exactly that view. “As was well said by Judge Mills of 
the Court of Appeals of Kentucky, ‘the mistake on the subject 
arises from not attending to a sensible distinction between political 
and civil rights. The latter constitute the citizen while the former 
are not necessary ingredients. A state may deny all her political 
rights to an individual and yet he may be a citizen.’ ” and it goes 
on and holds that political rights include the right of suffrage. And 
to the same effect you will find another decision in Harris’ Reports, 
in the body of the decision. I do not want the Convention to act 
hastily in this matter, because the law is uncertain. It is not settled 
in this State that I know of- 

MR. LOMAX—Will the gentleman from Greene permit me 
to ask a question. 

MR. COLEMAN (Greene)—Yes. 

MR. LOMAX—Has he ever examined the case of Washing¬ 
ton against the State in the 75th Alabama? 

MR. COLEMAN (Greene)—Yes. 

MR. LOMAX—Does not that case hold that voting is not a 
right but a privilege? 

MR. COLEMAN (Greene)—Voting is a privilege. There is 
no doubt .about it. And there will be found a much abler decision 
by Jud^: Stone in the 73d Alabama, page 26, the State against 
Green, where all these questions are discussed. But as I stated 
before, when I was upon the floor, there is no necessity whatever 
for Section 2 in our Bill of Rights. If the Convention thinks proper, 
however, to retain any part of Section 2, then we should eliminate 
from it all objectionable features whatever. Both the one sug¬ 
gested by my friend, the delegate from Montgomery, General San¬ 
ford, and also by the amendment of the gentleman from Lime¬ 
stone. 



1634 


OFFICIAL PROCEEDINGS 


MR. COBB—We are about to adjourn. Will the gentleman 
yield to me to make a motion to reconsider the action on your 
motion, or will you do it? 

MR. COLEMAN (Greene)—It has been reconsidered. 

THE PRESIDENT—Will the gentleman from Greene sus¬ 
pend. 

The hour of 6 having arrived, the Convention adjourned until 
tomorrow morning. 


THIRTY-EIGHTH DAY 


MONTGOMERY, ALA., 
Saturday, July 6, 1901. 

The Convention met pursuant to adjournment, was called to 
order by the president, and the proceeding's opened with prayer 
by the Rev. Mr. Patterson as follows: 

O Lord, our Heavenly Father, we once more come into Thy 
presence and as we come we acknowledge that we are Thy 
creatures. That in Thee we live and move and have our being, 
and that without Thee we can do nothing. We are grateful unto 
Thee that Thou hast revealed Thyself as the source of all wisdom, 
and as willing to impart that wisdom unto those who come humbly 
unto Thee and ask for it, and we pray that Thou wilt make good 
unto Thy servants here today all of Thy promises, and that Thou 
wilt grant them that wisdom that cometh down from above. We 
pray that Thou wilt look upon us with Thy mercy and loving care. 
Pardon our sins and grant we may be led by Thy holy spirit in 
the pathways of righteousness, and that our lots may be cast in 
the pleasant places. Be with us during the hours of this day, 
strengthen us for every duty. Guide us in every undertaking, and 
at last when Thou has served Thy will with us here upon earth, 
receive us and own us as Thine in Heaven, and to Thy name. 
Father, Son and ever blessed Spirit, shall be the praise, world with¬ 
out end. Amen. 

Upon the call of the roll of delegates 111 responded to their 
names. 

Leave of absence was granted to Mr. Searcy of Tuscaloosa 
for today. 

MR. WADDELL—I have a resolution which I wish to have 
unanimous consent to introduce, and I will ask a suspension of the 
rules and that the resolution be put upon its passage. 



CONSTITUTIONAL CONVENTION, 1901 


1635 


The resolution was read as follows: 

“Resolved, That this Convention remain in session until 2 
o’clock p. m. today, and that it then adjourn until Monday.” 

MR. WADDELL—I move a suspension of the rules. 

Upon a vote being taken the rules were suspended. 

MR. SANFORD—I move to amend by inserting 12 o’clock 
Monday instead of 9:30, so there may be a quorum present. 

MR. O’NEAL (Lauderdale)—I move to lay the amendment 
on the table. 

Upon a vote being taken the motion to table was carried. And 
upon a further vote the resolution, as read, was adopted. 

MR. MERRILL—I have a resolution. 

Ordinance No. 412, by Mr. Merrill: 

An ordinance relating to the bonded indebtedness of the 
State— 

Be it ordained by the people of the State of Alabama in con¬ 
vention assembled: 

That an act of the General Assembly of Alabama, entitled “An 
act to consolidate and adjust the bonded debt of the State of Ala¬ 
bama,” approved February 18, 1895, and an act amendatory thereto, 
entitled “an act to amend Section 6 of an act to consolidate and 
adjust the bonded debt of the State of Alabama,” approved Feb¬ 
ruary 16, 1895, which said last named act was approved February 
16, 1899. Be and the same are hereby made valid. The Governor 
is authorized and empowered to act under the same and carry out 
all the provisions thereof. 

Referred to the Committee on Amending Constitution and Mis¬ 
cellaneous Provisions- 

MR. O’NEAL—I have a resolution. 

Resolution No. 226, by Mr. O’Neal of Lauderdale: 

Whereas, This Convention has shown its ability to limit the 
debate, taxes and municipal indebtedness, but seems utterly power¬ 
less to limit the heat, and 

Whereas, There seems to be a strong limitation upon the pros¬ 
pects of this Convention reaching the snowy summits of Monte 
Sano and 

Whereas, we must remain for a time beyond which the memory 
of man runneth not to the contrary, in this hot but classic hall, 
therefore be it 



1636 


OFFICIAL PROCEEDINGS 


Resolved, That the Sergeant at Arms be instructed to place 
two additional fans in this hall. 

Referred to the Committee on Schedule, Printing and Inciden- 
tal Expenses. 

MR. WHITE—I would like to amend that by knocking out 
the preamble and putting in two more fans. 

MR. O’NEAL (Lauderdale)—I would accept the amendment. 

“Resolution No. 227 by Mr. Sentell: “Resolved, That the rule 
of this Convention as embodied in resolution No. 184, be amended 
so as to read as follows: That from and after the passage of this 
resolution, no per diem will be allowed to the delegates of this 
Convention who are absent, except those granted leave of absence 
on account of the sickness of themselves or members of their 
family, or other good cause.” 

Referred to Committee on Rules. 

MR. SPRAGINS—I have a petition which I ask to be read 
and referred to the Committee on Schedule and Printing. 

The petition was read as follows: 

Huntsville, Ala., June 21. 1901. 

To the Alabama Constitutional Convention, Montgomery, Ala.: 

In order to procure individual protection and to give to us 
and our families a wage that will maintain us, we have voluntariiv 
entered into an organization known as the Huntsville Typographi¬ 
cal Union, No. 422. We have at heart the interests of similar 
unions throughout the country, and we believe that organized 
labor should be recognized in every section of the Nation. There 
fore be it 

Resolved, That Huntsville Typographical Union, No. 422. 
hereby memoralizes the delegates composing the Alabama Con¬ 
stitutional Convention to give preference to the union printing 
establishments when consistent with the duties and obligations ir 
the exalted and distinguished capacity in which they have been 
called to serve the people of Alabama. 

Adopted this the 29th day of June, 1901 

H. L. Pollard, President. 

Geo. C. Patterson, Secretary. 

Resolution No. 228, by Mr. White: 

r Resolved, That the President of this Convention appoint a 
committee of five whose duty it shall be to see that all articles 



CONSTITUTIONAL CONVENTION, 3901 1637 

adopted by this Convention are properly engrossed. Said com¬ 
mittee to be known as The Committee on Engrossment. 

Referred to the Committee on Rules. 

Resolution No. 229, by Mr. White: 

Resolved, That when any article has been adopted, 300 copies 
thereof shall be printed for the use of the members of this Con¬ 
vention. 

Referred to the Committee on Rules. 

MR. HARRISON—When my name was called I did not have 
this resolution ready, and I ask unanimous consent to offer it now. 

The resolution was read as follows: 

Resolution No. 230 by Mr. Harrison: 

Resolved, That the Secretary of this Convention be, and is 
hereby instructed to deposit a copy of the stenographic report of 
the Convention in the libraries of the following institutions in this 
State, to wit: One at the University of Alabama; one at the Ala¬ 
bama Polytechnic Institute; one at the Southern University; one 
at Howard College; one at Spring Hill College and one at the Nor¬ 
mal College at Florence. 

MR. O'NEAL (Lauderdale)—I ask permission to add the 
Normal School at Florence. 

MR. GRAHAM—I ask permission to add the Alabama Girls’ 
Industrial School at Montevallo. 

MR. PETTUS—I rise to a point of order. The resolution is 
not before the House for amendment at this time. 

MR. O’NEAL—I did not make a motion to amend. 

The resolution was referred to the Committee on Rules. 

Upon the call of the standing committees, the Committee on 
Exemptions submitted their report and the accompanying ordi¬ 
nance, which was read as follows: 

Reports of the Committee on Exemptions: 

Mr. President: 

I am instructed by the Committee on Exemptions to make the 
following report: 

The Committee considered carefully all ordinances and reso¬ 
lutions submitted to it, several of which contain valuable sug¬ 
gestions, but the Committee has deemed it best not to make any 
change in the Article on Exemptions in the present Constitution, 



1638 OFFICIAL PKOCKKDINV.S 

and direct me to report said Article to be incorporated in the new 
Constitution. 

All ordinances and resolutions referred to the Committee art 
herewith returned. 

A. C. Howze. Chairman. 

article — -. 


Exempted Property. 

Section 1. The personal property of any resident of this Staic 
to ttie value of $1,000, to be .'elected lay such resident ,'hall be ex¬ 
empted from sale on execution, or other proces.' of am court. i"Ueo 
for the collection of any debt contracted since the 1 Ath day oi 
July r . 1868 or after the ratification ot this Constitution. 


Sec. 2. Every homestead, not exceeding IX acres, and the 
dwelling and appurtenances thereon, to be selected In the ownei 
thereof, and not in any city, town or village, or in lieu thereoi, ;u 
the option of the owner, any lot in a city, town or village, with 
the dwelling and appurtenances thereon owned and occupied In 
any resident of this State, and not exaedmg the value of $2.<>CX> 
shall be exempt front sale on execution or anv other process from 
a court for any debt contracted since the 1 3th da< ! n ] v !8bX. or 
after the ratification of this Constitution. Such exemption, how 
ever, shall not extend to any mortgage lawfullv obtained, but sun 
mortgage, or other alienation of said homestead bv the owne. 
thereof, if a married man, shall not he valid without the voluntary 
signature and assent of the wife to the same. 


Sem 3. The homestead of the familv. after the death of tuc 
owner thereof shall he exempt from the pavment of anv debts C on- 

S elf o', 13th ,! lav of J ,llv '»*• ™alter the ratification of 
this Constitution, in all cases, during the minority of the childrtn. 

J ec - 4 - The Provisions of Sections 1 and 2 of this Article shall 
not be so construed as to prevent a laborer's lien for work done 
and performed for the person claiming such exemption or a 
mechanics lien for work done on the premises. 

?*£ 5 ' H th i. e ° wner of a homestead die. leaving a widow but 
no children, such homestead shall he exemnt n tll iAu A , 
profits thereof shall inure to her benefit rcnts aml 

c. ,f €C ' 6 ' • ^A he r r f al or P ersona l property of anv female in this 
State acquired before marriage, and all'property re o n 

%&£ t'fj.'ll s ¥* rZ: 

property of such female, and shall not be liable fo/any debts. Zt 



CONSTITUTIONAL CONVENTION, 1901 


1639 


lizations, and engagements of her husband, and may be devised of 
bequeathed by her, the same as if she was a feme sole- 

Sec. 7. The right of exemption hereinbefore secured, may he 
waived by an instrument in writing, and when such waiver re¬ 
ntes to realty, the instrument must be signed bv both the husband 
and the wife and attested by one witness. 

MR. HOWZlv— I move that the report be printed, together 
with the accompanying ordinance. 

The motion was carried. 

THE PRESIDENT—The next order of business will be the 
special order which is the consideration of the report of the Com¬ 
mittee on Preamble and Declaration of Rights. The matter before 
the Convention is section two of the Article reported by the Com¬ 
mittee to which is pending an amendment by the gentleman from 
Montgomery, and an amendment to the amendment offered by 
the gentleman from Limestone. 

Is the Convention ready for the question on the amendment 
to the amendment? 

MR. LOMAX—I believe at the adjournment of the Conven¬ 
tion last evening the gentleman from Greene had the floor. If 
the gentleman from Greene will yield to me, I think perhaps we 
can settle this matter without further controversy. I ask the unani¬ 
mous consent of the Convention to make a statement, however, 
prior to stating what the action of the Committee will be upon 
this matter. I will say that the statement will probably cut off 
debate, and settle the matter in controversy between us, and I ask 
leave to make that statement. 

THE PRESIDENT—The Chairman of the Committee on 
Preamble and Declaration of Rights asks unanimous consent to 
make a statement explanatory of the position taken by the Com¬ 
mittee. 

To which there was no objection. 

MR. LOMAX—Now, Mr. President, on yesterday, I think it 
is due to myself and to the Convention, I should state that having 
fully satisfied myself from the decisions of the Supreme Court of 
Alabama, notably the case of Washington against the State, in 
the Seventy-fifth Alabama, that the words “political rights/’ in 
this section had no bearing upon the question of suffrage what¬ 
ever, 1 had not taken the trouble to investigate the quevStion of 
political rights in such a way as to be able, off hand, to give a defi¬ 
nition of thet words “political rights,” not believing that the ques¬ 
tion could possibly arise in connection with any matter of suffrage 
before this Convention. I am still, from a further investigation of 



1640 


O F FICIA I. P ROC F F D1N (S 


the authorities, convinced that if those words "political rights" 
might remain in this section, and that it would have no hearing 
upon any suffrage proposition which might he adopted hy us, and 
I am sustained in that position, not only hy the Supreme Court of 
Alabama, but in my judgment by the Supreme Court of the Cnited 
States, and by the meagre definitions which I find in the law hooks 
of the term "political rights:" hut the Committee is not disposed 
to have any great pride of opinion as to this particular matter. We 
do not desire to get up a heated discussion about the meaning of 
words in the declaration of rights. We believe that everything in 
that particular section of the hill of rights is covered already by 
the Fourteenth Amendment and we could not change or alter it 
if we undertook to do so. 


^ e are not informed of the reasons why the Convention of 
5 a( ?opted the bill of rights with this section in it without a 
dissenting vote, as the journal of that Convention show. But. 
entertaining the opinions which I have expressed, that the striking 
out of the words political rights, or the striking out of the words 
an} person who has legally declared his intention to become a 
citizen of the United States" are not material to he declared in the 
declaration of rights, the Committee arc willing and ask the unani- 

Twin s C t 0 a n te e M 0f p hiS -, C0nV< j! lt,0n to the amendments and 

I will state, Mr. President, that when this Convention has granted 

its consent to accept the amendments, 1 shall on mv own responsi¬ 
bility, move to strike out the entire section. ' 

MR BED DOW I would like to ask the Chairman of the 
Committee a question. What effect would the striking out of those 

T r t’ f pr ° p ° sed b >' ,he have on tho.e “ , ■ Tf 

tion on the amendS Iffee^ 

say he^is “itaglo ac/epij”thT,' lm ' ,erstoocl *he Chairman 
moss leave will be granted ■* m '"'lme„b. an,I I think tmani- 

of th“convm,w“ We ” iU aCCept bo ' b of ‘hen,, by the convent 

se JHK PRESIDENT Does the gentleman ask tmanimons con- 

MR. LOMAX—Yes, sir. 

To which objection was made. 



CONSTITUTIONAL CONVENTION, 1901 


1641 


MR. LOMAX —As the Convention refused to grant unanimous 
consent, I move that the section and the amendments be laid on 
the table. 

MR. PILLANS—Will the gentleman allow me to call his 
attention to one thing that may be material to be considered before 
that is done. Will he withdraw? 

MR. LOMAX—Yes. 

MR. PILLANS—It is simply this, the section as we find it in 
our last Code of this State, has appended to it a note, stating “the 
effect of this section is to place all persons natural and artificial 
on a basis of equality in the courts.” Citing the case of South and 
North Railroad against Morris, 65th, 75th, 85th, 87th and 106th 
Alabama, etc., and see also citations to another section : “there can 
be no discriminative advantage bestowed by law between the par¬ 
ties to the same suit,” citing other authorities. “The statute against 
miscegenation is not a denial of equal civil and political rights to 
the races.” Now if it appear from that, very likely that is a clause 
that has some efficacy and meaning, and has force in protecting 
investments and corporate rights and perhaps individual rights in 
this State, against hasty and ill advised legislation. 

MR. WALKER—Will the gentleman allow a suggestion? 
MR. PILLANS—Yes. 

MR. WALKER—Isn’t that purpose completely effected by 
the provision of the Fourteenth Amendment to the Constitution 
of the United States. 

MR. PILLANS—It is, possibly. I only wanted to say that I 
expect to vote against laying the section on the table for the reason 
that it can be amended and preserved. 

MR. LOWE (Jefferson)—I desire to state the grounds of my 
objection, and why I declined to agree to unanimous consent upon 
this question. It merely grows out my indisposition to mutilate 
our old constitution more than is necessary. I doubt if any gentle¬ 
man on the floor has suggested a single instance or particular, in 
which any harm has come from the declaration contained in the 
old constitution. To my mind I can find no good reason for 
changing that language, or modifying it in any respect. There¬ 
fore, acting upon the principle, and upon the belief, that unless a 
necessity exists for a change we should adopt not only the spirit, 
but the letter of the old Constitution, I hope that the amendment 
will be voted down, and that the report of the Committee will be 
adopted. 

MR. LOMAX—In reply to the suggestion of the gentleman 
from Mobile. I will state that an investigation which I made last 
night demonstrated the fact that this provision is not contained 



1642 


OFFICIAL PROCKF.DINY.S 


in any Constitutions at all, in the language in which it appears in 
our Constitution. It appears substantially in the- following Lull- 
stitutions: New York, Connecticut, Indiana, Minnesota. South 
Carolina and Virginia, and does not appear in the Constitution of 
any other State, except those named, and, as L >a\, it does not 
appear in this language in those Constitutions. I have no douht, 
however, that everything contained in that section is covered bv 
the Fourteenth Amendment, as I said before. and we could not 
possibly alter it if we undertook to do so. I think the section 
ought to stand as it is written, and as it was adopted unanimously 
by the convention of 1875. or else it ought to go out altogether, 
and therefore I renew niv motion to table both the amendments 
and the section. 

MR. PETTUS—I would like to ask the gentleman a question. 
If you strike out Section Two. will there appear any where in the 
Constitution of Alabama a section declaring who are citizens ot the 
State of Alabama? 

MR. LOMAX—There will not appear in the bill of rights any 
statement of that sort. I do not know what the subsequent com¬ 
mittees may do. It is not necessary in any event. I now renew 
my motion to table. 

Upon a vote being taken a division was called for, and hv a 
vote of 49 ayes to 42 noes the section and the amendments were 
laid upon the table. 

THE PRESIDENT—The Secretary will read the next section. 

The Clerk read Section Three as follows: 

Sec. 3.—That all political power is inherent in the people, and 
all free governments are founded on their authority, and instituted 
for their benefit; and that, therefore, they have'at all times an 
inalienable right to change their form of government in such man¬ 
ner as they may deem expedient. 

MR. LOMAX Mr. President, I will state that section is in 
the precise language of Section 3 of the Declaration of rights in 
the Constitution of 1875, and I move its adoption. 

Upon a vote being taken the section was adopted. 

Section Four read as follows; 

Sec. 4.—That no religion shall be established bv law; that no 
preference shall be given by law to any religious sect, society, 
denomination or mode of worship; that no one shall he compelled 
by law to attend any place of worship; nor pav anv tithes taxes 
or other rate for the building, or repairing of anv place of worship 
or for maintaining any minister or ministry ; that no religious test 
shall be required as a qualification to any office or public trust 



CONSTITUTIONAL CONVENTION, 1901 


1643 


under this State; and that the civil rights, privileges and capacities 
of any citizen shall not be in any manner affected by his religious 
principles. 

MR. LOMAX—I move the adoption of that section. 

Upon a vote being taken the section was adopted. 

Section Five was read as follows: 

Sec. 5.—No law shall ever be passed to curtail or restrain the 
liberty of speech or of the press; and, any person may speak, write 
and publish his sentiments on all subjects, being responsible for the 
abuse of that liberty. 

MR. LOMAX—I ask leave to make a verbal correction in that 
section, by inserting the word “that” in the beginning of the sec¬ 
tion, so as to make it read “that no law.” 

There being no objection, the amendment was allowed. 

MR. LOMAX—I will state that the committee has amended 
that section or added to the section in the Constitution of 1875, 
the first clause of the present section “that no law shall ever be 
passed to curtail or restrain the liberty of speech or of the press.” 
Those words have been added by the committee. The original 
section reads in the present Constitution. “Any person may speak, 
write or publish his sentiments on all subjects, being responsible 
for the abuse of that liberty.” I move the adoption of that sec¬ 
tion as read. 

MR. ASHCRAFT—I would like to ask the chairman of the 
committee- It seems in the original it was “any citizens” may 
speak. What was the design of the committee in changing the 
word “citizen” to the word “person”? 

MR. LOMAX — There was no special design at all, but I 
should think that the right to speak and publish his sentiments 
ought to be enjoyed by everybody, whether he is a citizen or not. 

MR. ASHCRAFT—I ask for information. There must have 
been some design in the original framers, for limiting it to the 
citizens as distinguished from a person. We might have an alien 
in an alien undertaking to stir up sedition and strife, and it 
might be possible in the interest of the country to prevent aliens 
from speaking and writing. 

MR. LOMAX—I will state to the gentleman from Lauder¬ 
dale in the event of such a thing as that taking place, as an alien 
may undertaking to stir up sedition, he would be chargeable with 
and liable to be convicted of treason. 



1644 


OFFICIAL PROCEF.DINGS 


MR. BOONE—Was not the purpose of the committee to 
allow the women of the State the right to express their views, 
also? 

MR. LOMAX—Women are citizens any how, but every per¬ 
son within the commonwealth ought to be permitted to write, 
speak and publish his sentiments whether he be a citizen of the 
commonwealth or not, and be responsible for the abuse of that 
liberty as every one else is. 

MR. CUNNINGHAM — What would be the status of an 
alien? Could he be indicted and tried for treason? 

MR. LOMAX—No, sir, but he could be tried for something 
else that would be equally as bad. 

Upon a vote being taken the section was adopted. 

Section Six was then read as follows: 

Sec. 6. — That the people shall be secure in their persons, 
houses, papers, and possessions from unreasonable seizure or 
searches, and that no warrant shall issue to search any place or to 
seize any person or thing without probable cause, support by 
oath or affirmation. 

MR. LOMAX—I move the adoption of that section. 

MR- DUKE—I would like to ask the chairman a question. 
What was the object of changing the word home to house? 

MR. LOMAX—To correct a misprint in that copy you have 
in your hand. The word in the Constitution was house, and in 
printing that particular copy it was printed home. 

Upon a vote being taken the section was adopted. 

Section Seven was read as follows: 

Sec. 7. That in all criminal prosecutions, the accused shall 
have a right to be heard by himself and counsel, or either; for 
either; to demand the nature and cause of the accusation; to have 
a copy thereof; to be confronted by the witnesses against him; 
to have compulsory process for obtaining witnesses in his favor; 
to testify in all cases, in his own behalf if he elects so to do, and 
in all prosecutions by indictment, a speedy, public trial, by an im¬ 
partial jury of the county or district in which the offense was 
committed, and that he shall not be compelled to give evidence 
against himself, nor be deprived of life, liberty or property, but 
by due process of law, but the General Assembly may, by a gen¬ 
eral law, provide a change of venue for the defendant in all prose¬ 
cutions by indictment, and that such change of venue on appli¬ 
cation of the defendant, may be heard and determined without 
the personal presence of the defendant so applying therefor. 



CONSTITUTIONAL CONVENTION, 1901 


1645 


The minority report thereon was then read as follows: 

The undersigned, member of the Committee on Preamble and 
Declaration of Rights, concurs in the majority of said report save 
as to portions of Section 7, and he offers as an amendment to 
portions of Section 7, the following: 

And in all prosecutions by indictment the place in the county 
or district in which the crime was committed shall be stated with 
reasonable certainty as to enable the defendant to know the par¬ 
ticular place where the criminal act is alleged to have been com¬ 
mitted. j. h. Barefield. 

MR. BAREFIELD—I ask unanimous consent to amend the 
minority report. 

The amendment was read as follows: 

Amend minority report, Section 7, by inserting after the word 
“indictment” the words “time and.” 

THE PRESIDENT — So as to read time and place. The 
question will be upon the adoption of the minority report. 

MR. HEFLIN (Chambers)—I move its adoption. 

MR. BAREFIELD—I do not care to take up much of the 
time of the Convention on a proposition that it seems to me ought 
to be in the organic law of this State. It has been argued by some, 
Mr. President, that the minority report is a question that can be 
handled by the Legislature- I admit that, gentlemen of the Con¬ 
vention, and will go further and say that the question of the in¬ 
dictment is a question that can be left to the Legislature of the 
State of Alabama. We have, Mr. President, a defendant brought 
before the bar of justice in the various courts of Alabama, and he 
comes in with an indictment against him that reads as follows: 
The Grand Jurors of said county charge that before the finding 
of this indictment, A. B. carried a pistol concealed about his per¬ 
son. We all known that the question of selling liquor and the 
question of carrying concealed weapons is one of the hardest of 
all offenses for a defendant to defend in a court of law. When 
he is charged with selling liquor or with carrying concealed 
weapons, he is not put on any notice whatever as to what he is 
expected to defend when he comes into court. He goes into court 
charged with violating the laws of Alabama, and he does not know 
the nature of the offense, he does not know the place where this 
alleged offense occurred. Now, Mt. President, in justice to a de¬ 
fendant, he ought, at least, to know what he is expected t# defend, 
so that he may be able, Mr. President and gentlemen of this Con¬ 
vention, to summon his witnesses and to prove, if possible, that he 
is not guilty of the alleged offense. 



1646 


OFFICIAL PROCEEDINGS 


Now, Mr. President, it has been argued by the gentlemen 
composing the committee on the Declaration of Rights that it 
opened wide the doors to perjury, but I say that if this Conven¬ 
tion inserts this as a guarantee to a defendant, you had better 
open the doors to perjury rather than to have one innocent man 
convicted under the laws of Alabama. It is a known fact, Mr. 
President and gentlemen of this Convention, that men who lack 
the backbone to confront a man that he does not like, or a man that 
has done him a wrong, and the natural result is that he concocts 
a plan, he gets his witnesses and goes into court, and perjures 
himself and thereby causes the downfall of possibly an innocent 
man, and yet, gentlemen of the Convention, the majority of the 
committee says that that man shall not be put on notice as to 
what he is expected to prove or to defend. Let us see the other 
side. The State of Alabama brings an ejectment suit against a 
man. The complaint is filed and served upon the defendant. He 
is put on notice as to what he is expected to defend against. Why 
should the State not be so generous as to criminals? I sav, Mr. 
President, that if this is inserted, that many a man who is inno¬ 
cent of any offense will have the right and the privilege of sum¬ 
moning witnesses that will prove to the courts that he is innocent. 


Now, let us take another proposition, gentlemen of the Con¬ 
vention, and I dare say there is not a practicing lawver in this 
Convention who has not gone up against the same proposition- 
A man is charged with an offense, and when he gets into court 
he has possibly one or two absent witnesses. He is forced to 
a trial by being put on a showing. He brakes his showing, and 
he submits it to the solicitor, who accepts it. In that showine 

1 t + S . tat ^ ment of one t ime and P' ace ’ the solicitor, 

g t emen of the Convention, will prove another time and another 
place What is the result? There is a man that stands before the 
°, f J ustl( T without a Single witness to speak in his behalf, 

h Jf i'n/th i 18 ffet t UP u n the stand to s P«k in his own be- 

nth f ; n? d tE h - , aw t l hath,s testimony shall be weighed in the 

light of the interest he has in the result of the trial. 

. ^ sa ^ f> en tlemen, that it is an injustcie to force a man to eo 

fend C ° Urt ’ and n0t 3 ° W h ‘ m t0 kn ° W What he is ex P ec ted to ck- 


MR. SMITH (Mobile)—Upon theory it looks as if there w»re 
merit in the minority report, but any lawyer who has had ex¬ 
perience ,n the criminal courts for any considerable length of time 
knows that to put that section in there will be a stumbling b ock 

'r 

™fcT‘ C , t ' C l'h Si r Ce I89 f’ bU ‘ Pri ° r that time 1 “aTi’n'ihrcrTmi 

nal court. I believe almost every day that it was open I was 
the representative of a number of defendants, but never prosecuted 



CONSTITUTIONAL CONVENTION, 1901 


1647 


a man in my life, and I unhesitatingly say that if that law had 
been in effect I should, regardless of every other question of evi¬ 
dence, have been able to have acquitted at least 50 per cent, of the 
men I defended, upon that and that alone. It matters not what 
question arises, there will be a divergency between witnesses as 
to minute particulars. There will be a divergency between the 
witnesses especially as to a question of time, and although the tes¬ 
timony may satisfy those that hear it that each witness is really 
speaking in regard to the same occasion, yet when you come to 
fasten their testimony upon the particular time, there will be such 
a divergency that the testimony will not be considered. Now, 
when the question is before the Grand Jury there are several wit¬ 
nesses, and those several witnesses testify substantially to the 
same transaction, but they do differ in the detail as to the par¬ 
ticular circumstances, or the particular place, or the particular 
time. Under this rule the Grand Jury must locate upon that hear¬ 
ing, the particular time. After the Grand Jury has heard the 
case, found the indictment, and the man is put upon trial, the 
several witnesses get together, under the rule or not, and discuss 
the matter, and the man upon whose testimony the particular 
time has been fixed is convinced by the other witnesses that he 
is in error as to that particular instance, or that particular minute, 
and upon the trial the case is thrown out. Now, in defending, 
while there have been a few cases of innocent men tried where it 
was impossible for me to locate the particular time and place of 
the charge, those instances were so very very few that I do not 
now recall a single one that occurred during my practice. Cer¬ 
tainly where that was the case, there was not sufficient evidence 
of the substantive facts to get a conviction. I certainly never 
represented a man that was convicted of a crime, the time and 
place and circumstances of which he did not know in advance. 
Once or twice, as I said before, I have defended men who did not 
know exactly what they were charged with, but the result always 
was that the witnesses did not know either and the man was 
readily acquitted, without more than the form of a trial. 

I believe therefore, that while the rule as here laid down is 
apparently reasonable in practice, it will tend to defeat justice and 
enable more men to be cleared upon technicalities than already 
avoid the law upon such grounds, and my experience is that there 
is now an abundance of those who are guilty, and know they are 
guilty, that avoid conviction upon technicalities, which serves na 
good purpose to the State? 

MR. WILSON (Washington)—The reason for alleging the 
time and place in any prosecution, criminal or civil, grew up cen¬ 
turies ago. Sprung up when the juries were selected from a par¬ 
ticular vicinity out of which the litigation came under the idea 
that the men from that community knew more about it than any¬ 
body else, and they were selected not to try the case on the evi- 



1648 


OFFICIAL PROCEEDINGS 


dence impartially, but to try it from their personal knowledge of 
the facts, hence the necessity for alleging the place. It was es¬ 
sential to allege the time in order to enable the sheriff to select 
jurors, who were in the community at the time that the litigation 
sprung up. Mr. President, that reason has ceased to be for over 
300 years. In addition to this, Mr. President, coming down to the 
present day, why should a defendant be served with a notice of 
the exact time and place of the commission of the alleged offense.'' 
It is said in indictments for carrying concealed weapons that the 
State may simply allege one carrying and may prove another, 
but as said by the gentleman from Mobile, a case of that kind will 
not arise in one case out of a thousand. Mr. President, the so¬ 
licitor is as often put on a showing as the defendant, and when 
once the solicitor is placed on a showing, that showing is as bind¬ 
ing on the State's witnesses as it is on that of the defendant. To 
adopt this provision means in substance and of necessity, carries 
with it the requirement that the State shall furnish the defendant 
an abstract of the evidence it proposes to use upon the trial. It 
opens the gates of fraud, and makes it almost impossible to ever 
get a conviction, it is a slap in the face of fair trial, it clogs justice, 
it retards law and order, and, Mr. President, the provision carries 
on its face a license to crime and a premium on perjury. Where 
is the defendant, if you will tell him the identical time and place 
where he engaged in a game of cards—I will ask the gentleman 
how many convictions there will be for card playing in this State. 
I will ask the gentleman how many of these gambling dens in 
Montgomery or any other place could be reached if you come up 
and cite them the time and place and the very night. How many 
of them cannot get up and prove that it was some other night, 
and there goes your case. Mr. President, I have seen a good many 
glass bottles, whiskey bottles and such truck as that turn men 
loose, that everybody knew were guilty of carrying concealed 
weapons. I have had men walk up to me and tell me right in the 
face of court that the defendant is guilty, but you cannot prove 
it, and if you do I am prepared to prove' that he was somewhere 
else, and I have seen it several times wind up by the threat being 
verified. It is too often the case as the matter now stands, and if 
you engraft this provision in the Constitution there won't be one 
conviction out of ten indictments. 

MR. BAREFIELD I would like to ask the gentleman a 
question. 

THE PRESIDENT—Will the gentleman consent to be in¬ 
terrupted ? 

MR. WILSON—Certainly. 

MR. BAREFIELD—I would ask the gentleman if I withdraw 
the word “time" will you support the word “place"? 



CONSTITUTIONAL CONVENTION, 1901 


1649 


MR. WILSON—No sir; one is bad as the other, an alibi is as 
easily proved against the place as against the time. Mr. President, 
I hope that this Convention will not place any such license on 
crime in violations of law, as proposed by this minority report. 

MR. BAREFIELD—I ask unanimous consent to withdraw 
the amendment as to time. 

THE PRESIDENT—The gentleman desires to withdraw the 
amendment; is there objection? 

MR. HOWZE—Yes; I object. 

MR. WILLIAMS (Marengo)—1 trust my friend will leave 
the word “time” in there for a short while, any how, to get the 
sense of the Convention, there may be a good many of us who 
like the word “time” in there, and let us get the sense of the Con- 
vention before we decide if we cannot get a whole loaf, let’s get 
a part of it. 

I dislike to differ from my distinguished friend, the solicitor 
from the county of Washington, and I would say in differing from 
him that I look at this matter entirely from the opposite side. 
My friend has argued here as if he were in the trial of a criminal 
case, and as if there were only one side to this question. I will 
admit that there are possibly too many safeguards thrown around 
one charged with the commission of a criminal act, but I submit 
that the English-speaking people desire safeguards thrown around 
those who are charged with the commission of criminal acts, and 
if you gentlemen talk about opening the doors to bribery and per¬ 
jury it is better to have them thrown wide open than that the doors 
of the penitentiary be closed upon too many innocent men as in 
my opinion they have been in the past. Now the argument of 
those who oppose this amendment is upon the grounds that the 
solicitor or Grand Jury practically the solicitor, would have a hard 
time in determining the time and place at which the offense was 
committed. I submit to the Convention that when the matter 
is before the Grand Jury that the Grand Jury has before them the 
State's witnesses and the State's witnesses are the ones who saw 
the thing done. Now what is the most natural result? The ques¬ 
tion that follows? When did you see it done, where did you see 
it done? I submit to the Convention that on the trial of every 
criminal case that you have heard, the first question asked by the 
Solicitor is: Where was this offense committed? Some of them 
say in the county of Montgomery, why not have it say in the city 
of Montgomery, if it happened at Jack's Mill, why not say at Jack’s 
Mill? At what time? Why, last week. My understanding of the 
amendment is that the time must be charged with reasonable cer¬ 
tainty. Is there anything unreasonable about saying on or about 
the 15th of June, near Jack's Mill over here in Lowndes county, 
near Hayneville? There is a murder down here near the Federal 



1650 


OFFICIAL PROCKEDINC'.S 


building. Say near the Federal building, or at the intersection of 
two streets, or at King’s Cross Roads, and describe it with some 
degree of accuracy. As it is now, you have the whole count\ ot 
Montgomery, the whole county of Walker, or of Jefferson, and 
you have twelve months, and as to a felony, you have three wars 
in which to say when the felony happened, and in civil cases 
the place and time to be fixed. The best illustration of the case 
are numerous railroad They say you must fix the time 
and place with reasonable certainty, where the particular injurv 
complained of happened. Let us have it so in the criminal courts. 
The worst illustration that my friend could have presented is this 
question of carrying a pistol, but let us take up the question ot 
carrying concealed weapons. 

MR. REESE—Did you ever know of a case of indictment 
for murder where any injustice was done by failure to allege the 
place where the man was murdered? 

MR. WILLIAMS—Oh, no; I did not mean to say that 1 can 
recall a particular case. Not in a murder case, but certainly the 
State’s witnesses know the time and place and why not give the 
defendant notice of the time and place charged at the time the in¬ 
dictment is brought. Gentlemen on the opposite side will say 
when witnesses come into court, where did it happen? Down at 
the cross roads. Won’t it fix the place? And when they say, 
when did it happen? On the 20th of June. That fixes the time, 
it is true. The defendant will have to send out and get his wit¬ 
nesses, when possible he came into court prepared for a different 
defense at a different time. They might say if a fellow is so bad. 
going around committing offenses at different times, he ought to 
be convicted, but that is not the policy of our law, prosecute him 
for the one offense or the other, but put him on notice of the time 
and place. 

MR. WILSON (Washington)—Is it not the custom to prove 
the time and place more definitely than to say a particular county 
and within one year before the finding of the indictment? 

MR. WILLIAMS—It is ordinarily done, and that is what I 
condemn. In the trial of a case where the time and place is 
brought to the defendant, he has not time to go out and get wit¬ 
nesses. Take the gambling cases in Montgomery mentioned bv 
the gentleman from Washington. If anybody sees gambling going 
on down town, he knows between what two streets, on Commerce- 
or Dexter, or which side of Dexter he saw it. He certainly ought 
to know with that much particularity and whether last week or 
last month, and not place the defendant within a limit of twelve 
months, and give him the whole limit of Montgomery County. I 
am in favor of having the time and place, and if we"cannot have- 
both, let us have the place by striking out the time. 




CONSTITUTIONAL CONVENTION, 1901 


1651 


MR. DUKE—For the life of me, I cannot see any good reason 
why this amendment should not be adopted- I cannot see, Mr. 
President, why it is that a man on trial for a criminal offense 
should not have the same right and have the same information 
given him in the indictment that he would be entitled to if he was 
defending an action on a contract or any other kind of civil action. 
A man who is on trial in which his life or his liberty may be taken 
from him, tell me, Mr. President, that he should not have the right 
to know the time and the place at which he is charged with the 
commission of an offense? Some of the gentlemen, and I was 
surprised at my distinguished friend from Mobile, say it will prove 
a stumbling block in the way of the administration of the law, if 
you will let the defendant know the time and the place of the of¬ 
fense that he is charged with committing. In other words, Mr. 
President, if you will let the defendant know what you are prose¬ 
cuting him about, you cannot convict him, because he can get up 
his evidence. Has it come to this in this country, that lawyers 
will argue that we have to slip up on these defendants in order to 
convict them ? How is he going to know r except from this indict¬ 
ment? You have the indictment. The grand jury of said county 
charged that before the finding of this indictment, that John Jones 
sold spirituous, vinous or malt liquors without a license and con¬ 
trary to law. That is a good indictment under the present law. 
He goes to his attorney and employs him. He tells his attorney, 
I never sold a drop of liquor contrary to law in my life. His at¬ 
torney says, well, where is your evidence? He says, 'Well, I don t 
know—I don’t know the time that he alleges; I don’t know the 
place; I don’t know anybody that can swear that. His attorney 
says. Yes, but somebody has sworn it; somebody has gone before 
the grand jury and testified that you are guilty of this offense. 
Then what is the man going to do? He is innocent and he goes 
on trial. The indictment is read and the witness is put upon the 
stand and testifies that at a certain time and certain place he did 
sell spirituous, vinous or malt liquors without a license. Then 
what is he to do? 

MR. PROCTOR—I would like to ask the gentleman a ques¬ 
tion. 

THE PRESIDENT—Will the gentleman consent to be in¬ 
terrupted for the purpose of being asked a question? 

MR. DUKE—Certainly. 

MR. PROCTOR—I would like to ask the gentleman how 
he is going to manage—to allege the time and place in crimes 
which are continuous in their nature—he readily understands 
that. 



1652 


OFFICIAL PROCEEDINGS 


MR. DUKE—I don’t think there will be any difficulty in that 
at all, I do not see why he cannot allege that it was continuing in 
a certain place. 

MR. WILLIAMS (Marengo)—I wish to ask Air, Proctor a 
question. 

THE PRESIDENT—The gentleman from Chambers has the 
floor. 

MR. WILLIAMS—The gentleman from Chambers will vield. 

MR. DUKE—Certainly. 

MR. WILLIAMS—I would like to know what offenses you 
call the “continuing” offenses? 

THE PRESIDENT—It seems to the Chair that colloquy is 
out of order, he may be permitted to ask the gentleman from 
Chambers a question. 

MR. W ILLIAMS—I beg to ask the gentleman from Cham¬ 
bers what the gentleman from Jackson meant bv the word ’'con¬ 
tinuous” offense. 

MR. DUKE—I am unable to answer the question, but in an¬ 
swer to the gentleman from Jackson, I desire to say if it is a con¬ 
tinuous offense there is no reason why he could not sav how long 
it continued if it was continuous at a certain place, there is no 
reason why he could not put that in the indictment. Now. I am 
not surprised at my friend in opposing this. You will find that 
most of the solicitors and I believe my friend who asked the 
question happens to be a solicitor—most solicitors do not wish to 
have their toes tread upon, and they like to convict. 

MR. O’NEAL (Lauderdale)—And we like to acquit. 

MR. DUKE—Yes, sir. 

MR. PROCTOR-How many gentlemen of this Convention, 
except Mr. Smith, who have been on the floor defending the 
amendment, who are not defending attorneys? 

MR. DUKE—I will answer the question of the gentleman I 
do not know in what capacity the different lawyers in the Con¬ 
vention practice. 

ask?^^ WILSON (Washington)—Are you an attorney, may I 

MR. DUKE—Well, yes sir. 

MR. WILSON—Are you a prosecuting attorney? 



CONSTITUTIONAL CONVENTION, 1901 1053 

MR. DUKE—I do both, it depends on the character of the 
pocketbooks of my clients. 

MR, WILSON—Are you a solicitor? 

MR. DUKE—No, sir. 

MR. WILSON—Do you defend more than you prosecute? 

MR. DUKE—Yes, sir; I do. 

MR. WILSON—And so do the rest of the gentlemen I take 
for granted. 

MR. DUKE—I have frequently prosecuted and I have been 
a solicitor. And right here, I was a special solicitor a good 
many years ago. when I could afford to quit my lucrative prac¬ 
tice for such a position. (Laughter.) I had a case, prosecuting 
a man in an adjoining county, and the case was one against a man 
for carrying a concealed pistol. After investigating that matter 
the attorney came to me and he said my client says that he don’t 
know anything about this, he never carried a pistol in his life, and 
he don’t know anything about it, and the prosecutor won’t tell 
me anything about it. Contrary to the usual custom of solicitors, 
I agreed with him that he might have a continuance in order that 
he might get up his evidence. I have been in the same position 
myself in defending cases, and I have never yet found one of the 
regular solicitors that was so accommodating as I was on that oc¬ 
casion. Now what is the harm, what is the harm, gentlemen, 
in having the indictment state the time and place? Gentlemen, 
suppose an indictment is brought against my friend Proctor for 
carrying a concealed pistol, of course he never carries one—he 
takes the indictment and looks at it, he says, well that offense must 
have been committed in Montgomery County, I have been living 
here for several months, twelve months. I never carried a pistol, 
but what am I to do about the proof? Somebody is going to get 
upon the stand and swear that I did it, and perhaps two or three 
swear that I did it. If I knew the time and place, I could go to 
the witnesses that were there and perhaps prove my innocence, 
but instead of that I cannot do it because I do not know the time 
and place. 

MR. PROCTOR — If a witness would perjure himself by 
swearing that I carried a concealed pistol, wouldn’t he likewise 
perjure himself by alleging the time and place? 

MR. DUKE—Yes, sir, and that is the point, if he perjure 
himself in alleging the time and place, I would look at the indict¬ 
ment and seeing the time and place I would go to the time and 
place and get my witnesses, and I would show that the gentle¬ 
man’s prosecution was founded upon perjury. That is just the 
point. 



1654 


OFFICIAL PROCEEDINGS 


THE PRESIDENT—The time of the gentleman from Cham¬ 
bers has expired. 

MR. O'NEAL (Lauderdale) — I move that the time of the 
gentleman from Chambers be extended. 

MR. DUKE—I am much obliged to the gentleman, but I will 
not take up any further time of the Convention. 

MR. PROCTOR—I believe that the question has been suf¬ 
ficiently discussed, and I therefore move the previous question. 

MR. WILSON (Washington)—The Chairman of the com¬ 
mittee has not yet been heard- 

MR. REESE—I move to lay the amendment upon the table. 

MR. ESPY—I rise to a point of order. The previous question 
has been ordered. 

THE PRESIDENT—The previous question has been moved 
but not ordered. 

A division was called for and by a vote of 56 ayes and 36 noes 
the amendment was laid upon the table. 

MR. REESE—I desire to offer an amendment. 

The Secretary read the amendment as follows: Amend Sec¬ 
tion 7 by inserting after the word “committed" in the 6th line the 
following: But in prosecutions for rape, adultery, fornication, 
sodomy or the crime against nature, the court in its discretion may 
exclude from the court room all persons except such as are neces¬ 
sary in the conduct of the trial/’ 

MR. REESE—The amendment does not admit of much dis¬ 
cussion. 

MR. BAREFIELD—I move to lay the amendment on the 
table. 

THE PRESIDENT — The gentleman from Dallas has the 
floor. 

MR. REESE — The amendment is not one that admits of 
much discussion, but I must say that it is one that recommends 
itself to the common sense and delicacy of every delegate upon 
the floor. It is a provision that occurs in a great many Consti¬ 
tutions— it occurs in the recent Constitutions that have been 
adopted, and the phraseology is copied bodily from the Constitu¬ 
tion of Mississippi. Mr. President, the excuse that is made for 
mob law and lynch law in this country is the difficulty and em¬ 
barrassment of attending the trial in this kind of cases. The prose¬ 
cutrix—and it is a terrible ordeal to put one through—to compel 
the prosecutrix in this sort of a case to go into a court house and 



CONSTITI TIOKAI. CONVENTION, 1901 


1655 


face a large and interested audience of idlers and people prompt¬ 
ed there hv curiosity to tell a tale that is more painful than any¬ 
thing that could he imagined. Mr- President, I think the amend¬ 
ment is a most reasonable one and a most proper one for the pro¬ 
tection of the prosecutrix, and for the protection of the young hoys 
and idlers that attend this character of cases, out of idle curiosity. 


MR. RARKKIKIJ)—1 would like to ask the gentleman if the 
Legislature cannot provide for that. 

MR. KKKSK—No, sir, not with this provision in the Consti¬ 
tution. 


The provision of Section 7 here, is that trials must be public, 
and unless this amendment to the provision is put in here all trials 
must he public. It has been suggested to by some gentlemen on 
the floor that in some parts of the State Judges have adopted the 
suggestion made in this provision. If it has been done, it was 
contrary to the Constitution of Alabama. This same idea is em¬ 
bodied in an ordinance that has been introduced here and sent 
to the Judiciary Committee, but in examining the Constitution 
of other States, I find that it appears as a proviso in the preamble 
and bill of rights. 


MR. ESPY—I move to table the amendment offered by the 
gentleman from Dallas. 

A vote being taken the amendment was tabled by a vote of 
57 aves to 34 noes on division. 


MR. LOMAX—I desire to state to the Convention that in 
the section as reported by the committee two changes have been 
made. One is by inserting in the 4th line the words: “to testify 
in all cases in his own behalf if he elects so to do and by adding 
at the end of the section: “but the General Assembly may bv 
general law provide for a change of venue for the defendant in all 
prosecutions bv indictments, and that such change of venue may 
be heard and determined without the personal presence of the de¬ 
fendant so applying. The first change merely puts into the Con¬ 
stitution what is now the established law. the right of the defend¬ 
ant to test if v in his own behalf: and the second is merely intended 
to permit changes of venue to be granted in those cases in which, 
owing to great public excitement in reference to the crime com¬ 
mitted. the person charged with the crime may be in danger of 
lynch law if carried to the scene of the crime shortly after its 
commission. This permits courts to hear and determine applica¬ 
tions of that sort without the personal attendance of the defend¬ 
ant I move the adoption of the section as reported by the com¬ 
mittee, and on that I call for the previous question, unless some 
gentleman desires to speak. I don’t care to shut off debate at 

all. 



1656 


OFFICIAL PROCEEDINGS 


MR. WALKER (Madison)—I wish to offer an amendment. 

The clerk read the amendment as follows: “Amend by strik¬ 
ing out all of Section 7 after the words ‘Due process of law’ on 
line 8.” 

MR. WALKER—The words proposed to be stricken out by 
this amendment allow an application by an attorney for a change 
of venue without the presence of the defendant. It occurs to me 
that that is a very considerable innovation upon the established 
rules of law, and is a dangerous one. The result of it would be 
that a defendant, especially if he had obtained bail before the 
change of venue was made and gone to Texas, could remain in 
Texas until it was determined that the change of venue be al¬ 
lowed, and might elect to remain in Texas, if it were refused. It 
has been an established rule in the administration of criminal law 
as far back as we have any knowdedge, that the personal presence 
of the defendant in criminal cases shall always be required, and 
the purpose of that requirement is that the defendant may be in 
the hands of the court, so that the visitation of the law upon him 
shall not be escaped. A provision of this kind would defeat that 
purpose of the law, I realize the danger that was in the minds of 
the members of this committee in putting this provision in here, 
but it is a recognition of the pow r erlessness of the law as now ad¬ 
ministered. I do not think that recognition itself should go into 
the Constitution. The thing to be done, is to provide such safe¬ 
guards that a recognition of the powerlessness of the law shall 
not be necessary to provide for the safety of the defendants to 
make an application of this kind under the conditions referred to 
by the chairman of the committee. Why, gentlemen, it is an es¬ 
tablished rule of law that a defendant cannot be heard in a crim¬ 
inal case by any court unless he is practically within the custody 
of the court, and if he is convicted and takes an appeal, and pend- 
ing that appeal gives a bond, why the appeal falls to the ground if 
he forfeits his bond and gets out of the State. Courts heretofore 
have always refused to hear anybody addressing them from across 
the border. That is a good old rule in the common law, and I do 
not think that we have reached the point that it should be aban¬ 
doned. It is a recognition that the powers of the law have been 
faulty, that we cannot protect persons in the custody of the law. 
That is the only excuse that can be given for this innovation. I 
submit that it is a dangerous innovation, and that the Convention 
should pause before it adopts it. 

l^IR* FITTS The amendment offered by the distinguished 
gentleman from Madison seeks to strike out all of the last por¬ 
tion of Section 7, seeks to strike out these words, “But the Gen¬ 
eral Assembly may, by general law, provide for a change of venue 
for the defendant in all prosecutions by indictment, and that such 
change of venue on application of the defendant, may be heard 



CONSTITUTIONAL CONVENTION, 1901 


1657 


and determined without the personal presence of the defendant 
so applying therefor.” Mr. President, the committee gave very 
serious and careful consideration to this addition. It is an inno¬ 
vation, it is an addition to the bill of rights of 1875, and nothing 
was put into the bill of rights by the Committee, except after the 
most serious consideration, but it was thought to be a step in the 
right direction. It is not open to the criticism offered by the gen¬ 
tleman, and if he had maturely considered, I do not believe that 
he would have made the criticism quite so broad. It does not pro¬ 
vide for the court’s hearing anything from any one accused who 
is across the border, nor does it provide for hearing anything 
from an accused who is not in custody. It does not seek to pro¬ 
vide that an alleged criminal can secure a change of venue while 
a fugitive from justice or while not in custody, but it seeks to 
provide a wholesome safeguard against what we know from ex¬ 
perience is the time of action when the mob forms and when the 
heat is up, and when if there is going to be a lynching, it is most 
likely to occur. Lynchings are most likely to occur at the first ap¬ 
pearance of the freshly arrested criminal when he is being car¬ 
ried to the court house for the first time to have the first orders 
made in his case. It does not mean that these orders could or 
should be made while he is a fugitive or while he is not yet in cus¬ 
tody, but it does seek to provide that as that is a mere order in 
which he has no reason to be present to testify at which there is 
no reason or necessity for his presence that the application can 
be presented in open court without bringing him out of jail and 
incurring the chance of his being seized and taken from the of¬ 
ficers of the law, and without incurring the necessary expense to 
send a military company there to guard him on his first appear¬ 
ance in the court house, while this order is being made. 

MR. WEATHERLY (Jefferson)—Will the gentleman per¬ 
mit a suggestion. 

THE PRESIDENT — Will the gentleman permit an inter¬ 
ruption ? 

MR. FITTS—Certainly. 

MR. WEATHERLY — Would there be any objection to 
amending the Section something like this: “Provided, such ap¬ 
plication shall not be heard or determined where the defendant in 
whose behalf the application is made is a fugitive, or is not in 
custody of the law. 

MR. FITTS—I would have no objection as a member of the 
Committee, but it is not necessary. It simply provides when one 
of those crimes have been committed which excites peoples, which 
disturbs the quiet of the community, which stirs them up that you 
need not carry that man in person to the court house, but that he 
can make his application for a change of venue through his au- 



1658 


OFFICIAL PROCEEDINGS 


thorized attorneys and have it heard and determined by the court 
without his personal attendance in the court house. This is a 
common sense proposition. What is our experience and observa¬ 
tion in this State, in this Southland? When is it, and what time 
is it, in the progress of criminal agitation that men are seized and 
taken out of the hands of the officers of the law? The time is 
always immediately after he is first arrested, either while the 
sheriff is getting his prisoner to the jail, and if not at that time 
almost always at the time when carried out of the jail to petition 
for some such order as this. 

MR. WALKER—Will you permit me to make a suggestion? 

MR. FITTS—Certainly, sir. 

MR. WALKER—Wouldn’t it be entirely within the power of 
a defendant when he has given bond to make this application 
from New York or anywhere else? 

MR. FITTS—-Well, if he had obtained bond, then there would 
certainly be no objection to his making it from New York or any¬ 
where else, because it is the bond that is looked to to have him 
returned to the court house for trial. 

MR. COLEMAN (Greene)—May I ask a question. 

MR. FITTS—Certainly, Judge. 

MiR- COLEMAN I propose to offer the following amend¬ 
ment. 

The Secretary read the amendment as follows: Amend Sec¬ 
tion 7 by adding thereto, the following words: Provided, that at 
the time of the application for change of venue the defendant is im¬ 
prisoned in jail or some legal place of confinement.” 

MR. FITTS As a member of the Committee, I would have 
no earthly objection to that, though I think it is sufficiently cov¬ 
ered as it is. 

MR. LOMAX—If the gentleman from Tuscaloosa will per¬ 
mit me, while I do not see any necessity in the world for those 
words, on behalf of the Committee, I am willing to accept them I 
believe, following the case of Warwick vs. The State, any court 
would refuse to hear an application from a defendant who is a 
fugitive. The Supreme Court did in that case; but I am perfect¬ 
ly willing to accept that. 

THE PRESIDENT—The Chairman of the Committee asks 
unanimous consent to add the amendment offered by the rrentle- 
man from Greene. ' * 

MR. WALKER—I withdraw my amendment. 



CONSTJTl'TlONAL CONVENTION. 1901 )o59 

I Hh PRESIDENT — The gentleman from Madison asks 
unanimous consent to withdraw the amendment offered by him. 
The Chair hears no objection to the withdrawal by the gentleman 
from Madison of the amendment proposed by him. and the or¬ 
dinance by the Committee, the amendment proposed by the gen¬ 
tleman from Greene, and it is so ordered. 

MR. WADDELL—I have an amendment. 

1 he Clerk read the amendment as follows: Amend Section 
7 by adding on the fifth line after the word “do,” the following 
words, “And the wife or the husband may he allowed to testify 
for or against each other where the charge is infanticide. M 

MR. MTTS—I make the point of order, that that amendment 
is not germane to the pending amendment which has been ac¬ 
cepted by the committee and has not yet been put to the house, 
and covers an entirely different subject. 

THE PRESIDENT-—It has been absorbed into the section by 
unanimous consent of the Convention. I overrule the point of 
order. The gentleman from Russell has the floor. 

MR. WADDELL—There were two cases in Russell County 
that have gone unwhipped of justice, because the wife could not 
testify against the husband. In one case, where the mother stood 
and saw her child’s brains beaten out before her eyes, and the 
law would not allow her to give evidence in the case. The man 
was convicted on circumstantial evidence and sent to the peniten¬ 
tiary for ten years, hut he ought to have been hanged. 

MR. FOSTER—May I ask the gentleman a question? 

MR. WADDELL—Yes, sir. 

MR. FOSTER—Isn’t it within the legislative power to enact 
laws to that effect? 

MR. WADDELL—1 think not. 

MR. LOMAX—Mr. President, I think it is clearly within the 
domain of legislation rather than Constitutional enactment, con¬ 
sequently I move to lay the amendment of the gentleman from 
Russell upon the table. 

A vote being taken viva voce, the amendment was tabled. 

MR. LOMAX—I move the adoption of the section, as amend¬ 
ed, and on that I call for the previous question. 

The previous question was ordered by a vote of the Conven¬ 
tion and the question then recurred on the adoption of the sec¬ 
tion as amended, and the section was adopted. 



1660 


OFFICIAL PROCEEDINGS 


The clerk here read Section 8: “That no person shall be ac¬ 
cused or arrested, or detained, excepting cases ascertained by law, 
and according to the form which the same has prescribed: and 
no persons shall be punished, but by virtue of a law established 
and promulgated prior to the offense and legally applied." 

MR. LOMAX—I move the adoption of Section 8. as read. 

A vote being taken, the section was adopted. 

The clerk read Section 9 as follows: 

Nine—That no person shall, for any indictable offense, be 
proceeded against criminally, by information, except in cases aris¬ 
ing in the military and volunteer forces when in actual service or 
by leave of the court, for misfeasance, misdemeanor, extortion and 
oppression in office otherwise than is provided in this Constitu¬ 
tion; provided, that in cases of misdemeanor the General Assembly 
may, by law, dispense with a grand jury, and authorize such prose¬ 
cutions and proceedings before Justices of the Peace or such 
other inferior courts as may be by law established. 

MR. OATES—I desire to offer an amendment to that section. 

MR. LOMAX—Will the gentleman permit me to state to the 
Convention the changes in the section before the amendment is 
read? 

MR. OATES—Certainly. 

MR. LOMAX—The only change in this section consists in 
striking out the named misdemeanors and inserting the word 
“misdemeanors,” without naming those particular offenses. 

PRESIDENT PRO TEM. (Mr. Willett)—Does the gentle¬ 
man from Montgomery insist on his amendment? 

MR. OATES—I do. 

The clerk read the amendment as follows: “Amend Section 
9 in line 2, after the word “information,” insert the following, “ex¬ 
cept when the felony has been committed and the grand jury at 
its first term thereafter fails to find a bill of indictment, the court 
may order such a prosecution.” 

MR. OATES—I will briefly explain that amendment. After 
the insertion of these words, the gentlemen will see in the second 
line that no person shall, for any indictible offense, be proceeded 
against criminally by information; then follows, except certain 
cases. This amendment is except when a felony has been com¬ 
mitted, and the grand jury fail to find an indictment at the first 
term thereafter. Then it will read “and except in cases arising in 
the military and volunteer forces,” etc. The reason why I offer 
this amendment, gentlemen of the Convention, is that the grand 



CONSTITUTIONAL CONVENTION, 1901 1661 

ou^ConTtftu^nn t0 ( bC th u f ?. untain of administrative justice, and 

charges of felon' S fr0m the flrSt havin K required that felonies or 

an indictment U ? USt £ a f s t0 the grand Jury and by that body 
an indictment be returned before one could be put upon his trial 

protect menarainVr^v’ WaS conceived and intended to 

what is the rSf 1 flC . t,t ! ou ? cl J a rges of such grave offenses. But 
localities than ^ °” toda y ? It is a notorious fact that in more 
practiced unon ^hi 'k Stat j ° f Alabama bribery is at times 

fshment rw h b ° dy in °[ der that rascals ma y esca P e pun¬ 
ishment. Cases have come within my knowledge in more counties 

than one where under our law, the grand jury, you know may 

cur C aUd P fi-nd 1* Kn*™ and k rec > uires twelve of them to con- 

... ® d ! nd a bdb and where a murder has been committed and 

used it hns rg i ed tberew | th has friends and means which can be 
f .° Und that they have succeeded in obtaining a 
l p th> , and inaction, or rather a negative action upon the part 
of enough of the grand jury to reduce the number who are dis¬ 
posed to find a true bill, and none can be found, and then the 
greatest of crimes goes unwhipped of justice. Now how are you 
gomg to remedy it? It is a great evil, and if any gentleman in 
this Convention will show me a better way to remedy it I will 
cheerfully support it. Why, gentlemen, it has been the custom 
or rather it has grown into a practice, that wherever a man who 
has any friends or any money, has murdered nobody but a negro 
there is scarcely any danger of his being indicted. Step by step 
crime always progresses until we see instances now where a white 
man has murdered a white man and in more cases than one where 
the grand jury refused to find a bill. 

MR. BAREFIELD I would like to ask a question. 

THE PRESIDENT PRO TEM.—Will the gentleman consent 
to be interrupted? 

MR. OATES—Certainlv. 


MR. BAREFIELD—I would like to ask the gentleman if a 
Judge is any better morally than the citizens that compose the 
juries of the county, and if a Judge could not be bribed about as 
easy as twelve men, or as eighteen men who are supposed at least 
to be good citizens of the county? 

MR. OATES—If he can, Mr. President, he ought to be im¬ 
peached, and if not the good citizens in the community ought to 
rise and kick him out of there. If there is the kind of the Judges 
you have, farewell to the administration of justice and triumph 
of law. Now, gentlemen, I have not the time to give you my ob¬ 
servations in extense upon this subject. It is not one that is new 
to me. I have been observing it for some time, and it is a grow¬ 
ing evil. How can you remedy it, that is the question. How can 
you? Now I could mention instances. I could give you names 



1662 


OFFICIAL PROCEEDINGS 


and state to you cases where this has occurred of a horrifying 
character, but that I presume is not necessary to impress you with 
the importance of it. Where I have heard the evidence adduced 
in one or two cases myself, a case of willful murder, murder in 
the first degree, and grand jury after grand jury sat there and al¬ 
though the evidence was presented to them and not questioned no 
bill was ever returned. When did any of you ever hear, with 
one single exception, of anybody in Alabama being indicted for 
lynching and taking the lives of people? The only instance of 
which I am acquainted occurred in Washington county, where 
they found the lynchers and prosecuted them, and sent some of 
them to the penitentiary. Not another instance, not another one. 
And it is not a single offense, the outrage committed by a negro 
upon our white women, assaults upon them is something most 
difficult to suppress, men will—relatives and neighbors feeling in¬ 
dignant get hold of such a wretch soon after it occurs, they are 
very apt to lynch him. But it is not confined to that at all. 

In many, many cases of charges of murder and some of much 
less gravity a party is taken out and lynched. Gentlemen, it tends 
to degrade our community. It renders life safe to no one and it 
ought to be broken up. 

I will relate one instance which occurred within my own 
knowledge where some white men went in pursuit of a negro man 
who had offended them, not by any crime, but they went into a 
town or village and went into a barroom, which was kept by an 
old negro, a man of such character that the authorities allowed 
him to open a bar and dispose of liquor. In talking about the mat¬ 
ter, the old negro ventured to remark that the negro they were 
pursuing had not committed an offense sufficient to warrant them 
in killing him and that he hoped they would not do it. My infor¬ 
mation is that soon after taking a drink or two and feeling lively, 
they took that old negro out in front of his bar and shot the life 
out of him. That is but one case. There are numerous occur¬ 
rences and some worse than that. 

The time of the gentleman here expired, and on motion of 
the delegate from Cleburne (Mr. Howell) his time was extended 
ten minutes. 

MR. OATES—I thank the Convention and my friend, the 
delegate from Cleburne, and I shall finish my statement as soon 
as I can. This is an intelligent body and I wish merely to state 
what is involved in the amendment. 

Now this, unlike other crimes, does not stalk forth from one 
to another and don’t extend to taking the lives of white people. 
Suppose that nobody is killed by white men but negroes, and 
they manage in many cases not to be indicted. Now go with me 
in a plain practical statement of facts. Those people are an in- 



1663 


CONSTITUTIONAL CONVENTION, 1901 

^nTaceTn tb b ? lieve f the most of them are entitled to 
| i f +i C adm,mstra tion of the State affairs alone: with and 

su rare ri ) !', me , n k We arc tatin S S "P S to elevate the 

t0 CUt out tbc masses of these people, not all because 

mnit of a h ^od Pe °h le ^ qUaIified themselves by the establish¬ 
ment of a f?ood character and intelligence enough so as to give 

knowled^to C ^ t e VT*'"? 48 citizens and &ve them sufficient 
ow ledge to cast a ballot, but we know they are dependent upon 

the white people, that we are practically their guardian” There 

is not a negro in office in the State of Alabama, except a few ap- 

poin ed by the President and very few of them, and when thly do 

not take any part in making or administering the laws, is it^not 

oVoMh ^ d “ ty T °/ ?, he White to K»ve them the full protec- 
and 6 f ,!\ I f , J y T OU : R ent, emen, the responsibility is on us 
Cod mH ftarfu ° nC r * ,s a weighty one and as sure as a just 
( ;° d bold f rnen accountable for their acts in this world that re¬ 
sponsibility is on us and when we allow the red-handed murderer 

hn ,7 Pe ° Pe to ^“"whipped of justice, it is a fearful thing 
ho resp0 ' ls ' hl f for - Wi » you like men discharge your 

y to these people who are dependent for their protection upon 

blood an'l y< ' u a,lou ’ th e iavvless to maltreat them and shed their 
, n , ;, lct towards them in some cases most inhumanely and 

deny him the protection of the laws. If you do you degrade our 
people and our institutions. It is unworthy of a noble race, and 
yye should convict the perpetrators without any reference to any¬ 
thing m our past history. Take hold of this thing and guard 
their rights and protect their lives as we do our own. 

These are the objects I seek to attain by offering this mea¬ 
sure so that after giving the grand jury an opportunity to find 
an indictment soon after the crime is committed and if they do 
not at the first session act, the judge or court may order the prose¬ 
cution instituted. Not that he must but that he may. That shifts 
the responsibility to him and if he is what he ought to be, if he 
is a true judge, and is satisfied that a crime against nature hais 
been committed, any felony, which should by all means be inves¬ 
tigated, he will order it. Sometimes felonies don’t require such 
action as that and if the judge is satisfied that public good and 
common justice don't require it he will not take the responsibility 
of making the order; but presuming he is what he ought to be 
whatever a judge should be, can we not risk him and let him say 
whether proceedings shall be had against the suspected party by 
information filed. It seems to me that the case is exceptional be¬ 
cause of practices that have been inaugurated to dodge responsi¬ 
bility and because of the course that has been pursued which has 
iverted grand juries from noble purposes and converted them by 
means of bribery into a shield to protect the guilty. 

MR PITTS — Will not the adoption of your amendment 
amount to the abolition of the grand jury? 



1664 


OFFICIAL. PKOCKEDIN<'.S 


MR. OATES—I think not. But I will say furthermore, if the 
grand juries cannot be relied on to indict the crimes to which I 
have alluded, they ought to be abolished. 

MR. PITTS — Will it not put the prosecution within the 
hands of the families and friends of those injured" 

MR. OATES—Not necessarily. It will he in the hands of the 
officers of the law. 


MR. PITTS—Suppose the crime of burglar) hu> been com¬ 
mitted and the grand jury ignores it, won’t this put it in the power 
of those back of the prosecution to proceed again>t a suspected 

person ? 

MR. OATES—Not at all. They would have to deal with the 
judge, and if the, judge don’t see proper to order it, tliev cannot 

proceed. 

MR. SANFORD—How do von propose, that the information 
shall be filed, at the request of the solicitor? 

MR, OATES—On the order of the court and not in the ab¬ 
sence of such order. 


MR. PITTS—On what information would the judge act? 
MR. OATES ^ou would have to ask the judge. 

the judgef ITTS ~ H0W ' VOUkl '' lH ‘ hrou - ht to th <- knowledge of 

MR. OATES-These things are generally known. 

MR. PITTS—But would he proceed on his own motion? 

he h* >-n 

to reguh,e°aH tt E a« And W#nW " W ,h ' have the power 

MR. OATES—Yes. 

as to protect a man from* indfctmentTv *0iT “ lo ? a - lity art ‘ M,ch 
the same influence protect him tr„ m ' * .^ ran<1 J l,r y. "ill not 

Is not there a great deal more troubteTbom ^ * petit Jur - V? 

men loose than about the failure 0 f grand in JU "? S turnin £ 
would you not have to abolish netir i? • d - Jun , es to mdict and 
you speak of to get justice? ries in classifications 

MR. OATES—Fortunately we h-, 
of degradation yet and I trust to God we mvJ' ^hail''' *'**' 



CONSTITn IONAL CONVENTION, 1<X)1 


1665 


MR. HULCER—If I understand the amendment offered by 
my friend from Montgomery and its influence, it would be very 
unwise to put it in the fundamental law. It is clearly a departure 
from a time honored practice and custom under our theory of 
government that has proved so satisfactory for many, many years. 
The gentleman in support of his position cites exceptions to the 
general rule- He cites cases in which the grand juries have not 
indicted men who in his judgment ought to have been indicted. 
It is always unsafe to bade a rule of action on exceptions to the 
general rule,. Is the Judge a better man than the grand juries 
are? If so, why so? The grand jurors under our system are 
selected from the body of the county on account of their integrity, 
intelligence and high standing among their fellows. A Judge is 
selected from a larger body on the same ground and for the same 
reasons. Gentlemen have failed to tell this Convention why a 
Judge is safer to indict a man than a grand jury is. In the one 
case the matter in controversy is left to eighteen men to judge, in 
the other to only one, and I maintain it is eighteen times as safe 
in the hands of the grand jury as it is in the hands of the Judge. 

Now, Mr. President, while there are exceptions and cases in 
which men should have been indicted when they actually were 
not the exceptions to which the gentleman refers never go out of 
date and if the first grand jury in session after the crime fails to 
do its duty because of bribery or other cause as the gentleman 
seems to intimate, we only have to wait six months under our 
practice to have another grand jury. I believe no citizen of Ala¬ 
bama ought to be put upon a final trial unless a grand jury of the 
community in which the crime is committed says by an indictment 
that he ought to be put upon trial before a court and a traverse 
Jury. I am unwilling to depart from the time honored practice 
that has proven healthy not only to our system of government but 
to all civilized governments that a man should first be indicted be¬ 
fore he is put on trial. 

MR. JENKINS—One of the prime principles in all govern¬ 
ments instituted among men is for the protection of life, liberty 
and property of the citizen and when the machinery we have de¬ 
vised fails to accomplish that purpose, I maintain there ought to 
be some resort to extreme means so that you could say to any 
man i4 In the name of justice and of God you must come up to the 
bar and stand your trial for this offense of which it is said you 
are guilty.” 

There is not a county in the State of Alabama in which mem¬ 
bers on this floor do not know of instances time after time—I 
could name them in Wilcox, Monroe, Butler and adjoining coun¬ 
ties—where not through bribery but through influence and power 
of position men have been stricken to death and grand juries 
through fear or favor have refused to do their duty. There have 



1666 


OFFICIAL P R O C EI £ DINES 


been murders committed, arson and the darkest crimes that black¬ 
ens the statute books, and through fear or favor there have been 
no indictments. I have known a case—I won't call the name— 
where the terror of one man prevented witnesses from going be¬ 
fore a grand jury and swearing to what they knew, and when ev¬ 
ery man in that county, you might say, knew the fact and yet the 
grand jury could not get a man to come in before them and swear 
as to the facts. But now in our circuit we happen to have on the 
bench a judge who is a> fearless as the most undaunted and with 
the power placed in his hand by this amendment, I do not believe 
any one man or any set of men or any power or influence under 
the sun could deter him from doing his duty under the law. And 
I say no man has a right to sit upon a bench unless he has the 
physical courage to resist all improper influences. I think we 
have such Judges now, but if we have not, we will have them. 

I have talked with delegates on this floor and they have men¬ 
tioned many cases in their county where the grand juries have 
failed to do their duty. 

We cannot calculate the deterrent influence on crime that 
th is will have when you say to everyone, be they never so high. 
“It matters not how great is your influence, or how much money 
or how much political influence you have, if you commit a felony 
of any kind you have to come up and face a petit jury and be tried 
for it.’’ That will serve to create a sentiment of respect for the 
majesty and greatness of the law and serve to put the law in that 
high place it ought to occupy in the minds of the people. But 
when people see murder and arson and other felonies committed 
in the light of day and the men committing them walk around un¬ 
whipped of justice with no indictment, the feeling is fostered that 
they can do anything likewise- There is not a white man who 
lives in the Black Belt that does not feel that he can kill a negro 
and come clear. That is the condition of things that should be 
changed and we can change it if we will and I say it is our dutv 
to make every man come strictly under the law. 

MR. BAREFIELD—Are there not more indictments than 
convictions? 

MR. JENKINS—Yes, and if there were more indictments 
there would be still more convictions and less crime in Alabama. 
And because that a certain twelve men have failed to do their 
duty or because the State happens to have a weakling in the place 
of a solicitor or because of some technicality of some judicial pro¬ 
cedure, some guilty man has been let go scott free is no reason 
to continue such a procedure and make it unchangeable and iron 
bound, as it were. So when the whole machinery of justice falls 
and breaks to pieces and when the public conscience is outraged 
and justice stands degraded, let there be a place somewhere to 
which the outraged citizen can go and say “I want justice.” I 



CONSTITUTIONAL CONVENTION, 1901 1607 

know a man living in South Alabama whose boy was shot in the 
back as he sat talking to his family at their fireside. The grand 
jury failed to indict the assassin and this man moved away. I 
asked him about it and he said I did not get justice. I felt like 
taking my shot gun and if it had not been for my wife and chil¬ 
dren I w ; ould have done it. Gentlemen, there are others w'ho 
feel like taking personal vengeance because grand juries failed 
to do what ought to have been done. I expect I have consumed 
mv time but T have often thought about this thing and prepared 
a bill for the Legislature along these very lines and found when 
1 examined the Constitution that that wouldn’t do because the 
Constitution has this plain provision that every felony should be 
proceeded against by indictment. As Governor Oates said this 
does not force the Judge to do it, he is simply allowed to do it, 
and I believe he will do it where the necessity exists. 

MR. DUKE—I offer an amendment. 

The amendment was read as follows: Amend amendment bv 
inserting immediately after the word “felony" the words “which 
may be punished capitally.” 

MR. OATES—So far as I am concerned the amendment is 
acceptable to me. 

MR. DUKE—I am opposed to giving the judge the power 
of a grand jury in all these felonies. 1 think the object intended 
by the gentleman from Montgomery w-ill be reached by making 
it apply only to felonies that may be punished capitallv. 

MR. PETTUS—The amendment offered by the gentleman 
from Montgomery, as amended by the gentleman from Chambers, 
seeks to remedy a recognized evil which has been eloquently por¬ 
trayed by the distinguished gentleman from Montgomery; but I 
do not believe that the remedy that is proposed will be adequate. 
It has been said here in debate upon the floor that influence reach¬ 
es a grand jury and may prevent it from discharging its dutv to 
the State and to the people. I agree with what the distinguished 
delegate from Montgomery has said about a high and exalted ju¬ 
diciary, but we are forced to admit that judges are human beings, 
and that they are as liable to be reached by public opinion and by 
influence, and perhaps as much so as the twelve or eighteen men 
composing the grand jury. It seems to me this is a very radical 
departure from well established principles of law that a judge who 
is to be the trial judge in a case shall set in motion the machinery 
of the law for prosecution of offenses of this character. It seems 
to me that is a very unwise departure from long established prin¬ 
ciples of law. 

Another result from the adoption of this amendment would 
be that you take from the grand jury the responsibility which rests 



1668 


OFFICIAL PROCEEDINGS 


upon them to discharge their duty to the State if you divide the 
responsibility, the whole of which now rests upon their shoulders. 

MR. FITTS — Speaking of the long established use of the 
grand jury, I ask if the prophet of old did not make this announce¬ 
ment : “Seek out and find the old ways and walk therein and ve 
shall find rest for your souls?’’ 

MR. PETTUS—I take it tor granted that the question car¬ 
ries its own answer. The very fact that this amendment seeks to 
divide the responsibility that rests upon the shoulders of the 
grand jury will have a tendency to make that body more lax in 
the discharge of its duty than it now is. If the grand jury has any 
doubt about whether public opinion will uphold the finding of an 
indictment, it will put it off on the judge these capital cases and 
make him shoulder the responsibility which they shirk. I believe 
in that way this amendment will do more to defeat its end than it 
will do to remedy the evil it seeks to stop. 

Another thing is public opinion after all. must justify and 
enforce the law before the law can be effective, and whether vou 
put the machinery of the law in the hands of the grand jurv or 
in the hands of the judge, it is public opinion that enforces it in 
the end. The law is merely a lever and unless it rests upon the 
fulcrum of a solid and well-founded public opinion, it will be in¬ 
effective and useless on the statute books—it will be a dead let¬ 
ter. For that reason. I move to lay this amendment on the table. 

The motion to table was withdrawn at the request of the 
delegate from Greene (Mr. Coleman). 

MR. COLEMAN — I have had the honor to represent the 
State as prosecuting attorney as long or longer than any man in 
the State. These questions have occurred to me often, and I have 
considered frequently the troubles which arise such as have been 
suggested by the delegate from Montgomery. But remembering 
that this is a free country and that there should stand some pal¬ 
ladium between the law and the prosecuting attornev, and the 
rights of the people, I have refrained and do now consider it a 
most dangerous innovation to strike down the power and authority- 
afforded to the grand juries of our country. 

The gentleman has referred to cases in Montgomery, and my 
friend to the left has referred to cases within his knowledge. The 
evil does not arise from the fact as stated bv them. Who is it 
that forms the grand juries of this county? And who is it that 
selects and provides for the selection of the petit juries ? The jurv 
system of Montgomery County was established by the repre¬ 
sentatives of Montgomery County, and if they were not satisfied 
with the plan adopted or if, under the law, proper and competent 
grand jurors are not selected, the fault does not lie with the law. 



CONSTITUTIONAL CONVENTION, 1901 


1669 


but in the statutes under which the grand and petit jurors are 
drawn. 

MR. OATES—I desire to correct the gentleman. My re¬ 
marks did not apply alone to Montgomery, but were general. 

MR. COLEMAN (Greene)—The gentleman referred to cases 
in Montgomery and I say the delegates to this Convention must 
remember that if competent jurors are not selected it is not a de¬ 
ficiency in the organic law of the State but is owing to a defective 
plan of selecting grand and petit jurors and shall we admit of 
this innovation, this striking down of the protection between the 
power of the courts and the liberties of the people because the 
statutes of the State are not remedied or improved? 

That is a matter wholly within the discretion of the Legisla¬ 
ture. They can select and provide for the selection of fit and com¬ 
petent persons. As it is now, names are put in some box and are 
drawn out at random, and that is the defect not in the organic 
law, but from the fact that in drawing them out, they are not able 
to reject any of the names, and thus you get incompetent grand 
jurors and petit jurors to try the cases. I trust the delegates to 
this Convention will consider well before they put the power in the 
court or the prosecuting attorney to start these prosecutions. I 
have time and again felt the desire to exercise this power, but as 
I grow older and have retired from interfering or practicing in 
that kind of cases and consider the condition of our country, I 
realize it is better to suffer the ills we bear than to fly to others 
we know not of. 

MR. OATES—I would like to ask the gentleman this ques¬ 
tion: Nothwithstanding we have had a great many lynchings in 
Alabama, does the gentleman know of any case where the grand 
jury ever returned an indictment, except that single one in Wash¬ 
ington County. 

MR. COLEMAN—If the gentleman will go and look at the 
rolls of the penitentiary, he will find there a number of men that 
I had sent there for that offense. 

MR. OATES—For lynching? 

MR. COLEMAN—For whitecapping. 

MR. OATES—I asked for lynching. 

MR. LOWE (Jefferson)—Does not the gentleman think that 
whatever influence might be brought to bear to prevent witness¬ 
es from appearing before a grand jury and securing an indict¬ 
ment, would also prevent them in general trials and that prose¬ 
cutions under this system would be a failure after all in most 
cases? 



1670 


OFF1C1AI, PROCEE L)1 N< *S 


MR. COLEMAN—I do not doubt it but I look at this question 
from a broader standpoint. It is whether the poor man without 
money has the protection afforded to him by the intervention of 
a grand jury. It is manifestly unjust to trust a prosecuting at¬ 
torney with his association and influence with the judge to sav 
when and who shall be proceeded against by information. Where 
does the judge get his information: Is he to examine the witness¬ 
es and have an ex parte investigation of the case? Must not he 
necessarily derive his information from the prosecuting attorney 
or else institute proceedings ex parte or have a preliminary trial. 
Even in the Federal Court the information filed by the district 
attorney proceeds upon a finding by the grand jury. I do not 
say it positively, but I do not think there a State where the 
liberties which are secured to the people by the intervention of a 
grand jury are not recognized and it is a most dangerous inno¬ 
vation and I protest against this Convention striking down this 
palladium for the people of this State. 

MR. PETTUS—I now renew tin motion to table the amend¬ 
ment. 


MR. HOWELL—On that I call for the yea- ami nav>. 

The delegate from Cleburne withdrew the call and tin 
was renewed by Mr. Oates arid wa- sustained, and tin ml 
resulted as follows: 


call 

call 


AY F.S 


Barefeld, 

Bartlett, 

Beavers, 

Beddow, 

Bethune, 

Blackwell, 

Brooks, 

Bulger, 

Byars, 

Cardon, 

Carnathon, 

Chapman, 

Cobb, 

Coleman, of Greene, 
Cornwall, 

Ferguson, 

Fitts, 

Fletcher, 

Foster, 

Freeman, 

Glover, 


Haley, 

Heflin, of Chamber-. 
Hodges. 

Hood. 

Inge, 

J a c k s o n, 

Jones, of Hale. 

Jones, of Wilcox. 
Knight. 

bong, of Butler. 
Lowe, of Lawrence, 
MacDonald, 

McMillan, of Wilcox. 
Martin, 

Merrill, 

Miller, of Wilcox. 
Moody, 

NeSmith, 

°PP, 

O’Rear, 

Parker, of Cullman, 


Parlor, ot FJmore. 

I Varee, 
f Vn us, 

Phillips 

Fitts. 

I doctor, 

Reese, 

Renfro, 

heynobU ( Henry ), 
sogers, of Lowndes, 
Rogers, of Sumter. 
Sanders, 

Sen tell. 

Sloan, 

Smith, Mac A., 
Smith, Morgan M., 
Sorrell. 

Spears. 

Spragins, 

Stewart, 

Thompson, 




CONSTITUTIONAL CONVENTION. P>01 




Willet, 

Walker, 

Weatherly, 


Williams, of Barbour, Wilson, of Washington, 
Williams, of Marengo. Winn, 

Wilson, of Clarke, 

TOTAL—71 


NOES 


Messrs. President, 
Ashcraft. 

Banks, 

Boone, 

Browne, 

Burns, 

Cofer, 

Cunningham, 

Dent, 

Duke, 

Eley, 

Espy, 

Foshee, 

Graham, of Montgomery, 
Graham, of Talladega, 


(irayson. 

Harrison, 

Henderson, 

Howell, 

Howze, 

Jones, of Montgomery, 
Jenkins, 

Jones, of Bibb. 

Kyle, 

Leigh, 

Locklin, 

Lomax, 

Long, of Walker. 
Lowe, of Jefferson, 
Malone, 


M axwell. 

M urphree. 

Norman, 

Oates, 

O'Neal of Lauderdale 
O’Neill (Jefferson). 
Palmer, 

Porter. 

Sanford, 

Selheinter, 

Studdard, 

Waddell, 

Watts, 

White, 


TOTAL—44 


ABSENT OR NOT VOTING 


Almon, 

Altman, 

Burnett, 

Carmichael, of Colbert, 
Carmichael, of Coffee, 
Case, 

Coleman, of Walker, 
Craig, 

Davis, of DeKalb. 
Davis, of Etowah, 
deGraffenreid, 

Eyster, 

Gilmore, 

Grant. 


Greer, of Calhoun, 
Greer, of Perry, 
Handley, 

Heflin, of Randolph. 
Hinson, 

King, 

Kirk, 

Kirkland, 

Ledbetter, 

McMillan (Baldwin) 
Miller, of Marengo, 
Morrisctte, 

Mulkey, 

Norwood, 


Lilians, 

Reynolds, of Chilton, 
Robinson, 

Sanford, 

Searcy, 

Smith, of Mobile. 
Sollie, 

Tayloe, 

Vaughan, 

Weakley, 

Whiteside, 

Williams, of Elmore. 


So the amendment was laid on the table. 

During the roll call: 

MR. JONHS (Montgomery)—This morning the gentleman 
from Mobile (Mr. Smith) asked me to pair with him on the propo¬ 
sition to authorize nine jurors to find a verdict. It may be that 
he considered that that was a general pair on this report. If he 



1672 


OFFICIAL PROCEEDINGS 


were here I would vote no. 1 don’t know how he would vote but 
having made the pair I do not like to be put in the attitude of 
breaking it. 

THE PRESIDENT—This is an entirely different question. 

MR. JONES (Montgomery)— Then I will vote no. 

After the roll call had been finished and the result announced: 

MR. JONES (Montgomery)—I have an amendment to of¬ 
fer. 

The amendment was read as follows : Amend Section L ) by 
adding after the words “actual service in the third line of the 
printed bill the words “or when assembled under arms as a mili¬ 
tary organization.” 

MR. JONES (Montgomery) — I will >tate briefly the object 
of the amendment. Under the law and the Constitution the mem¬ 
bers of the volunteer organization are liable to a court martial 
only when they are called on duty, in the enforcement of law, 
which they are organized in a camp of instructions and possibly 
when they are ordered to the drills that the statute provides for. 
There are a good many cases where the organizations are not in 
actual service such as when they go to attend trial drills or some 
fete or celebration and it often happens that offenses are commit¬ 
ted that for the good of the organization and discipline ought to 
be punished by court martial. The object of my amendment is to 
allow the military authorities to deal with a man who, when he 
goes to a picnic under arms, gets drunk and raises a row, and 
not allow him to escape punishment by court martial under the 
plea that he was not in actual service. I was a long time connected 
with the sanitary service and I offer this for the good order of 
military discipline. 

MR. LOMAX Are these offenses provided with proper pun¬ 
ishment in the military law? 

MR. JONES \ es, but without this vou cannot proceed 
against them. 

MR. ROGERS (Sumter)—Would this take the punishment 
out of the hands of the civil authorities? 

MR. JONES—I think not. A private might slap an officer 
and he could be court martialed and still could lie proceeded 
against in a civil court just like he could for murder. 

A vote being taken the amendment was adopted. 

MR. FERGUSON—I have an amendment. 



CONSTITUTIONAL CONVENTION. 1901 


1673 


The amendment was read as follows: Amend Section 9, line 
5, after the word “misdemeanor” by adding the words “and grand 
larceny.” 

MR. FERGUSON—1 wish briefly to explain to the Conven¬ 
tion the purpose of this amendment. In the first place it means 
a great saving of money to the tax-payers of Alabama. That 
ought to commend itself to the watchdogs of the treasury upon 
this floor. 

It furthermore guarantees, Mr. President, a speedy trial to 
many people that are charged with the crime of grand larceny 
in this State that should commend itself to the guardians of civil 
liberty upon this floor. 

MR. FOSTER—Does that authorize justices of the peace 
to sentence a man to the penitentiary? 

MR. FERGUSON—Not at all. By the report of the Attor¬ 
ney General, Mr. President, for the last preceding two years grand 
larceny was a predominant crime in the State of Alabama. There 
were 937 cases of grand larceny prosecuted in the State of Ala¬ 
bama for the two years ending the first of last September. By the 
report of the Attorney General for the two years ending Septem¬ 
ber 1, 1896, there were more than fifteen hundred cases of grand 
larceny prosecuted in the State of Alabama. Take it year in and 
year out, there is an average of eleven or twelve hundred cases 
of grand larceny prosecuted within the confines of this State. 

MR. OATES — I desire to ask the gentleman a question. 
Would not that amendment leave the offense of grand larceny to 
be tried and disposed of by justices of the peace? 

MR. FERGUSON—Not at all. 

MR. OATES—Do you think they should be allowed to try 
and dispose of the cases finally? 

MR. FERGUSON—Not at all. Now the gentleman is a 
lawyer and he must know the law. This Section 9 as it stands now 
and as it has stood heretofore permits the legislature to dispense 
with the absolute necessity of indictment in all misdemeanor cases. 
Now then under that law the jurisdiction of justices of the peace 
is confined to certain offenses. I mean the final jurisdiction of 
justices of the peace are confined to what? According to my 
recollection I will briefly state them. To vagrancy, assaults, as¬ 
saults and batteries, affrays, in which no stick or other weapon 
is used, cruelty to animals, public drunkenness, and perhaps one 
or two other little offenses. 

Now, then, all the other misdemeanors of the State are not 
within the final jurisdiction of justices of the peace. Upon the 
same principle as the statute law fixes what the final jurisdiction 



1674 


OFFICIAL FKOCLLOINC.S 


of Justices of the Peace is, you can not say that the Legislature 
will give them a final jurisdiction ot grand lurcenv cases. 1 be 
lieve that is an answer to the question ot the gentleman Iron, 

Montgomery. 

MR. PITTS—What is the punishment for grand larceny.' 
MR. FERGUSON—I was coming to that later. 

MR. PITTS—Well tell us what it is now? 


MR. FERGUSON—From one to ten years. 

MR. PITTS—You propose to send a man to the penitentiary 
for ten years on information? 

MR. FERGUSON—That will be at the election of the de¬ 
fendant. He will lose no rights in the premises. He can still de¬ 
mand his trial by jury. 

MR. PITTS—Why limit this to grand larceny, why m.t put 
in all the other felonies? 

MR. FERGUSON—I was satisfied this Convention would not 
consent to the putting in of all felonies but I believe after 1 have 
explained the purpose for which I offer this amendment the Con¬ 
vention will vote for it. 


Now bear with me patiently just a moment longer- There 
is not a man upon this floor but who knows that the distinction 
between grand and petit larceny is shadowy, purely technical. The 
only thing that makes the distinction is the value of the property. 
Under the present statute to steal a hog worth $5 is grand lar¬ 
ceny, if the hog is only worth $4.50 it is petit larceny. 

MR. PITTS—What about the punishment, what is the dif¬ 
ference between grand and petit larceny? 

MR. FERGUSON—The extreme punishment for petit lar¬ 
ceny is twelve months in jail and $500 fine. The lowest punish¬ 
ment for grand larceny is one year in the penitentiary. 

MR. PITTS—What is the highest penalty? 

MR. FERGUSON—Ten years, but the gentleman is bound 
to know from his experience as a prosecuting attorney in this 
State for many years that the extreme punishment is rarely visit¬ 
ed in that class of cases. I can safely' say that the average pun¬ 
ishment for grand larceny in Alabama is not exceeding three 
years. It would be a most extraordinary case to warrant a judge 
in giving more than three years’ punishment for the offense of 
grand larceny. So I say the distinction is shadowv and purely 
technical. A man convicted of petit larceny loses” his political 
rights just the same as a man convicted of grand larcenv. 



CONSTITUTIONAL CONVENTION, 1901 


1675 


Now coming to the second ground to which I referred, the 
amendment is really in the interest of civil liberty and carrying 
out the principle you have adopted in Article 7 of this ordinance 
guaranteeing a speedy trial. If a man is charged with grand lar¬ 
ceny he must remain in jail until the grand jury convenes and an 
indictment is returned into court before he can be put upon trial 
for it. 

MR. O’NEAL—This authorizes that a grand jury can be dis¬ 
pensed with in proceedings and prosecutions before Justices of 
the Peace and such other inferior courts as may be established? 
Why not amend that by inserting the words “Circuit Court” be¬ 
fore Justices of the Peace so that parties could be proceeded 
against in the Circuit Court on information without indictment. 

MR. FERGUSON—Being a solicitor, I did not want to come 
in the attitude of a Greek bearing gifts, I come in the interest of 
economy. In the interest of speedy trials in this sort of cases. As 
I was proceeding to say, if a man has committed grand larceny 
it may have been within two or three days after the grand jury 
has adjourned and he will have to lie in jail six months until an¬ 
other grand jury convenes before he can be put on trial. That 
means $9 a month, or $54 for his feed. He may want to plead 
guilty. I have in my own experience known w r here men were 
committed to jail on the charge of grand larceny and they desired 
to plead guilty but could not do so because they had not been in¬ 
dicted, and they had to lie in jail many weary months until a 
grand jury convened before they could plead guilty. With such a 
provision as this amendment in the organic law those men could 
go before any court of competent jurisdiction and enter their plea 
of guilty. 

MR. ROGERS—Before what tribunal would the accused be 
tried in those counties where there are now no courts of competent 
jurisdiction, when the Circuit Court is not sitting? 

MR. FERGUSON—I am glad the gentleman asked that ques¬ 
tion, because in nearly every court we have a County Court that 
has jurisdiction of all misdemeanor cases that the Justices of the 
Peace have not final jurisdiction of. There is not a county in the 
State but what has a County Court or some court having jurisdic¬ 
tion of all misdemeanors, like the City Court of Montgomery, the 
City Court of Mobile, and the Criminal Court of Birmingham. 

MR. BOONE—And the Inferior Court of Mobile. 

MR. FERGUSON—And there is one at Gadsden and one at 
Talladega. In all these courts these men could immediately plead 
guilty if they desired or they could get a speedy trial without the 
intervention of the grand jury. 



1676 


OFFICIAL PROCEEDINGS 


MR. JONES (Wilcox)—I am satisfied, Mr. President, that 
the delegates on this floor would not entertain for a moment a 
proposition to allow all felony cases to be proceeded against by 
information. 

MR. FERGUSON—I do not ask that. 

MR. JONES (Wilcox)—I can see no reason why an exception 
should be made in the case of grand larceny. There is no reason 
that presents itself to my mind why we should pick out that single 
offense and make an exception of it and say that with regard to 
that offense an information shall be allowed and that an indict¬ 
ment by a grand jury is not necessary. I do not want to take up 
the time of the Convention and if no gentleman cares about speak¬ 
ing particularly, I move to lay the amendment on the table. 

A vote being taken the amendment was tabled. 

MR. O’NEAL—I offer an amendment. 

The amendment was read: Amend Section 9, line six, by add¬ 
ing the words “the Circuit or City Court, or" before the words 
“Justices of the Peace.” 

MR. LOMAX—I move the adoption of the section and on 
that I call for the previous question. 

A vote being taken the main question was ordered and a fur¬ 
ther vote being taken the section was adopted. 

Section 10 was then read as follows: 

Sec. 10. That no person shall, for the same offense be twice 
put in jeopardy of life or limb; but courts may, for reason, fixed 
by law, discharge juries from the consideration of anv case, and 
no person shall gain any advantage by reason of such discharge 
of the jury. 

MR. LOMAX—The amendment to that section proposed In' 
the committee is to allow courts, for reasons fixed bv law, to dis¬ 
charge juries from the consideration of any case. I can' see no 
reason why a court should not have the power after a jury has 
fully and fairly and honestly for a long time considered a case, to 
discharge the jury under proper conditions and circumstances that 
may be prescribed by law. There is no reason whv a jury should" 
be tortured by one or two men holding that jury until their pa¬ 
tience is exhausted and until they are altogether wearv and worn 
out. For that reason the committee thought it was best to sav in 
this section that courts may for reasons fixed bv law di^char^e 
juries from the consideration of any case, and that'this discharging 
the jury should not be held to have put the defendant in jeopardv 



CONSTITUTIONAL CONVENTION. 1901 


1677 


MR. CUNNINGHAM—I desire to ask the Chairman what is 
meant by “limb.’ 

MR. LOMAX—It means an arm or a leg or an eye or a nose. 

MR. BOONE—Does it not mean mayhem ? 

MR. LOMAX—Yes; it means his life or grievous bodily 
harm. 

On motion of Mr. Lomax the section was adopted and Section 

11 was then read as follows: 

Sec. 11. That no person shall be barred from prosecuting or 
defending before any tribunal in this State, by himself or counsel, 
any civil cause to which he is a party. 

On motion of Mr. Lomax this section was adopted and Section 

12 was read as follows: 

Sec. 12. That the right of trial by jury shall remain inviolate. 

The minority report for Section 12 was also read as follows: 

Minority reports: 

The undersigned members of the Committee on Preamble and 
Declaration of Rights do not concur in the foregoing report of the 
committee so far as it relates to Section 12, Article I, for the fol¬ 
lowing reasons: 

In every relation of life in Alabama, where the result is de¬ 
pendent upon the opinions and decisions of a number of persons, 
the principle of majority rule governs, with the single exception 
of a verdict of a jury. Why should a unanimous verdict on a ques¬ 
tion of fact be required and enforced from a jury? A majority of 
one vote in this Convention either puts a proposition in the organic 
law, or rejects it. A majortiy of one vote in each House of the 
General Assembly creates, repeals or modifies a positive law. re¬ 
gardless of the magnitude of the interests involved. A majority 
of the Senate of the United States ratifies or refuses to consent to 
a treaty with a foreign power. A majority of a single vote in a 
half a million in a pivotal State may elect a President of the United 
States, change the policy of the Government and bring prosperity 
or ruin to seventy millions of people. And yet the majority of the 
committee deny that it would be sensible to apply this principle to 
a verdict of a jury in a civil suit at law. When a judgment is en¬ 
tered on a unanimous verdict, if an appeal is taken to the Supreme 
Court of the State it can be then finally adjudicated by a bare ma¬ 
jority of the Justices. So in the Supreme Court of the United 
States, five of the Justices against four held the income tax un¬ 
constitutional; and in the same court five of the Justices held that 
Porto Rico was not under the Constitution, and four that it was. 



1678 OFFICIAL PROCEEDINGS 

Again in all ministerial anti execntite IxhIUs the majority rules, 
and the will of the minority tm.st g.ye way to that o. the tna or ty 
when lawfully expressed. I'or these reasons we think that the 
provisions authorising three-fourths of a jury ... r.n.ler a verthet 
in a civil case should become a part of our Const. tution as it is ... 
several other important States of the L nion. 

We therefore recommend as a substitute for .Section 12. Article 
I, as reported by the committee, the following: 

Art. I. Sec. 12: The right of trial by jury a> heretofore en¬ 
joyed, shall remain inviolate: hut in civil actions three-fourths of 
the jury may render a verdict. 


Respectfully submitted. 


Samuel Black we 
E. P. Wilson. 

T. [. Cornwell. 


MR. LOMAX—I move that the minority report be laid on 
the table. 

MR. BLACKWELL—I hope that no such gag law will be 
adopted. 

MR. BEDDOW—I ask the gentleman to withdraw that. 

MR. LOMAX—Don’t call it “gag law.” I >at in my seat 
nearly a half a minute waiting for something and nothing was 
done, and then I made the motion to table. 1 withdraw the mo¬ 
tion, however. 

MR. BLACKWELL—As one of the minority that made this 
report, I desire to be heard in regard to the matter. 

Mr. President, and gentlemen of the Convention, it is a fact 
that is known without the stating of it to this body that in a great 
many cases that are constantly being tried in our courts, cases of 
great importance that consume considerable amount of time, the 
tendency is growing to have mistrials, and those mistrials fre¬ 
quently result from one man refusing to agree with eleven others. 
And it is charged in many localities that infliunces are brought to 
bear to “fix” juries in order that mistrials may be had. There are 
cases being tried and constantly, where one party has no hope of 
a verdict, and yet as the law requires a unanimous jurv. if that 
party can succeed in fixing one member of the jurv he can secure 
a mistrial and a delay which makes it harder to have the witnesses 
there at a succeeding trial. As I say frequently those trials are of 
important cases and there are a great many witnesses and a con¬ 
siderable amount of time consumed and great expense incurred 
by the county. And yet under our present system, if vou can fix 



CONSTITUTIONAL CONVENTION, 1901 1679 

h is to he man ° n J ur y w iH °ot agree, the whole expense 
i t , & ne ? ver > whole matter retried and frequently the 

pr Knt al :.;r tn ^ r h en ? erS itim P OSsible t0 ^ as man? whVesses 
present as were at the first trial. 

mistrials'* F\w 6man has L seen the growing tendency to have 
mist! nils. Every man knows the expense incurred. While as I say 

these mistrials are frequently in the larger cases, cases of great 

i lportanee, any case involving $20 may be tried by a jury and a 

m,.trial result and these cases more time and money, multiply! 

m?nl f 11Umey many tim f. s th « amount involved by this require- 
mcnt of a unanimous verdict. 

Now the argument as presented in this minority statement 
prepared by Mr Wilson from Clarke, sets forth the case very clear¬ 
ly. In every relation of life in Alabama as it is there stated, where 
the result is dependent upon the decision of a number, the principal 

of a majority rules. I hen why should we have a unanimous ver¬ 
dict in civil cases.'' 


MR. W ILSON (Clarke)—You are crediting my brother’s min¬ 
ority report to me. 

MR. BLACKWELL—I beg pardon for the mistake. Why 
should a unanimous verdict on the question of fact be required 
and enforced from a trial jury? 

I here will be no answer to that except the statement that we 
have had this for a long time, that the present system is time 
honored, and, therefore, it ought not to be abandoned. If that 
principle were to govern none of the improvements of the nineteenth 
century that are demanded by our development ought to have been 
recognized and accepted. If everything of antiquity must be pre¬ 
served and retained, we should have never had the splendid system 
of electric lighting we have today, but we ought to have retained 
and should now go back to the old tallow candle. We should go 
back to the stage coach or the ox team as a means of transporta¬ 
tion rather than the splendid system of railways we have today. 
W’e should go back to the dug-out and the tom-tom rather than 
the ocean steamers of today if antiquity alone is what shall recom- 
mend a thing to us. 

MR. WEATHERLY—Is not the fact that an institution is 
old some evidence that it is good? 

MR. BLACKWELL—Some evidence that it is good, but no 
evidence that there is not something better, no evidence that there 
cannot be an improvement. Men are constantly progressing, mind 
is constantly developing, surroundings are constantly changing and 
the result is we adapt our methods to the conditions surrounding 
us and thus create improvement. 



1680 OFFICIAL PROCEEDINGS 

This system made its appearance in England soon after the 
Norman conquest. 

Remember we are not proposing to abolish this system or to 
apply this amendment to criminal cases. We apply it only to civil 
cases. 

As I say the system of a jury appeared in England soon after 
the Norman conquest in the Seventh Century* but at that time the 
jury was not required to be unanimous. Prior to the time of Ed¬ 
ward IV. majority verdicts had been sufficient. \\ e are not here 
dealing with the jury system, but simply with a unanimous verdict 
as to a matter of fact. 

Now the jury was originally called to give evidence, and one 
of the reasons for having a jury of twelve was, as history shows* 
that that was considered the amount of evidence necessary to 
establish the guilt or innocence of parties to a very large extent. 
The jurors were taken from the immediate community in which 
the offense was committed and were supposed to be entirely fa¬ 
miliar with all the facts and issues involved in the trial of the case. 
As civilization progressed and communities enlarged it became 
apparent that you got men on the jury now and then who were 
not competent to give evidence. But they were still legally sum¬ 
moned jurors and when such were brought in it became necessary 
to go out and get others on the outside as the jurors did not know 
all the facts. 

MR. STEWART—Why not apply this to criminal as well as 
civil cases? 

MR. BLACKWELL—For the same reason that was suggested 
by my friend Mr. Ferguson, that it is harder to accomplish a reform 
that is sweeping than a reform that just touches one little subject. 
If we had proposed to apply it to all trials, gentlemen would have 
risen and exclaimed. ‘‘You are absolutely proposing to try a 
man where his life is involved with a less number of jurors than 
heretofore required/’ so we preferred first to say to the gentlemen 
of the Convention that we are applying it to a $20 trial rather than 
to the trial of a man for his life. 

MR. CUNNINGHAM—Does the gentleman apply this onlv 
to cases involving not more than $20? 

MR. BLACKWELL—Twenty dollars and up, 

MR. CUNNINGHAM—Not twenty dollars and down. 

MR. BLACKWELL—Now there are many constitutions that 
have this provision: Colorado, Florida, Idaho, Iowa, Louisiana, 
Missouri, Michigan, Montana, Nebraska, New Jersey, North Da¬ 
kota, Washington and Wyoming, and I think there are some 
others. 



CONSTITUTIONAL CONVENTION, 1901 


1681 


Some gentlemen cite us in opposition to our contention to 
sections of the United States Constitution, but those sections do 
not apply to the State courts and the State Constitutions can ab¬ 
solutely fix any number that they feel inclined to as a jury. The 
number of jurors is limited in these States I have just mentioned. 
In Montana in civil cases two-thirds of the jury can render a ver¬ 
dict. In Idaho in all cases of misdemeanors five-sixths can render 
a verdict. In Iowa the legislature may authorize a verdict by less 
than twelve jurors in any of the inferior courts of the State. 

As I say, some have objected to this, claiming there is some 
conflict with the rights guaranteed by the Constitution of the 
United States. But the rights not delegated to the United States 
by the Constitution nor prohibited by the States are reserved to 
the States, and while the first six or seven amendments to the 
Constitution of the United States concede the right of trial by jury 
as they are not to be understood as restricting the powers of the 
States and the States if they choose can provide for trials for all 
offenses against the State. 

MR. BULGER—Does this section reported by the Committee 
prevent the legislature from providing for a majority verdict? 

MR. BLACKWELL. Yes. Heretofore the opinion has been 
that where no number was mentioned a jury meant twelve and 
that is unquestionably the result of everything that I have read 
on that subject. 

MR. BOONE—Has it not been decided by the Supreme Court 
of the United States that the first ten amendments to the Consti¬ 
tution of the United States apply to Federal power and not to 
States. 


MR. BLACKWELL—We are not talking about Federal pow¬ 
er in this matter. 

MR. BOONE—But I say that is the limitation upon Federal 
power and not the power of the State, so that the State has the 
power to make this amendment? 

MR. BLACKWELL—There are cases in which juries are not 
used now. such as contempt of court and it is doubtful if a jury 
is aright in a contested election case as shown in our Alabama 
decisions and in damages to property taken for the public, the 
party is not entitled under many decisions to a trial by jury unless 
the Constitution of the State provides a tribunal for that purpose. 
The courts have said, where they have held that, that it is no more 
essential to have unanimity than the common law qualifications of 
jurors which have been continued in force 

THE PRESIDENT—The gentleman’s time has expired. 



1682 


OFFICIAL P K O C F. F D1N C S 


MR. BEDDOW—I rise to endorse the report of the minority 
of this committee. As the gentleman who has just taken his seat 
has truly said, in all lines and in all departments of life great 
progress has been made except in this one feature of our govern¬ 
ment—trial by jury. A number of States have already made some 
progress along this line, but Alabama is still in the rear. 

MR. BOONE—She has not had the opportunity. 

MR. BEDDOW—This is the first opportunity she has had. 
As I say, great progress has been made along all lines except this. 
I know there are gentlemen in this Convention who will sav that 
the trial by a jury of twelve men is a matter that comes to us 
from ancient days, and is consecrated by precedent and cemented 
by time, but all this argument has been fully answered bv tin- 
gentleman who has just taken his seat. 

Because a thing is old is no reason why improvement cannot 
be had. Under that argument, the boy was right who was going 
to mill with a bag of corn to be ground and in one end of the bag 
he had corn and in the other a rock. He asked whv he didn't put 
a peck of corn on the other side and carry a half bushel instead of 
just one peck- He said his father always carried a rock in one 
end of the bag and corn in the other, and he was going to keen 
that up. 

This is the argument that the opposition used. Now we have 
some great men and some good men who are advocating this doc¬ 
trine that a majority—even a majority of the jury—shall be able 
to render a verdict. One of bur Justices of the Supreme Court of 
the United States, David J. Brewer, in a recent lecture to the stu¬ 
dents of b: ale College advocated the abolition of the svstem of 
unanimous verdicts by juries. 

Judge A. 13. Grace shows the ridiculousness of requiring unani- 
mity in a jury. He says “This is an error that should not continue 
to exist. The majority system would practically remove the temn- 

t u tl0 r n !u° f bnbery \ Under our law now one juror can dictate to 
all of the eleven others or make a mistrial. All a litigant now has 
to do is to fix one juror. Then he can have one of these mistrials, 
but with the majority system, he would have to bribe six jurors 
instead of one to even get a mistrial, which would alwavs most 
surely leak out, and to get a verdict he would have to bribe seven 
jurors and to keep his bribe a secret would be practicallv im- 


Then he calls attention to facts that show the impractibilitv 
and the ridiculousness of enlightened States continuing the svstem 
of unanimous juries. He says “In every relation of life in America 
where the result is made to depend on the opinions and decisions 
of a number of persons, the principle of majority rule has been 
adopted with the sole exception of the verdict of a jury ” 



CONSTITUTIONAL CONVENTION. 


1901 


1683 


of Congress siifficeYto create* 1 each . hoUs< : o{ a General Assembly 

gardless of the maimit.,5* repeal or chan £ e a positive law, re- 

of a currencyluTvlrMUut' 'T?'* a > in case 

, a taritt Oil 1 or a declaration of war 

.... u4'w!;V: «*« - «• «—« 

may elect "a *Pre YlenY'YlY ' °i^ e - n ^ a ^ a in ' Plon ,n a pivotal State 
a> c ect a 1 resident of the tinted States, change the entire noli- 

of people y’Y |' !l' nC,U J Un<! l ,) 1 rillK ’ P ros P cri ty or ruin to 70,000.000 

will roll their evVs^tYYo', Y'thT’ honcst an<1 .Patriotic lawyers, 
be sensible u, -.'.,,>1 i 1 th( . vt ' r > suggestion that it would 

f Y "ti ke V ” ‘' lht ;. sa T Vr'naph i„ deciding a replevin suit 

no. eY a , Pestlc ' t,le(i Pony." and yet again this calf 

or pony case when it has ascended by appeal from the Justice of 

Co u r t * o f t he * *St a / ? M’^'ircuU Court, and thence to theSuprenm 
• , atl ' decided by a bare majority of the judges if 

they should happen to differ.’’ K ’ 

Mr. President and gentlemen of the Convention, this is no 
new <l<Hstloin It lias been agitated for a hundred vears. 1 hold 
in my hand Forsyth’s History of Trial by Jury, a inan known to 
the entire legal fraternity. 

A hundred years ago it was advocated by men like those, that 
it was ridiculous to adhere to the old principles of unanimity in the 
verdict of a petit jury. 

MR. W FATHERLY—Will the gentleman allow me to ask 
linn a question? 


MR. BEDDOW—I decline to yield for questions. I have but 
ten minutes and I want to talk during that time. The gentleman 
no doubt will have an opportunity to answer what I have to say. 

( On page 245 of Forsyth’s History of Trial by Jury, he says • 
‘In a valuable note in his Middle Ages, Mr. Hallam, speaking of 
the grand principle of Saxon polity, the trial of facts by the country 
says, from this principle, except as to the preposterous relic of 

barbarism, the requirement of unanimity, may we never swerve_ 

may we never be compelled in wish to swerve.” 

He like myself believed in the verdict of a jury, and it is one of 
the greatest institutions that the country was ever blessed with, 
and by this improvement upon it, there can be nothing on earth 
that can replace it. but with it as it is. it permits one man to 
corrupt the jury and to throttle the will of eleven. 

THE PRESIDENT—The gentleman’s time has expired. 

A DELEGATE—I move that the gentleman’s time be ex¬ 
tended for ten minutes. 



1684 


OFFICIAL PROCEEDINGS 


The motion was carried. 

MR. BEDDOW—I thank the gentleman. Under the present 
system, all that has to be done is that some friend to some lawyer 
be upon the jury and he will decide with him right or wrong. Some 
person who has some interest in it, apart from justice and right, 
may purchase him before he enters upon the trial of the cause. 
You cannot tell me that is not the case. We see it every day in 
the week. In Birmingham not long ago there sat upon a jury a 
man who had said before the evidence had been heard, and before 
the charge of the court had been given to the jury, that he had 
come there for the purpose of hanging the jury, and that he has 
his money in his pocket, and he was going to sit there to make it 
a mistrial, unless the case was decided according to the way he 
desired it decided- The case went to trial, and in that self same 
case, that man did hang the jury and produce a mistrial, when 
there were eleven men who had agreed upon the verdict. You tell 
me that in an enlightened age like this, that cases like that should 
be permitted? That it should be within the power of such persons 
to prostitute justice? I say nay, nay, the time has come when we 
should rise up in our might and purify the jury system, by putting 
it beyond the reach of corrupt practices to produce mistrials, when 
justice is on the one side or the other. 

Mr. Forsyth further says : “when the House of Lords sit as 
a court of appeal, or as a criminal court to try a peer or in the case 
of impeachment of a commoner, a bare majority of one is suffi¬ 
cient to determine the judgment, and it may be fairly asked why 
the rule should be different for twelve jurors, and why if there be 
a single dissentient amongst them, no verdict can be given?’’ 

And gentlemen of the Convention, as early as seventy years 
ago, a commission in England, the place we get our jury system, 
investigated the question of the unanimity of the verdict of the 
jury, in the year 1830, and in their report at that time they say, 
“it is essential to the validity of a verdict that the jury should be 
unanimous, and regularlyjihey are not allowed to be discharged un¬ 
less by the consent of the parties, until such unanimous verdict has 
been returned. It is difficult to defend the justice or the wisdom 
of the latter principle. It seems absurd that the rights of a party- 
in question of a doubtful and complicated nature, should depend 
upon his being able to satisfy twelve persons that one particular 
state of facts is the true one. As it is notorious that upon such 
questions a body of men so numerous are often found to differ 
irreconcilably in their views, it is obvious that the necessity of re¬ 
turning in every case a verdict, and a unanimous one, before they 
separate, must frequently lead to improper compromise among the 
jurors of their respective opinions. There is reason also to appre¬ 
hend that where any of them happen to be actuated by partial mo¬ 
tives, it must tend to produce a corrupt verdict. Indeed no one can 



CONSTITUTIONAL CONVENTION, 1901 1685 

ha\e been much conversant ...jil . r . 

quently having he**rrl th ^ ourts of J ustlce < without fre- 

long in suspense that he reinar J c > where the verdict has been very 
friend upon the jury.” 0 '* ° f ° tHer ° f the cwntendin t? parties has a 

age. numerous^State" r f ^-h - re V? r f' a " d in the light of the present 
adopted the salient f th ‘ S y nion have fal, en into line and have 

chanter the author J 1 including his remarks in this 

. i 9 * r sa y > » the time is fast approaching' if it has 

lepaf fabric wHM " ht,n 'T* h * > ur >'- lik ' other part of our 

fe? „rrv„a l'i h ’r.'i'" 1 ' s '! t> ; eCt of the Public criticism, and I 
feel per. uaded that then it will be found impossible to justify or 

retain a rule which is both opposed to justice and expediency.” 

counn° % ther Ir ' Pre f! em ’ T 1 £ entlemen of the Convention, in my 
count\ there are at least 25 per cent, of the cases that go to the 

thousand r f Sl l V" <l " llstria1 ' !t amounts to thousands and 
thousands of dollars to be paid out by the tax pavers of this State. 

for no other purpose than of perpetuating a system that has been 
condemned by the wisest and best men that this or anv other 
nation have ever known. Why should we stand back? We are 
here for the purpose of amending the Constitution, making it bet¬ 
ter. building it up, increasing its field of operation, and perfecting 
a system of law and of justice. ' 


If you will make this amendment to this trial by jury, by re- 
ducing it in civil cases to three-fourths, instead of the unanimity 
rule, it will produce great good to your State. It will prevent fraud 
and corruption in the temples of justice, and under its beneficent 
influences this State will continue to grow and to prosper and the 
temple of justice will not be prostituted once where it is a thousand 
times at present- 


MR. BOONE—Mr. President and gentlemen of the Conven¬ 
tion. I wish to occupy your time only about two or three minutes 
further, on one suggestion that has not been made in the argu¬ 
ments of the gentlemen that have preceded me. Nearly all of the 
reasons have been shown why the minority report should be adopt¬ 
ed. but one. which it occurs to me is of very great importance, 
showing, as it does, the system of jurisprudence in Alabama, where 
certainly as much property, as many rights are involved. This 
applies only in civil cases as proposed by the minority report, and 
if the arguments of the opponents of the measure are sound, why 
should a Chancellor have the power to decide questions involving 
thousands of dollars' worth of property in equity suits and pass 
on questions of fact, which are often the main questions in the 
case, and when an appeal is taken from his decree to the Supreme 
Court, where the judges also pass upon the facts, should the ma¬ 
jority of those judges, three against two, affirm or reverse that 
decree? 



1686 


OFFICIAL PROCEEDINGS 


Now let us look at the progress of the law in Alabama in the 
equity field: For years it was the law in this State that when the 
Chancellor rendered a decree on a question of fact, and an appeal 
was taken to the Supreme Court of Alabama, there was a pre¬ 
sumption, mind you, a presumption, indulged in by the Appellate 
Court in favor of the regularity and the correctness of the decree 
below. But the Legislature saw there was no reason for that, 
there was no sense in indulging in that presumption, and that was 
stricken down and the Supreme Court now tries the case whtn it 
comes up de-novo. Now, why should this one man, as some one 
has said on this floor today, this judge, who is but a man, and, as 
Stephen J. Field said in an opinion once in a case before the Su¬ 
preme Court of the United States, because he sat on the bench, 
he did not fail to have the senses, he saw, he heard, and the senti¬ 
ments, the same views, that a man had, were there with him. He 
tried to be perfectly impartial and to smother it all out, but he 
did not cease to be a man. Now, why should the Chancellor be 
able to pass on a question where there are hundreds thousands 
of dollars involved, and his decision be affirmed by a bare majority 
of a court, when in a damage suit against a railroad company you 
have got to have the unanimous verdict of the jury? I say, gentle¬ 
men, that we are in line with this amendment, with progress, with 
the thoughtful men of all nations, and we should not claim that 
all the wisdom of the Union is here in Alabama; but we can profit 
by what has been found to be good in other States, and there is not 
a single State which has ever adopted this proposition (some of 
them having adopted it more than forty years ago), that have 
ever abandoned it, and I do hope that the Convention will adopt 
the minority report. 

MR. GRAYSON—I desire to offer an amendment. 

The amendment was read as follows: Amend by striking out 
“three-quarters” and insert “five-sixths.” 

THE PRESIDENT—The question will be upon the amend¬ 
ment proposed by the gentleman from Madison to the amendment 
proposed by the minority report. 

MR. GRAYSON—This is an entirely new departure in our 
courts and to require a three-quarters majority verdict may be too 
radical a change. I am satisfied, though, it will be to the best 
interest of the State, and to the best interests of the litigants, not 
to require a unanimous verdict, because it so often results in mis¬ 
trials, brought about by corruption, but the change to three-fourths 
is too great, and therefore I move this amendment, making it five- 
sixths. In that case it will require ten jurors, whereas under the 
amendment of the minority of the committee, it would require onlv 
nine. 



CONSTITUTIONAL CONVENTION, 1901 


1687 


BAREFIELD I move to lay the amendment, and the 
report of the minority of the Committee on the table- 

MR. REESE I ask for a division of the question. 

THE PRESIDENT-A division of the question is called for. 
This question will be upon the motion to table the amendment 
offered by the gentleman from Madison. 

The motion to table was carried. 

THE PRESIDENT—The question recurs upon the amend¬ 
ment offered by the minority report. 

MR. BLACKWELL—Upon that I call for the ayes and noes. 

THE PRESIDENT—The ayes and noes are called for. The 
question is, is the call sustained. 

The requisite number rising the call was sustained. 

THE PRESIDENT—As many as favor the motion to table 
the minority report will vote aye and those opposed no, as their 
names are called. 

During the call of the roll: 

MR. JONES (Montgomery)—I am paired with the delegate 
from Mobile (Mr. Smith); if he were present he would vote aye 
and I would vote no. 

MR. WILSON (Clarke)—I am paired with the delegate from 
Mobile (Mr. Pillans.) If he were here he would vote no and I 
would vote aye. 

The call of the roll resulted as follows: 

AYES. 


Messrs. President, 
Barefield, 

Beavers, 

Bethune, 

Byars, 

Cardon, 

Carnathon, 

Cunningham, 

Espy, 

Foster, 

Glover, 

Graham, of Talladega, 
Henderson, 

Hood, 

Howze, 

Total— 43 . 


Jackson, 

Jones, of Hale, 

Jones, of Wilcox, 
Leigh, 

Lomax, 

Long, of Walker, 
Lowe, of Jefferson, 
Lowe, of Lawrence, 
Martin, 

Maxwell, 

Merrill, 

Miller (Wilcox) 
NeSmith, 

Norman, 

O’Neal (Lauderdale), 


Opp, 

O’Rear, 

Parker (Cullman), 
Parker (Elmore), 
Porter, 

Rogers (Sumter), 
Sanders, 

Spragins, 

Stewart, 

Thompson, 

Waddell, 

Walker, 

Weatherly, 

Willet. 



1688 OFFICIAL PROCEEDINGS 

NOES. 


Ashcraft, 

Grayson, 

Pitts, 

Banks, 

Haley, 

Reese, 

Beddow, 

Hodges, 

Reynolds, of Henry, 

Blackwell, 

Inge. 

Rogers (Lowndes), 

Boone, 

lones, of Bibb, 

Sanford, 

Brooks, 

Kyle, 

Selheimer. 

Bulger, 

Macdonald, 

Smith, Mac. A.. 

Burns, 

Malone, 

Smith, Morgan M.. 

Chapman, 

Moody, 

Spears, 

Cobb, 

Murphree, 

Watts, 

Cofer, 

Oates, 

White. 

Dent, 

O’Neill, of Jefferson, 

Wilson (Wash’gton), 

Eyster, 

Palmer, 

Winn. 

Fletcher, 

Pearce, 


Foshee, 

Pettus, 



T otal—43. 


ABSENT OR NOT VOTING. 


Altman, 

Greer, of Calhoun, 

Norwood, 

Almon, 

Greer, of Perry, 

Phillips. 

Bartlett, 

Handley, 

Pillans, 

Browne, 

Harrison, 

Proctor, 

Burnett, 

Heflin, of Chambers, 

Renfro. 

Carmichael, of Colbert, 

Heflin, of Randolph. 

Reynolds (Chilton). 

Carmichael, of Coffee, 

Hinson, 

Robinson. 

Case, 

Howell, 

Samford, 

Coleman, of Greene, 

Jenkins, 

Searcy, 

Coleman, of Wialker, 

Jones, of Montgomery, 

Sentell, 

Cornwall, • 

Kirk, 

Sloan, 

Craig, 

King, 

Smith (Mobile). 

Davis, of DeKalb, 

Kirkland. 

Sollie, 

Davis, of Etowah, 

Knight 

Stoddard, 

deGraffenreid, 

Ledbetter, 

Tayloe, 

Duke, 

Locklin, 

Vaughan, 

Eley, 

Long, of Butler, 

Weakley, 

Ferguson, 

Lowe, of Jefferson, 

Whiteside, 

Fitts, 

McMillan, of Baldwin, 

Williams (Barbour). 

Freeman, 

McMillan (Wilcox), 

Williams (Marengo), 

Gilmore, 

Miller (Marengo), 

Williams (Elmore), 

Graham, of Montgomery, 

Morrisette, 

Wilson (Clarke). 

Grant, 

Mulkey, 


By a vote of 43 ayes and 43 noes the motion to table was lost. 

THE PRESIDENT—The question recurs upon the adoption 
of the minority report. 

MR- BURNS—An amendment. 


CONSTITUTIONAL CONVENTION, 1901 1689 

* ^^^IDENT The gentleman from Montgomery has 

the floor. 

MR. LOMAX I yield for an amendment. 

MR. BLRNS It is too late to call for a verification of that 
last vote I suppose? 

THE PRESIDENT—It is too late now. 

MR. SANDERS — I rise to make a motion to adjourn. I 
think that a question of so much importance should be voted upon 
when more delegates are present. I therefore move that the Con¬ 
vention do now adjourn. 

The motion to adjourn prevailed. 

Leaves of absence were granted to Mr. Carmichael (Coffee) 
for today; Mr. Stoddard for Monday and Tuesday on account of 
the illness of his father, Mr. Opp for Monday, Mr. Norwood for 
today, and Mr. Cofer for Monday. 

MR. PROCTOR—I ask unanimous consent to submit the 
report of the Committee on journal. 

There being no objection, the report was read, stating that 
the Journal for the thirty-seventh day of the Convention had been 
examined and found to be correct, and the same was adopted. 

And thereupon the Convention adjourned until 9:30 o’clock, 
a. m. Monday. 


THIRTY-NINTH DAY 


MONTGOMERY, ALA., 
Monday, July 8th, 1901. 

The Convention met pursuant to adjournment, was called to 
order by the President and opened with prayer by the Rev. Mr. 
Howell, as follows: 

O Lord God, our Heavenly Father, we are brought under re¬ 
newed obligations to Thee, to praise Thy great name, for that 

kind providence that has been over us and above us, that our 
health and lives have been preserved, and we are permitted this 
morning to assemble here, to prosecute the business pertaining 
to this work. Accept the gratitude of our hearts, and the praises 

of our lips, for all the blessings Thou hast vouchafed to us. And 

we invoke Thy presence this day to give us divine light and wis¬ 
dom, to transact the business pertaining to this day, in the fear of 
God and in the interest of our commonwealth. Bless the homes 
and families of these Thy servants during their absence. May 



1690 


OFFICIAL PROCEEDINGS 


their lives, and their health, be precious in Thy sight, and we pray 
Thee to command Thy blessings upon all the people. May Thy 
kingdom come in all of its righteousness and purity, and per¬ 
vade the hearts and lives of all Thy people. Forgive us our sins, 
and prepare us for every good word and wrnrk, and may we so 
live as individuals and as representatives, that when the end of 
life shall come with us, we may have the consciousness of knowing 
we have done the best we could. May we meet Thy divine ap¬ 
probation at last. May we so have lived that Thou wilt say to us, 
well done, good and faithful servants, and in Heaven's bright 
and happy home be gathered at last, and we pray forever in Christ 
our Redeemer, Amen. 

Upon the call of the roll, ninety-five delegates responded to 
their names. 

The report of the Committee on Journal was read, stating 
that the journal for the thirty-eighth day of the convention had 
been examined and found to be correct, and the report was 
adopted. 

Leaves of absence were granted, as follows: Indefinite leave 
for Mr. H. W. Cardon, on account of sickness. Mr. Brown of Tal¬ 
ladega for Monday and Tuesday, Mr- Inge of Hale for today. Mr. 
Moody for today on account of sickness, indefinite leave for Mr. 
Studdard on account of sickness in his family indefinite leave for 
Mr. O’Rear on account of sickness, Mr. Tayloe for today. Mr. 
Coleman (Greene) for today, Mr. Locklin for today. 

The roll of delegates w-as called for the introduction of ordi¬ 
nances. resolutions, etc. 

Ordinance No. 413 by Mr. Burns: 

Amendment to article on taxation. 

Amend by adding—section or proviso—That no license tax 
shall be required by State, county or municipality of any veteran 
or ex-soldier of the Civil War of 1861-65. who is unable to per¬ 
form manual labor, and w'hose taxable property does not amount 
to the exemptions allowed by this Constitution. Provided, That 
this ordinance shall not apply to the sale of malt or spiritous 
liquors. 

Referred to Committee on Taxation. 

MR. BURNS—I am requested by several delegates to offer 
a resolution which has been sent to the clerk’s desk, and I shall 
move a suspension of the rules in order that it may be passed. 

The resolution was read as follows: 

Resolution No. 231 by Mr. Burns: 



CONSTITI TIOXAL CONVENTION, 1901 1691 

nirnrhairT'orono^ilf 1 ^ esolutlon N°- 184. introduced by Mr. Cun- 
rescinded ^ ° re S u late leaves of absence, be and is hereby 

. • reso ' ut ' on lias reference to the resolu¬ 

tion offered by the gentleman from Jefferson, a few days ago— 

IHi\ PKKSIDhNT—'The question is not debatable- 

MR. BURNS— I was going to move a suspension of the rules. 

I pon a vote being taken the rules were suspended. 

IHI% PRKSIDI-.NT—'The question is on the passage of the 
resolution. 


.IK. HI KaS I suppose each delegate lure understands 
wliat resolution the present resolution has reference to. The other 
rtM> ution parsed by the house I consider not at all complimentary 
to the members of the House, that they shall not be entitled to pay 
tor services unless absent on account of sickness. I think every 
delegate on this floor should be the judge for himself of the neces¬ 
sity, and should answer back to his constituents and not to the 
members ot this Convention, for any leave of absence he may de¬ 
sire. I hope that the resolution will pass. 


MR. COB I*—Just one word. I believe that the passage of 
that resolution the other day was an error, not only for the reason 
just given, but for the additional reason, there are causes which 
call men away from this Convention other than sickness of them¬ 
selves or their families, and which justifies their going. They only 
go for a short time. They have some important matters to look 
after, and no harm comes because of their absence. There is al¬ 
ways enough here to go on with the business and not enough 
members leave at one time to prevent the business of the Con¬ 
vention being transacted. A man that wants to go, who is called 
away on necessary business, generally regards the time and sees 
when he can go without any danger to any pending matter be¬ 
fore the Convention, and I think that it is a matter that ought to 
be left just as it was before the passage of the original resolution, 
and I support the proposition now pending before the House. 


MR. CUNNINGHAM—The* propriety of being paid for ser¬ 
vices not rendered is a matter of individual conscience. I pre¬ 
sume that any member of this Convention could refuse when grant¬ 
ed leave of absence for business reasons, to accept the S4 a day, and 
in that wav satisfy what conscientious scruples he may have upon 
the question. 

But as a matter of business I believe that this Convention 
has jurisdiction of this question, and I believe it should not permit 
a delegate to go home to attend to his private business and at the 
same time receive his per diem. We are not on a salary by the 
month. We are here on a per diem, and for that reason I believe 



1692 


OFFICIAL PROCEEDINGS 


that the resolution introduced by myself, about two weeks ago, 
is a good resolution- 

MR. JENKINS—I would like to ask the gentleman a ques¬ 
tion. 

THE PRESIDENT—Does the gentleman yield to the gentle¬ 
man from Wilcox? 

MR. CUNNINGHAM—Certainly. 

MR JENKINS—Does he not think as a matter of fact we 
could get along faster when a fewer number is here than when 
there is a full attendance. 

MR CUNNINGHAM—I am very glad the question has been 
asked, because that has been privately urged as a reason for the 
repeal of this resolution. 

MR. WHITE—Will the gentleman allow a question." 

MR. CUNNINGHAM — The gentleman will wait until I 
answer the other question. If it had been in the interest of the 
people of the State of Alabama to have a smaller number in this 
Convention, the probability is that those who are responsible for 
the enabling act would have put a smaller number in it. I here- 
fore I believe that the gentlemen who have been elected to this 
Convention should come forward and do their duty, unless there 
is a providential reason why they should not do it. That is mv 
honest conviction upon the subject. 

MR. WHITE—Does the gentleman yield for a question? 

MR. CUNNINGHAM—Certainly. 

MR. WHITE—The gentleman from Wilcox asked if you did 
not think we would get along better without some of the mem¬ 
bers here- 

MR. JENKINS—I rise to a question of privilege. I did not 
say that, but I said that we would get along faster. 

MR- WHITE—Faster, yes. . I would ask the gentleman from 
Jefferson if it is not a fact that the gentlemen who have business 
at home are probably the most desirable members? 

MR. CUNNINGHAM—Mr. President, I must say that I am 
not competent, nor is it my duty to pass upon the efficiency of in¬ 
dividual members of this Convention, of those who are present, or 
of those who are absent. But I will say this much, that it strikes 
me that in the discharge of this very great and sacred duty, that 
we have assumed, we should do so or at least not accept com¬ 
pensation for our negligence or indifference. I do not care to 



1693 


CONSTITUTIONAL CONVENTION, 1901 

prolong* the discussion. I move to lay the resolution on the table, 
and on that I call for the ayes and noes. 

The requisite number of members not rising, the call was not 
sustained. 

1 HE PRESIDENT—The question is on the motion to table 
the resolution. 

L pon a vote being taken the motion was lost. 

MR. OA 1 ES I do not wish to prolong the time consumed 
with th\> matter at all, or to take any active part in the discussion, 
but I desire to say that the resolution which was offered by the 
delegate from Jefferson and adopted is not unprecedented at all. 
It was once found that absenteeism was so great in the House of 
Representatives of the United States, that a rule of that kind was 
adopted. 1 recollect distinctly when I was away from there, can¬ 
vassing in this State for Governor, that I lost my pay. I did not 
get any during that time, and I am inclined to think it is a very 
healthy rule. If a man cannot discharge the duty of an office, he 
ought to resign and get out. That is the true doctrine. If he gets 
compensated, if it is worth anything to him, he ought to stay and 
perform the duties. Wherever a gentleman is called away by 
sickness of his family, or himself, under the rule adopted, I be¬ 
lieve it does not affect his compensation at all. But wherever he 
has business of such importance as to draw him away from here, 
then he can well afford to lose the little $4 a day he would other¬ 
wise get, and when he don’t do anything to earn it I don’t think 
he ought to get it. 

MR. REESE—I move the previous question. 

MR. O’NEAL—There is no second to the motion. 

MR. COBB—I ask the gentleman to withdraw the motion. 

THE PRESIDENT—Does the gentleman yield? 

MR. REESE—Yes sir. 

MR. COBB—Just a moment. I want to say that I am not 
.affected by this, so far as I am personally concerned, and it is 
not on that account I make the point that I now do before the 
Convention, but the gentlemen are in error in supposing that be¬ 
cause a man goes home on a sudden call, it may be on some pri¬ 
vate business, that he is not discharging his duty as a delegate to 
this Convention. It does not necessarily follow that he is avoid¬ 
ing his duty when he goes home for a day. The mere question of 
losing three or four dollars, supposing a man's house should burn 
up, as a gentleman suggests to me, or a matter of that sort calls 
him away, it struck me at the start, and strikes me now, as rather 
too small a matter to be dealt with by this Convention in this 



um 


OFFICIAL PROCEEDINGS 


way. It is not the matter of a little amount, which no delegate 
probably cares anything about, but it is a kind of reflection upon 
the members of this Convention, confessedly a patriotic, conserva¬ 
tive and faithful body of men. Therefore I think this resolution 
ought to be rescinded, and I want to say when my friend (Mr. 
Oates) failed to get his pay in Congress, he did not do so because 
it was demanded of him, but because he voluntarily gave it up. 
Because it was expressly ruled in Congress that when a man was 
absent by leave, or absent any way, his pay could not be taken 
from him, except by his consent. It w r as so ruled by the Speaker. 
If you remember, when Bailey made the fight— 

MR. OATES—Yes, I know the Speaker who ruled so there, 
Thomas B. Reed. 

MR. REESE—I now renew my motion. 

THE PRESIDENT—Does the gentleman call for the pre¬ 
vious question? The Convention seems ready to vote on the reso¬ 
lution. 

MR. REESE—I withdraw the motion, then. 

MR. CUNNINGHAM—I call for the ayes and noes and I 
hope the Convention will sustain the call. 

MR. BULGER—I make the point of order that the call for 
the ayes and noes was made and not sustained. 

THE PRESIDENT—On the motion to table. A call is made 
for the ayes and noes; the question is, is the call sustained? 

THE PRESIDENT—On the motion to table. A call is made 
for the ayes and noes; the question is, is the call sustained? 

A sufficient number not rising, the call was not sustained. 
Upon a vote being taken, the resolution was thereupon adopted. 

MR. GREER (Calhoun)—I rise to a question of personal 
privilege. When I left Wednesday afternoon I paired with a gen¬ 
tleman, Judge Stewart from Perry, in favor of the Weakley amend¬ 
ment. I have been informed he is not present, but that he stated 
to the Convention he was paired with some member and did not 
know who, and he declined to vote. I would like, Mr. President, to 
be recorded as being paired in favor of the Weakley amendment. 

MR. GRANT—I have been requested to ask that this petition 
be read and referred to the Committee on Printing, etc. 

The motion to read the petition was carried and the same 
was read as follows: 



CONSTITUTIONAL CONVENTION, 1901 


1695 


Anniston, Ala., July 3, 1901. 

To Calhoun’s Representatives in Constitutional Convention: 

Gentlemen—In view of the contemplated printed matter to be 
given out by the Constitutional Convention now in session, we, 
the printers of Anniston Typographical Union, No. 419, under 
International rule, submit the following resolutions for your con¬ 
sideration : 

Resolved, first, that we request our representatives in Con¬ 
vention to insist that the Allied Printers’ Union Label be used in 
the execution of all printed matter given out by said Convention, 
and, 

Be it further resolved, That every effort put forth by our rep¬ 
resentatives to this end will be considered as a token of high re¬ 
spect to the laboring men; and 

Be it further resolved. That such action on the part of the 
Constitutional Convention would be not only an encouragement 
to the laboring element in the State, but would be the means of 
strengthening unionism and co-operation among working men; 
and we will regard such action as a fitting recognition of the 
right of labor and be a guarantee that our representative men 
recognize the laboring element of our population and their value 
to the State- 

J. H. Church, 

J. K. Smith, 

J. F. Ruddisill, 

Committee, 

T. A. Moore, President, 

J. R. Ayres, Secretary, 

Referred to Committee on Stationery, Printing and Incidental 
Expenses. 

MR. SPRAGINS—I send a petition to the clerk’s desk and 
ask that the| body of it be read and the petition referred to the 
Committee on Taxation. 

The petition was as follows: 

Petition No. 15, introduced by request, by Mr. Spragins of 
Madison: 

We, the undersigned business men and citizens of the city of 
Huntsville, Madison county, most respectfully petition our dele¬ 
gation to the Constitutional Convention, Hons. R. E. Spragins, 
R. W. Walker, A. S- Fletcher and J. W. Grayson and the mem¬ 
bers of the Constitutional Convention, not to enact any law in 
our Constitution for the collection of a privilege tax. We believe 
that such a tax is unjust. 



](.')(> 


OFFICIAL PROCEEDINGS 


J. A. Anderson & Co., W. L. Halsey, Van Valkenberg & Mat¬ 
thews, Luke Matthews, treasurer; Huntsville Cotton Mills, J. A. 
Wallace, Jr., D. C. Monroe, W. T. Chofin, J. W. Kingler & Co.. 
Cantrell & Young, George T. Marsh, agent Merrimack Mfg- Co., 
Huntsville Furniture & Lumber Co., James A. Ward, Jr., secre¬ 
tary; W. H. Rowe Knitting Co., by Charles E. Shaver; Dallas 
Mfg. Co., by J. S. Davidson, superintendent. 

Referred to Committee on Taxation. 

On the call of the standing committee, the chairman of the 
Committee on Executive Department submitted the following re¬ 
port : 

The report and ordinance were read as follows: 

MR. PRESIDENT—The Committee on the Executive De¬ 
partment, to whom was referred the resolution introduced bv the 
gentleman from Montgomery (Mr. Watts) as to the advisability of 
framing and reporting an ordinance to provide for the succession 
in the office of Governor, have had the subject under considera¬ 
tion and direct me to report the accompanying ordinance, the 
passage of which the committee respectfully recommend. 

Thomas G. Jones, Chairman. 


An ordinance to provide for the succession in the office of 
Governor, in event of his death, resignation, removal from office, 
disability, or absence from the State, occurring prior to the next 
election of a President of the Senate and Speaker of the House. 

Section 1.—Be it ordained by the people of Alabama, in Con¬ 
vention assembled, that in event the Governor dies, resigns, is re¬ 
moved or under disabilities, or absent from the State for more than 
twenty days prior to the next election of a President of the Sen¬ 
ate and a Speaker of the House, the power and duties of the office 
shall devolve in the order named, upon the Honorable D- J. 
Meadors, the last President pro. tern of the Senate; next upon 
Hon. A. M. Tunstall, the last Speaker pro tern of the House; 
next upon the Attorney-General; next upon the Auditor; next up¬ 
on the Treasurer; but the powers and duties of the person ex¬ 
ercising the office of Governor in lieu of the Governor shall cease 
and terminate whenever a President of the Senate and a Speaker 
of the House shall be elected at the next meeting of any General 
Assembly. 

Sec. 2.—Be it further ordained, that this ordinance shall go 
into effect immediately. 

MR. JONES—If I am in order I will state that this is an or¬ 
dinance looking to what might be an emergency. We have no 
president of the Senate and no Speaker of the House, and the 



CONSTITUTIONAL CONVENTION, 1901 


1697 


committee reported an ordinance to cover a contingency of that 
sort, and it covers it only until the General Assembly meets, when 
there will be a president of the Senate and Speaker of the House. 
That is the reason they have provided it should become effective 
immediately. 

THE PRESIDENT—The rule will require it to lie on the 
table and be printed. 

The Committee on Executive Department submitted a fur¬ 
ther report and resolution as follows: 

Mr. President, the Committee on Executive Department di¬ 
rect me to report the accompanying ordinance for the relief of E. 
L. May and to recommend its passage. 

Thomas G. Jones, Chairman. 

An ordinance for the relief of E. L. May. 

Be it ordained by the people of Alabama, in Convention as¬ 
sembled, that the sum of $35 be and the same is hereby appropriated 
to pay E. L. May for his services as clerk for attending the meet¬ 
ings of the Committee on the Executive Department, and trans¬ 
cribing the article on the Executive Department as finally adopt¬ 
ed and reported by the committee. 

THE PRESIDENT—The ordinance will lie on the table and 
be printed. 

MR. JONES (Montgomery)—I do not think it is necessary 
to print it, unless somebody desires to have it printed. 

THE PRESIDENT—The rule requires it shall be printed. 

THE PRESIDENT—The next order of business is the re¬ 
port of special committees, of which there are none, and next un¬ 
finished business, the report of the Committee on Preamble and 
Bill of Rights. 

MR. PETTUS—I move to reconsider the vote by which Sec¬ 
tion 10 of the report of the Committee on Preamble and Declara¬ 
tion of Rights was passed. I desire to state, Mr. President, that 
it ought to be either amended or stricken out in the second and 
third lines. 

In the old Constitution Section 10 reads “that no person 
shall twice be put in jeopardy of life and limb,” and the Conven¬ 
tion adopted on Saturday and additional clause which says courts 
may for reasons fixed by law discharge juries from the considera¬ 
tion of any suit, and no person shall gain any advantage by reason 
of such discharge of the jury. 

MR. WATTS—I rise to a point of order. 



1698 


OFFICIAL PROCEEDINGS 


THE PRESIDENT — The gentleman will state the point 
of order. 

MR. WATTS—That this Convention has under considera¬ 
tion Section 12, and about to take a vote whether or not the minori¬ 
ty report shall be adopted. 

MR. PETTUS—Under the rules a motion to reconsider can be 
offered at any time within one hour after the reading of the Tour- 
nal. 


THE PRESIDENT—Rule 27 says “when a vote has passed, 
except on the previous question, or on a motion to lay on the table, 
or to take from the table, it shall be in order for any delegate 
who voted with the majority to move for a reconsideration there¬ 
of, on the same day, or within the morning of succeeding day. and 
such motion, if made on the same day shall be considered immedi¬ 
ately after the approval of the Journal on the day succeeding that 
on which it is made.” etc- 

The chair will inquire if the gentleman voted in favor of the 
adoption ? 

MR. PETTUS—There is no record of the vote, and I don't 
remember just now how I voted, and I submit that where there 
is not an aye and no vote anybody can make a motion to recon¬ 
sider. 

THE PRESIDENT—The ruling of the chair has been the 
other way. 

MR. LOMAX—-If the gentleman from Limestone is not able 
to state how he voted I submit his motion to reconsider is not in 
order. 

MR. WILLIAMS (Marengo)—I voted aye on the proposi¬ 
tion, and I now move to reconsider the vote by which Section 10 
was passed. 

THE PRESIDENT—The chair will make a ruling that dele¬ 
gates can understand. The chair ruled the other day on a similar 
question that while the rule is as referred to by the gentleman 
from Limestone, it is the opinion of the chair and the general par¬ 
liamentary authorities hold that a motion to reconsider must be 
made by one who voted in favor of the proposition, and it must 
affirmatively appear that he did so vote. 

MR. WILLIAMS (Marengo)—I voted aye on the passage of 
the section, and I now desire to make a motion to reconsider the 
vote by which Section 10 was passed on Saturday, and I yield the 
floor to the gentleman from Limestone. 

MR. PETTUS—The old Constitution provides that no per¬ 
son shall twice be put in jeopardy of life and limb, and I see no 



CONSTITUTIONAL CONVENTION* 1901 


1699 


reason why an additional clause should be adopted authorizing 
the courts to discharge jurors from the consideration of any cause, 
and if the section is adopted that could be done over the protest 
of the defendant as the practice is and as has been stated by the 
gentlemen who have advocated the adoption of the section. When 
a court now discharge the juries it is by the consent of the de¬ 
fendant, and the defendant will not insist on forcing a verdict in 
an improper case. I think this should be an improper case. I 
think this should be amended so that the jury may be discharged 
on the request of the majority of the jury as suggested by one of 
the delegates, or else it ought not at any rate to be done over the 
protest of the defendant. And if the amendment is not adopted, 
making it necessary for the majority of the jury to concur in the 
request there ought to be a time limit, and it ought not to be in 
the discretion of the judge to discharge the jury until it has been 
sitting for at least the limited time, and has made an earnest ef¬ 
fort to agree on a verdict. 

MR. O’NEAL (Lauderdale)—This would apply to civil as 
well as criminal cases? 

MR. PETTUS—I am speaking of the effect it has on crimi¬ 
nal cases, and I don’t think the other is a matter of so much im¬ 
portance. As the rule now stands, I can see there may be cases 
in which a hardship may be worked upon the jury, that a de¬ 
fendant might insist on keeping a jury for a long time on account 
of the will of one of twelve men on the jury, but it seems to me 
that he would do so at his own risk, and that he would prefer a 
mistrial and to take his chances again before another jury, but as 
this section now stands, as adopted Saturday, reported by the 
committee, the judge is authorized to discharge the jury before 
they have made an attempt to reach a verdict, and it seems to me 
that, it is rather too much arbitrary power to give him in this mat¬ 
ter, and it ought to be limited so the jury will not be discharged 
before a certain time has elapsed after the case has gone to the 
jury, or ought to be done at the request of a majority of the jury 
sitting on the case, and I do not see, I do not know of any instance 
of abuse under the old section. It stems to me after the case goes 
to the jury and the jury is discharged when they might have reach¬ 
ed a verdict acquitting the defendant that he has been twice put 
in jeopardy under this section. While I have no argument to 
make on it, I submit it is a dangerous innovation and this Con¬ 
vention ought to reconsider the section for the purpose of striking 
it out, and leaving it as it was in the Constitution of 1875. As 
the law is now, it may be, as I said before, that it sometimes 
works a hardship on the jury. But if you leave it as it is now in 
this section it may work a hardship on the defendant, and the de¬ 
fendant’s interest ought to be protected and safeguarded, as is the 
policy of our laws. 



1700 


OFFICIAL PROCEEDINGS 


MR. JONES (Montgomery)—Mr. President, 1 am in hearty 
sympathy with the purpose which the committee had in view in 
giving the judge some power to discharge a jury in a criminal 
case, but I am in favor of reconsideration, because I think on a 
reconsideration we may better the article. Now it is known in 
United States courts the judge can discharge the jury whenever 
he sees proper in a criminal case. The rule has been otherwise 
in Alabama, but we know that judges are human, like the rest 
of us. I do not think the judge ought to have it in his power 
simply if the jury stays out beyond what he thinks they ought 
to, to say to them: “I will discharge you: you have had time/ 
enough to find a verdict.” I am in favor of reconsidering it for 
the purpose of an amendment, that the judge on the request of 
six of the jurors may discharge them. I think that would ac¬ 
complish everything the committee had in view ami be an im¬ 
provement on the present. 

MR. LOMAX—Will the gentleman allow tne to call hi< at¬ 
tention to the fact that the language is that the "court mav for 
reasons fixed by law, and that leaves it to the Legislature to suv 
vvhat shall authorize the discharge of a jury ; the fixing of the 
particular reason for the discharge is a matter of detail that ought 
not to go into the Constitution. 

MR. JONES — I see the force of that, but 1 would not wish 
the Legislature to pass on it at all. My idea would be that when¬ 
ever half of the jury ask to be discharged and the judge in the ex¬ 
ercise of his judicial functions, thinks thev ought to be discharged 
to give him the power to do it. It will he very difficult to frame 
reasons which would cover cases satisfactorily, and I think it will 

be better left to the conscience of the judge on the request of six 
jurors. 


MR. WEATHERLY (Jefferson)—Mav I inquire if this would 
become operative without legislative action? 

MR. LOMAX — No; the Legislature would have to make 
provision. 

MR. WILLETT—This seems to me to be a dangerous in- 
novatmn.. I agree with what the gentleman from Limestone savs 
The Legislature may prescribe for what reason a jure mav 'be 
discharged when they are apparently not going to agree but the 
judge may act arbitrarily, and what is the provision That immedi- 
atdy follows however arbitrarily that judge mav act. however 
much the defendant may object to the discharge of thlt jurv 
whatever reason the Legislature may prescribe wherebv the bulge 
may discharge that jury, he may go out and get reasons of 
own and act arbitrarily, and it express!v savs no one shall "ain 
any advantage by reason of the discharge of the jurv Isn't that 
a dangerous Constitutional provision, isn't that dangerous in this 



CONSTITUTIONAL CONVENTION, 1901 


1701 


State to say that a judge shall act as he pleases, that the Legisla¬ 
ture can prescribe reasons, and yet with the defendant sitting 
there protesting against the discharge of jury trying him for his 
life or liberty that the Constitutional provision says that he shall 
not take advantage of the fact of the arbitrariness of the judge 
or get the benefit of it in the supreme court. It is too dangerous 
and I am in favor of the motion to reconsider. 

MR. WATTS—It seems to me that the gentleman totally 
misapprehends this section. The judge under this section would 
not have a right to act arbitrarily. It is distinctly provided in 
the section that he shall only discharge the jury under rules pre¬ 
scribed by law, therefore he would be compelled to follow the 
rule prescribed by law. 

MR. WEATHERLY (Jefferson)—Would it not be within 
the power of the Legislature under the clause as passed to fix a 
rule whereby a judge could pass a case and it be left within his 
discretion so that no appeal would lie from his ruling? Is it in 
the power of the Legislature under that clause to so fix it that 
there would be no appeal from the discretionary action of the 
judge ? 

MR. WATTS — Yes, I think the Legislature would pre¬ 
scribe rules for the discharge of juries and if the judge followed 
the rules and discharged the jury his action would be affirmed, 
but I don’t think the Legislature would prescribe that there 
should not be an appeal from the action of the judge in any mat¬ 
ter that came before him. Now as to the point of my friend 
from Pickens that the latter part of the clause is dangerous. I 
think he misinterprets that. It is not, as he seems to construe it, 
that anybody shall be deprived of a right by the discharge of this 
jury, but the language is that no one shall gain any advantage 
by the discharge of the jury that is, the action of the judge shall 
not benefit the plaintiff or defendant, but that the case shall go 
on and be tried again and the judge shall not discharge the jury. 

MR. O’NEAL—Under this provision the Legislature could 
provide that the judge could discharge the jury upon the request 
of six as suggested by the gentleman from Montgomery? 

MR. WATTS—Certainly. 

MR. O’NEAL—And that against the protest of the defend¬ 
ant ? 

MR. WATTS—Yes. 

MR. O’NEAL—Do you think that a safe provision? 

MR. WATTS—Yes; I think the Legislature could prescribe 
that the judge could discharge the jury in the event of the hap¬ 
pening of a certain event—for instance, after it has been out 24 



1702 


OFFICIAL PKOCKi-DINCS 


hours, or a juryman takes sick, or a juror called from the jury 
room by necessity- The idea is to prevent setting up in a subse¬ 
quent trial the fact that the jury was discharged in accordance 
with the forms prescribed by law. 

MR. LOMAX—As stated by the gentleman from Montgom¬ 
ery, Mr. Watts, the sole purpose of this amendment to the bill of 
rights is to enable the Legislature to fix certain rules which Miall 
govern judges in discharging juries, and to provide that when a 
judge acting under the rules prescribed by law does discharge 
a jury that the defendant nor the State can take anv advantage 
of that discharge, but that the case go on and be tried de novo. 
Now the matter as suggested by m\ friend from Montgomery 
(Mr. Jones) was purely a matter of Legislative detail, but ><> far 
as I am concerned, in my practice of the law, 1 have nevar vet 
seen a jury come out and say, six of u- want to be discharged, or 
five of us want to be discharged, but invariably come out after 
considering the case and say to the court that they a>k to he dis¬ 
charged because it is impossible to agree on a verdict. Now, un¬ 
der the operation of the law in some counties of the State, notab¬ 
ly in this county, in Mobile and Jefferson countv, a juror can 
be kept in that court three solid months considering a verdict 
where it is impossible for them to agree. Now that power ought 
not to be in the hands of anybodv, that is a power of condemn¬ 
ing the jury to hard labor for the county just as much as if thev 
went to the coal mines. That don’t interfere with anv right of 
the defendant, except his right to sit there and refuse "to permit 
men who have given a fair, a just and an earnest consideration 
to his case, who are unable to agree, to be discharged, to prevent 
him from keeping those men there an interminable length of time, 
and we do not put in it in the discretion of the judge but sav 
the Legislature, the General Assembly shall fix the rule which 
shall govern the judges in the exercise of their power. Now if the 
judges overstep those rules, the defendant has his right to ap¬ 
peal as he had before. 


MR WEATHERLY—-Could not the Legislature under that 
leave it to the judgment ot the judge? 

LOMAX I think not. because the section exoresslv 
says that he shall have the right to do it for reasons fixed ! v law 
and consequently the Legislature would have to fix reasons for' 
the judge to act upon. U1> ,or 

afte M th' PE T^ US ~ D ° >' ou r yi ect to this amendment: Insert 
after the word case’ in line three “after a jurv has had a casd 

Tverd^t- S ’ 3 maj ° ritV reP ° rt that the >’ «"«<* reach 


MR. LOMAX — Yes, I object to it heratwf> ;+ i 

ter of legislative detail and has no business in the Const it Jtfom^' 



CONSTITUTIONAL CONYKNTION. 1901 


1703 


I think gentlemen, we ought not to insert in the Bill of Rights 
of the Constitution any matters of Legislative enactment, and I 
submit that all of these propositions made in reference to this 
section are simple matters of detail under the provisions of the 
Constitutional enactment which we propose. It can work no harm 
to anybody, it simply makes the defendant go through another 
trial and that is all without taking away a single right, it enables 
juries to be discharged that ought to be discharged, and the sec¬ 
tion ought to be adopted in my judgment. 1 move Mr. Presi¬ 
dent, that the motion to reconsider be laid upon the table. 

A division was called for on the proposition to lay on the 
table. 

MR. REESE—On that I call for the ayes and noes. 

The call for the ayes and noes was not sustained. 

MR. REESE—I make the point of order that a motion to re¬ 
consider cannot be laid upon the table. 

THE PRESIDENT—Does the gentleman refer to a rule? 
MR. REESE—Yes, to Rule No. 27. 

THE PRESIDENT—The point of order is overruled. 

A vote being taken the motion to reconsider was laid upon 
the table by 52 ayes to 37 nays on division. 

THE PRESIDENT — When the Convention adjourned on 
Saturday, it had under consideration the minority report on Sec¬ 
tion 12, and the gentleman from Dallas sent up an amendment 
which was not read as the time for adjournment had arrived. 

MR, BURNS — I ask unanimous consent to withdraw the 
amendment. 

THE PRESIDENT—The Chair hears no objection. 

The question is on the adoption of the minority report on 
Section 12, that in civil actions three-fourths of the jury may ren¬ 
der a verdict. 

MR. LONG (Walker)—I am not a corporation lawyer, but 
I want to talk to this Convention a moment on a plain business 
proposition. I can see no good reason why three-fourths of the 
jury should be entitled or allowed to bring in a verdict. We all 
know very well and we had as well be frank among ourselves that 
this is but a step of some men who are hostile to corporations, in 
order to get large verdicts and unjust verdicts against corpora¬ 
tions in the State of Alabama. That is true, because I can cite 
instances, and I have in mind now an instance that happened in 
a sister county of mine where a preacher riding on a half fare 



1704 


OFFICI AL PRC)CEFI )I XF S 


ticket got jolted a little and brought a .suit against a railroad com¬ 
pany and eleven men wanted to give him a verdict lor $7,500. but 
one man alone held that jury and afterwards that preacher gladly 
compromised the case for $150, and he was not entitled to one 
hundred and fifty cents. Now I will tell you what the farmers ot 
this country will think about this. In my humble judgment they 
will say: Do you know what the} have down there at Montgom¬ 
ery ? Another one will say no, 1 have' not heard what thev have 
done. Well they have fixed it so the fellows in town can get a 
verdict agin us with just nine men. \\ t are poor folks and can¬ 
not get but three of our friends on the jury, and those fellows 
round town know' them and can pick the jury agin us. The* fann¬ 
ers and people of this State are not clamoring for thn. Xobodv 
wants it except men who are hostile and who are out after cor¬ 
porations in this State. This question was not discussed before 
the people of Alabama. Nobody claimed that we were going to 
fix a three-quarter clause so far as juries were concerned. 


MR. WILLIAMS (Marengo)—W as it not discussed to this 
extent, that we were not to tamper with the jury sy.-tem? 

MR. LONG—I cannot answer that, i don’t know, hut i do 
know there was no three-quarter dame advocated in this State 
so far as I know. It was not in the Democratic platform. Here 
we are asked to give up a system that has existed for centuries. 
If there is ineiit in this question there should he power given t*> 
the Legislature to do this, so if it prove- a had thing it ean he un¬ 
done. But there is no sensible reason whv it should he put in 
the Constitution of Alabama. The people will rise up and rebuke 
Jp - vo _ u invite the hostility of the corporations in Alabama 
Ihe farmers themselves will rebuke it. and believers in fair plav 
will rebuke it. I am opposed to the three-quarter dame in the 
insurance laws of this State, and to the three-quarter danse in 
the jiny laws. Why, when the lawver comes to select the jurors 
in a murder case or in an important case, they select some sap 
leaded fellow who has got nothing himself and wants uobodv 
e se p have anything, and puts him on the jury Nine times 
out of ten you cannot get over three smart men on'the jury on an 
average in this State. You know that is a fact. 1 have heard 
arguments made in the jury room myself that so and so ha- plenty 
of money, this corporation is rich, this poor fellow is poor let us 
take it away from them Everybody knows that that has happen 
eel m the jury box. I think this minority report will do a great 
deal of harm m Alabama. I want the Convention to look at this 
thing fair in the face, and I ask is it right to put a three-q a ter 
clause in our Constitution which will invite the • 

everybody in the State, tha, want"fair X c< “ “ST” °1 
everybody else? The people don't want it. and 7 hope and'S 
lieve this Convention will not have it done. 6 ’ 



CONSTITUTIONAL CONVENTION. 1901 


1705 


MR. THOMPSON—The proposition of the minority admits 
that it is a danger. Gentlemen of the Convention, if it is good in 
civil cases why is it not good in criminal cases? By every rule it 
ought to come in criminal cases because as you all know the bur¬ 
den of proof in a criminal case beyond all reasonable doubt makes 
it harder to get a unanimous verdict than it does in civil cases, 
where the plaintiff only has to make out his case to the reason¬ 
able satisfaction of the jury. 1 say if it is good in a civil case, it 
ought to apply in a criminal case. I don’t believe there are three 
men in the Convention who for a moment would think of taking 
a man’s life or his liberty except upon a unanimous verdict. 'Then 
I submit tfiat a man's property or his homestead ought to be just 
as sacred as his liberty. It is not right to take his land in an 
ejectment suit, for those cases often turn upon questions of fact 
and are submitted to the jury. That his subsistence ought not 
to he taken ; that his hard-earned dollars should not be taken upon 
the whim of nine men. As has been mentioned bv the gentkinan 
from Walker, it is rarely the case in an average county in .Ala¬ 
bama that you have over two men out of twelve who are of such 
intelligence as they can weigh the evidence and apply the charge 
of the court to it. 

Then if you put it in the power of nine men belonging to the 
average hoodlum element, if they know* the}' are not hound to sit 
there and listen to the statements and arguments of a man on that 
jury who they recognize is superior in intelligence to themselves, 
that they have not got to he governed by or listen to him at all. 
they will stand there bull-heacled and bring in a verdict regardless 
of law’, justice and right. Then, I submit that if three-quarters 
is a good rule, if we are going to depart from ancient landmarks 
and leave out a unanimity verdict, if they believe in majority rule, 
let us have majority rule. Let us have it in criminal cases, too. 
I submit no man would think of that for a moment. It is cntirelv 
too revolutionary, and I submit to the gentlemen of the Conven¬ 
tion this is the most revolutionary subject yet introduced in this 
Convention. It is fraught wdth more danger and will stir up more 
opposition to the ratification of this Constitution than anything 
yet, unless, perhaps, it was the talk taken on the subject of sheriffs. 
This certainly equals that, and, as has been said, no man ever dis¬ 
cussed this on the stump, except to promise that the jury sys¬ 
tem should not be interfered with. Gentlemen of the Conven¬ 
tion, remember that two years ago in the manifesto issued as one 
of the causes assigned why the act calling a Constitutional Con¬ 
vention should be repealed, it was said that there was no pledge 
then given that the jury system should not be interfered with. 
Then, if it was not discussed, and there is no claim that anybody 
asked for it except as has already been said by gentlemen inter¬ 
ested in holding up corporations for big verdicts, why should it 
he adopted. I will make the admission that I have never tried a 
case for a corporation submitted to a jury. I have never tried a 




1706 


OFFICIAL PROCKKDINGS 


case before a jury in which I represented a corporation. I am 
not interested in the matter in any sense. 

MR. BOONE—Would you say that I and Governor Oates 
and Mr. Murphree and Governor Jones of Montgomery are en¬ 
gaged in holding-up corporations? 

MR. THOMPSON—I do not mean that every man of the 43 
who voted for this proposition is engaged in such a business. I 
do not individualize. 

I submit, Mr. President, we ought not to depart from a svs- 
tem that has been a part of our law so long, a part of our .Ameri¬ 
can system that has existed for so long ought not be broken down 
except for good reasons, and if we are going to break it down in 
one instance, break it down in all. 


MR. MARTIN—I can not get my consent to vote in favor 
of this amendment that proposes to alter a rule of law of ^uch 
long standing in this country. Why it has been so long that the 
memory of man runneth not to the contrary. It has been en¬ 
dorsed by the learned jurists and the most experienced and cap¬ 
able practitioners; and, above all. it has been sustained and up¬ 
held and endorsed by the people of the country. Constitutional 
Conventions in this State have assembled for the purpose of 
amending the Constitution. 1 hev have assembled for the pur¬ 
pose of revising the Constitution.' They have assembled for the 
purpose of making Constitutions; yet this grand and this true 
law has remained unshaken and unmolested. Now. gentlemen, 
why is it that this law has remained for so many hundred vears? 
Why is it that it has been endorsed by the wisdom of men all 
along the line." Why is it that there has been im demand among 
the rank and file of the people for its alteration or its change* 
Other things have changed. Other laws have been departed from; 
but this one has been held up so long that the mcmorv of man 
runneth not to the contrary, at least in this countrv 'There is 
but one way to answer it; and that is. that it has been found use¬ 
ful It has been found efficient. It has been found serviceable 
to the people in the administration of justice. Gentlemen of the 
Convention, I am opposed to cutting loose from these ancient 
moorings and departing from the land-marks of our fathers with¬ 
out a good and cogent and an overshadowing reason can be given 
lor it. Aon may alter it. vou mav tear down .he ancient K 
mark, but at once you will place upon vourself the necessitv of 
giving your reasons for it. and. take my word for it. you will find 
more men differing with you than men on your side. 

Now it has been said upon this floor that these gentlemen 
are standing by these ancient laws and these ancient pract ce" 
simply because they were indulged in by our fathers I,i manv 
cases that is true. But, gentlemen, I contend here today tlm it 



1707 


CONSTITUTIONAL CONVENTION, 1901 

would be better for the people of this country, and it would be 
f >et . t ® r £ tbe State of Alabama, if many cases, if we would walk 
in the foot-prints of our fathers. God speed the day, and I think 
1 catch the first days of its dawning, when the people of Alabama 
can return to the ancient practices and customs of these good men 
who have gone before us, at least in some respects. 

Now, what is it you propose to do? You propose to allow' 
nine men instead of twelve, to render a verdict. Will this en¬ 
courage litigation? Will it stimulate litigation? Gentlemen, I 
insist that it will stimulate litigation. I insist that its tendency 
will not be to quiet litigation. Why? Here is a man has a case 
in court. I welve men render a verdict against him. There is 
not a man, woman or child in all this land who knows anything 
about courts, but what knows that it requires the concurrence 
of twelve minds to render a verdict in a civil or criminal case. I 
say, when a man has a case in court and twelve men render a ver¬ 
dict against him, lie begins to think, and he says, “There are 
twelve men twelve intelligent citizens, and they say there is no 
merit in my cause—there is no strength in my position; and, there¬ 
fore. I must be mistaken in my contention." But let that man 
belie'e that there are three intelligent men standing up to him, 
three men who saw the facts as he saw them, and just nine men 
against him, he will say, “There were three men for me, and I 
will renew my fight and I will strengthen up my line and I will 
present the case, and these three perhaps will be multiplied. 

AIR. BOONE Can he do that without reversing the case? 

THE PRESIDENT—The gentleman will please address the 
chair when he desires to interrupt a speaker. 

MR. BOONE—-Very well, sir, I will do so. 

MR. MARTIN—I say it will simply be when twelve men 
rise up and say there is no virtue in your case, will put a quietus 
upon it; but wdien only nine men rise up and say there is no virtue 
in your case because three men stand up and contend for it. it is 
not calculated to quiet litigation. Ah. but they say you can bribe 
one juror. Probably one juror may be bribed and it is possible 
to bribe three jurors and it is possible, perhaps, to bribe the fudge. 
All these things may occur; but I sav that is no reason for alter¬ 
ing this rule of long standing, which is well founded in the jury 
system of this country. 

I w r ould say to the gentlemen of this Convention, in the lan¬ 
guage of some eloquent man upon this floor, we had better pur¬ 
sue the course of our fathers and travel and use the oar with which 
they steered. 

MR. WHITE — It seems to me that on a matter which 
should be decided from the standpoint of reason, the motives of 



3708 


OFFICI AL PR< X/KKIMW.S 


men on the other side should not he a>sailed; hut it has been >aid 
here that it is being urged by men who want to hold up cor¬ 
porations. Forty-three of them voted here who. 1 am as >ure were 
as patriotic as the gentleman who voted on the other >ide. 1 might 
just as well and with just as much force say. it 1 were inclined to 
do it, though I am not, that the only opposition comes from the 
corporations, who are afraid of the jury. I >ay it would he as 
equally fair for me to say that as for the gentlemen to sav what 
they have said. Now remember this is not an extreme tiling. 
Nine men out of twelve must concur in a verdict. Surely three- 
quarters of any body united upon one thing carries with it con¬ 
servatism. It can not he said that i> extreme when three-fourths 
of a body agree to it and must agree to it before a result can he 
reached; but they tell us it is ancient. I admit that it ha^ around 
its neck and over its form a cob-vvebb of centuries. It had its 
birth in the land of our fathers at a time when true men and fair 


women were carried to the stake and burned for witchcraft. It 
it just as old as that. Yes, it is ancient. It dates hack to a time 
when tender women and light-bearded men were carried to the 
scaffold and died because they imagined the death of the king. 
Imagined the death of the king. Yes, it is ancient. It dates hack 
to a time when men and women were burned at the stake lie- 
cause they would not admit and confess that the bread and wine 


was the body and blood of the Savior. Yes, it has all of that: but 
does that make it right t ft dates hack to that time when it was 
declared that the King could not do any wrong, vet, our ancestors 
more than 100 years ago said that kings could do wrong; ami 
could do such grave wrongs that it justified a colonv in rebellion. 
Now they say it is ancient. I concede it; but these other things 
I have mentioned are ancient along with it. Is that your argu¬ 
ment? Do you meet the proposition on nothing but that? Mv 
friend says it has not been considered bv the people- Neither was 
the proposition which you adopted on Fridav and defused to re¬ 
consider this morning ever discussed before the people, i. e., that a 
Judge could discharge a jury, or a legislature could authorize him 
to do it, upon whatever cause the legislature might sav thev 
founded it. W e have there broken down a provision that stands 
in every Constitution almost in the American Cnion and has stood 
in every Constitution Alabama has ever had. Mv friend sit<T<r Cs ts 
why it took so long after the decision in the Dartmouth College 
case to reach the proposition that the legislature had the right to 
amend or repeal a private charter. All these things are hedged 
about with these ancient things. But I want to put the emotion 

rr„7' a Tl 1,8 mer, ; ts : W*.' "ave men : ,li the virtue ami 

it don t abide in one? If there is virtue in the twelve, it must he 
conceded in the greatest number of things that there is eleven 
times as much virtue in the eleven as there is in one. Then what 
right has one man possessed with no more intelligence and with 
no more knowledge and no better information, what right has he 



CONSTITUTIONAL CONVENTION, 1901 1709 

to stand up and thwart the will of the eleven. Now we are ad¬ 
vancing. We are in the noon-day of the Twentieth Century. As 
civilization and light falls upon the earth, men advance. So we 
only know it is a thing of the past simply because it had its origin 
in the dark ages. We know, those of us who have practiced law, 
we know that in many cases one man defeats the will of the elev¬ 
en, either because he is corrupt, or because he sometimes has been 
prejudiced by some tale of woe poured into his ear. It is easier 
to reach one man than three or four. It purifies the channel of 
justice and the stream that flows from that channel. It makes it 
practically impossible for a man with money or prejudice to tam¬ 
per with the jury. He can’t tamper with four men. He takes too 
many chances. Do you think it is as wild a theory as some of 
our friends would make you believe, when such men as Justice 
Brewer of the Supreme Court of the United States declared in its 
favor, and when one of your Supreme Court Justices says it is 
right? Now let us look at it as thoughtful, reasonable and dis¬ 
passionate men, without regard to who advocates it or who does 
not. If it is right, let us keep it there. If it is wrong let us take 
it away. 

The President called the attention of the gentleman speak¬ 
ing, Mr- White, that his time had expired. On motion, by unani¬ 
mous consent his time was extended. 

MR. WHITE—I am very much obliged to my friend (Mr. 
Cunningham) but I have about concluded my remarks. 

MR. WEATHERLY—In the short time allotted by the Con¬ 
vention, I will do something that I do not often do, request the 
members not to interrupt me, I mean by asking questions : 

Mr. President, when it was charged by the ex-Governor of 
the State, then the Governor, and I use the word distinguished in 
good faith and mean what I say, that there was danger of the 
Constitutional Convention tampering with the Bill of Rights and 
disturbing the right of trial by jury, as an argument against the 
calling of a Constitutional Convention, I treated the suggestion 
with ridicule. But here we are deliberating soberly upon a ques¬ 
tion of whether or not the right of trial by jury shall be so im¬ 
paired that one of its most essential constituents shall be taken 
away. I have a great deal more regard for the judgment and 
foresight of the distinguished Governor now than I had then. 

MR. WHITE—May I interrupt the gentleman? 

MR. WEATHERLY—I decline to be interrupted. 

The argument for a change in this right of trial by jury is 
utterly fallacious. The minority ask, why should a unanimous 
verdict on a question of fact be required and enforced from a jury. 
“A majority of one vote in this Convention either puts a propo- 



1710 


O F F 1C IA L P ROC E i 1> IN'S 


sition in the organic law or rejects it. I deny it. It ma> put it 
tentatively in this Constitution, but it must go to the people to 
be affirmed or rejected. “A majority of one vote m each house 
of the General Assembly creates, repeals or modifies a positive 
law, regardless of the magnitude of the interests in\ol\ed. I 
deny it. It must be passed on by the other house and passed on 
again by the Chief Executive of the State. A majorit} of the 
Senate of the United States ratifies or refuses to consent to a 
treaty with a foreign power/’ In one sense that is true. Hut how 
do they act upon it? They act upon it as a check upon what has 
been done bv the Executive; and it takes, two-thirds, as has been 
suggested. “A majority of a single vote in a half million in a 
pivotal State, tnav elect a President of the L nited States, change 
the policy of the Government and bring prosperity or ruin to sev¬ 
enty millions of people.” On its face that looks like it is true, 
but it is not. Under our peculiar form of elections whereby 
elections are had by States, a minority of the people of the United 
States may elect a President, and have done it. The system was 
devised for the express purpose of putting a check upon majori¬ 
ties, and, Mr. President, there is not a single institution in our 
republican government that is so constructed that it is left with¬ 
out a check, without some other power to check its operation. 
Our system of checks and balance in the operation of our Repub¬ 
lican form of government is one of the chief sources of the ad¬ 
miration which other nations accord to us. 

“So in the Supreme Court of the United States, five of the 
Justices against four held the income tax unconstitutional.” Thev 
held it upon an appeal from another court. And I am not sure 
but what the very gentlemen who raised this question will agree 
that it is always safe to leave the decision of those questions to 
a bare majority, even of the Supreme Court. 1 have heard more 
dissent and dissatisfaction expressed on the score of those deci¬ 
sions. Besides there is a natural check to the action of the court. 
It is composed of trained lawyers who have months in which to 
deliberate upon a question, but in the case of jury trials, thev are 
required to be speedy and all the facts are taken before the jury. 
They act on the spur of the moment, d hev act sometimes under 
excitement. They act under the stress of popular prejudice: and 
to authorize them to bring in a verdict by a bare majoritv, is to 
give speed to hast}' and ill-considered verdicts in disposition to 
truth, and right, and justice. What are the real reasons on the 
other hand for requiring a unanimous verdict? I quote from 
Proffatt on jury trials, using it in preference to anv language of 
my own devising: 

“Each member of the jury is sworn to declare the truth ac¬ 
cording to his conscience. A single member, if conscientiously 
impressed with a view of a statement of facts, different from the 



CONSTITUTIONAL CONVENTION, 1901 


1711 


others, is as much entitled to have that view considered as the 
view of the majority; that when unanimity is required, the facts 
in the case are more thoroughly and fully investigated, with the 
\ lew of bringing this unanimity about—for if a mere majority are 
agreed at the first consultation there would be no necesstiy to de¬ 
liberate and reason together with the view of making a unani¬ 
mous verdict is required, each member, however insignificant, has 
a right to explain his views and to compel the majority to listen 
to him ; for it has been well said, truth is established by investi¬ 
gation and delay, but falsehood prospers bv precipitancy. That 
the verdict of twelve men if rationally obtained, is more likely to 
be correct than that of nine out of twelve. It is calculated on 
the doctrine of probabilities that the probability of error in a ver¬ 
dict where a majority of nine out of twelve is sufficient for a de¬ 
cision. is about one to twenty-two, while unanimity is exacted 
it is one to eight thousand, and that a decision of twelve men, 
when unanimous, will command more respect and weight than 
nine out of twelve, or than the decision of a mere majority/’ 

1 he time of the gentleman here expired, and on motion of 
Mr. Samford, was extended ten minutes- 

Now, in addition to that, I want to present this fact to this 
view of this Convention. My own idea about the real essential 
value of a jury trial which requires unanimity is this, it protects 
those who are unpopular in the community and who would other¬ 
wise ,be oppressed under the laws of God ; but there is always 
one man at least can be found who will stand up for the right, 
though the heavens fall. Talk about corporations. Yes, of 
course, corporations are weak in public opinion and it is a pro¬ 
tection to them ; but there are others for the Convention to con¬ 
sider. Any man of wealth in the community may be unpopular, 
not so much on account of his wealth, but the way he got it. That 
is no reason why he should not have a fair jury trial. Corpora¬ 
tions have the right to exercise the right of eminent domain. 
They can come to the gentleman of W ashington or they can 
come to you and take your land from you but they would have 
to pay you for it; but maybe you don’t want to give up your land. 
You go to a jury to try that question; and under this ancient law, 
which is being ridiculed here today, your rights are protected, be¬ 
cause it takes twelve men to say whether or not you shall give 
it up and how much shall be pa id for it. Whereas, under the 
amendment here proposed, this corporation could go in there and 
submit its case and on the first consultation nine men out of the 
12 would be against you; and they would not reason and they 
would not deliberate but they want the railroad to come in or the 
rolling mill to be established or the cotton mill in their midst, 
they want the public improvement and the whole town is against 
you and your only protection is the one or two men on that jury. 



1712 


OFFICIAL PROCEEDING'S 


The time has been, Mr. President and gentlemen of this Con¬ 
vention, when the minority representation on the jury in the Fed¬ 
eral Court was worth its weight in gold—in gems of the most 
priceless value, in the South. Recall the days of reconstruction 
and you can recall them. When you were before the Federal 
courts the only barrier that stood between you and utter humilia¬ 
tion was the minority on the jury. If there is anything in the 
world that inspires—I was almost about to say disgust, but I 
won’t say that; but it inspires indignation for men to come here 
and attempt to overthrow an ancient institution having elements 
in it which were put in it for the express purpose of protecting 
the weak against the strong. What can we foretell as to what 
conditions will confront us in this country, especially if we under¬ 
take the suffrage law or even if we do not? How can anv man 
predict the conditions that will arise which will require the pro¬ 
tection of this jury institution, as we have it now? 

MR. BURNS—Will the gentleman permit an interruption? 

MR. WEATHERLY—I must decline to be interrupted. Mr. 
President. Now they ridicule it because it is ancient. The gen¬ 
tleman has said that it was contemporaneous with the doctrine 
that the King could do not wrong, yet the English people cut off 
Charles First’s head and destroyed that doctrine and left the jury 
system intact. Why the English people and the svstem. gentle¬ 
men. are ten centuries old. Think of it. one thousand vears old; 
and the English people have progressed and lived upon it The 
highest social body in the world today, the English people, and 
they have gone through their court procedures and reformed them 
root and branch The English system of law is nothing today like 
it was one hundred years ago. They have changed and reformed 
it entirely, but no Englishman has dared to lav his hand on this 
great institution. 


You might as well say a jury should be reduced to eight. Whv 

tinr. e VC mSt m a ^ ° f e,gh !’ That would re quire less delibera¬ 
tion. They would do it quicker but the reason is it was put there 

for a purpose, it is a goodly number of men and it adds delibera¬ 
tion in the formation of a verdict. 

MR BROOKS—The proposition that two-thirds of a jury 
may render a verdict is, as has been well stated by the gentle 

to Seat ’ a radica ! de » ar,ur ' our fysleni 

been dfs’cussed for mau proposition by any means. It has 

been discussed for many years, and has received the favorable 

consideration of some of the strongest men in this country It 
an innovation and it is true that innovations are not alwavs n 
provements, but a blind adherence to a system consecrated bv 
time merely will make it impossible ever to have innovation^that 
are improvements. uuns inai 



CONSTITUTIONAL CONVENTION. 1901 1713 

it s (,ve°mirn^L^ e hl tl tK len wh ° opp ? se this Proposition talk about 
moval of th ^ and Pol'cy of centuries, that it is a re- 

a. well s f ettleri anCien V andmarks - But ’ sir ’ wel1 settled principles 
fied bv chanfref| PreCe H-!" tS and customs must sometimes be modi- 
an enlLhtenS condltl °ns and they must yield to the demand of 
lv because th J >Ub ' C sentirnent - The conversation to reject mere- 
rU am if !/ overturn precedent and custom handicaps prog- 

and test exi-tin"' aP f!' l ° Wel1 settled precedents and customs 
we 1111V as in'r ^ cond,tl ° ns we may promote development and 

make steonino- T Ua S ^ 3S f people ’ d we profit by experience, 
tUi 1 ^ stones of our dead selves to better things. When 

from Ih "T UP f ° r d,scussion ’ 1 listened in vain for argument 

debate hOS; i : h Uh0 t a r re ° PP f ed to il ’ and not one word was said in 
clePate. Ihis distinguished convention, which has alwavs been 

so generous in its views in respect to any matter before it, so far 
as the opposition to this proposition is concerned, was as dumb 


MR. LOMAX—Will the gentleman permit a question? 
MR. BROOKS—Yes, sir. 


MR. LOMAX—Is it not a fact that after the gentleman from 
Macon and the gentleman from Washington and the gentleman 
rom Je erson had each spoken in favctr of the minority report 
that the motion was made to lay on the table so that all the de- 
bate from the majority was cut off? 


MR BROOKS Yes, and the motion was made by the een- 
tleman himself, the chairman of the committee. 

MR. LOMAX—No, sir. I think it was made by Mr. Bare- 
field of Monroe. 


MR. BROOKS—The chairman of the committee first made 
the motion to table and then withdrew it, but up to the time the 
chairman had made that motion no argument from that side had 
been made. 


MR. LOMAX—I stated on Saturday and I desire to state 
in, that I sat in my seat for half a minute waiting for some 
gentleman from the minority of the Committee to make some 
motion, or to discuss the question, and they failing to do it, I made 
the motion to table and as soon as they indicated a purpose or a 
desire to discuss the matter, I withdrew the motion to table and 
it was then renewed before the majority of the committee had 
an opportunity to discuss the proposition. 

MR. BROOKS—I think the chairman of the committee un¬ 
derstands the point I make. There is no inconsistency between 
what he says and what I say. My contention is that up to the 
time the motion was made to table this resolution, no gentleman 



1714 


OFFICIAL PROCEEDINGS 


on behalf of the committee had opposed this minority report by 
any argument to the Convention, and the stenographic report 
will bear me out in that statement. Now I state as a fact and I 
am glad at this late moment after we have only had an expres¬ 
sion from the opponents of the measure by 43 votes recorded 
Saturday, that they have at last come forward and put up some 
champions to defend the cause. 

Now, Mr. President, my own reflections lead me to believe 
that this language embodying the principle of unanimity of tIn¬ 
jury in civil cases ought to be modified not only in the interest of 
the parties litigant but of the counties, cities and generallv for 
the public interest. I do not propose to go into any elaborate 
argument why this change should be made because much has 
been said pro and con. but I do say there are several reasons 
which it seems to me ought to address themselves to the general 
good sense of the people of this State in behalf of the change 
proposed bv the minority. 

It has been said that one trouble is that a single juror may 
be fixed, and the result is a mistrial. If that is true, it is no worse 
for corporations than it is for individuals. If it is true, the honest 
litigant is at the mercy of the dishonest litigant, the poor but hon¬ 
est suitor is at a disadvantage with a well-to-do opponent who is 
unscrupulous enough to use his means unworthily. 

But leaving out the question of corporations, there are other 
reasons- There is scarcely a jury in the land upon which there 
is not one or two or perhaps more men who are governed by their 
prejudices, and who are incompetent, for that reason, to brink in 
any just and proper verdict. Those men are generally governed 
by their admiration for one of the counsel in the case, and they 
will vote for a verdict, or against it, just as desired by the counsel 
for whom they have that admiration so deeply imbedded in them. 

I remember on one occasion ex-Senator Pugh told an anecdote 
about an old gentleman of Alabama during the reconstruction 
days. He was so strong in his prejudices that he refused to be re¬ 
constructed ever so little and his friends argued with him and they 
said to him “You ought to lay aside your prejudices.” but said 
the old gentleman, “my prejudices are my principles.” So it is 
with many men on the jury. Their prejudices are their principles. 

MR. JACKSON—If it is wrong to allow three-quarters of the 
jury to deprive a man of his liberty, why is it not likewise wrong 
to allow three-quarters to deprive him of his property? 

MR. BROOKS—That is a very pertinent question at the 
right time and occasion, but we are not discussing that now. 

THE PRESIDENT—The gentleman's time has expired. 



CONSTITUTIONAL CONVENTION, 1901 


1715 


MR. WHITE—I move that the time of the gentleman be ex¬ 
tended. 

MR. BROOKS—I am very much obliged to the gentleman 
and to the Convention but I prefer to abide the rule. 

MR. CUNNINGHAM—Mr. President, I believe with the ex¬ 
ception of Mr. Brooks, nearly all the delegates on this floor who 
have discussed this question are lawyers. I though it was about 
time that you heard from the people, and with the indulgence of 
this Convention I will make a few remarks. I want to say, Mr. 
President, I myself believe that the world do move; and I am 
free to confess that ancient customs and traditions should not ex¬ 
ercise an absolute and uncontrollable influence upon enlightened 
parliamentary bodies at the beginning of the 20th century. We 
should look upon this question very largely in my judgment in 
the light of the present day, and the first question or proposition 
to which 1 desire to call your attention is the disposition to im¬ 
pugn, to suspect or to criticise the motives, not only of attorneys 
and delegates who may appear in a parliamentary body, but also 
of witnesses who appear upon the stand. 

Now 1 believe that a change of this jury system from a ver¬ 
dict that is unanimous to one that is three-fourths, will not be to 
the best interests of the people of the State of Alabama. I be¬ 
lieve primarily it will work hardship upon the corporations of the 
State of Alabama. I have not a doubt of that proposition. Right¬ 
fully or wrongfully there is a bias and a prejudice against prop¬ 
erty invested in corporations in the State of Alabama. I do not 
believe that anybody will question that proposition. And if that 
be true, it therefore follows that in the selection of a jury to try 
cases in which corporations appear as defendants in damage suits, 
the plaintiff has primarily the advantage. If fifty per cent, are 
more or less biased and prejudiced in advance, it therefore follows 
that this bias or prejudice, though it may be unconscious, will 
have a tendency to make up a verdict prior to the hearing of testi¬ 
mony, and the hearing of argument. Not only is this true in my 
judgment, but those here who have had the misfortune to testify 
upon the witness stand as experts and as to matter of fact, are 
familiar with the fact that if your testimony is to the benefit and 
interest of the plaintiff, the lawyer for the plaintiff is very easy 
in the cross examination. If it appears to be in the interest of 
the defendant then the lawyer with the defendant is very easy, but 
if vour testimony is against one side or the other then the purpose 
is to degrade the character of that witness, though he may stand 
in every relation in life, socially, in business and politically, and 
in every way unchallenged for honesty and integrity, yet they will 
undertake to besmirch his honor and character by asking questions 
which to my mind are clearly out of order. 



1716 


OFFICIAL PROCEEDINGS 


Mr. President, sympathy has no place in a court in my judg¬ 
ment, and yet it plays an important part. Now, I undertake to 
say that if this amendment is adopted—I am not afraid to say it— 
it will redound to the interest of plaintiffs in damage suits in Jef¬ 
ferson county. I say it boldly, but I do not want here to interpret 
the motives of the gentlemen who usually appear for plaintiffs in 
these cases as having that as a primary motive. I am opposed 
to that proposition, but I undertake to say it will add thousands 
and hundreds of thousands of dollars to those who bring suits for 
damages and imaginary damages, and of that fifty or twenty-five 
per cent, will find lodgment and properly, no doubt, in the pock¬ 
ets of those who appear for them in courts of justice. Now who 
bears the burden? Is it the corporations? Does not the corpora¬ 
tion take into consideration the amount of money they have to 
pay the insurance companies when they are considering these 
questions with the committees that appear for labor. Don’t they 
take into consideration the amount of money they will probably 
have to pay, considering the doctrine of chances in adjusting the 
wages with their labor. Why, Mr. President, about that there 
cannot be a question, and while it will apparently cost the cor¬ 
porations of Jefferson County thousands of dollars, in reality it 
comes out of the pocket of the man that earns the money. It 
comes out of the labor because it will be a charge and a charge 
that is properly made against the cost of operating these great 
industries. Now, Mr. President, I believe on the floor of this Con¬ 
vention gentlemen should be permitted to say what they have to 
say, and exercise the privilege of voting without questioning their 
motives. I do not believe it is the proper place, and, therefore, 
I do not approve of all that has been said on the question I am ad¬ 
vocating. I am opposed to this three-fourths proposition, and I 
sincerely hope, in the interest of justice, and fair play, right and 
propriety, that we do not disturb this great independent and fun¬ 
damental question of the right of trial by jury. 

MR. COLEMAN (Greene)—Mr. President and delegates of 
the Convention, I have listened to the argument Saturday and 
today, pro and con, with a great deal of interest, and at the risk 
of being considered as consuming too much of your time by ap¬ 
pearing too much on this floor, I conceive it to be a duty to make 
some suggestions to you as have occurred to me in regard to the 
question now under consideration. It cannot be denied that there 
has been great merit and force in the argument of the gentle¬ 
men who contend for the unanimous verdict, nor can it be denied 
that there has been much merit in the contention of those advocat¬ 
ing verdicts by three-quarters of the jury. If, therefore, there is 
a plan of solution which will facilitate trials as insisted upon by 
those who favor the minority report, and at the same time protect 
those who, chiefly, the argument has contended, would be injured 
by the adoption of the three-quarter verdict, it does seem to me it 



CONSTITUTIONAL CONVENTION, 1901 


1717 


would be wise for this Convention to consider that question. No 
man who has appeared in the courts of this country but knows full 
well that in every trial by an individual against a corporation, 
whether city, county or railroad corporation, or express company, 
or any character of corporation, however honest and sincere the 
juies may be in their desire to do justice, their sympathies are with 
the plaintiff, the one single suitor against the corporation. But 
because that exists, does not appear to me any sufficient reason 
why three-fourths should not be sufficient in cases purely ex con¬ 
tractu. If there is a case between an individual and an individual, 
or an individual and a corporation, founded upon contract purely, 
juries will be just between those parties and it seems to me from 
the argument we have had, that the sole trouble grows out of 
cases sounding in tort in which cases the attorney having the 
closing argument can, by a skillful speech, secure the sympathies 
of the jury to such an extent that no court can overcome it. Any 
man who has watched trials in the courts in this country knows 
that it is true. Having had this matter under consideration, and 
having considered the matter since Saturday afternoon, it has 
occurred to me wise and proper to offer the amendment which I 
now send up and ask the clerk to read. 

The amendment was read as follows: Amend the minority 
report of the committee by striking out said minority report, and 
adding to the section as reported by the committee the following: 
“Provided, that the General Assembly may authorize the return¬ 
ing of verdicts upon the agreement of three-fourths of the jury 
in all civil cases, not including actions in tort/’ 

MR. COLEMAN—I use the phrase “in tort” because it has 
a comprehensive legal definition. All courts and lawyers know 
their meaning. This has been suggested by those who are in op¬ 
position to the minority report, and the amendment of itself will 
facilitate trials in all actions founded upon contract, express or 
implied, and this Convention by that amendment does not take 
upon itself to decide arbitrarily that a verdict may be returned 
by three-quarters. The matter is left to the General Assembly. 
As it is said this matter was not discussed when we were elected 
to these positions, but it can be discussed, and the members to 
the General Assembly will be in a position to know the desires 
of the people upon the subject. 

MR. WEATHERLY—Is it not a fact that the only difference 
between the amendment offered by you and the report of the 
committee is that the whole matter is relegated to the Legislature? 

MR. COLEMAN—There is one other difference. The matter 
is not left to the Legislature so far as actions in tort are concern¬ 
ed. They remain exactly as reported by the committee. I will 
say to the delegates to the Convention that upon reading this re¬ 
port it met with my approval, but after hearing argument pro 



1718 


OFFICIAL PROCEEDINGS 


and con, and seeing where hardship would result, and where pro¬ 
tection could be afforded, I came to the deliberate conclusion that 
there should be protection given to those parties against whom 
we know from experience, however just and honest juries may be, 
their sympathies are altogether upon one side and not upon the 
other. I do not believe, as has been suggested, that corporations 
stalk abroad in the State and the jury trials and the body politic 
are festering sores from beginning to end. There are exceptional 
cases which should give rise to severe criticism, but upon the 
whole, I maintain the rights of property are as well preserved in 
this State as in any other State, and I believe a provision such as 
embraced in the amendment I have offered will quiet these people 
who are apprehensive of injustice being done to them, and you 
will raise up no opposition to the ratification of the Constitution 
because they are protected in the only particular where injury can 
be done to them. Upon contracts they are willing to go before 
the juries of the country because there the law* determines the 
measure of damages that ought to be recovered, but in trials in 
tort cases there is a great latitude left to the jury, and tin re is no 
way to correct an abuse. 

MR. SAMFORD—It seems to me that this discussion has 
been protracted long enough for every delegate upon this floor 
to come to a satisfactory conclusion. I, therefore, move the pre¬ 
vious question upon the section and both amendments. 

MR. WHITE—Will the gentleman allow' me to discuss the 
amendment to the amendment? 

MR. SAMFORD—No sir, I decline to withdraw the motion 
for the previous question. 

A vote being taken, on a division the previous question was 
carried by a vote of 57 to 46. 

MR. LOMAX—I do not care to unnecessarily consume the 
time of this Convention in the discussion of this proposition. 

MR. ROGERS (Sumter)—I rise to a point of order. The 
question is on the adoption of the amendment offered by the dele¬ 
gate from Greene and is not on the original proposition. 1 think 
the gentleman will have his time to close the debate when the 
question is on the original proposition. 

THE PRESIDENT PRO TEM (Mr. Graham) Talladega— 
In response to the point of order, the Chair will state that the main 
question is ordered on the proposition and all amendments. The 
question is in order. 

MR. LOMAX—Mr. President, I do not believe any question 
has yet come before this Convention which more involves the es¬ 
sential liberties of the people of Alabama than the question now 



CONSTITUTIONAL CONVENTION, 1901 


1719 


before you, and, therefore, it has not seemed to me that an at¬ 
tempt ought to he made to cut off a full and a fair discussion of 
it, but I believe now every view of this question has been pre¬ 
sented and I believe this Convention is ready to say what shall 
be done with the original proposition and both amendments. 
Hence, I shall not detain you long in the discussion of the question. 

i he very fact that the amendment offered by the minority 
and the amendment offered by the gentleman from Greene are in 
such direct antagonism, is to my mind evidence that these amend¬ 
ments ought not to be adopted and that the section should stand 
as reported by the Committee. 

'1 he complaint made on Saturday was that by reason of the 
fact that bribery stalks at noon time and sitteth in the court 
house in the evening hour, we should make a verdict of nine 
men control a jury, because the men who are injured by these 
great corporations could not get at them as long as they had the 
power to bribe one man on a jury. I do not believe with all due 
deference to my friends that the people of Alabama are as cor¬ 
rupt and venal as they are painted in that declaration. I do not 
believe that bribery runs rampant over the hills and valleys of 
Alabama. I believe that in the matter of morals, in the matter 
of honesty and in the matter of integrity, the people of Alabama 
today compare with its people in any period of its history and 
will compare with the people of any time in the future. If it be 
true that in some portions of Alabama there is bribery of jurors, 
gentlemen who represent that portion ought to go home and pun¬ 
ish the bribe-givers and takers, and not seek to strike down the 
monuments of liberty of all the rest of the State to accomplish it. 

Now, I have no sympathy with the idea that one side or the 
other of this proposition is interested because of peculiar interests 
they happen to represent in court. But I want to call the at¬ 
tention of the Convention to one particular proposition in connec¬ 
tion with that idea about the verdict of juries being controlled 
by corporations by securing one man. Most of the actions for 
damages which are brought in this State for personal injury are 
brought against railroad corporations. Every single large railroad 
corporation in Alabama is chartered under the laws of a foreign 
State. Pass this amendment, provide for a jury of nine men, bring 
your suits in the State court against the corporations, and all these 
corporations would have to do is to move to transfer that case to 
the Federal Court and entrench themselves forever behind a ver¬ 
dict of twelve men and the result Avill be— 

MR. BOONE—Is it not the law that on the law side of the 
Federal Court, under express statute, the proceedings conform 
to the proceedings of the State court? 



1720 


OFFICIAL PROCEEDINGS 


MR. LOMAX—Yes; but that does not affect the guaranty 
of the Federal Constitution of a jury of twelve, and the result will 
be, if you adopt this provision, you will drive the corporations into 
the impregnable fortress of the Federal Court and make this rule 
only to affect the common people of Alabama. Are you prepared 
to do it? 


MR. BLACKWELLL—Does the gentleman tell the Conven¬ 
tion that when the amount involved is less than $2,000 that von 
can transfer that case? 


MR. LOMAX—Certainly not; but who ever heard <>f a dam¬ 
age suit for less than $2,000 whtre there was an injure as much 
as the loss of a finger- 1 would like to he pointed to one on the 
records of the courts of Alabama. 

So I say by the adoption of this proposed amendment you ab¬ 
solutely, entrench these corporations in the Federal Court and 
you don’t accomplish the purpose you desire. 

Now, they say this provision has cobwebs on it. 1 have heard 
that the best wine has cobwebs on its bottles. 

It is said that this provision had its origin in the davs wh“n 
the doctrine prevailed that kings held by divine right. It'did and 
upon the field of Runnymede from the throat of a king who claim¬ 
ed by divine right the people of England wrung this concession 
and it stands to this day untouched in English law. It was not 
only in Magna Charta but it was in the declaration of rights at 
the restitution of Charles II. It was put in the act of settlement 
when W illiam and Mary came to the throne. It was imbedded in 
the American Constitution and there it ought to stand until time 
shall be no more. 


But we are told that some of the great States have adopted 
this reform. What States do thev cite us to? The States t ,f 
Colorado, Florida, Idaho. Iowa. Louisiana. Missouri. Michigan 
Montana. Nebraska. New Jersey. North Dakota. Washington and 
Wyoming. 


A* y RATHERL\—W’lll the gentleman allow me to ask if 

North Dakota is the State where you can get a divorce in twentv- 
four hours? 


MR. LOMAX—Aes. and Wyoming is a woman suffrage State 
and Colorado is another and all of the States, with the exception of 
three, have not got the swadding clothes of statehood off yet. 

TexasV^ WHlTE—Hovv about California and Connecticut and 


MR. LOMAX—I am reading from the States cited in the ar¬ 
gument of my learned friend, Mr. Blackwell. If there are others 



CONSTITUTE )NAL CONVENTION. 1901 


1721 


I don t know it. I suppose he cited them all. But when you re¬ 
fer 11 s to the great re f orni j n the jurisprudence and judicial system 
of a State why don’t you refer us to some of the great States that 
have been the leaders in public thought for a century? Why 
don’t you refer us to New York which, only a few years ago had 
a Constitutional Convention? Why don’t von carry us to Massa¬ 
chusetts, where the law has always been executed in all the per¬ 
fection of detail for one hundred years. Why refer us to these 
little children that have grown up here like mushrooms in the last 
twenty years? 

Now my learned friend from Jefferson read on yesterday 
from an elaborate report that was made by a Committee, I be¬ 
lieve it was said of seventy, to the English Parliament, in which 
they advocated the reform of the jury system- This very reforni 
that is proposed here now. the reduction of the number of the jury 
to make a verdict to nine men. 

1 tell you gentlemen of the Convention, 1 do not believe that 
even in these United States is the doctrine of constitutional lib- 
ertv more deeply engrafted than it is upon the soil of England, 
and vet. not withstanding that report of the Committee in favor 
of this reform. England stands today upon a verdict of twelve 
men. and in it she is followed by the most progressive, the most 
populous, the most prosperous, and the most enlightened States 
of the .American Cnion, and the American (lovernment itself. Ah, 
Mr. President, but these gentlemen that talk about reform, my 
friends, the reformers, have not got the true metal of reform about 
them ; it does not ring like the toosin calling the people to awake. 
If it be true that this is a reform which is demanded, if it be true 
that it ought to be done, because in the Congress of the Lnited 
States, in the Legislature of Alabama, in a great national election, 
a majority of one decides all questions, and T believe in looking 
over the list of citations which they have made, they cite but one 
single instance where a majority of more than one is required, and 
that is in the United States Senate, on the question of the ratifi¬ 
cation of a treaty between the United States and a foreign power, 
where it requires two-thirds—but if the majority rule is so good, 
if. by it. we can decide the question of who shall be the President 
of the United States, if by it we can decide what shall be the laws 
of the commonwealth and of our country, if by it we can decide 
what shall be the rule of our Supreme Courts, why don’t they 
come up to the full measure of their duty; why have } ou not the 
('Qura.ge of vour convictions, and come out and sa\ that a majori¬ 
ty of one on a jury shall decide the rights of property in Ala¬ 
bama? That does not sound like reform. If it is good to have 
nine to decide the case, it is better to have seven. We know it 
because these gentlemen have said it, and vre knew before they 
said it that in these other matters, a majority of one decided ques- 



1722 


OFFICIAL PROCEEDINGS 


tions, even to the election of a president of the United States. If 
it be such a great reform, why, gentlemen, do you not apply it to 
criminal cases? Why do not you say that the jury shall have a 
right by a majority of one to determine that a man's life or his 
liberty shall be taken? Oh, they reply, that it is a different thing. 
Is it different? Do you know a man, gentlemen of the Conven¬ 
tion, that will not defend his property with his life, and if the man 
himself is so careless of his life, that he will defend his property 
with it, why should you be so careful of it as to take his property 
away, by less than twelve, and yet retain the twelve to keep him 
out of the penitentiary or away from the gallows? 

I submit to you, gentlemen of the Convention, if you adopt 
this proposition another thing will happen. You absolutely de¬ 
stroy the chances for deliberation, in a jury box. If a jury goes in 
the box. and they are divided in opinion, and thev must he unani¬ 
mous, those men will sit down and reason together, thev will dis¬ 
cuss the evidence, talk about the law as the Court gave it to them, 
and in a majority of cases, in the large majority of cases, thev will 
find where the truth is, and declare it in their verdict: but once 
say that nine men shall decide a case and they walk into a jury 
room, and the first thing is “let us take a vote and see who has 
got a majority, and nine of the jurors say the plaintiff or the de¬ 
fendant should have the verdict, deliberation is gone, and vou have 
what you seem to be hunting for, quick and speedy justice, with¬ 
out sale, denial or delay, but you have not got it as the result 
of the deliberate conviction of the jury, as you ought to have it, 
if our laws are to be properly executed in this countrv. 

Now, gentlemen, the proposition of my learned friend from 
Greene is based upon another hypothesis. He says, and his view 
of it is that if a man brings an action of damages against a cor¬ 
poration, the sympathy of the jury goes out to the plaintiff, and 
it is so strong that it will overcome, (I don’t mean that is his argu¬ 
ment), but I take it it would be so strong that it would overcome 
the bribe-bought juror, my friend, the gentleman from Jefferson 
(Mr. Beddow) talks about, and so the gentleman from Greene 
puts it that in cases of tort, a majority verdict of nine shall not 
prevail. 

I tell you, Mr. President, and gentlemen of the Convention, if 
you go amongst the people of Alabama, (and I tell vou vou have 
got to have a fight to get this Constitution adopted, 'you all know 
it and realize it), and let some man get up before them, that has 
the oower of speech on the stump, and let him tell the people of 
this State that this Convention has passed a statute which abso¬ 
lutely guarantees to the corporations a verdict of twelve men. but 
if a man sues you, for your little forty acres of land here, nine 
men can take it away from you—You cannot defend it on the 
stump, and you put your Constitution in peril. 



CONSTITUTIONAL CONVENTION, 1901 1723 

I t,#>^'r\ 0n . ot ^ er hand, you leave out this proposition and 

^^ P r 0S,t,0n contained in th e minority report of the 
Committee, the same power lies in the hands of designing and un- 

scrupu ous men to go to the men who own their little farms all 
over a a JJ la > an d say to them, this Constitution has done what 
it was predicted it would do, it has tampered with the jury sys¬ 
tem of Alabama. It has put it in the hands of this fellow that 
has got a mortgage on your property, to get it from you by a 
\erclict of nine men, when the Constitution since the dawn of 
time ha> s»aid twelve men, and that proposition would give you 
trouble world without end in securing the adoption of the Con¬ 
stitution. 


I appeal to this Convention not to tamper with the bill of 
rights. I do not; care if it is old. If the proposition I submit to 
you does not appeal to you by reason of its virtue and its merit, 
God knows I do not ask you to vote for it by reason of its age, 
but it is part and parcel of the rights reserved to the people, and 
I appeal to this Convention not to touch them, but to let them 
stand as they have stood since the dawn of Alabama’s history, 
the bulwark of the people against oppression of all sorts. 

THE PRESIDENT PRO TEM—The previous question has 
been ordered upon the amendments and the main proposition. 
The question now is upon the amendment ordered by the gentle¬ 
man from Greene. 

MR. WHITE—I call for the ayes and noes. 

THE PRESIDENT PRO TEM—The ayes and noes are de¬ 
manded ; shall the call be sustained? 

The requisite number of delegates rising, the call was sus¬ 
tained. 

THE PRESIDENT PRO TEM—The queston is upon the 
amendment offered by the gentleman from Greene. As many of 
you as favor this amendment will make it known by saying aye 
as your names are called, and those opposed will make it known 
by saying no as your names are called. 

Mr. Banks asked for a reading of 4fre amendment and it was 
again read. 

MR. JONES (Montgomery)—On this question I am paired 
with the delegate from Mobile (Mr. Smith) : 

I do not know how he would vote on this proposition. If I 
were free to vote, I would vote no, because I want the minority 
report or nothing. 

MR. HEFLIN (Chambers)—It is my understanding that a 
delegate cannot pair with another delegate unless he knows how 



1724 


OFFICIAL PROCEEDINGS 


that delegate would vote, and there is an understanding that one 
will vote in the affirmative and the other in the negative— 

THE PRESIDENT PRO TEM—To what purpose does the 
gentleman rise? To require that the gentleman from Montgomery 
should vote? 

MR. HEFLIN—I rise to a point of order that the gentleman 
is not paired, and he should vote. 

MR. JONES (Montgomery)—A delegate cannot vote after he 
pairs on a proposition, and I would like to say that I consider the 
point of order as entirely frivolous. 

THE PRESIDENT PRO TEM—The Chair so holds, under 
the statement made. The roll call will proceed. 

MR. OATES—I am paired with the delegate from Monroe 
(Mr. Morrisette), but I do not know how he would vote on the 
question; therefore I vote aye. 

MR. PALMER—I am paired with Mr. Locklin. If he were 
here I reckon he would vote aye and I would vote no. 

And upon the call of the old roll the vote resulted. 

AYES 


Ashcraft, 

Banks, 

Brooks, 

Coleman, of Greene, 


Messrs. President, 
Almon, 

Barefield, 

Bartlett, 

Beavers, 

Beddow, 

Bethune, 

Blackwell, 

Boone, 

Bulger, 

Burnett, 

Burns, 

Byars, 

Carmichael, of Colbert, 
Carnathon, 

Chapman, 

Cobb, 

Craig, 


Dent, 

Macdonald 

Oates, 

Reynolds (Henry), 

NOES 

Cunningham, 

Davis, of DeKalb, 

Davis, of Etowah, 

Duke, 

Eley, 

Eyster, 

Ferguson, 

Fitts, 

Fletcher, 

Foshee. 

Foster, 

Freeman, 

Gilmore, 

Glover, 

Graham, of Montgomery, 
Graham, of Talladega, 
Grant, 

Greer, of Calhoun, 


Rogers (Lowndes), 
Rogers (Sumter), 
Wilson (Washington), 

TOTAL—11 


Haley, 

Harrison, 

Heflin, of Chambers, 
Heflin, of Randolph, 
Henderson, 

Hodges, 

Hood, 

Howell, 

Howze, 

Jackson, 

Jenkins, 

Jones, of Bibb, 

Jones, of Hale, 

Jones, of Wilcox, 
Kirk. 

Kirkland, 

Knight, 

Kvle, 



1725 


CONSTITUTIONAL CONVENTION, 1901 


Ledbetter, 

Parker (Elmore), 

Smith, Morgan M., 

Leigh, 

Pearce, 

Sorrell, 

Lomax, 

Pettus, 

Spears, 

Long (Butler), 

Phillips, 

Spragins, 

Long (Walker), 

Pillans, 

Thompson, 

I,o\ve (Lawrence), 

Pitts, 

Vaughan, 

M c M illan (Wilcox), 

Porter, 

Walker, 

Martin, 

Reese, 

Watts, 

Maxwell, 

Reynolds (Chilton), 

Weatherly, 

Merrill, 

Samford, 

White, 

Miller (Wilcox). 

Sanders, 

Whiteside, 

Murphree. 

Sanford, 

Willet, 

Xe Smith, 

Searcy, 

Williams (Barbour), 

Norman, 

Selheimer, 

Williams (Marengo), 

Norwood, 

Sentell, 

Wilson (Clarke). 

O’Neal (Lauderdale) 

Sloan, 


Parker (Cullman), 

Smith, Mac. A., 

TOTAL—103 


ABSENT OR NOT VOTING 

Altman, 

Inge, 

Palmer, 

Browne, 

Jones, of Montgomery, 

Proctor. 

Cardon, 

King, 

Renfro, 

Carmichael, of Coffee, 

Locklin, 

Robinson, 

Case, 

Lowe (Jefferson), 

Smith (Mobile), 

Cofer, 

McMillan (Baldwin), 

Sollie, 

Coleman, of Walker. 

Malone, 

Stewart, 

Cornwall, 

Miller (Marengo), . 

Studdard, 

deGraffenreid, 

Moody, 

Tayloe, 

Espy. 

Morrisette, 

Waddell, 

Grayson, 

Mul key, 

Weakley, 

Greer, of Perry. 

O’Neill (Jefferson), 

Williams (Elmore), 

Handley, 

Opp, 

Winn, 

Hinson, 

O’Rear, 



So the amendment was lost. 

THE PRESIDENT PRO TEM—The question recurs upon 
the minority report. 

MR. BLACKWELL—And on that I call for the ayes and 
noes. 

THE PRESIDENT—The ayes and noes are demanded; shall 
the call be sustained? 

The requisite number rising, the call was sustained. 

During the call of the roll: 

MR. BURNS—I desire to state that on Saturday I made a 
pair conditionally with M!r. Carmichael of Coffee. I have just 



1726 


OFFICIAL PROCEEDINGS 


heard his name called and he is not present to vote, and conse¬ 
quently the pair ought to stand, and I would vote no and he would 
vote aye. 

MR. JONES (Montgomery)—I ani paired with the delegate 
from Mobile (Mr. Smith.) If he were here he would vote no and 
I would vote aye. 

MR. JONES (Wilcox) — I am paired with Mr. Cofer of 
Cullman; if he were present he would vote aye and I would vote 
no. 


MR. McMILLAN (Wilcox)—I am paired with Mr. Moody. 
If he were present he would vote aye and I would vote no. 

MR. PALMER—I am paired with Mr. Locklin. If he were 
present he would vote no and I would vote aye. 

Upon the call of the roll the vote resulted as follows: 

AYES 


Ashcraft, 

Dent, 

Reese, 

Banks, 

Fletcher, 

Reynolds (Henry), 

Bartlett, 

Foshee, 

Rogers, of Lowndes, 

Beddow, 

Freeman, 

Sanford, 

Blackwell, 

MacDonald, 

Selheimer, 

Boone, 

Murphree, 

Smith, Mac A., 

Brooks, 

Norwood, 

Spears, 

Byars, 

Oates, 

White, 

Cobb, 

Pettus, 

Wilson, of Washington, 

Craig, 

Pitts, 

TOTAL—29 


NOES 


Messrs. President, 

Ferguson, 

Hood, 

Almon, 

Fitts, 

Howell, 

Barefield, 

Foster, 

Howze, 

Beavers, 

Gilmore, 

Jackson, 

Bethune, 

Glover, 

Jenkins, 

Bulger, 

Graham, of Montgomery Jones, of Hale, 

Burnett, 

Graham, of Talladega, 

Jones, of Bibb. 

Carmichael, of Colbert, 

Grant, 

Kirk, 

Carnathon, 

Greer, of Calhoun, 

Kirkland, 

Chapman, 

Haley, 

Knight, 

Coleman, of Greene, 

Greer, of Calhoun, 

Kyle, 

Cunningham, 

Haley, 

Ledbetter, 

Davis, of DeKalb, 

Harrison, 

Leigh, 

Davis, of Etowah, 

Heflin, of Chambers, 

Lomax, 

Duke, 

Heflin, of Randolph, 

Long, of Walker, 

Eley, 

Henderson, 

Long, of Butler, 

Eyster, 

Hodges, 

Lowe, of Lawrence, 



CONSTITUTIONAL CONVENTION, 1901 


1727 


Martin, 

Maxwell, 

Merrill, 

Miller, of Wilcox, 
NeSmith, 

Norman, 

O’Neal, of Lauderdale, 
Parker, of Cullman, 
Parker, of Elmore, 
Pearce, 

Phillips, 


Pillans, 

Porter, 

Reynolds, of Chilton, 
Rogers, of Sumter, 
Samford, 

Sanders, 

Searcy, 

Sentell, 

Sloan, 

Sorrell, 

Spragins. 


Thompson, 

Vaughan, 

Walker, 

Watts, 

Weatherly, 

Whiteside, 

Willet, 

Williams, of Barbour. 
Williams, of Marengo. 
Wilson, of Clark, 

TOTAL—81 


ABSENT OR NOT VOTING 


Altman, 

Browne, 

Burns, 

Cardon, 

Carmichael, of Coffee, 
Case, 

Cofer, 

Coleman, of Walker, 

Cornwall, 

dcGraffenreid, 

Espy, 

Grayson, 

Greer, of Perry, 
Handley, 

Hinson, 

Inge, 


Jones, of Montgomery, 
Jones, of Wilcox, 

King, 

Locklin, 

Lowe, of Jefferson, 
McMillan (Baldwin), 
McMillan, of Wilcox, 
Malone, 

Miller, of Marengo, 
Moody, 

Morrisette, 

Mulkey, 

O’Neill (Jefferson), 
Opp, 

O’Rear, 

Palmer, 


Proctor, 

Renfro, 

Robinson 
Smith, of Mobile, 
Smith, Morgan M., 
Sollie, 

Stewart, 

Studdard, 

Tayloe, 

Waddell, 

Weakley, 

Williams, of Elmore, 
Winn, 


And by a vote of 81 noes to 29 ayes the minority report was 

lost. 


THE PRESIDENT PRO TEM—The question recurs upon 
the adoption of the original Section as reported by the Committee. 

MR. BOONE (Mobile)—I offer an amendment. 

THE PRESIDENT PRO TEM—It is too late, the previous 
question has been ordered. 

And upon a vote being taken the Section as reported by the 
Committee was adopted. 

The hour of 1 o'clock having arrived, the Convention stood 
adjourned until 3:30 p. m. 


AFTERNOON SESSION 

The Convention met pursuant to adjournment, there being 
eighty-seven delegates present upon the call of the roll. 



OFFICIAL PROCEEDINGS 


1728 


MR. HEFLIN (Chambers)—I rise to a question of ptrsonal 
privilege. 

THE PRESIDENT—The gentleman will state the question 
of privilege. 

MR. HEFLIN (Chambers)—On this morning, during roll call, 
upon the last roll call before adjournment, when the gentleman's 
name from Montgomery was reached, he stated to the Chair that 
he was paired with the gentleman from Mobile, and that he did 
not know how that gentleman would vote and proceeded to ex¬ 
plain his vote, saying that he would vote for the minority report, 
as he wanted that or nothing. I rose to the point of order that the 
gentleman could not state a pair unless the other gentleman would 
vote in the opposite from himself. Then the President pro tern 
asked me for what purposes I rose, and I said to have the gentle¬ 
man from Montgomery to cast his vote without reference to a 
pair. The Chair ruled, when the distinguished gentleman from 
Montgomery said that it occurred to him that the point of order 
was frivolous, and the Chair said that the Chair ruled, that my 
point of order was frivolous. I want to set myself right before 
this Convention, Mr. President, by reading rule 38 of this Conven¬ 
tion : “Every delegate may be required to vote on any question 
before the Convention.” Further, rule 40: “After a vote has been 
ordered upon any question no delegate shall be permitted to ex¬ 
plain his vote, without the unaintnous consent of the Convention.” 

The gentleman from Montgomery stated something with ref¬ 
erence to a pair, without stating a pair with the gentleman from 
Mobile upon the pending question, and without obtaining the 
consent of the Convention he stated that he would vote against 
the amendment, because he wanted the minority report or nothing, 
thereby explaining his vote to this Convention, by permission of 
the chair, but without the consent of the Convention. I rose to 
the point of order, and I think the President of the Convention will 
sustain me, for all parliamentary law does, that a gentleman cannot 
pair with another gentleman, unless the other gentleman would 
vote directly opposite from the way the gentleman himself would 
vote. I merely want to suggest, Mr. President, under the ruling 
of the President pro tern, the Convention was not very wise in 
passing these two rules. I just wanted to call attention to the 
matter. 

MR. JONES (Montgomery)—I rise to a question of personal 
privilege. The point made by the gentleman from Chambers arose 
in this way: I stated that I was paired with the gentleman from 
Mobile, upon this question, and that I did not know how he would 
vote, and if he was present I would vote so and so. My friend 
from Chambers misapprehended the phase of the case in which the 
matter came up. When the amendment offered by the gentleman 



CONSTITUTIONAL CONVENTION. 1901 


1729 


from Greene came up. I then stated to the Chair that I did not 
know how the gentleman from Mobile would vote on that, but 
that I was paired with him on the general question, but if he was 
present I thought he would vote so and so, and I would vote so 
and so. That is not an explanation of a vote. 

MR. HEFLIN (Chambers)—I will ask the gentleman a ques¬ 
tion before he sits down. Did you not state while you were on your 
feet, that you would vote against the amendment, because you 
favored the minority report or nothing? 

MR. JONHS (Montgomery)—Which amendment do you 
speak of? 

MR. HEFLIN (Chambers)—The amendment of the gentle¬ 
man from Greene. 

MR. JONHS (Montgomery)—I think I did. 

MR. HEFLIN (Chambers)—Was not that explaining your 
position without leave from the House? 

MR. JONES (Montgomery)—I don't think it was. 

MR. HEFLIN (Montgomery)—I think it was. 

THE PRESIDENT—It seems to the Chair there is nothing 
for the Chair to rule upon. 

MR. GRAHAM (Talladega)—Just one word, not to prolong 
the matter. 

THE PRESIDENT—Does the gentleman rise to a question 
of personal privilege? 

MR. GRAHAM (Talladega)—I do. 

THE PRESIDENT—The gentleman will state the question 
of personal privilege— 

MR. GRAHAM (Talladega)—I wanted to correct the state¬ 
ment of the gentleman from Chambers in one particular. The 
President pro tern did not hold that this point of order was frivo¬ 
lous, but the Chair mentioned in the announcement that it was 
not well taken. 

MR. HEFLIN (Chambers)—I dislike very much to call the 
distinguished gentleman’s attention to the fact that the gentle¬ 
man from Montgomery said that it seemed to him to be frivolous 
and the gentleman from Talladega said, and the Chair so rules. 

THE PRESIDENT—The special order will be the considera¬ 
tion of the report of the Committee on Preamble and Declaration 
of Rights. The Secretary will read the next section of the report. 

Section 13 was read as follows: 



1730 


OFFICIAL PROCEEDINGS 


Thirteenth—That in all prosecutions for libel for or the publi¬ 
cation of papers investigating the official conduct of officers, of 
men in public capacity, or when the matter published is proper 
for public information, the truth thereof may be given in evidence; 
and that in all indictments for libel, the jury shall have the right 
to determine the law and the facts under the direction of the court, 

MR. LOMAX—There is a verbal error in the printed copy 
which might mislead some gentlemen. In the first line, after the 
word “for” is placed before “orit ought to be “or for the publi¬ 
cation of papers.” 

The only change in this Section, Mr. President, is that the 
words “for libel” are inserted before the words “for the publication 
of papers investigating the official conduct of public officers,” and 
it permits the truth of the charge to be given in evidence in prose¬ 
cution for libel. I move the adoption of the Section. 

MR. CUNNINGHAM—But before taking that vote, I desire 
to ask the Chairman of the Committee if it is the rule of practice 
in most civil suits or suits for damages, slander, etc., that the jury 
has to determine the law or does that apply to this special charac¬ 
ter of suits? 

MR. LOMAX—That has been in every bill of rights in refer¬ 
ence to libel, that I know anything about. In reality it is a legal 
fiction, but it has been there so long, nobody ever disturbs it. The 
jury in reality, in a libel case, decides just like they do in any 
other case. 

THE PRESIDENT—The question is on the motion to adopt 
the Section. 

Upon a vote being taken the Section was adopted. 

Section 14 was read as follows: 

Fourteenth—That all courts shall be open; and that every 
person for an injury done him, in his lands, goods, person or repu¬ 
tation, shall have a remedy by due process of law; and right and 
justice shall be administered without sale, denial or delay. 

MR. LOMAX—There is no change in that Section and I move 
the adoption of the Section. 

Upon a vote being taken the Section was adopted. 

Section 15 was read as follows: 

Fifteenth—That the State of Alabama shall never be made a 
defendant in any court of law or equity. 

MR. LOMAX—The same proposition applies to that Section, 
and I move the adoption of the Section. 



CONSTITUTIONAL CONVENTION, 1901 


1731 


Upon a vote being taken the Section was adopted. 

Section 16 was read as follows: 

Sixteenth—That excessive fines shall not be imposed, nor 
cruel nor unusual punishments inflicted. 

MR. LOMAX—There is no change made in that Section. 

MR. PILLANS—I offer an amendment. 

The amendment was read as follows : 

Amend Section 16 of the Declaration of Rights, Article I. of 
the Constitution, by adding thereto the words following, to wit: 
And that it shall not be lawful to use the lash upon or whip or 
flog any person held to labor under conviction for crime or mis¬ 
demeanor in this State. 

THE PRESIDENT—The question is on the adoption of the 
amendment proposed by the gentleman from Mobile. 

MR. PILLANS—It is with great reluctance that I offer an 
amendment to an old Section of the Bill of Rights, and did I not 
take it that there was a serious need for protection to be afforded 
by this Constitution to an unfortunate and unhappy class of our 
fellow beings in this State, I would not have offered it. But I 
think that the history of the present administration of the convict 
camps in this State justifies the amendment. It is a fact, known 
to all observant men, that not only are those who are convicted of 
felonies, either grave felonies or the lesser felonies, hired out as 
slaves, treated as slaves, whipped sometimes like dogs, but that 
this is done with those who are guilty of the most ordinary mis¬ 
demeanor. It seems to me that it would appeal to any man of 
good feeling and humanity to do something to prevent this evil 
from continuing in this State. Now, Mr. President, I will say, and 
I say it without the fear of successful contradiction- 

MR. COLEMAN (Greene)—Let me ask you a question. Does 
not Section 16 apply to punishments inflicted after sentence upon 
conviction, and none other? 

MR. PILLANS—I think it does. 

MR. COLEMAN (Greene)—Don’t you propose to reach as¬ 
saults and batteries committed in the punishment inflicted by par¬ 
ties in control? 

MR. PILLANS—That is precisely what I propose to reach 
and I am not particular about where it comes in. 

MR. COLEMAN (Greene)—One more question. Are not 
these parties in control as much guilty of assault and battery under 



1732 


OFFICIAL FROCK FI) IXOS 


the law now as if your provision were incorporated in the lull of 
rights? 

MR. PILLANS —T am very much obliged to my distinguished 
friend for asking the question. I vvu> of the opinion as a lawver 
that they were guilty, U|) to the time that the legislature of .Ala¬ 
bama was seduced into passing an act that validated it. I'p to 
the time that the legislature of Alabama passed an act for the 
protection of these unfortunates and provided for this whipping 
to be done only under the supervision of inspectors, it was without 
doubt an assault and battery, punishable by civil damage* and 
criminal prosecution, and f am surprised that the abb* bar of Bir¬ 
mingham, and of Jefferson County, had not found it worth their 
while to bring damage suits for these >lave> for tlu* flogging which 
took place in their mines and works such a number of times. Hitt 
they did not do it. ft became a common practice in tlu»e mines 
and in those establishments, as far as f can learn. It became the 
common habit for those who were handling these gallv slaves to 
inflict this punishment and the legislature of Alabama deeming it 
necessary to protect these people, passed laws, w hich, vv hik ^in¬ 
tended for their protection, really only gave validitv, 1 fear, to this 
evil, which ought never to have been done. 


Now, not getting away from the line I was arguing. 1 will 
come hack to it. The putting- of this clause at the end ..FSietion 
16 as an amendment may he criticised In .-nine <»f mv friends 
When ,t was first offered hy me. f offered it a- an independent 
ordinance. Members of the Committee were of opinion that if it 
came in at all that it should come in as a part of this section, 
f it is not made a part of this section it mav well come in a- an 

SeZ'n'*'T ! ° n ( bl lL thm is "" ' nl P ri, l>ri( tv in a,I,In,, i, 
Section 16 as it is tor the protection of the citizens of the State 
which is really the object of the section. 

I am aware from personal observation of how a white man has 
een crushed to earth and made a mere animal of. hr heiim flr><r<r e d' 
og-g-ed like a dog-, and there is not one man of von here who would 
have endured the agony of having one who was kind to vm or 
C °T e „ ' Y' th y ° U - floRR "' ««l> » manner who■, ‘, v 

ertz' j "T <7™ J C 

selling of lottery tiehZ i.^ofia "ZVS. TY aVe i,e" 
cause it is made so hv law TUo* 1 a ciime he- 

family. A man of excellent rearingAhut TmaViT 0t /' XCe,len J 
he was put in a convict camp and floWed and that ° rCe 
be a man except in semblance. that n,an ceascd to 

prevSjzviS •’**... 

Constitution. You tnay say it is i?£ 



CONSTITUTIONAL CONVENTION. 1M()1 


1733 


choose, 1>ut does it do gentlemen to flog white men. Apply it to 
yourself, and take it to yourself, and is there one of you who would 
do anything’ hut take the life of the man that put the lash upon 
him, if such a misfortune should ever fall to your lot. 1 ask you 
to protect these people, as you would protect yourself, or vour 
son or brother, and that is all. 1 do not care to make any lengthy 
speech upon this subject and I will submit the matter to this Con¬ 
vention and its conscience. 

MR. CUNNINGHAM.—1 yield to no man in his desire to 
be both philanthropic and humane, and upon the question that is 
under discussion, I think my public record shows that I am in the 
line of humanity. If the gentleman from Mobile had introduced 
an amendment prohibiting any person convicted of a criminal of¬ 
fense in this State, from being leased or hired to any contractor I 
would have cheerfully voted for it and perhaps, would have asked 
for additional time over and above the ten minutes to present the 
argument as to whv it should be done. The matter under discus¬ 
sion, however, is a mere question of discipline. I speak not from 
theorjq from newspaper hearsay or from any abstract principles of 
philosophy or science, but as an observer of the matter of discipline 
in the management of convicts in the State of Alabama, and I 
want to say, and I say it deliberately, that the lash is the most 
humane, and at the same time the least degrading method of 
maintaining discipline that the present authorities can possibly 
devise or allow. 

MR. JONES (Montgomery)—How about bread and water, 
I will inquire of the gentleman? 

MR. CUNNINGHAM—The geneleman offering the amend¬ 
ment offers no substitute for the lash and the gentleman from 
Montgomery asks how about bread and water. 

MR. WHITE—Will the gentleman from Jefferson allow a 
question? 

MR. CUNNINGHAM—As soon as I answer the question of 
the gentleman from Montgomery. 

THE PRESIDENT—We have fallen into a rather informal 
way of carrying on the discussion. I believe the usual rule is 
when gentlemen desire to interrogate the speaker, that they ad¬ 
dress the chair. Does the gentleman consent to he interrupted? 

MR. CUNNINGHAM—I will answer the gentleman in a mo¬ 
ment, as soon as I answer the question of the gentleman from 
Montgomery. 

According to my personal observation of the various methods 
that have been tried, bread and water, with or without a dark cell, 
and anyone at all familiar with the laws of physiology knows that 



1734 


OFFICIAL PROCEEDINGS 


the continued use of bread and water is not merely a punishment, 
but results in a change of the bodily conditions of the man in such 
a way as to invite disease. In the first place, if continued for a 
sufficient length of time it will produce scurvy, and even if stopped 
short of that time, it invites especially the invasion of contagious 
diseases, and more especially tuberculosis. Indeed, any condition 
that is thrown around the convict that takes away from him the 
very best nourishment and the very best possible hygenic sur¬ 
roundings, invites the invasion of that particular disease. Not 
only that, but the records of your penitentiary will show that not¬ 
withstanding the precaution taken in regard to these matters, that 
from forty to sixty per cent of the mortality of your convict popu¬ 
lation is due to tuberculosis. A few years ago the dark cell was 
adopted for the purpose of trying to control certain verv unman¬ 
ageable convicts. That was found to be unavailing and ineffectual. 
Carrying out the instructions of State officials, their arms were 
suspended in this position above their heads, and I deliberately, 
on my own authority, after a short time, had them removed, for 
the reason that it would undoubtedly have resulted in death. Mv 
experience has shown that particular order of punishment, the sus¬ 
pension of the hands above the head is not onlv ineffectual, but it 
is the reverse, and, in reality, it renders the convict still harder to 
manage, and, as a rule, more or less damages his physical condi- 


Now, I agree with the gentleman from Mobile that to dele- 
gates upon this floor, without being convicted, a flogging would 
probably mean death, but they recognize the fact that convicts 
are there m obedience to the law, and that there are certain rules 

HiVt f e P n ,n !i Wh ' C , h they must ol,servt - Thev recognize the fact 
that if this discipline is violated that there must be some method 

or some means of punishment. Now. I undertake to sav from 

s pt'rr rtex 

o &-2SS 

far as my observation goes The time «•» • , n , J C - 

changed.'* $„* 

width and weight, applied over the clothe, ',, ra| ’ ° a certain 
I will say. in the winder season embraces aL , y " OTn ' ,' vhich - 
at any rate. A convict cannot hr> w ' , OUt tuo l >air5; of pants 

except by order and in the presence ofTstate^if h ’ S | bo , d . v 

cers are not always particular upon this ones',on' r' 3 " A’ 

ss oZz P zi, r, “ d “» 

tion. The result of i, is fighting among the CMviSTa^tomy 



CONSTITUTIONAL CONVENTION, 1901 


1735 


personal observation, there are three or four convicts killed almost 
every year by fellow convicts, and it results because there is not 
a proper enforcement of discipline. Then, again, a State officer 
will come along and he will make up his mind to break up this 
condition to affairs, and he does it with his presence and by his 
order inflicting the punishment with the lash, and the infliction 
< this punishment by some properly constituted authority im¬ 
mediately results in a great reformation and stops the fighting 
among this class of men. K K 


Now there is a question that appeals, I presume, to the busi¬ 
ness men upon this floor. Your convict system, Mr. President is 

" 0t ' V *! at lt OUf ; ht be - n . or will it be what it ought to be so long 
as the lease system is continued, there is a practical business propo 
sition ,s this: If you adopt a dark cell, or if you adopt bread and 

but^acu? i? on ? e , other form of punishment, humane in appearance, 
but actually inhumane in its application, who is going to pay for 

menf "tH " 6 are under £ oin f? this milk and cider punish¬ 

ment. There can be but one answer to that proposition. It must 

come out of the treasury of your State or out of the treasury of 
your county. I believe, Mr. President, that the amendment ofthe 
gentleman from Mobile ought not to be adopted. I believe it is 
an injury to the convicts themselves. I believe no effectual sub¬ 
stitute can be offered that will take the place of an ordinary hu¬ 
mane lashing. So far as its mental effect is concerned upon the 
delicate, refined, cultivated white man. I am willing to admit it 
rmght prove somewhat depressing and demoralizing, but it is very 
rare that we get a man of that character in the penitentiary, and 
when he goes there. Mr. President, his pride in observing disci¬ 
pline controls him, so that it is the exception when a man of that 
character has to be punished in any way. This is all that I have 
to say upon the amendment. 


MR. WHITE I want to ask the gentleman a question, 
forgotten CUNNINGHAM — 1 ask the gentleman’s pardon. I had 


_ f ask the £ entleman from Jefferson if it is not 

taCt * hat * hese conv,cts are beaten because they do not comply 
with the tasks that have been allotted to them in the mines> P Y 


MR. CUNNINGHAM—There are various things, Mr. Presi- 
dent, for which whipping is done in the penitentiary. That is one, 
but statistics can be obtained upon this subject accurately by 
referring to the Convict Department in this building. I can state 
from my personal observation that a majority of the whipping is 

fiVht; f ° r the violation °f_ discipline in regard to conduct, such as 
fighting, gambling, and things of that character. 

tVl „ MR ' LOMA ?^ Thl , s is a matter which, if one will observe 
the argument of the gentleman from Mobile, is purely one of Legis- 



1736 


OFFICIAL PROCEEDINGS 


lative detail. It is a matter that can be corrected in the Legislature 
and I do hope the Convention will not burden this bill of rights 
with legislative enactments. I move to lay the amendment of the 
delegate from Mobile on the table. 

MR. PILLANS—Of course I can make no response. I trust 
it will not be laid upon the table— 

MR. LOMAX—Of course, if the gentleman desires to have 
an opportunity to reply, I do not want to cut off debate or move 
to table. In order to give the gentleman an opportunity to speak, 
I will move the previous question on the amendment. 

THE PRESIDENT —Does the gentleman withdraw the mo¬ 
tion to table? 

MR. LOMAX—I will with the leave of the Convention. I do 
not care to cut off debate. 

MR. BEDDOW—Mr. President, again I heartily agrte with 
this amendment offered by the gentleman from Mobile to amend 
the Bill of Rights, and again am glad to hear the gentleman from 
Jefferson say if an ordinance had been introduced before this Con¬ 
vention to prevent the hiring of convicts under the lease system 
that he would heartily favor such a proposition, and I say before 
this Convention adjourns, we will probably give him an opportuni¬ 
ty to assist 11 s along that line. 

The gentleman from Jefferson says that the lash is the most 
humane manner by which discipline can be enforced in a convict 
camp. If it is the most humane, XIr. President, I know of nothing 
that to my experience and to my observation can be worse. I say 
authoritatively that three-fourths of the whipping that is done in 
convict camps in this State, is done by reason of the failure of the 
convict to come up to the high task that is put before him in the 
performance of his daily work. For 365 days in the year he is 
expected to work, Sundays, Christmas Day, and the Fourth of July 
excepted. He works in the mines, where free labor has the oppor¬ 
tunity to take a little respite from its labor in case of sickness, 
where in case he is worked down, he can go home and stay with 
his family a day or two, but to these poor unfortunate individuals 
that are being sent to Jefferson County, and worked in its mints, 
365 days in the year no such right or opportunity is given. They 
are sent there, they are hired out to a class of people whose profit 
comes from the hardships of the convict. The less thev give him 
to eat, the more they make. The most days he works in the year, 
the more it is in their pocket book, and so’ it is that they are pun¬ 
ished to the extent that I speak of for the failure to come up to 
their daily tasks. It may be said that these men cannot be whipped 
unless the inspectors are present. I know that that is not true, 
because the only time at which the inspector is required to be 
present when these men are punished, is w'hen they are asking 



CONSTITUTIONAL CONVENTION, 1901 


1737 


that they be punished by twenty-one lashes upon the bare skin. 
There is not a night that passes in Jefferson County, but what 
from twenty-five to 300 of these unfortunates are whipped without 
the presence of anyone except the officers of the company, whose 
money comes through the labor of those poor unfortunate creatures. 

MR. CUNNINGHAM—Will the gentleman permit a question? 
MR. BEDDOW—Yes. 

MR. CUNNINGHAM—How many did you say? 

MR. BEDDOW—I say all the way from twenty-five to 300. 

MR. CUNNINGHAM—I want to emphatically contradict that 
as far as the Pratt Mines are concerned- 

MR. BEDDOW—But what do you say about the county? 

MR. CUNNINGHAM—I have no personal knowledge outside 
of Pratt Mines. 

MR. BEDDOW—I would like for gentlemen who interrupt 
me to speak of matters within their personal knowledge. 

MR. BAREFIELD—I will ask you if the State don’t appoint 
the man who does this whipping? 

MR. BEDDOW—I say to you that the State appoints them 
on the recommendation of the company which pays him. That is 
the way it is done. The company selects the man that they want 
to inflict the punishment, and they recommend him and he is al¬ 
most always appointed. 

MR. SAMFORD—If you do away with the punishment now 
permitted, will you suggest some punishment that will take the 
place of it? 

MR. BEDDOW—If you had seen the poor unfortunate crea¬ 
tures that I have, with the blood whipped out of them, with their 
backs bruised and mangled, you would say to me that any other 
punishment would be preferable. If you had seen like I have seen, 
men sick going to the company’s physician pleading his illness and 
telling him he was sick and unable to do his work, and then to be 
scourged into a mine where he had to crawl on his hands and 
knees to get to his work, and then be brought out dead, then you 
would agree with me. 

MR. SAMFORD—Will the gentleman permit an interruption? 

MR. BEDDOW—I will. 

MR. SAMFORD—If you had been so humane then as you 
are now, why did not you prosecute that official before the grand 
jury of your county. 



1738 


OFFICIAL PROC E EDIXGS 


MR. BEDDOW—It was not my business to prosecute people 
before grand juries of the county, and I will say that all of those 
who were present were not State officials or other persons, hut 
were employes of the company, and in the pay of the company, 
and they were not hunting prosecutions of that kind. 

Now, Mr. President and gentlemen of the Convention, these 
men are often sent up on short sentences, and it is not an unusual 
thing for a man having a short sentence of thirty days to go to the 
mines for some petty offense, and when he gets there a chunk of 
slate may fall on him and crush his leg. A man may suffer death 
for a petty offense, and I sav the best way to meet this condition 
is according to the suggestion of my friend from Jefferson. Let 
us inaugurate a system here that will not only prevent inhuman 
punishment to these unfortunate individuals, but let us. while we 
are assembled, pass an ordinance that will require the State of 
Alabama within the next three or four years to take every convict 
out of the mines and not allow them to be hired to people whose 
monetary considerations control their treatment of these unfor¬ 
tunate convicts. I heartily concur in the amendment proposed by 
my friend from Mobile and hope this Convention will adopt it. 


MR. ROGERS (Sumter)—I think perhaps the gentlemen who 
are picturing the evils of the convict system are overdrawing it 
to some extent. The man I left at home in charge of mv negroes, 
is a negro himself, and an ex-convict, and f have talked'with him 
some times upon this question, and asked him about this whipping. 
He says, “Yes, boss, they do whip them up there and thev ought 
to be whipped.” He says they whim them because they will not 
work, and because they fight and because they steal and gamble, 
but he says if a man goes there and tries to do his duty he is 
treated just like he is everywhere else. They expect him to do 
his work and no more. Now everybody knows that the great hulk 
of convicts in this State are negroes. Evervbodv who knows any¬ 
thing about the character of a negro, knows that there is no pun¬ 
ishment in the world that can take the place of the lash with him. 
He must be controlled that way. He inherited that peculiarity 
from his ancestors when he came from the shores of Africa where 
they provide that kind of punishment, and if we take awav the 
lash from this convict system, we will destroy the efficiency of 
the system. I do not know what these humane gentlemen want 
to do with the convicts, in case we cannot control them There 
is certainly nobody who is going to take them that cannot control 
them, and this bread and water business, and dark cell puts me in 
mind of a system of something of that kind down in Mexico \ 
friend of mine who goes there frequently, says that there is no 
punishment on earth that is so awful as the kind of punishment 
hey have in Mexico. There they put the convicts in a hole, where 
the sun can shine on him, instead of whipping him The law in 



CONSTITUTIONAL CONVENTION, 1901 


1739 


Mexico does not allow the convict to be whipped, but they take 
these people and dig a hole out where the sun can shine on them, 
and they let them stay there until they are conquered. I think it 
is infinitely better to whip these negroes or white men than to have 
such punishment as that. And gentlemen, let me tell you, this 
maudlin sentiment about a man that gets into the penitentiary is 
all foolishness. That is all there is to it. A man that goes to the 
penitentiary ought to be punished if he deserves it. and he wont 
get the punishment unless he does deserve it. 

MR. PILLANS—Suppose he plays cards in what is de¬ 
nominated a public place, which may be a very private place under 
the decisions of our court, and he cannot be fined but must go to 
the penitentiary. 

MR. ROGERS (Sumter)—Yes, a man that violates the law 
ought to go to the penitentiary. I play cards myself and may be 
convicted for it some time and have to go to the penitentiary, but 
I will never get up and grunt about it when I am violating the law. 
You respect the laws of this country and you stay out of the con¬ 
vict camp ; you break the laws, and you go there and receive the 
punishment that you would expect to have inflicted upon you. 

MR. WILLIAMS—I now move the previous question but will 
give way to the gentleman from Mobile if he will agree to with¬ 
draw it. 

MR. HOWELL—Before that is done. I want to ask the gen¬ 
tleman from Jefferson (Mr. Beddow) if I understood him to say 
they worked 365 days in the year? 

MR. BEDDOW—I excepted Sundays. Fourth of July and 
Thanksgiving. 

Mr. Pillans here arose. 

The Chair will call the attention of the gentleman from Mo¬ 
bile to the rule. 

MR. PILLANS—Only speak one time on a subject? 

THE PRESIDENT—Yes, sir. 

Mr. O’Neal asked unanimous consent for the gentleman from 
Mobile to submit a few remarks and the consent was given. 

MR. PILLANS—I thank the Convention and the gentleman 
for the opportunity. I have never been a convict nor has any 
kinsman of mine ever been a convict. Certainly I have never 
known a white man of my blood to be whipped. If I had instead 
of being a member of this Constitutional Convention I should be 
confined in the penitentiary as a murdered. For with the blood in 
mv veins and with the spirit that actuates me, I would have had 
the irresistible desire to spill the blood of any man who would visit 



1740 


OFFICIAL PROCEEDINGS 


such a disgrace upon any of my blood. It is so with all of us. 
We are all Southerners. And if the poor negro can stand the 
flogging better than we can it does not make us any the less 
restive under it. Is it possible that we who have gone beyond 
the Russian knout and the Delaware whipping post, who are un¬ 
willing to use the lash as part of our methods of criminal punish¬ 
ment, I was about to say to the introduction of a system of gaily 
slaves, but I will say to continue such a system. And I have been 
amazed to see men of as much refinement as myself from Ensley 
stand up and tell you that men like to be flogged. 

MR. CUNNINGHAM—I certainly did not state such a thing 
and I cannot conceive how the gentleman should interpret my re¬ 
marks in that way. I said as compared with other forms of pun¬ 
ishment which, under my personal observation, had been prac¬ 
ticed, it was better. 

MR. PILLANS—Did the gentleman say better or that they 
liked it better? 

MR. CUNNINGHAM—Better. 

MR. PILLANS—This matter of flogging has come before the 
American people, and has been abolished in our State codes. It 
has been abolished in the American navy, mercantile and martial. 
It has been abolished by all of the great States of the Union except 
a few of us who are occupying a backward position and have stood 
on a mere matter of dollars and cents. For that is what it amounts 
to. The knout is a well known method of punishing and correcting 
persons in this age. Did any of you read the article by Kellond, 
printed in Harper, I think, describing the punishment by the knout 
in Russia? And did you ever read an article which described the 
Alabama system more perfectly? Did you not feel indignant that 
such things could be tolerated in this age. Why, only a few weeks 
ago a Governor of this State sent an inspector. I think it was Dr. 
Bragg, to look into an affair called a convict camp in Monroe 
County. His report was printed in the newspapers and doubtless 
every gentleman of you read it. He stated that there were some 
sixty odd men in a single pen and a house with four walls and no 
openings for ventilation except a door which had to be locked at 
night. Think of human beings being confined in such a place. 
Without the ordinary conveniences which are necessary where 
men are gathered. They lay along the two sides of the house 
without air in the midst of the foulest and most unmentionable 
things. That is the result of the conditions in Alabama. I remem¬ 
ber one instance which I can cite to you as to the effect of this 
system. There was a man to whom I was talking once, and he 
was the first one to call my attention to the flogging of white men 
—in a conversation with him I asked him why he flogged the con¬ 
victs. I knew it was unlawful and I said why do you flog these 
negroes, and he said. “Oh, we flog them, and white men too.” 



1741 


CONSTITUTIONAL CONVENTION, 1901 

That man afterwards stood his trial in Arkansas for murdering a 
prisoner Graduated from Alabama schools, he went to Arkansas 
and finally reached the penitentiary for manslaughter. He escaped 
rom e penitentiary and went on his career of taking care of 
peop e, suppose. That man was a product of the Alabama sys- 
em. ^5 that nobody who knew that man would come to 
t le conclusion that he was innately a bad man, that all that was 
t le matter with him was the result of being afflicted with the power 

given to him by the unfortunate state of affairs that existed in 
- \ labama. 

We are asked how we can punish them. It has been stated 
n the gentleman from Jefferson that all these cases of flogging 
are for failure to perform some task. The man I had in mind was 
a man unable to perform a task that the negro from Sumter Coun¬ 
ty performs. 

MR. ROGERS I thought these convicts were numbered as 
to their capacity and that certain classes were given certain tasks 
and certain others given others, I would not expect your friend 
to perform the task my negro performs. 

MR. PI LEANS—He is not my friend. 

MR. CUNNINGHAM—Does the gentleman from Mobile un¬ 
derstand that these convicts are classed and tasked by the State? 

MR. PILLANS That was just stated bv the gentleman from 
Sumter. 

MR. CUNNINGHAM—Does the gentleman also understand 
that notwithstanding the classification by the State that the records 
of Pratt City will show that from fifteen to thirty are monthly taken 
from the mines by the company’s physician notwithstanding the 
State says they are able to work? 

MR. PILLANS—I know nothing of the details of that matter, 
but I am happy if the humanity of my friend has been penetrating 
enough to perform such noble work. I am not an encyclopedia of 
convict management. I have never burdened my mind and have 
never sought to learn how to manage convicts, but there can be 
no doubt that if other States manage convicts without the lash, we 
can do it, and it appears by the speech of one gentleman who is 
opposing the report that down in Mexico the peon is protected by 
law from the lash. 

MR. LOMAX—I move the amendment offered by the gentle¬ 
man from Mobile be laid upon the table. 

A call for the ayes and noes by Mr. White was not sustained, 
and a viva voce vote being taken, the amendment was laid on the 
table. 



1742 


OFFICIAL PROCEEDINGS 


Section 17 was read as follows: 

17 That all persons shall before conviction be bailable by 
sufficient sureties, except for capital offenses when the proof is 
evident or the presumption great; and that excessive bail shall not 
in any case be required. 

MR. LOMAX—That is the same as the old Constitution, and 
I move that it be adopted. 

A vote being taken, the section was adopted. 

Section 18 was read as follows: 

18. That the privileges of the writ of habeas corpus shall not 
be suspended by the authorities of this State. 

On motion, the section was adopted. 

Section 19 was read as follows: 

19. That the treason against the State shall consist only in 
levying war against it, or adhering to its enemies, giving them aid 
and comfort; and that no person shall be convicted of treason ex¬ 
cept on the testimony of two witnesses to the same overt act, or 
his confession in open court. 

MR. LOMAX—The word “the" following the first word 
“that” is incorrectly inserted, and I ask that it be stricken out by 
consent. I also ask to insert the word “own" before the word 
“confession.” 

The consent was given, and both amendments made the sec¬ 
tion adopted. 

Section 20 was read as follows: 

20. That no person shall be attainted of treason by the Gen¬ 
eral Assembly; and not no conviction shall work corruption of 
blood or forfeiture of estate. 

On motion, the section was adopted. 

21. That no person shall be imprisoned for debt. 

MR. OATES—I desire to offer an amendment. 

The amendment was read as follows: Amend Section 21 by 
adding thereto “except for willful and flagrant fraud.” 

MR. OATES—I have but a few words to offer in support of 
that amendment. I remember well when we used to have a law 
which imprisoned a man for debt, and I remember very well when 
it was abolished, and I have observed how it has worked since, 
and, as a general proposition, I am decidedly in favor of it. But 
there are cases of the most flagrant fraud in which parties have 



CONSTITUTIONAL CONVENTION, 1901 


1743 


no remedy against the perpetrators, and this provides that in cases 
of willful or flagrant fraud, there may be imprisonment for debt. 
Of course that leaves it to the Legislature. And they might pro¬ 
vide proper penalties. 

MR. CARMICHAEL—I move to lay the amendment on the 
table. 

A vote being taken, the motion was carried, and, on motion, 
the section was adopted. 

Section 22 was then read as follows: 

22. That no power of suspending laws shall be exercised by 
the General Assembly. 

On motion, the section was adopted. 

Section 23 was read as follows: 

Twenty-third—That no ex post facto law, or any law, impair¬ 
ing the obligations of contracts, or making any irrevocable or ex¬ 
clusive grants of special privileges or immunities, shall be passed 
by the General Assembly; and every grant of a franchise, privilege 
or immunity, shall forever remain subject to revocation, alteration 
or amendment. 

MR. LOMAX—There are two changes made in that Section. 
One is by inserting the word “exclusive” after the word “irre¬ 
vocable.” The other is by adding at the end of the Section that 
all franchises, privileges or immunities shall be subject to revoca¬ 
tion, alteration or amendment. I move the adoption of the 
amendment. 

MR. SAMFORD—May I ask what was the object of that? 

MR. LOMAX—The object of the word “exclusive” was to 
prevent the Legislature from granting any exclusive or irrevocable 
franchises to any one. And the object of the other is to make 
more specific and definite the proposition that all franchises grant¬ 
ed are revocable by the will of the General Assembly. 

GENERAL HARRISON—What was the reason of the Com¬ 
mittee putting in that latter clause? 

MR. LOMAX—Simply to make more specific and definite 
the proposition that franchises are revocable at the pleasure of 
the power that grants them. 

Upon a yote being taken the Section was adopted. 

Section 24 was read as follows: 

Twenty-fourth—That the exercise of the right of eminent 
domain shall never be abridged nor so construed as to prevent the 



1744 


OFFICIAL PROCEEDINGS 


General Assembly from taking the property and franchises of in¬ 
corporated companies and subjecting them to public use the same 
as individuals. But private property shall not be taken or applied 
for public use, unless just compensation be first made therefor; 
nor shall private property be taken for private use or for the use 
of corporations, other than municipal, without the consent of the 
owner; provided, however, that the General Assembly may by 
law secure the persons or corporations the right of way over the 
lands of other persons or corporations, and by general laws provide 
for and regulate the exercise by person and corporation of the 
rights herein reserved; but just compensation shall, in all cases, be 
first made to the owner, and, provided that the right of eminent 
domain shall not be so construed as to allow taxation or forced 
subscription for the benefit of railroads or any other kind of cor¬ 
poration, other than municipal or for the benefit of any individual 
or association. 


MR. ROMAX—There is no change in that section and I move 
that it be adopted. 

Upon a vote being taken the section was adopted. 

Section 25 was read as follows; 


Sec. 25. That all navigable waters shall remain forever public 
highways, free to the citizens of the State, and of the United States, 
without tax. impost or toll; and that no tax. poll, impost or wharf¬ 
age shall be demanded or received from the owner of any mer¬ 
chandise or commodity' for the use of the shores, or any r wharf 
erected on the shores, or in or over the waters of any navigable 
stream, unless the same be expressly authorized by law. 

MR LOMAX There has been no change in that section and 
1 move that it be adopted. 

Upon a vote being taken the section was adopted. 

Section 26 was read as follows: 


Sec. 26. That the citizens have a right in a peaceable manner 
to assemble together for the common good, and to apply to those 
invested with the power of government for redress of grievances 
or other purposes, by petition, address or remonstrance. 


I 


MR LOMAX—There has been no change in that section and 
move that it be adopted. 


Section 27 was read as follows: 


. . SeC - , 2 /' T h f e J ery c,t,zen has a n > ht to bear arms in defense 
of himself and the State ; and it shall be the duty of the General 

Assembly to define, by law, small arms, and regulate the bearing 
of the same. s 



CONSTITUTIONAL CONVENTION. 1901 


1745 


MR. LOMAX—The latter part of that section as added “and 
it shall he the duty of the General Assembly to define by law, small 
arms and regulate the bearing of same,” was adopted at the sug¬ 
gestion of some gentleman who introduced an ordinance to that 
effect in the Convention with a view of calling the attention of the 
Legislature to the evil and practice of carrying concealed weapons 
and to adopt more stringent remedies than exist today. 

MR. O’NKAL (Lauderdale)—State whether they would have 
the right to prevent a man from carrying a pistol? 

MR. LOMAX—I am inclined to think they have. But it was 
the view of some of the members of the committee who introduced 
the ordinance, to put this in the Constitution with a view of at¬ 
tracting the attention of the Legislature more particularly to the 
practice of carrying small arms and perhaps of carrying small 
arms might to some degree check the practice of carrying con¬ 
cealed weapons, which makes it the duty of the Legislature to 
do it. 

MR. SAM FORD—I ask if the committee don’t object that the 
last part of the section be stricken out. 

MR. LOMAX—The only difference is, while the Legislature 
has the power now, it makes it the duty of the Legislature to de¬ 
fine small arms and regulate the bearing of the same, and the idea 
was that putting it in the Constitution and the Legislature having 
the power to define what a small arm is, it might in some way 
adopt some measures by which the evil of carrying concealed 
weapons would be remedied. 

MR. PETTUS—I can understand what the committee means 
to do by making it the duty of the General Assembly to regulate 
the bearing of small arms, but I cannot understand what it hopes 
to get at by making it the duty of the General Assembly to define 
small arms. 

MR. LOMAX—The idea was that the legislature might in¬ 
clude some small arm that is now a dangerous weapon to carrv 
about the country that is not in the statute against carrying con¬ 
cealed weapons. 

MR. O’NEAL (Lauderdale)—Under that provision could not 
the legislature have the right to define an air-gun a concealed 
weapon ? 

MR. REESE—I offer an amendment. 

The amendment was read as follows: “Strike out all of the 
section after the word “State” in the first line,” 

MR. REESE—The purpose of that amendment is to leave 
this section where it was in the old Constitution of 1875. Mr. 



1746 OFFICIA L P ROCK EDI N G S 

President, it would be well to leave some of these provisions like 
they used to be. It would be well to send some of the sections 
back to the people so they can see an old friend with which they 
are acquainted. I fail to see where the explanation given by the 
Committee comes in. The legislatures have legislated along this 
line since I have been recollecting anything about it. Judges have 
charged grand juries, and the Circuit Court Judges of the State 
have charged the communities in which they held their courts 
about the evil practice of bearing small arms, I hardly conceive 
that the explanation that has been given explains. It looks to me 
like there is a nigger in the woodpile somewhere. 

MR. PETTUS—I would like to ask the gentleman a ques¬ 
tion. 

THE PRESIDENT—Does the gentleman yield? 

MR. REESE—Yes. sir. 

MR. PETTUS—I would like to ask if this question is in re¬ 
lation to the “razocU that the nigger in the woodpile has? 

MR. REESE—I expect it is, but the legislature can reach 
this question without this provision in the Constitution. 

MR. O’NEAL (Lauderdale)—Under this provision it shall be 
the duty of the General Assembly to define by law “small arms.” 
Would not they have the power to define an air gun or small 
rifles as a small arm and prevent the carrying of the same by the 
people of the State? 

MR. REESE—I expect they have the right to do that now 
under the law. Under this provision they may prescribe that 
when you carry a pistol you must carry it in your hand, or when 
you carry any other gun, they might prescribe which hand vou 
would carry it in, and they might make you do all sorts of things. 
Mr. President, why not act honestly and squarely with the peo¬ 
ple. If this Convention desires to stop the people from carrying 

arms and desires to strike the clause out of the Constitution of 
Alabama, let us come up like men and say so, and I believe T would 
vote for it, but do not let us deceive them. Do not let us stick 
a thing in there which may be susceptible of different meanings, 
but let us say candidly what we mean. I for one, oppose this, be¬ 
cause I do not know what it means. After all of the explanation 
that has been here, as it happened on this floor on one other oc¬ 
casion before, in the consideration of this report, we were request¬ 
ed to put in something that we did not know the meaning of and 
the distinguished and able lawyer who is the Chairman of the 
Committee did not know the meaning of it, and I object to put¬ 
ting this thing in because I do not know what the meaning of it 

is. 



CONSTITUTIONAL CONVENTION. !</)! 


1747 


MK. LA )MAX-■-Under the present Constitution do you think 
you can levy a privilege license on the right to carry a pistol? 

MR. REESE—I cannot say. 

MK. JENKINS—Under this clause in the present Constitu¬ 
tion. if the legislature was to levy a license of say $25 or $50 for 
carrying a pistol, do you believe that they could do it. under this 
provision saving that a man has a right to bear arms? 

MK. REESE—f have not investigated that subject. I as¬ 
sume that you could not levy a tax on it, because the last Legis¬ 
lature levied a tax on everything they could, and they did not levy 
a tax on the carrying of pistols. 

MK. JENKINS—I will say to the gentleman from Dallas— 

I see he takes his seat--but I w ill say to him anyhow, that the 
only reason thev didn’t put a tax upon carrying pistols was be¬ 
cause the Constitution did not allow' it, and I believe that if we 
ever can get a tax on pistols, in the shape of a privilege license, 
that you will abolish the carrying of concealed weapons, and not 
until you get that license will you ever do it. 

MR. WHITE—That would give a man with money the right 
to carry a pistol and a poor man could not carry it. 

MR. REUSE—T am willing to abolish it. 

MK. IEXKIXS No man should he allowed to carry it with¬ 
out a license. 

MR. GREER (Calhoun)—I move to lay the amendment of¬ 
fered by the gentleman from Dallas on the table. 

MR. REESE—I will state to the gentleman that it is not mv 
amendment. Tt is the amendment of the gentleman from Cham¬ 
bers who desires to speak on it. and I will ask him to withdraw the 
motion. 

MR. GREER (Calhoun)—If I withdraw* the motion, will the 
gentleman from Chambers renew it? 

MR. HEFLIN (Chambers)—I hate to renew a motion to lav 
mv own amendment on the table, but T will do it. 

MR. GREER (Calhoun)—I withdraw it if you will renew 
it. 

MR. HEFLIN (Chambers)—I thought that the section as 
reported by the committee ought to be amended. I thought it 
should be left as it is in the old Constitution. I thought, and 
think now, that the reasons given by the committee for the amend¬ 
ment were not good. I see no reason why the section in the o 
Constitution should be changed. It reads after this manner: Sec- 



1748 


OFFICIAL PROCEEDINGS 


tion 27, That every citizen has a right to bear arms in defense 
of himself and the State. We have had this section in the Con¬ 
stitution since 1875, and I have never seen any evil growing out 
of this right being lodged in the fundamental law of the State. I 
can see no good which is to come from the report of the committee 
changing this section. The section is short. As the gentleman 
from Dallas has said, let us go back to the people of the State 
with something that they may recognize as an old friend in the 
Constitution when we go before them and submit this Constitu¬ 
tion for their ratification. I do not desire to speak further on the 
question. The gentleman from Calhoun has requested that I make 
a motion to kill my own amendment. I therefore do so, Mr. Chair¬ 
man, and move to lay the amendment on the table. 

Upon a vote being taken upon the motion to table the amend¬ 
ment of the gentleman from Chambers, a division was called for, 
and. In a vote of A/ ayes and 4/ noes, was announced. 

MR. HEFLIN (Chambers)—I call for a verification of the 
vote. 

THE PRESIDENT The chair has not voted, and has a 
right to vote. The chair will vote against the motion to table. 

MR. REESE I move the previous question on the amend¬ 
ment. 


MR. GREER (Calhoun)—On that I call for the ayes and noes. 

THE PRESIDENT—The gentleman from Dallas move* the 
previous question, and the question is. shall the main question be 
now put? 

The main question was ordered. 

THE PRESIDENT—The question is on the adoption of the 
section as amended. 


move the adoption of the section as amend- 
ed, and I move the previous question. 

THE PRESIDENT — Does the gentleman insist upon the 
previous question? The Convention seems ready to vote. 

The call for the previous question not being insisted upon 
a vote being taken, the section was adopted. 

Section 28 was read as follows: 

28 That no standing army shall be kept up without the con¬ 
sent of the Genera Assembly, and, in that case, no appropriation 
for its support shall be made for a longer term than one year; and 
the military shall in all cases and at all times, be in strict subor- 
dmation to the civil ower. 



CONSTITUTIONAL CONVENTION, 1901 


1749 


MR. LOMAX 1 move the adoption of that section. 

I pon a vote being taken, the section was adopted. 

Section 29 was read as follows: 

29. That no soldier shall, in time of peace, be quartered in 
any house without the consent of the owner, nor in time of war, 
but in a manner to be prescribed by law. 

MR. LOMAX—i move the adoption of that section. 

Lpon a vote being taken, the section was adopted. 

Section 30 was read as follows: 

30. That no title of nobility or hereditary distinction, honor, 
privilege or emolument, shall ever be granted or conferred in this 
State; and that no office shall be created, the appointment to 
which shall be for a longer time than during good behavior. 

Upon a vote being taken the section was adopted. 

Section 31 was read as follows: 

31. That immigration shall be encouraged, emigration shall 
not be prohibited, and that no citizen shall be exiled. 

MR. JONES (Montgomery)—I have an amendment. 

The amendment was read as follows: Amendment to Sec¬ 
tion 31 of the report of the Committee on Declaration of Rights. 
Amend Section 31 by adding at the end thereof, the following 
words: “No well person shall be compelled to exile himself from 
the State to secure refuge from disease, when the health authori¬ 
ties of any County are willing to allow him refuge in its borders. 

MR. TONES — Before making any remarks on the amend¬ 
ment, I would like to inquire of the Chairman of the Committee 
whether the Committee is opposed to its adoption. If they are not, 
I do not wish to speak. If they oppose it, I do. 

MR. LOMAX—The Committee is opposed to the amendment. 
At least as Chairman of the Committee I am opposed to it. Of 
course 1 have not the authority to speak for the balance. 

THE PRESIDENT—The question is on the amendment of 
the gentleman from Montgomery to the section as reported by the 
Com mittee. 

MR. TONES (Montgomery)—I cannot conceive of any plau¬ 
sible objection to the amendment, unless it falls under this head 
in the preliminary report under which it says “Some of the ordi¬ 
nances rejected by the Committee failed of adoption because it 
was evident that the object sought to be obtained could be se- 



1750 


OFFICIAL PROCEEDINGS 


cured by legislative action, and hence they were not proper mat¬ 
ters for Constitutional enactment.” 

That is true of nearly every declaration in the Bill of Rights. 
A prudent legislature could and would always secure these rights 
there announced by legislative enactment. There are some matters 
which the people always wish to withdraw from legislative con¬ 
trol. There are matters paramount and fundamental in their na¬ 
ture, which it is always deemed proper to give a permanent place 
in the Constitution of a State. This, and not whether legislation 
could effect the object determines whether the Declaration of 
Rights is the proper place for them. 

Now, why do men love their government ? Is it altogether 
because of the soil or its fertility, the mountains and the valleys, 
its rivers, the beauty of its scenery, or the climate? Is it alto¬ 
gether for its history? Is it altogether for its people? These and 
each of them add much to love of country, but at last the para¬ 
mount consideration in every man's heart when he loves his gov¬ 
ernment is. the measure of protection it affords to life and liberty. 

We have had in recent years a flagrant example of the need 
for some such provision in the fundamental law. I will not say 
who was the author of the principle I condemn because I am not 
sure—it is of doubtful paternity. Here in Alabama, ever since the 
seashore was settled, when God in his providence allowed epi¬ 
demics to come among the people the people of stricken cities 
have been allowed to go among their friends and neighbors for 
refuge, wherever it would not imperil the public health. There 
never was a day or an hour in Alabama before 1897 when a citi¬ 
zen of Alabama before 1897 lawed by the State of Alabama and 
turned over to the charity of strangers in other States when he 
sought refuge from a city in which there was an epidemic or con¬ 
tagious disease. Kindred and friends in localities where his pres¬ 
ence would not harm had always been allowed to succor him in 
times of distress. We had yellow fever in Montgomery time and 
time again, and in Mobile, and there never was a day before 1897 
when the State of Alabama declared all avenues of refuge in Ala¬ 
bama are closed to you. Every spot in Alabama is liable to in¬ 
fection. It matters not what the experience of communities mav 
have been, and it matters not that they may know by actual ex¬ 
perience that no danger could come to the public health or to 
its people by aiding you. I put the strong arm of Alabama upon 
you, and tell you if you are poor you may die where you are 
with the pestilence. If you are rich I will carry you through the 
State, and leave you a dependent upon the good will or the charity 
of strangers in neighboring States. Now, I ask if there is any 
wisdom in that? Is there any right in it? Is there any humanity 
in it? Is there any religion in it? For a brave people, a noble 
people, a people who have suffered so much as the Southern peo- 



CONSTITUTIONAL CONVENTION, 1901 


1751 


pie, and surmounted with such heroism so many trials, we have 
presented a most piteous spectacle to the people of the world, 
whenever some man has cried out “yellow fever.” It seems then 
that society and government and Christianity are all forgotten, 
and we become a set of savages. Much of that is due to men who 
claim to know most about it and who may know least, because 
they discovered what they call the theory of “portable yellow 
fever,” and forthwith every little place sprung up with a shot gun 
quarantine. They would not bury the dead. They would not even 
give to the sick a cup of cold water or a piece of bread. We re¬ 
solved ourselves into a set of heathen and savages and turn on 
our own flesh and blood. I have known a Board of Health in this 
good town of Montgomery to decide that a great mass of pig iron 
from Leake's foundry in New Orleans, which had been out in the 
country for three weeks on the cars, and reeking with carbolic 
acid, might endanger the health of this city, but that two intelli¬ 
gent physicians whom the city council sent to Louisville to in¬ 
quire whether there was yellow fever there and who found it 
might come hack here with impunity. In the last epidemic, Mr. 
President, with all this foolishness, and I think that is a soft term 
for it, when they would not let a man stop in the State, the Health 
Officer of Alabama was going in and out from the Capitol every 
day in actual contact with yelloAv fever, and then coming back 
here and mingling with our wives and children. 

The thing was nonsensical. What is the good of such action? 
Take that blessed town of Opelika, and I say God bless her, for 
her people have never closed its doors. They know that yellow 
fev< r does not spread there and they opened wide their arms, as 
thcv also did in Ttiskegee and other places in years gone hv, to 
refugees ; and vet the fiat of the State said you shall not stop there, 
vou must go over to Georgia. What was the practical result. 
People went over to Georgia and came back to Opelika and stayed 
there. They spread all over Alabama. It was nonsense, it was 
worse than nonsense, it was crime, because it was the State of 
Alabama warring on women and children. 

Only a few years ago a cry went up all over this continent, 
that finally brought on a war in spite of some of the most eminent 
statesmen' in this country, because a foreign people were concen¬ 
trated in cities to starve; and yet here in Alabama in 1897, the 
population of the three chief cities in Alabama were, by the dic¬ 
tate of the State of Alabama, compelled to stay here, men, women 
and children, and take whatever fate awaited them at the hands 
of a dread disease, if they could not go to other States, though 
shelter was offered in Alabama. Was not that worse than Spanish 
cruelty? Thev had the justification there that the government 
was warring upon its enemies, but here were the wives and chil¬ 
dren of our people and the citizens of Alabama, and it cruelly 

warred on them. 



1752 


OFFICIAL PROCEEDINGS 


I do not propose to add but a few words more. I remember 
well when my friend on my right (Mr. Lomax) and some of the 
rest of us here were trying to do what we could for the peop e 
who remained in Montgomery. There was a young widow with 
two children, whose husband could not get to her. >-he ac no 
employment here, and she had no place to sta>\ She wanted o 
get to her friends in the country and could not. Finally the nionev 
was gotten for her, so that she could get out of the State, v. ie 
was a bright woman, a sensible woman and an emotional \\oman. 

I tried to find her letter in which she described her pride m Ala¬ 
bama and how she steamed through its borders in the night, with 
all the windows down, a brutal guard at the door to keep them 
from getting air. She said when she got into Columbus. Georgia, 
that though she had always loved Alabama she got down on her 
knees, Alabamian as she was, and “thanked God that she was out 
of Alabama.” 

I want to put this amendment in the Constitution, so that 
such a condition of affairs can happen no more. It is right and it 
is proper. It is not a mere legislative declaration. It is an ut¬ 
terance in defense of liberty, and for the protection of the de¬ 
fenseless people who have suffered these persecutions and these 
outrages. They will rise up and call you blessed, if you put it in 
the fundamental law, whether it is legislative or not. 

THE PRESIDENT—The question is on the amendment of¬ 
fered by the gentleman from Montgomery. 

MR. CUNNINGHAM—Here at the eleventh hour- 

MR. JONES (Montgomery)—I beg the gentleman’s pardon, 
but I offered that ordinance and the committee rejected it. 

MR. CUNNINGHAM—At any rate, without any official no¬ 
tice that this Convention would be called upon to consider so 
serious a question, we are brought face to face with an amend¬ 
ment which proposes to destroy the efficiency of the quarantine 
system of our State. That amendment is presented by a gentle¬ 
man of profound learning in the law, of unquestioned patriotism, 
of boundless sympathy for the oppressed and the unfortunate ev¬ 
erywhere. With a heart whose every impulse is prompted by sen¬ 
timents of the highest conception of humanity and benevolence, 
it strikes me that before voting upon the proposition we should 
give it the wise and serious reflection that the subject demands. 

I want to say, and I say it deliberately that the introduction 
of yellow fever, of the plague, of cholera, or typhus fever (not ty¬ 
phoid understand me, but typhus fever) and other forms of con¬ 
tagious and infectious diseases that have been, met with in this 
country, is the result of one of two things, an inefficient quaran¬ 
tine at the point of departure, or an efficient quarantine at the 
point of landing. 



CONSTITUTIONAL CONVENTION, 1901 


1753 


MR. JONES (Montgomery)—Will my friend permit a ques¬ 
tion? 

THE PRESIDENT—Will the gentleman yield to the gen¬ 
tleman from Montgomery? 

MR. CUNNINGHAM—If the gentleman will note his ques¬ 
tions, I will answer them in the last two minutes of my ten. 


Now, Mr. President, the mouth of the jug to the State of 
Alabama in the matter of the introduction of foreign diseases, is 
the city of Mobile, and if this amendment is adopted, if I properly 
interpret it. the special Quarantine Board of Mobile Bay, which 
consists of commercial interests largely, with one or two mem¬ 
bers of the Board of Health upon it, will have the authority, not¬ 
withstanding the fact that the Board of Health prohibits it, to 
raise any quarantine that may have been established in the city 
of Mobile by the State Board of Health, and if there should be 
an epidemic of yellow fever, starting anywhere in the State of 
Alabama, there should be a county in this State in which there is 
no County Board of Health, and there are such counties, who 
will receive persons from infected places, then refugees from these 
infected districts, sorrowfully and distressed as they may be would 
have the right to go into these communities, and introduce yellow 
fever with their persons and with their baggage. 


It is well that this Convention should know, and I will briefly 
inform them as to organization of the Board of Health of this 
State. The Board of Health of the State of Alabama consists of 
the Medical Association of the State. This has a Committee on 
Public Health consisting of a certain number of gentlemen, elect¬ 
ed bv the Medical Association. These gentlemen in turn elect a 
State Health Officer, who is paid out of the State Treasury of 
Alabama. The Countv Board of Health consists of the county 
medical societies in each county. Those county medical societies 
elect a Committee of Public Health, and also a County Health o - 
ficer, who becomes the executive officer of the County Board of 
Health Now I undertake to sav, with all due respect to the County 
Boards of Health of the State of Alabama, that they have not the 
knowledge neither theoretical or practical in matters of quaran¬ 
tine. The State Board of Health, on the contrary, and especially 
its State Health Officer, has not only an opportunity and privi¬ 
lege, but it is his duty to study and post himself upon all of these 
questions, and thereby to qualify himself for the discharge of these 
delicate duties. 

Now if the State Board of Health declares quarantine against 
any county or city in the State of Alabama the Governor has to 
order it. It must be done through the Chief Executive Officer 
of the whole State of Alabama, and if he does not approve it, 
then it falls to the ground and does not become operative as a 



.754 


OFFICIAL PROCEEDIN' OS 


matter of fact. The question now is, shall the County Board of 
Health, consisting of five censors in each county, override the 
State Board of Health, and the State Health Officer and the Chief 
Executive of the State of Alabama. That is exactly what this 
amendment amounts to. Though all of these may declare a 
quarantine, and may show the reasons why it should be adopted, 
and the Chief Executive may order it, yet a little County Board 
of Health can throw open the doors of any county in the State to 
this unfortunate woman with her two children, and she may be¬ 
come the source of infection and destroy the lives of a thousand 
women and children that otherwise would be protected. 

Therefore, I say while it appears inhuman to the unfortunate 
refugee, that it is an inhumanity to the unfortunate citizen in that 
community which has no protection from these infectuous and 
contagious diseases, and for that reason I think that this amend¬ 
ment should not pass. 


I am perfectly willing to leave the doors wide open for the 
General Assembly to regulate these matters as they ste fit. but 
I am opposed to placing in the Constitution an inhibition that 
will forever prevent, or will prevent until amended, which in all 
probability would not be for many years to come, anv progress in 
the prevention of disease in this State. There is nothing better 
established in medical science than that these diseases are pro¬ 
duced by microbes or bacteria scientifically speaking, and that 
they can be communicated from person to person, and bv articles 
that have come in contact with the person. Some of them can be 
communicated through the atmosphere, such as la grippe, dengue 
and relapsing fevers, over which quarantine has no control Then 
I say that we should not tear to pieces the system and regulation 
and law which has been the result of the study and experience 
of the medical profession not only in Alabama, but of the whole 

C L ltU e , !i S ’ by ^ ,m P ulse of an honorable, sympathetic 
and great hearted ex-Governor of the State of Alabama, who 
knows nothing more about the principles of quarantines and dis¬ 
ease than the present speaker knows about the law. 

a qu«Hon? NES (Mont S omer y>-Will you allow me to ask you 


utes “ft CUNNINGH AM-Sure. I think I have about 


two 


min- 


MR, JONES I will yield to the gentleman from Mobile. 

MR. PILLANS—I desire to ask the gentleman, he says that 
the ex-Governor knows nothing of how that yellow fever ^s car¬ 
ried from place to place; can the State Board of Health be a - 

erno e r > ^ ^ &h ° Ut * 33 3 certaint y than the ex Gov- 



CONSTITUTIONAL CONVENTION, 1901 


1755 


MR. CUNNINGHAM—In answer to that question I will say 
that the question itself shows a patent want of appreciation of the 
advances of civilization. We were told today on this floor that 
the jury system has existed for centuries and the legal profession 
has failed to change it. I want to tell you that modern medicine 
is of recent origin and it stands today almost as an exact science. 
And upon these great questions the profession is not divided as 
our great legal lights are as to what constituted the rights of citi¬ 
zens of Porto Rico or the Philippines, or the carrying of conceal¬ 
ed weapons. The medical profession is practically unanimous upon 
the question, and I will be pardoned for saying that the medical 
profession has produced brains equal to that of any other pro¬ 
fession. They seldom have as much money because they deal 
with the misfortunes of humanity while the lawyers deal with the 
rascalities of life. 

MR. HARRISON—Will the gentleman allow a question? 
MR. CUNNINGHAM—Yes, sir. 

MR. HARRISON—I understood you in your remarks to say 
that one of your objections was that the County Boards would 
overrule the State Board. If there is no difference of opinion 
amongst you, then is there any danger to apprehend from this 
source? 

MR. CUNNINGHAM—I will answer that question of the 
gentleman by saying that the County Boards of Health, like ev¬ 
ery other set of public officials and every other relation in life, 
may be more or less influenced by certain circumstantial condi¬ 
tions; the influences of local environment address themselves to 
their consideration the same as other men. Doctors are not par¬ 
ticularly exempt from these collateral influences and incidental 
circumstances any more than the legal profession. 

I will not answer the question of the gentleman from Mont¬ 
gomery. 

MR. JONES—I would like to ask my friend if there is any 
great State in Europe or in this country which now maintains 
a quarantine against places; do they not maintain quarantine 
against individuals and isolate them if they are found suffering 
with contagious diseases? 

MR. PILLANS—Yes, I will suggest that Turkey does. 

MR. JONES—I meant to say civilized countries. 

MR. CUNNINGHAM—In answer to that question the quar¬ 
antine system of European States is so good that it is very 
seldom indeed that there is an introduction of disease prevailing 
in any other State, and therefore the question of local quarantine 
is practically a matter of no importance. 



1756 


OFFICIAL PROCEEDINGS 


MR. JONES—How about the city of New York? 

MR. CUNNINGHAM—I do not know anything about the 
city of New York except that it is perhaps, beyond the yellow 
fever line. I would say this much to the gentleman, however, 
that if the plague was prevailing in Montgomery he would find 
himself unable to land in the city of New York. 

THE PRESIDENT—The time of the gentleman from Jef¬ 
ferson has expired. 

MR. LOMAX—I do not care to consume much of the time 
of this Convention upon this proposition. I do not know exactly 
how to characterize it, but the almost contemptuous way in which 
my distinguished friend from Montgomery, spoke of propositions 
being advanced here upon ordinances or amendments which con¬ 
tained matters of legislation, I insist before this Convention that 
the proposition contained in the amendment of mv friend from 
Montgomery is absolutely in the control of the General Assembly, 
and needs no constitutional enactment in order for the legislature 
to control it. The whole matter of quarantine is in the hands of 
the legislature. There is no necessity of putting in this Constitu¬ 
tion anything about a quarantine. Either quarantine laws are 
wrong, if the eminent, able and distinguished physicians who have 
made a lifetime study of this question have shown that they are 
absolutely without brains and do not know what quarantine is 
when they see it, then it is in the power of the General Assembly 
to say that the Board of Health shall be abolished, and that there 
shall be no more quarantine, and men shall not be required to 
stay out of the State after they have run out of it away from an 
epidemic. 

Now how did these people get out of the State that my dis¬ 
tinguished friend talks about? Were they forced to go? They were 
not forced to go except that other quarantine rules which says 
that the more people you get out of a community at a time of epi¬ 
demic, the less you leave for the disease to feed upon, and there¬ 
fore the quicker you can stamp out the disease. But they do not 
have to be told that. Let the cry yellow fever come up in any 
community in Alabama and a mad, wild rush begins for other 
places and for other States, and nothing but an army with gatling 
guns could stop it, and when you have thus voluntarily carried 
them out of the State, because the quarantine is kept in force, 
and they say for a certain period of time you shall not come back 
into the State, we are told that that man is exiled and that we 
must put a clause in the Constitution to forbid it. It is a common 
practice and custom amongst quarantine officers, that at certain 
periods of an epidemic, after the quarantine has been in force for 
some time, and the necessity for extending it to the whole State 
may cease to exist they establish a marginal line at the edge of 
the dangerous districts, and let the people come into the non-in- 



CONSTITUTIONAL CONVENTION, 1901 


1757 


fected districts, and thereby reduce the extent of districts from 
time to time until the end of the quarantine comes. Now I do not 
pretend to know anything about quarantine. The result has 
been that the concensus of the highest authority is that the best 
way to prevent the spread of infectious and contagious disease is 
by quarantine. You have just heard a statement from a distin¬ 
guished gentleman who understands the proposition. I do not. 

MR. PILLANS—Will the gentleman allow me to ask him 
to name the authorities whether they are American authorities 
or European. 

MR. LOMAX—I cannot name an authority because I have 
read them from time to time, and do not know what they are, 
but I think that I can name one who knows as much about quar¬ 
antine as either the distinguished gentleman from Mobile or my 
distinguished friend from Montgomery, and that is Dr. Russell 
M. Cunningham of Jefferson County. (Applause.) 

Now, I have gone beyond what I wanted to say. What I 
wished to say was this: I do not blame people from running 
from yellow fever. I wanted to run mighty bad in 1897, but I felt 
like it was mv public dutv to stay here, and I stayed side by side 
with my distinguished friend there, and did what I could, but I 
wanted to run. I do not blame them from running, but when they 
do go, I say do not let us put into the Constitution a provision 
that shall say that we cannot keep them out until the health of 
Alabama is secure against infection. We owe a duty to our State 
more than we do to any supposed exile that has gone from her 
borders. I say, gentlemen of the Convention, that this is purely 
a question of legislation ; that the whole matter embraced in this 
amendment can be enacted by the General Assembly of Alabama, 
and there is no reason why we should put into this Convention 
an amendment which gives to the word exile an entirely dif¬ 
ferent meaning from what it has always had before, and which 
puts into the Constitution a matter that is purely, absolutely and 
exclusively a subject of legislative action. I think the amend¬ 
ment should be laid upon the table. 

MR. HEFLIN (Chambers)—I want to say a word against 
the Convention usurping the functions of the Legislature of Ala¬ 
bama I favor the report of the committee to leave this section 
as it is in the old Constitution. I believe, Mr. President, the 
amendment which says any well man or able-bodied man, I do 
not remember exactly how it reads, that by the consent of t e 
health officer in any county, may go into that county although 
he may come right from disease and may carry smallpox right 
into the community, should not be adopted. It may be that the 
health officer is related to those who live in the city, and who 
would like to get out among the hills, and these health officers, 



1758 


OFFICIAL PROCEEDINGS 


by reason of their relation, or their friendship, against the will of 
the sovereign authority of the county, might extend an invitation 
to these gentlemen who live in the city where disease may be lo¬ 
cated, when the people of that county might rise up and say we 
do not want them to come into our hills and our homes nestling 
there, among our wives and children, because we want them free 
from this disease, and we do not want you officers to let these 
people come in here and run the risk of spreading disease in our 
county. Under that amendment, there is no power by which this 
can be regulated. The health officers can invite the city of Mont¬ 
gomery into Chambers County, and five thousand voters in that 
county might rise up, but they have got no relief whatever under 
that amendment, and I am opposed to it. I do not think that it 
ought to be incorporated in this Constitution. If the gentlemen 
insist that there ought to be any further law upon this question, 
let them submit it to the General Assembly of this State, let them 
take it up with the legislative bodies, as it is purely and wholly a 
legislative question. We ought not to take up the time of this 
convention with the consideration of legislative questions, and, 
Mr. President, in the hope that we will get through with this re¬ 
port this evening, I make the motion to lay the amendment upon 
the table. 

And upon a vote being taken, the motion to table was carried. 

THE PRESIDENT—The question recurs upon the section 
as reported by the committee. 

MR, CUNNINGHAM—I move its adoption. 

And upon a vote being* taken, the section was adopted. 

Section 32 was read as follows: 

32. That temporary absence from the State shall not cause 
a forfeiture of residence once obtained. 

MR. SANFORD (Montgomery)—I desire to offer an amend¬ 
ment. 

The amendment was read as follows: Insert the words “or 
county” after the word “State.” 

MR. HEFLIN—I move the adoption of the amendment. 

MR. LOMAX—I move to lay the amendment on the table. 
The section is just as it was in the previous Constitution and as 
it ought to remain. 

MR. SANFORD (Montgomery)—I offer this amendment be¬ 
cause the rights of the man in a State depend upon his residence. 
They depend upon his residence in the county, and if it is neces¬ 
sary to say that he shall not forfeit his residence in the State, it 
should be equally right to say he shall not forfeit it in the county 



CONSTITUTIONAL CONVENTION. 1901 


1759 


by a temporary absence. His right to be sued depends upon his 
residence in the county. Therefore, I say it is just as necessary 
to say that a temporary absence shall not forfeit his residence in 
the county as that a temporary absence shall not forfeit his resi¬ 
dence in the State. It is his residence in the county that enables 
him to exercise his political right, and also the burdens of taxa¬ 
tion are imposed upon him by reason of such residence. He is 
taxed in the county where he lives, and he votes in the county 
where he lives. 

MR. LOMAX—I move that the amendment be laid upon the 
table? 

Upon a vote being taken, the motion to table was carried. 

MR. LOMAX—I move the adoption of the section as re¬ 
ported. 

Upon a vote being taken, the section was adopted. 

Section 33 was read as follows: 

33. That no form of slavery shall exist in this State; and there 
shall not be any involuntary servitude, otherwise than for the 
punishment of crimes, of which the party shall have been duly 
convicted. 

MR. LOMAX—I move the adoption of the Section; it is un¬ 
changed. 

Upon a vote being taken the Section was adopted. 

Section 34 was read as follows: 

34. The privilege of suffrage shall be protected by laws regu¬ 
lating elections, and prohibiting, under adequate penalties, all un¬ 
due influences from power, bribery, tumult or other improper con¬ 
duct. 

MR. LOMAX—The only change, Mr. President, made in that 
Section is the striking out of the word “right” and inserting the 
word “privilege”—the privilege of suffrage, instead of the right of 
suffrage. 

MR. HEFLIN (Chambers)—I move the adoption of the Sec¬ 
tion. 


Upon a vote being taken the Section was adopted. 

MR. LOMAX—Before the next Section is read in the Com¬ 
mittee’s report, I desire to call the attention of the Convention 
to the fact that Section 35 in the Preamble and Declaration of 
Rights of the Constitution of 1875 is stricken out by the Commit¬ 
tee and does not appear. 



1760 


OFFICIAL PROCEEDINGS 


Section 35 was read as follows: 

35. Foreigners who are, or who may hereafter become bona 
fide residents of this State shall enjoy the same rights in respect 
to the possession, enjoyment and inheritance of property, as na¬ 
tive-born citizens. 

MR. SANFORD (Montgomery)—I have an amendment. The 
amendment was read as follows: Amend Section 35 by inserting 
in the first line the word “naturalized” before the word “foreigner.” 

MR. SANFORD—The same reasons apply to that, that were 
offered in the argument the other day in regard to the suffrage 
question and to the individuals having declared bona fide, their 
intentions to become citizens. While we invite emigrants to ths 
State we want them to come as citizens, and not as transitory 
marauders. The amount of real property that is owned in the 
United States today is astounding. In Texas, in Mississippi, in 
West Virginia, in Tennessee, the amount of property is estimated 
at 27,000,000 of acres, nearly two-thirds of the whole State of 
Alabama, owned by foreigners, residents of England, Germany 
and France, and therefore I say that if these people are to own 
land, let them be citizens so they can bear the burdens of citizen¬ 
ship as well as enjoy the benefits of the rights of such a position. 
I will mention some of these that own lands in this country. 
Three millions of acres in Texas, to show you the character of 
that ownership, are owned by Earl Cardigan, Duke Buford, Wil¬ 
liam Alexander, Louis Stephenson, Douglas Hamilton, Duke of 
Bowden, Duke of Rutland, and others of that character. So, in 
Mississippi, Florida, Tennessee and Texas, I say these people 
reap the benefits from these lands, they should also bear some¬ 
thing of the burdens of State. It is said in Texas thousands of 
tenants pay their rentals to people living abroad, who have never 
set foot on the American shore. This results in the impoverishment 
of this country for the benefit of foreign nations and therefore 
in Alabama let them be naturalized citizens, that shall own prop¬ 
erty and enjoy the rights of such proprietorship of lands in this 
State. It is for that I move that the words “naturalized citizen” 
be placed before the word “foreigner.” 

MR. BOONE—I move to table the amendment. 

Upon a vote being- taken the motion to table was carried. 

THE PRESIDENT The question recurs upon the adoption 
of the Section as reported by the committee. 

MR. LOMAX—I move the adoption of the Section. 

Upon a vote being taken the Section was adopted . 

Section 36 was read as follows: 



CONSTITUTIONAL CONVENTION, 1901 


1761 


36. That the sole object and only legitimate end of govern¬ 
ment is to protect the citizen in the enjoyment of life, liberty and 
property, and when the Government assumes other functions, it 
is usurpation and oppression. 

MR. LOMAX — There is no change in that Section, and I 
move its adoption. 

Upon a vote being taken the Section was adopted. 

MR. LOMAX—I will ask the indulgence of the Convention 
and prefer a request, in as much as I have not consumed much 
of the time of this Convention, certainly no more than I have felt 
was my duty to consume as Chairman of this Committee. There 
are but three more Sections to the report of the Committee on 
Declaration of Rights and if we can finish the consideration of 
this report this evening it would give me the opportunity to leave 
here for a few days to answer a very urgent and important call 
which I have upon me and I ask the indulgence of the Conven¬ 
tion to finish the consideration of this report, and I trust it will 
be granted. 

Upon a vote being taken the rules were suspended. 

Section 37 was read as follows: 

37. That no restraint upon the privileges of suffrage on ac¬ 
count of race, color or previous condition of servitude, shall be 
made by law. 

MR. PETTUS—I offer an amendment. 

MR. SAMFORD (Pike)—I move to lay that section upon 
the table. 

MR. LOMAX—Don’t do that. Do not cut off all debate. I 
want to state the reasons why this section should remain. 

MR. PETTUS I will state to the gentleman from Pike that 
I have the floor and I have offered an amendment. 

MR. SAMFORD—I beg your pardon. 

The amendment was read as follows: Amend the report of 
the Committee on Preamble and Declaration of Rights by strik¬ 
ing out Section 37 on Page 10 of the proposed ordinance. 

MR. PETTUS—In regard to that I want to say that I do not 
see why the State of Alabama should perpetuate the Fifteenth 
Amendment in its Constitutions. Some of us have a hope that some 
time in the dim and distant future that the light of reason will 
dawn upon this continent, and that the Fifteenth Amendment 
will be repealed in the Federal Constitution, and if that be true 
we do not want our hands shackled by the State Constitution so 



1762 


OFFICIAL PROCEEDINGS 


that we may not regulate our suffrage in such manner as it may 
seem best to us. I therefore move to strike out the section and on 
that I call for the previous question. 

The previous question was ordered. 

MR. LOMAX—Mr. President, I desire for the Convention to 
understand the reasons of the committee for leaving that section 
in the Bill of Rights. As I understand the report of the Commit¬ 
tee on Suffrage there is no change or restriction upon suffrage, 
on account of race, color or previous condition of servitude. 

MR. BOONE—I would like to ask the gentleman a question. 

THE PRESIDENT—Does the gentleman yield? 

MR. LOMAX—Yes, sir. 

MR. BOONE—Is not that limitation put upon the State of 
Alabama by the 15th amendment and has not the Supreme Court 
of the United States repeatedly held that the amendment because 
a part of the law of the land including the law of the State? 

MR. LOMAX—I will say that this is imposed upon the peo¬ 
ple of Alabama by the 15th amendment, and that the Constitution 
of the United States and the amendments thereto are the supreme 
law of the land and govern Alabama as well as every other State, 
but what I propose to say is this, there is not a line or a syllable 
in the majority or minority report of the Committee on Suffrage 
which undertakes to say, or which pretends to say that there will 
be any restriction of the privilege of suffrage on account of race, 
color or previous condition of servitude. Now it is apprehended 
and in fact, Mr. President, it is threatened, that whatever suf¬ 
frage amendment this Convention sees fit to adopt, will be car¬ 
ried to the Supreme Court of the United States for review. So far. 
as I have been able to read the report of the majority of the Com¬ 
mittee on Suffrage, I believe that provision is constitutional and 
I do not believe that the Supreme Court of the United States can 
declare it unconstitutional. 

MR. COBB—Do you hold that the declaration of rights is 
simply an announcement of the great fundamental principles of 
government in Alabama? Is that true? 

MR. LOMAX—I hold that the declaration of rights consists 
of three things: First, the rights reserved to the people; second, 
the rights delegates to the Legislature, and third, restrictions upon 
the power of the Legislature. These are the three consistent ele¬ 
ments of a bill of rights. 

MR. COBB—One more question, please. 

MR. LOMAX—Certainly. 



CONSTITUTIONAL CONVENTION. 1901 


1763 


MR COBB—Do you believe that the people of the State of 
Alabama believe that the 15th amendment of the Constitution of 
the United States is a great fundamental political principle. 

MR. LOMAX—I do not know that they do. 

I want to say that so far as I am concerned, I am rather in¬ 
clined to think, as Bourke Cochran expresses it, we seldom go by 
the 15th amendment, but however it may be that amendment 
stares us in the face as the fundamental law of this land. 

What I was going on to say, Mr. President, was this: It isaP" 
prehended and threatened, as I say, that the Constitution which 
we adopt will be carried to the Supreme Court of the United States 
for review, and that the question of the constitutionality of our 
suffrage amendment will be passed on directly by that court. 

Now it has been declared in some cases, though I do not re¬ 
call the title now, that in deciding questions of this sort that the 
court will look at contemporary history, and they will look at 
the reasons of this Convention, based upon which the constitu¬ 
tional provision was adopted, when the court passes upon these 
questions; and when the Supreme Court of the United States 
looks at the debates of this Convention and sees that we have 
stricken out of the bill of rights the declaration which was m the 
Constitution of 1868, and in the Constitution of 1875, and has been 
in the Constitution of Alabama up to this moment, the Supreme 
Court of the United States will say these men stand before us 
self-confessed violators of the 15th amendment. 

MR. O’NEAL—Is it not a fact that this provision was in¬ 
corporated into the Constitution of 1868 by force, and by threats 
of Federal power? 

MR. LOMAX—I do not think that the Constitution of 1868 
was ever really binding upon the people of Alabama, because it 
was not adopted by the people. 

MR. PETTUS—I desire to ask the gentleman if he does not 
think a legitimate construction that can be put upon our action 
in striking out this section, is that we hoped that the Fifteenth 
Amendment would sometime or other be repealed and that this 
Convention wants to leave it in the power of the General Assembly 
at such a time to restrict the suffrage as they think proper. 

MR. LOMAX—I do not think the court in passing on the 
question would come to that conclusion. 

MR. COLEMAN (Greene)—If we put it in our Constitution 
does it not appear as if we approved and endorse the Fifteenth 
amendment? 

MR. LOMAX—Not necessarily. 



1764 


OFFICIAL PROCEEDINGS 


MR COLEMAN (Greene) — Would it not be said every¬ 
where that we framed our suffrage law confronted with the Fif¬ 
teenth Amendment and that we are not only bound by it, but that 
we adopted it voluntarily, and made it a part of otir fundamental 
law, and we thereby endorse it and accept the reasons for it. 

MR. LOMAX—I don’t think so. Any reasonable man in the 
light of contemporary history and in the light of the history of 
Alabama, could come to no such conclusion about any man who 
is a true, square out citizen of the State of .Alabama. 

MR. WALKER—Would the striking out of this provision, 
as contained in the report, strike out anything from the law at 
all? 


MR. LOMAX—Certainly not. 

MR. WALKER—The law will be just the same whether it 
is in the Constitution or not? 

MR. LOMAX—Precisely, but 1 wanted thi> Convention to 
understand the reasons that actuated our Committee. We thought 
it better to leave these words in here, than subject this Convention 
to the criticism, that while in your suffrage article you pretend 
not to make any discrimination on account of race, color, or pre¬ 
vious condition, you show by your conduct and action in your bill 
of rights that you did intend to make a discrimination on account 
of race, color or previous condition of servitude. 

Now I think it is better to leave it in there. So far as the 
Fifteenth Amendment is concerned I think it is wrong in prin¬ 
ciple, it was wrong in morals, and I regard it as one of the po¬ 
litical crimes of the nineteenth century, but as it is the law. as we 
cannot get around it, as it may have influence upon the question 
of upholding our suffrage amendment in the United States Su¬ 
preme Court, I think it better that we should bear the ills that 
we have than to fly to others that we know not of. 

MR. BOONE—I ask you, in the event that our suffrage ar¬ 
ticle is atta«ked, and that the case is carried to the Supreme Court 
of the United States, would not the court pass upon that question 
as to whether or not it infringed the Constitution of the United 
States, whether it was incorporated in the Constitution of Ala¬ 
bama or not. 

MR. LOMAX Yes, sir; but has not it been repeatedly held 
that the court looks to the legislative intention. 

MR. CHAPMAN A point of inquiry. Is there anything be¬ 
fore the Convention? 

MR. LOMAX I will state to the gentleman from Sumter 
that I am before the Convention, but I will be down in a few 
minutes. 



CONSTITUTIONAL CONVENTION. 1901 


1765 


MR. CHAPMAN—But my friend is not a thing; I hope he 
will not consider himself a thing. 

MR. WATTS Is it not a fact that the State of Alabama in 
fact did ratify the Fifteenth Amendment? 

MR. LOMAX—I think so. 

MR. WATTS—Would not this in effect be a ratification of 

it? 

^ this would be a ratification of it it was 
ratified in 18/5. because this is the identical language of the Con¬ 
stitution of 1875. 

Now gentlemen of the Convention, those are the reasons 
that actuated your Committee. They believed it was better to 
leave these words in, and they believed that it would have a bet- 
ter effect to do so. but if it is the deliberate judgment of the Con¬ 
vention that they be stricken out. I want to sav to vou that the 
Committee on Preamble and Declaration of Rights will have no 
tears to shed. 

THE PRESIDENT—The question is on the amendment of 
the gentleman from Limestone. 

Lpon a vote being taken the amendment was adopted. 

MR. WHITE I think the next in order is to adopt the sec¬ 
tion as amended. 

MR. LOMAX Yes, Mr. President, I move—no. the section 
has been stricken out. My parliamentary friend came very near 
getting me into an error. 

Section 38 was read as follows : 

38. In the government of this State, except in the instances 
in this Constitution hereinafter expressly directed or permitted, 
the Legislative Department shall never exercise the Executive or 
Judicial powers, or either of them; the Executive shall never 
exercise the legislative and judicial powers, or either of them : the 
judicial shall never exercise the legislative and executive powers, 
or either of them ; to the end that it may be a government of laws' 
and not of men. 

MR. HEFLIN (Chambers)—I move the adoption of the sec- 

tion. 

Upon a vote being taken, the section was adopted. 

Section 29 was read as follows: 

39. That this enumeration of certain rights shall not im¬ 
pair or deny others retained by the people; and, to guard against 



1766 


OFFICIAL PROCEEDINGS 


any encroachment on the rights herein retained, we declare that 
everything in this Declaration of Rights is excepted out of the 
general powers of government, and shall forever remain inviolate. 

MR. LOMAX—I move the adoption of that section. 

Upon a vote being taken, the section was adopted. 

MR. LOMAX—Now, Mr. President. I believe the proper 
course is to move that the article be engrossed and ordered to a 
third reading. 

MR. HOWZK—I rise to a question of parliamentary inquiry. 
I do not understand where they get that rule from, that it must 
be ordered to a third reading and engrossed. It seems to me that 
this article is ready for its passage now. and when it passes it 
has to be engrossed under Rule 52, as I understand it. After its 
passage it has to be engrossed, but not before. 

THE PRESIDENT—Rule 47 reads as follows: 

Rule 47—When any ordinance is introduced it shall b* read 
at length and be referred by the President without a vote being 
taken, unless otherwise ordered by a two-thirds vote of the Con¬ 
vention, to the appropriate committee. No ordinance shall be re¬ 
ported back from any committee until after the lapse of one entire 
legislative day. W hen any committee shall have reported to this 
Convention any article or section of the proposed Constitution, 
said article or section shall again be read at length and three hun¬ 
dred copies thereof printed for the use of delegates; and such ar¬ 
ticle or section shall lie on the table at least one day and until 
in regular order it shall be taken up for consideration bv the Con¬ 
vention. 


and rule 52 says: Rule 52—All Articles ,.f the Constitution after 
their adoption by the Convention, shall be engrossed before their 
delivery to the Committee on Order. Consistency and Harmony 
of the Constitution and after the report of said Committee has 
been adopted by the Convention said Constitution shall be cor- 
rectly enrolled. 


MR. HOWZE—Is not the Article ready to be passed? 

THE PRESIDENT-Not until it is read a third time. 

MR. HOWZE—The reading just had is the third reading. 
THE PRESIDENT—This is the second reading. 

MR. LOMAX Does the gentleman make a point of order? 


I 


J nse to a question of parliamentary inquiry 
cannot find any rule for anything of that kind. 



CONSTITUTIONAL CONVENTION, 1901 


1767 


MR. LOMAX—I do not desire to detain this Convention. 1 
will move that the Article be ordered to be engrossed and read 
a third time after engrossment. 

MR. O’NEAL—1 rise to a parliamentary inquiry. If en¬ 
grossed and ordered to a third reading, is it open for debate on 
the third reading? 

THE PRESIDENT—It is open for debate but not for amend¬ 
ment. 

The question being upon the motion of the gentleman from 
Montgomery, the same was carried. 

MR. LOMAX—I desire to return my thanks to the Conven¬ 
tion for the consideration they have shown me in completing the 
report of the Committee this evening. 

Leaves of absence were granted to Mr. Kirkland for tomor¬ 
row and Mr. Carmichael of Coffee for today. 

Thereupon the Convention adjourned until tomorrow morn¬ 
ing. 


FORTIETH DAY 

MONTGOMERY. ALA.. 

Tuesday, July 9, 1901. 

The Convention met pursuant to adjournment, was called to 
order by the President, and opened with prayer by the Rev. Mr. 
A. T. Dix as follows: 

O, Lord God, King of Kings, and Lord of Lords, who yet 
careth for the children of men and hath invited them to approach 
unto Thee, and unto Thee we come this morning for Thou art 
the source of our lives, and Thou has said if any man lacked wis¬ 
dom, let him ask of God, who giveth unto all men liberally and 
upbraideth not. We do indeed lack wisdom in the many prob¬ 
lems that come before us in life that we may reach even solution 
which is satisfactory to ourselves and to our fellow man, and much 
more that shall be pleasing in Thy sight. We come before Thee 
this morning confident that Thou wilt hear and that Thou wilt 
confer Divine guidance, for Thou hast taught us that we may 
trust in Thy mercy, which is over all Thy work. 

We pray Thee to forgive our sins; we pray Thee permit us 
to have the right view of Him who is our advocate, in whose ex¬ 
cellency we may approach Thee, and thus coming, we pray that 
Thou wilt give unto this body here assembled the blessings which 
the}' need ; that in considering the interests of the people which 



1768 


OFFICIAL PROCEEDINGS 


they represent, true humanitarian principles may underlie their 
action and may the love of man and tear of God dwell in 
their hearts, and may they he so enabled to enact the fundamental 
law that the generations to come of the children of men may ap¬ 
prove, and Thy divine approbation may rest upon their work. And 
now. Our Father, do Thou bless the members of this Convention 
as individuals. Give unto them that experience in Thy grace which 
is indeed that they may be acceptable to Thee. Bless their fami¬ 
lies. Bless their communities, and in so doing mav Divine bene¬ 
diction rest upon our beloved State. Mav all of our interest be 
subserved, according to Thy love and for Thine own glory. \\> 
ask for Thy name's sake. Amen. 


Upon the call of the roll 116 delegates responded. 

Leaves of absence were granted as follows: 

Mr. Henderson and Mr. Moody for today. Indefinite leave 
for Mr. Taylor, on account of sickness. 

The roll of delegates was called for the introduction of or¬ 
dinances, resolutions, etc. 


MR. SANFORD—I rise to a question of personal privilege. 

THE PRESIDENT—The gentleman will state the question" 

MR. SANFORD (Montgomery)—In the remarks that I made 
on yesterday afternoon in support of the amendment to add the 
M°rd naturalized before the "foreigners." in the official report 

f L^ n j - m f d f f y -- the amoum of n ' al property that is owned in 
the Lmted States is astounding. I said the amount of property 
that is owned by foreigners in the United States is astounding. ' 

,^ n(l U say ! ,n . Texas - Mississippi. West Virginia and Tennes- 
and ;? e , amount ot property is estimated at 27.000.000 of acres 
and it says nearly two-thirds, when I said it was not more than 
two-thn-ds of the area of the State of Alabama. As the report is 
printed .t makes it appear as if I had asserted that two-JhinD of 

reSioTbe'^r b> ’ f ° reiKnerS ' Tbmk>r < 1 •* the cor- 


!. h ?< *J* 

q»e Jed l S,M< * ra '> h " " i» '» re- 

MR. BROOKS—I rise to a nnesti™ t 

i ibe ro a question of personal privilege 

THE PRESIDENT— The gentleman will o. 
of personal privilege. e question 



CONSTITUTIONAL CONVENTION. 1901 


1769 


MR. BROOKS—The stenographic report of the proceedings 
of yesterday in five lines reports me to have stated as much non¬ 
sense as would be possible in that space. It says “the conver¬ 
sation to reject merely because they overturn precedent and cus¬ 
tom handicaps progress, and if we will apply to well settled prece¬ 
dents and customs and test existing conditions, we may promote 
development.” 

As a matter of fact what I did say was this : “The conserva¬ 
tism that rejects changes merely because they overthrow pre¬ 
cedents and customs, handicaps progress, but if we will apply to 
well settled principles and customs the test of existing conditions 
we may promote development.” 

In^ the second to the last paragraph in the column the report 
reads “but leaving out the question of corporations” when I said 
“but leaving out the question of corruption.” 

Report of the Committee on Journal was read, stating that 
the Journal for the thirty-ninth day of the Convention had been 
examined and that the same is correct, and the same was adopt¬ 
ed. 


MR. BEDDOW—Owing to the force of this discussion of 
the convict question on yesterday, I believe, Mr. Samford of Pike, 
and myself have concluded to offer an ordinance looking to the 
improvement of the convict system in the State of Alabama. 

The ordinance was read as follows: 

Ordinance No. 416, by Mr. Beddow: 

A proposition to be entitled an ordinance to prohibit the hir¬ 
ing or leasing of convicts in this State. 

Be it ordained by the people of Alabama, in Convention as¬ 
sembled. 

That after the first day of January, 1904, the labor of con¬ 
victs shall not be let out by contract to any person, co-partner¬ 
ship, company or corporation, and the Legislature shall by law 
provide for the working of convicts for the benefit of the State 
and the several counties thereof. 

Referred to Committee on Legislative Department. 

MR. BOONE—I have several petitions that I desire to be 
read. 

Upon motion the petitions were read as follows: 

To the Honorable President and Members of the Constitutional 

Convention, assembled at Montgomery: 



1770 


OFFICIAL PK< >CFKI>1 W,S 


Gentlemen—The undersigned residents and citizens of the 
State of Alabama, and members <0 the Working Mens Organi¬ 
zations, known as the Mobile Division Xo. MO, Order Railway 
Conductors, having read and considered the matter or the memo¬ 
rial and petition of Mobile Typographical l nioii Xo. 27 , hereto 
append, 

Respectfully show to your honorable body that they favor 
that prayer of said memorial and petition that >aid matter be 
given your consideration and that if consistent your favorable 
action. 


And is it duty bound your petitioner- will ever pray. 

John J. Dunn, 

President, 

X. K. Ludlow, 

Recording Secretary, 

James H. Kopf, 

Financial Secretary. 

Office of Mobile Typographical Union X"o. 27 . 

To the Honorable President and Members of the Constitutional 
Convention of the State of Alabama: 

Gentlemen \ our petitions, whose names are appended to 
this memorial would respectfully show: 

That the y are each residents in. and citizens of the State of 
Alabama. 


That they favor such change and amendment in the organic 
law ot the State as will remove the menace of a suffrage tainted 
with ignorance, and open to corrupt practices, which the present 
Constitution fails to prevent. 

That they are members of an organization of artisan work¬ 
ingmen, known as the International Typographical Union, tin- 
objects of which organization are declared to he “the encourage¬ 
ment of skilled representatives of their membership, the careAf 
their sick and superannuated members, the burial of deceased 
members; the maintenance of cordial relations between emplovino- 
^ P ° ye , d P rmters ’ and the establishment of a rate of wages 
with the mutual consent of employers and emploves that shall be 
deemed just and fair by both parties to the wages contract." 

That the purposes of the organization as outlined above have 
been earned out, we would respectfully show to vour honorable 
body that the membership of the International'Tvpographical 
Union in the United States and Territories snr! ; n r ^ P 
British North America numbers over 50,000; that the puhlishTrs 
of nine-tenths of the newspapers, and more than nine-tenths of 



CONSTITUTIONAL CONVENTION, 1901 


3771 


the job printing and book printing offices in these countries em¬ 
ploy the labor of this large membership; that the relationships ex¬ 
isting between the Typographical Union and said employing 
printers are most friendly. The American Newspaper Publishers 
Association which comprises more than 200 of the daily newspa¬ 
pers of the United States and employs more than twenty thou¬ 
sand printers, of whom more than 60 per cent are members of the 
T ypographical Union, and the members of said Typographical 
Union have this year entered in a convention which provides that 
in the event of any dispute or disagreement arising between em¬ 
ployers and employed where these two parties are concern, such 
troubles shall be settled without recourse to strike or lockout on 
the part of either, by mutual agreement or by arbitration ; 

1 hat the organization provides for its sick, indigent and dis¬ 
tressed members in such manner that none become a charge upon 
the tax payers you represent, in almshouses, poorhouses or public 
hospitals. 

These premises stated your petitioners respectfully pray: 

T hat your Honorable body give such encouragement to pro¬ 
ductive workers resident in and citizens of Alabama as may be 
secured by a constitutional limitation that the public printing 
of the Legislative and Executive Departments of Alabama shall 
be done only in the State of Alabama. 

That the Constitutional Convention now in session give such 
recognition to organized labor as may be implied by the appear¬ 
ance of the trade mark or the organized printers known as the 
Union Label, upon the printing needed for your Honorable body. 

And as in duty bound, your petitioners pray. 

Signed, Dave McBride, and others. 

A similar petition was read from the Cigar Makers* Interna¬ 
tional Union of America—Local 219 and 433; from the Marine 
Engineers Benefit Association No. 84 of Mobile, Ala.; from the 
Central Trade Council, and from the Working Men’s Timber and 
Cotton Benevolent Association, each petition having a number of 
names signed thereto. 

The petitions were referred to the Committee on Stationery, 
Printing and Incidental Expenses. 

MR. JONES (Montgomery)—On yesterday my colleague, 
Mr. Lomax, who is now absent was requested to present a memo¬ 
rial of the Montgomery Printers Protective Fraternity. Mr. Lo¬ 
max is absent today, and I ask leave to have it read and to ex¬ 
plain that Mr. Lomax did not have an opportunity to present it on 
yesterday. j 



1772 


OFFICIAL PROCEEDINGS 

A MEMORIAL 
To the Officers and Members of the Constitutional Convention: 

Whereas, a resolution has been introduced in the Constitutional Con¬ 
vention instructing the Committee on Schedule, Printing and Incidental Ex¬ 
penses to have the union label placed on all printed matter of said Conven¬ 
tion, which work shall be done by members of a typographical union, there- 
fore be it 

Resolved, That Montgomery Printers’ Protective Fraternity opposes said 
resolution and hereby memorializes the Constitutional Convention to re¬ 
ject said resolution on the following grounds: 

First—The proposition to limit the right to engage in labor on public 
jobs to one class of citizens, and thus forbidding other classes from par¬ 
ticipating in the benefits conferred by the public to the industrial and com¬ 
mercial activity in the State, is infamous and abhorrent to all sense of 
justice, a prostitution of every idea of government by all and for all, utterly 
un-American in principle, a most monstrous instance of the practice of 
monopoly, trust and combine, and only effective in working disaster to 
honest labor. 

Second—Resolutions and labor laws which, when put into effect op¬ 
erate to prohibit all non-union men from securing employment at work per¬ 
formed for the State are illegal, and, when put to the test, must necessarily 
be declared invalid. 

Third—To require that all printing done for the Constitutional Conven¬ 
tion shall bear the union label would, in effect, be a boycott on all non¬ 
union printing establishments and would place Alabama in the preposterous 
position of exacting taxes from non-union printers to defray the expenses 
of a boycott prosecuted against them by the State. 

Fourth—Where did the right come from to discriminate in this way 
between citizens? Can a Presbyterian, a Methodist or a Catholic come here 
and say that he must have all public favors and the others none? If one 
class is to be granted special favors, that class should possess special 
claims. Has union labor any special claim not possessed by non-union 
labor? Has some particular class of citizens developed great enterprises, 
monuments of honor, usefulness and helpfulness to themselves and the public 
at large, and are they asking for a monopoly by ordinance of trade and 
labor? Is anybody seeking special favors at your hands who contribute to 
the State something of great value? Is the existence of the State and its 
prosperity due to the brains, the genius, the enterprise and labors of any 
now asking that they be given a monopoly by legal enactment? 

Fifth—Do members of the Typographical Union pay all the taxes that 
they should have exclusive rights? They do not. Do they go to war and 
do all the fighting? No. Their warlike services are after the manner of 
the Chicago strike, requiring troops and marshals to prevent them from 
destroying property and interfering with the rights of others. Do they 



CONSTITUTIONAL CONVENTION, 1901 1773 

perform all of the charitable and benevolent work of the State? Certainly 
not, fraternal orders, made up of all elements of people, look after the 
distressed and afflicted. 

Sixth In every instance where union label ordinances have reached 
the Supreme Court, the illegality and injustice of such class legislation has 
been thoroughly established and the acts declared null and void. The Su¬ 
preme Court of New Jersey, in the case of The Paterson Chronicle against 
the City of Paterson, February 26, 1901, set aside, as illegal, a resolution of 
the Common Council of that city instructing the Printing and Stationery 
Committee to confine all orders for printing and advertising to offices and 
newspapers employing members of the Typographical Union. 

Seventh—The State Printers of Montgomery do not recognize the Typo¬ 
graphical Union as an organization, but employ members of the Montgom¬ 
ery Printers Protective Fraternity, No. 47, and non-union men, and do not 
use any label. 

Eighth The larger job printing establishments of Birmingham have 
contracts extending over several years with Birmingham Printers' Protec¬ 
tive Fraternity, No. 55, and do not use the union label. 

Ninth These concerns have paid the State for the privilege of trans¬ 
acting business and are entitled to State protection when labor organizations 
conspire to injure and destroy their business. 

Tenth The Typographical Union does not control a single office in 
the State capable of doing the State work, and all of the union printers 
in Montgomery County could not set and print the report of one day’s pro¬ 
ceedings of the Constitutional Convention in the required time. 

Eleventh—All contracts for work for the State should be let to the low¬ 
est responsible bidder and no citizen of Alabama should be excluded from 
participating in a contest for work or enjoying benefits derived from taxa¬ 
tion. 


Twelfth—The changed industrial condition of the past year or so has 
been the result of the most serious thought and considerate judgment of a 
class of men who conceive and extend trade, whose every aim has been to 
hold up the style of American living; men kindly and patriotically inclined, 
and not to the vicious persecution of irresponsible bodies called trades coun- 
cils or industrial assemblies. 


Adopted July 7, 1901. 
F. H. Huston, 

President. 
C. Baber, 

Secretary. 


W. E. Phillips, 

M. E. Ford, 

F. H. Huston, 

State Legislative Committee. 



1774 


OFFICIAL PROCEEDINGS 


Referred to Committee on Stationery, Printing and Incidental 
Expenses. 

THE PRESIDENT—The next order will be the consideration 
of the report of the Committee on Local Legislation. 

MR. O’NEAL (Lauderdale)—The Committee on Local Leg¬ 
islation beg leave to add to their report a section which by inad¬ 
vertence on the part of the committee was left out. \\ e ask that 
it be added to the report and be considered in connection with it. 

THE PRESIDENT—An additional section or amendatory of 
some section? 

MR. O’NEAL—An additional section. 

The clerk here read the article reported by the Committee 
on Local Legislation as follows: 

An ordinance concerning local legislation. 

Be it ordained by the people of Alabama, in Convention as¬ 
sembled, that the following articles on local legislation be inserted 
in the Constitution: 

Article — Local Legislation: 

Section 1. The General Assembly shall not pass a special, private or 
local law in any of the following cases: 

1st. Granting a divorce. 

2d. Relieving any minor of the disabilities of non-age. 

3d. Changing the name of any corporation, association or individual. 

4th. Providing for the adoption or legitimizing of any child. 

MR. OATES—I have not written an amendment, but I sug¬ 
gest changing a word instead of “legitimizing" use the word le¬ 
gitimate. I have looked in the World's dictionary, which is the 
latest, and legitimizing is not to be found there. 

MR. WATTS—It is correct; we took care to get it right, and 
got it out of the dictionary. 

MR. OATES—I have not seen it. 

THE PRESIDENT—The gentleman from Montgomery will 
suspend until the secretary reads the entire section. 

The reading was continued. 

Sth. Incorporating a town, city or village. 

6th. Granting a charter to any corporation, association or individual. 

7th, Establishing rules of descent or distribution. 



CONSTITUTIONAL CONVENTION, 1901 


1775 


8th. Regulating the time within which a civil or criminal action may 

be begun. 

9th. Exempting any person, corporation, county, township, municipali¬ 
ty or association from the operation of any general law. 

10th. Providing for the sale of the property of any individual or estate. 

11th. Changing or locating a county seat. 

12th. Providing for a change of venue in any case. 

13th. Regulating the rate of interest. 

14th. Granting any exclusive or special privilege, immunity or franchise 
whatever. 

15th. Fixing the punishment of crime or misdemeanors. 

16th. Providing for or regulating either the assessment or collection 

of taxes. 

17th. Giving effect to invalid will, death or other instrument. 

18th. Legalizing the invalid act of any officer. 

19th. Authorizing any township, city, town or village to issue bonds 
or other securities. 

20th. Amending, confirming or extending the charter of any corpora¬ 
tion or remitting the forfeiture thereof. 

21st. Creating, extending or impairing any lien. 

22d . Chartering or licensing any ferry, road or bridge. 

23d. Regulating the jurisdiction and fees of justices of the peace or the 
fees of constables. 

24th. Establishing separate school districts. 

25th. Establishing separate stock districts. 

26th. Creating, increasing or decreasing fees, percentage or allowances 
of public officers. No special, private or local law, except a law fixing the 
time of holding courts, shall be enacted in any case, which is provided for 
by a general law, or when the relief sought can be given by any court of 
this State, and the courts and not the General Assembly shall judge as to 
whether the matter of said law 7 is provided for by a general law and as to 
whether the relief sought can be given by any court; nor shall the General 
Assembly indirectly enact any such special, private or local law by the 
partial repeal of a general law. The General Assembly shall pass general 
laws for the cases enumerated in this section. 

Sec. 2._No special, private or local law shall be passed on any sub¬ 

ject not enumerated in Section 1 of this article, except in reference to fixing 
the time of holding courts, unless notice of the intention to apply therefor 



1776 


OFFICIAL PROCKF.DIWS 


shall have been published, without cost to the -State. ,n the county or coun¬ 
ties where the matter or thing to be effected may be situated, winch notice 
shall state the substance of the proposed law. and be published at least once 
a week, for four consecutive weeks in some newspaper, or it there is no 
newspaper published in the county, by posting the -aid notice tor tour con¬ 
secutive weeks at five different public places in the county or counties prior 
to the introduction to the bill; and the evidence that -aid notice has been 
given shall be exhibited to each house of the (<eneral Assembly, and the 
fact of said notice spread upon the Journal. The courts shall pronounce void 
every local law which the Journals do not affirmatively show was passed 
in accordance with the provisions ot this Section. 

Sec. 3. The General Assembly may repeal any special, private or local 
law' upon notice being given and shown as provided in the last preceding 

section. 

Sec. 4. The operation of no general law shall be suspended for the bene- 
fit of any individual, corporation, association, town, city, county or town¬ 
ship nor shall any individual, corporation, association, town, city, county or 
township be exempted from the operation ot any general law. 

Sec. 5. The general Assembly may be general law confer upon Courts 
of County Commissioners, Boards of Revenue or other courts. >uch power 
of local legislation and administration, touching all matters and things not 
proving*! for by general law, and not inconsistent with the provisions of this 
Constitution as the General Assembly may from time to time deem expedient. 

Sec. 6. A general law within the meaning of this Article i> a law which 
applies to the whole State; a local law is a law which applies to any political 
sub-division or sub-divisions of the State less than the whole—a special or 
private law within the meaning of this Article which applies to an individual, 
association or corporation. 

MR. MACDONALD—I desire to offer an amendment. 

MR. O’NEAL—I raise the point of order, an amendment is 
not now in order until the whole report is read, and the supple¬ 
ment report is to he considered with this. 

THE PRESIDENT—The rule requires it to he considered 
section by section. 

MR. O NEAL I understand, but it is to be considered at the 
same time. 

THE PRESIDENT—Does it relate to Section 1 ? 

THE PRESIDENT Do you desire the supplemental report 
read, or included in the report of the Committee. 

MR. O NEAL We do not care to have it read particularly. 
It will have to be considered in connection with this report, it 
was agreed at the time that the report of the Committee on Local 
Legislation should be considered at the same time. I suggest that 
they read that. 



CONSTITUTIONAL CON VK NT I ON, 1901 


1777 


MR. CHAPMAN — I suggest that it is necessarily follows 
here, the regular report ends at Section 26, and the report of the 
Legislative Department begins at Section 27 following on. 

1 he Clerk here read the supplemental report from the Com¬ 
mittee on Legislative Department as follows: 

27. hxemption of property from taxation or from levy 
or sale. 

28. Exempting any person from jury, road, or other civil duty. 

29. Laying out, opening, altering, or working roads or high¬ 
ways. 

30. Providing for the management or support of any common 
or private school, incorporating the same or granting such school 
any privileges. 

31. Granting any land owned by or under control of the State 
to any person or corporation. 

32. Remitting fines, penalties or forfeitures. 

33. Providing for the conduct of elections, or designating 
places of voting, or changing the boundaries of wards, precincts, 
or districts, except on the organization of new counties. 

34. Restoring the right to vote to persons convicted of in¬ 
famous crimes or involving moral turpitude. 

Refunding money legally paid into the State Treasury. 

Your committee do not concur in Section 5 of said article as 
reported by the Committee on Local Legislation, and recom¬ 
mends as a substitute therefor Section 25 of Article IV of the pre¬ 
sent Constitution. 

MR. O’NEAL—On behalf of the Committee on Local Legis¬ 
lation we accept that as a part of our report except so far as it 
may already be covered by the report of the Committee on Local 
Legislation, except the last clause commencing with line fifteen 
which the committee does not consent to. 

MR. WILLIAMS (Marengo)—Will the gentleman allow an 
interruption? Several of us have been trying to find out wheie 
we are at. We do not understand the two reports and ask that 
you explain the situation. 

MR O’NEAL (Lauderdale)— Mr. President —An eminent 
authority has stated that three periods may be distinguished in 
the development of State Governments as set forth in their con¬ 
stitutions, each period marked by an increase in the length and 
minuteness of those instruments. The first period includes the 
constitutions of the original thirteen States as well as Kentucky, 



1778 


OFFICIAL PROCEEDINGS 


Vermont, Tennessee and Ohio. Most of these ear y constitutions 
gave expression to the impressions of the Revolutionary \ . 

They manifested a dread of executive and military power to¬ 
gether with a disposition to leave everything to the legislative 
authority, which more directly represented the people. Hence most 
of these 7 early constitutions contained but little except an elabo¬ 
rate bill of rights, a simple outline of a frame of government, with 
a few executive officers and courts of justice. I he second period 
as shown by the same authority covers the first halt of the nine¬ 
teenth century, down to the time when the agitation over slavery 
arrested the natural processes of State development. Ihis period 
was characterized by the fact that the absolute powers of the Leg¬ 
islature began to be questioned, and a tendency to regard them 
as mere agents of the people exercising delegated powers, and 
whose powers could only be increased by resort to the sovereign, 
the people, by constitutional amendments. I he third period began 
about the date of the Civil War, and was marked by a tendency 
to strengthen the Executive and Judicial Departments. I he most 
marked and noticeble change during this period, however was 
the tendency to narrow the power and competence of the Legis- 
lature, and to fetter its action by absolute prohibition. The Eng¬ 
lish theory of government that a community must act through a 
ruling legislature had been adopted by the States after the revo¬ 
lution. This conception of government had prevailed till about 
the period of the Civil War, at which time it began to be aban¬ 
doned by the States in framing new charters of government. It 
was not a step towards a pure democracy as might at first ap¬ 
pear. The withdrawal of power from the Legislature, gave it 
back to the people, but as the people could only act in direct leg¬ 
islation after long delav and by complicated methods, such pro¬ 
visions limiting the competency of the Legislature are really con¬ 
servative in their tendency, and is really a check imposed bv the 
people on themselves. This brief review of the three periods of 
the growth and development of State constitutions, is necessary 
to show that the modern tendency to limit and narrow the powers 
of the Legislative Department of the government is the result 
of evolution, the slow, gradual outgrowth of actual experience, 
by all the States, in the administration of State Governments. 
The demand in this State for additional and more stringent lim¬ 
itations upon the power and competence of the legislature has 
gradually grown from actual knowledge that the remedies here¬ 
tofore adopted have proved unavailing. There is no reform in 
the constitution we are now framing more important than a check 
upon the evils of local and special legislation. In every public 
utterance upon the stump, the advocates of a Constitutional Con¬ 
vention pledged the people of Alabama, that next in importance 
to a reform of our suffrage, the purity of the ballot and the re¬ 
moval of the causes which had forced our people to resort to ques¬ 
tionable methods to maintain good government, was the pressing 



1779 


CONSTITUTIONAL CONVENTION, 1901 


f [ , ^: , t . ve r f fo . ri V- rhe growing evils of special, private 
or local legislation had long been recognized in Alabama. The 
framers ot the Constitution of 1875 had undertaken to check and 
as they supposed had prevented this class of legislation. They 
had provided that the General Assembly should pass no local 
or special law on a subject which could be provided for by a gen¬ 
eral law, but the decision of our Supreme Court that the question 
of whether a local or special law could be provided for by a gen¬ 
eral law was purely the subject of legislative discretion rendered 
their efforts in this direction fruitless. Since that time States 
which have framed new constitutions have sought to overcome 
this danger by enumerating specifically certain subjects as to 
which the legislature was absolutely prohibited from passing lo¬ 
cal, special or private laws. J his method was adopted because 
experience had demonstrated that the usual requirements that the 
legislature should pass no local, or private laws on subjects which 
could be provided for by a general law, had utterly failed to ar¬ 
rest the flood of local laws which with ever increasing volume 
had been pouring from every legislative body. Hence we find 
that the latest and best considered constitutions contain long 
lists of enumerated cases as to which the legislature is expressly 
prohibited from passing local, special or private laws. The full¬ 
ness and minuteness with which in many constitutions this long 
and ever increasing catalogue of local or special laws is presented, 
demonstrates that the mischiefs and evils arising from improvi¬ 
dent and corrupt legislation of this class had grown alarming. 
That these constitutional prohibitions lessen or check the evil is 
shown by the States where this method has been adopted. 


Illinois for instance soon after the adoption of her constitu¬ 
tion, reduced her sessional statutes to about three hundred pages, 
Iowa to about 200 pages, whereas Wisconsin statutes for 1885 
reached two thousand pages there being in that State 
very little restriction on legislative action. In Alabama there has 
been a gradual but rapid increase in the number of local or special 
laws. The size of the volume has been increasing annually until 
the last local acts were so volumenous they were unwieldly and 
could not be incorporated in one volume. 


Mr. President, the question may be asked what is the cause of 
this widespread opposition to this class of legislation. Local, 
special or private bills are condemned because they destroy the 
harmony of the law, consume the time of the legislature, obscure in 
the eyes of members of the General Assembly the importance of 
general laws, furnish opportunity for perpetrating jobs, inflict in¬ 
justice on individuals or localities in the interest of a favored few. 
It has been truly declared that they are one of the scandals of the 
country. They have been in the past and will continue to be in 
the future the prolific sources of corruption. Such bills are most 
frequently presented and promoted by corporations or individuals 



1780 


OFFICIAL PROCEEDINGS 


proposing to form corporations in order to secure some valuable 
franchise, privilege or other pecuniary advantage which cannot be 
obtained under general laws. To procure the passage of such laws 
all the methods of intrigue, lobbying, and log rolling are used and 
some time lavish expenditures of money. The history of legisla¬ 
tive bodies shows that in the great States of the Union the pro¬ 
moters and authors of such bills have not hesitated to buy those 
who could be bought, or win support for their schemes by methods 
however questionable. The bribery and flagrant corruption which 
has disgraced the Legislature of some of the States of the Union 
can all be traced to the effort to secure the passage of local or 
private bills, conferring some special or valuable privilege, fran¬ 
chise or pecuniary advantage on the promoters or syndicate in¬ 
terested in the proposed legislation. In States like New York, 
Illinois and Pennsylvania, and some of the new Western States, 
offering promising fields for pecuniary investment, the possibility 
of making money out of a seat in the Legislature, has furnished 
the opportunity to reap golden harvests for a certain class who 
regard money as of more value than character or self-respect. It is 
to the credit of our institutions that only a few of the great States 
of the Union has this open and shameless bribery been attempted. 
So far the money power has directed its attacks against the Legis¬ 
latures of only a few of our States, and while our State has so far 
been exempted from such scandals and the personnel of our Legis¬ 
lature has been pure and above reproach, the effect of such legis¬ 
lation has been felt in other ways. It has created a spirit of local¬ 
ism and has obscured in the eyes of the members of the Legislature 
the importance of general laws. A member of the Legislature is 
no longer under the system which these local laws have established, 
a representative of the State. He is the member from Buzzard’s 
Roost, or Limekiln, and his whole time and talents are directed 
towards securing the passage of some local legislation which will 
increase his local influence, secure an appropriation for some local 
institution, or the obtaining of some special privilege or franchise 
for some local corporation or individual. The higher and more im¬ 
portant functions of general legislation are completely overlooked. 
The pressing demands of reforms in the administration of justice, 
the proper enforcement of the laws or the revenue system of the 
State are ignored, and to our States may be applied the famous 
dictum “too many laws corrupt a republic.” The spirit of localism 
is all pervading and all controlling. It dominates our Legislature 
and has established customs and usages as inexorable as the laws 
of the Medes and Persians, by which the local member is clothed 
with absolute and undisputed power to control all legislation af¬ 
fecting his locality or county. Under this tyranical rule or custom 
every member feels bound to sustain and support any local bill 
the member from the county to which the local law applies, may 
introduce. The experience of every one who has essayed the hope- 



CONSTITUTIONAL CONVENTION, 1901 


1781 


less task of opposing the passage of a local law which has the 
support of the local member confirms this statement. 


It matters not how vicious such a bill may be, how much the 
members may oppose the principles it may declare, or how shame¬ 
fully it may violate individual rights, or the interests of the State, 
if it has the support of the local members its passage is generally 
secure. It is vain to point out to other members that such a bill 
is unwise, that it has the bitter opposition of the people of the 
locality affected or that it tramples under foot every principle of 
local self government, imposes burdtns on the citizens and vests 
in individuals or corporations valuable franchises or privileges, 
which could not be obtained under general laws, you will be met 
with the response that while they sympathize with your views 
and oppose the principles on which the bill is based, that the cour¬ 
tesy and usage of the House or Senate leave them no alternative 
but to support any measure which has the endorsement and sanc¬ 
tion of the local member. You may appear before the committee 
to which the bill is referred, you may oppose its passage with 
arguments which are unanswerable, you may present the testimony 
of leading citizens in the community to which the local law applies, 
and when you have finished the Committee will blandly ask the 
local member what his wishes are in the matter, and you will be 


told that however much the committee may appreciate your argu¬ 
ment and feel convinced of the justice of your position, that they 
are compelled to heed and obey the views of the immediate repre¬ 
sentative of the people. The inevitable result is that the uniformity 
and harmony of the law is destroyed, and the community that 
may be outraged and wronged by such legislation has no redress 
but to await in patience the next election and retire the member 
to the shades of private life. If any member, recognizing the dan¬ 
ger and mischief which follows the observance of such a courtesy 
or custom, refuses to give his approval, he will soon find himself 
without influence, unable to secure the passage of any local bill, 
however meritorious or unobjectionable. It follows, therefore, that 
local special or private legislation, embodies not the concurrent 
wisdom and approval of a majority of the Legislature, but is sim¬ 
ply the expression of the desire of the local representative, who, 
by this courtesy, is made the sole and absolute arbiter of all legis¬ 
lation which mav affect his particular locality. Nor do such bills 
ever receive the same careful scrutiny and examination by the 
Executive or Legislature which is given laws of a general charac¬ 
ter It has been argued in opposition to this limitation of the 
power of the Legislature to pass local laws that if they are de¬ 
prived of this prolific source of legislation that they will give too 
much attention to general laws and upset too many statutes of a 
general nature or pass too many general laws Such has not been 
the experience of States where local legislation has been prohibited. 
Subjects of a general nature will provoke more debate, will be 



1782 


OFFICIAL PROCEEDINGS 


considered with more care, will be examined with more critical 
scrutiny and with the result that only general laws of a pressing 
character, and the necessity of which is apparent, will be enacted. 
The British Parliament which legislates for a nation whose empire 
is so extensive that it girdles the globe passes only a few hundred 
laws. The general laws passed by Congress are comparatively 
few in number and hence this fear is not warranted by the history 
and experience of legislative bodies. Another result will be that it 
will elevate the tone and character of the Legislature. Men who 
are now unwilling to spend weeks securing the passage of some lo¬ 
cal law, the granting of some franchise to some corporation, will 
more readily consent to seek a seat in a bod) - engaged in general 
legislation. 

Each member will feel that he is the representative of the 
people of Alabama, engaged in legislating for the State and re¬ 
forming its laws, and increasing the efficiency of the administra¬ 
tion. The blighting spirit of localism which has so long degraded 
the tone of our Legislature will be overcome, and our respect and 
confidence in the law-making body of the State will be increased. 
If there be danger of reckless or extravagant appropriation of the 
public money this can easily be obviated by incorporating in our 
fundamental law provisions now found in nearly all the recent 
State Constitutions by which a majority of the members elected 
to the General Assembly are required to pass any bill carrying an 
appropriation of public money. 

Another one of the chief evils of local legislation is to be found 
in the constant intermeddling with the government of our munici¬ 
palities. Thoughtful students of our system of government have 
declared that in the government of our cities and towns is to be 
found the weakest features of American institutions. This is large¬ 
ly due to the fact that the average citizen is too much engrossed in 
his private affairs to give much attention to the misgovernment. 
corruption or reckless extravagance that may exist in municipal 
government. It is only when corruption becomes so unblushing 
or an aroused public sentiment is created by flagrant abuse of 
power, or danger of bankruptcy that the forces of reform are 
awakened and organized. All authorities on this subject, how¬ 
ever, agree that the inefficiency of municipal government is chiefly 
due to the constant intermeddling and tampering with local affairs 
by the legislature. The local laws of the last session of our Gen¬ 
eral Assembly show that a majority of the local bills passed were 
in reference to municipal corporations. 

A distinguished statesman of the old world speaking on this 
subject said “one form of this specal legislation is peculiarly at¬ 
tractive and pernicious. It is the pow'er of dealing by statute 
with the municipal constitutions and actual management of cities. 
Cities grow so fast that all undertakings connected with them are 



CONSTITUTIONAL CONVENTION, 1901 


1783 


peculiarly tempting to speculators. City revenues are so large 
as to offer rich plunder to those who can seize the control of them. 
The vote which a city casts is so heavy as to throw great power 
into the hand- of those who control it, and enable them to drive a 
good bargain with the wirepullers of a legislative chamber. Hence, 
the control exercised by the legislature over city government is a 
most important branch of legislative business, a means of power 
to scheming politicians, of enrichment to greedy ones, and if not 
of praise to evil doers, yet certainly of terror to them that do well.” 


No city can be well governed whose affairs are directed by 
the legislature. The local member of the legislature has not the 
time or the requisite knowledge of details to direct the affairs of 
municipalities. Such intervention involves a disregard of one of 
the fundamental principles of government, the right of local self- 
government. No two cities in the State have the same laws. Al¬ 
though vast interests may be involved no one but a skilled lawyer 
can wade through the numerous statutes and charters applying 
to each town or city in the State or keep advised of the numerous 
changes in municipal laws. The uncertainties arising from such 
multiplied and conflicting legislation lead, as has been truthfully 
stated bv an eminent judge, to incessant litigation with all its ex¬ 
pensive burdens, public and private. 


The Commissioners appointed by the State of New \ ork in 
1876 speak thus truthfully about this evil. They say: “It may be 
true that the first attempts to secure legislative intervention in 
the local affairs of our principal cities were made by good citizens 
in the supposed interest of reform and good government, and to 
counteract the schemes of corrupt officials. The notion that legis¬ 
lative control was the remedy was a serious mistake. The corrupt 
cliques and rings thus sought to be baffled were quick to perceive 
that in the business of procuring special laws concerning local 
affairs thev could easilv outmatch the fitful and clumsy labors of 
disinterested citizens. The transfer of the control of the localities 
to the State Capitol had no other effect than to cause the transfer 
of the methods and arts of corruption, and to make the fortunes 
of our principal cities the traffic of the lobbies. 

“Municipal corruption, previously confined to within terri¬ 
torial limits, thenceforth escaped every bound and spread to all 
parts of the State. Cities were compelled by legislation to buy 
and's for parks, and places because the owners wished to sell them 
compelled to grade, pave and sewer streets without inhabitants, 
and or no other purpose than to award corrupt contracts for the 
work Cities were compelled to purchase at the public expense and 
at extravagant prices, the property necessary for streets and ave- 
nues useless for other purposes than to make a market for the 
Xintaff property thus improved. Laws were enacted abolish,n E 
one office ^and creatine another with the same dut.es in order to 



1784 


OFFICIAL PROCEEDINGS 


transfer official emoluments from one man to another, and laws to 
change the functions of officers with a view only to a new distribu¬ 
tion of patronage, and to lengthen the terms of office for no other 
purpose than to retain in place officers who could not otherwise 
be elected or appointed.” 

The picture so elaborately drawn of the dangers of this class 
of local legislation has fortunately not been realized in this State. 
We cannot, however, doubt that with the growth and development 
of municipal corporations in this State, the same evils in the future 
will arise unless we now remove the cause of this danger to honest 
government. Although the corruption portrayed has not yet de¬ 
veloped in Alabama, we can not fail to recognize the fact that this 
constant tinkering by the legislature with municipal affairs, and 
local self-government, has already increased to an alarming extent 
in this State and has become a serious evil. The Committee has 
given this subject special attention and are led to believe that the 
adoption of their report will remove the danger of evils from this 
class of legislation in Alabama. They have sought to prevent the 
legislation from interfering with municipal governments or the 
conduct of municipal affairs. 

Mr. President, your Committee recognized that one of the most 
frequent modes in which the legislature adopted special laws was 
by amending a general law by excepting from its operation certain 
counties and cities in this State. Another plan was to pass what 
purported to be a general law but which was in fact a special law. 
This we have expressly prohibited. 

Mr. President, the danger in private or special bills became 
so manifest in England over fifty years ago as to lead to the adop¬ 
tion of a quasi judicial board for their consideration. Such bills are 
brought into the British Parliament by petition and three months’ 
notice by advertisement must be given before a Parliament meets 
and a copy of the bill must be filed some weeks before the opening 
of the session. After the second reading instead of being con¬ 
sidered in the committee of the whole, the bill is referred to a 
special committee of four who exercise a kind of judicial function. 
They take evidence in regard to the bill from promoters and oppo¬ 
nents, hear argument of counsel and make their report. It would 
be regarded as improper to attempt to influence the decision of 
this Committee as it would with us to influence the decision of our 
Supreme Court. With us, however, such bills are treated as public 
bills. They are referred to the appropriate committee and if sup¬ 
ported by the local member are generally reported favorably and 
passed without question. In England instead of the lobby there 
is a trained body of men who represent parties promoting such 
bills, known as Parliamentary agents. These agents are controlled 
by a code of ethics as binding as the code of ethics that govern 
attorneys at law. No improper or questionable methods to secure 



CONSTITUTIONAL CONVENTION, 1901 


1785 


the passage of local or private bills is tolerated. Mr. President, 
the forces of evil have grown too strong to yield without a strug¬ 
gle. 1 he experience of States which have attempted to lessen 
the mischief of local or special legislation, show that even the 
most stringent provisions do not prevent evasions. We can not 
hope that our efforts will prove completely successful in removing 
from our legislation this danger, but we do believe that we have 
profited by the experience of our own and othtr States and that 
by the provisions of the article we have reported, local or special 
legislation will be largely eliminated and its evil minimized. 

W e all realize the truth of Mr. Jefferson’s declaration that 
too much legislation is one of the greatest dangers of a Republic. 
The growth of the paternal idea of government in recent years 
has become alarming. Men who desire reform for some fancied ill 
of society immediately -eek a legislative enactment and the result 
is that the statute books are teeming with penal laws or restrictive 
legislation on almost every conceivable subject. Individual enter¬ 
prise and the pride of personal freedom are sacrificed and the citi¬ 
zen is being taught that he must not look to the press, public 
sentiment or education and the precepts of religion and morality 
for relief from the evils of social life, but to the Legislature. We 
forget that that community is hist governed which is least gov¬ 
erned ; that personal freedom is being destroyed and the citizen 
hedged in with innumerable statutes, relief from which he only 
stcures bv their non-enforcement. 


Sumptuary laws, that vex and oppress are being poured out 
by everv session of the Legislature in a confusing mass and today 
we are the most governed people in the world. W t submit to 
restraints on our personal freedom which in almost any other 
civilized country would provoke revolution. 

MR. CARMICHAEL (Colbert)—I rise to a parliamentary 
inquiry. 

THE PRESIDENT —The gentleman will state his parlia¬ 


mentary inquiry. 

MR. CARMICHAEL—I would like to inquire how long the 
gentleman has been speaking. 

THE PRESIDENT—The gentleman’s time has almost ex¬ 


pired. 

MR O’NEAL (Lauderdale)—Mr. President, by prohibiting 
local legislation we do not seek to impair the power and usefulness 
of the Legislature. Under our system ,t wtll contmue to be one 
of the greft departments of government and we are only endeavor¬ 
ing to elevate its tone and enlarge its field of usefulness. We 
ing to eie\a • intended, a body engaged in legis- 

would have it to be as it vv^s , t1 - „ j pvnt „j 

lation for the State, and not an assembly whose time was devoted 



1786 


OFFICIAL PROCEEDINGS 


almost exclusively to petty matters of purely local concern. Stop 
the great and alarming evils of local legislation and you will have 
taken a most commendable step towards removing popular preju¬ 
dice against the Legislature, elevating the character of its member¬ 
ship, widening its field of usefulness, and making this great de¬ 
partment what it was in the earlier and better days of the republic 
a body composed of the most distinguished men of the State, 
no longer living in the breath of public opinion, swayed bv every 
dominant impulse or passion among the people, swift to fulfill 
popular behests almost before they are uttered, engaged in ex¬ 
travagant expenditures of public money, or struggling to secure* 

SO ? 1 f K ranchise ° r advanta £ e to some individual or <Torporation, but 
a deliberate assembly, conservative in its character, engaged in the 
serious concerns of State and seeking to reform unwise laws and to 
promote the prosperity of all the people. 


MR. OATES—Mr. President, since the very able and elaborate 
discussion of this subject by the learned delegate from Lauderdale 
l do not propose to consume but little time of the Convention 
upon it. The Convention of 1875 knew*, as the country did. that 
prior thereto the evils of local legislation had developed so that 
they called the attention of the country to it, and the question of 
that Convention was how to properly limit and restrict it. I had 
the honor, Sir, to offer a proposition which is shown on the journal. 

Z h Jl C \^ if S J r ^ collect - seventeen classes of cases in which no 
local bills should be passed, and that everything named might be 
provided for under general laws. It occurred to me that that was 
the only way to properly limit and restrict this growing evil, but in 

T h r C n nV 5 °n Was th ,° U8:ht that that was rath er too radical. 

ecollect well the remarks of my old friend, Mr. Lyon the dele¬ 
ft e from Marengo. He stated that that would curtail' local legisla¬ 
tion greatly, but he thought it would be too radical. He offered a 
proposition which was adopted and incorporated in the present 
Constitution requiring that wherever any one desired the passage 

° f ^ a +l? C ^ stlouId P nor thereto, advertise its purpose 

and the kind of bill the object of it, in a newspaper^publishedIn 
the county where the bill would operate when passed. I did not 
believe then that that would remedy the evil, and it so proved. The 
first case that was carried to the Supreme Court to test the con¬ 
stitutionality of it for a non-compliance with its requirements the 
Supreme Court very properly decided that it presumed everything 

° nC WhlCh thC Constitution required to have been 
done_ There was no requirement that this advertisement should 
be affirmatively shown upon the record, and the court presumed 
it was else the Legislature would not have passed the act Thai 
opened the doors to the flood of local legislation which we have 
since seen, and it is a growing evil. Every Legislature that con- 
venes passes a greater number. Now the members areno t to 
blame for it. Their constituents apply to them to have those 



CONSTITUTIONAL CONVENTION, 1901 


1787 


measures passed, and their representative is anxious, of course, to 
represent his people in a manner acceptable to them. It has prown 
to such an extent that it consumes the whole time allowed by the 
Constitution for the Legislature to do its work, and the general 
laws are neglected, woefully neglected, and a proper amount of at¬ 
tention not given to them at all. Now, sir. take the Legislature 
before the last, and I took the pains to count up and see what that 
had been. 1 he general laws are contained in a little volume about 
the size of \\ ebster s Spelling Book, and it contained including the 
appropriation acts, forty-eight so-called general laws, the volume 
of local acts contained 949. Then to see something of the evils of 
it. I inquired of the Secretary of State about the cost to the State 
of the passage of many of these acts. You take, for instance, the 
acts chartering towns and villages, which might w'ell have been 
done before the Probate Court at the expense of a dollar, but he 
informs me as to several and the expense of passing them was from 
$50 to $150 for the clerical work, printing, etc. Now when you 
count up the whole amount of it, it is a large expense, and is wholly 
unnecessary and improperly saddled upon the general tax payers 
of the State. To say nothing of the other evils that result from it, 
these are enough to call upon this Convention to abate that evil. 
It cannot be done, as experience has shown in other States and in 
our own. by declaring that no local act shall be passed which can 
be provided for by general law. That is not obeyed. Then the 
committee over which I had the honor to preside, the Legislative 
Department, have had several ordinances referred to it on this 
subject, and went to work and prepared a schedule of the cases 
in which the committee did not believe any local laws should be 
passed. Then it transpired that the importance of this thing had 
grown to much upon the country that the President of the Con¬ 
vention thought it best, and with the advice of his Committee on 
Rules, had a special committee, a separate committee, to deal with 
this question. Then it was that on conference with the Chairman 
of the Committee on Local Legislation, all of the work of the 
committee upon general legislation to which this class of work 
had belonged theretofore, was turned over to that committee, but 
as they did not adopt all of the recommendations of the Committee 
on Legislative Department, the supplemental report which you 
have proposing several additions was made by that committee. 
That is the reason there are two reports here. I have heard some 
delegates say that they would like to have some explanations of it. 
That is the best explanation I can give. There is no conflict be¬ 
tween the committees as I understand it at all, all desiring the 
same object, the same purpose—to restrict the Legislature .from 
passing local laws on a good many subjects, and the only question, 
it seems to fft'e for this body to consider is whether we have gone 
too far or not far enough, and as to each one of these paragraphs 
to consider whether it is proper to restrict them, to prevent the 
Legislature from passing any local law upon that subject. I pre- 



1788 


OFFICIAL PROCEEDINGS 


sume there will be not much difference of opinion. There may be 
some difference a little later on as to some of the provisions herein, 
but in the general discussion, I will consume no more of vour time, 
feeling that these were points which my friend, the Chairman of 
the Committee on Local Legislation, had not touched upon par¬ 
ticularly, but had given a most excellent and full explanation of 
the general purposes. 

Mr. Foster here took the chair. 

MR. WILLIAMS (Marengo)—I ask unanimous consent to 
introduce a resolution. 

MR. O’NEAL (Lauderdale)—Will the gentleman yield to me 
for a suggestion? 

MR. WILLIAMS—Certainly. 

MR. O’NEAL—The first section embraces all the catalogue 
of subjects as to which the Legislature is prohibited from passing 
local laws. I believe it will expedite matters to take up each one 
of the subjects such as granting divorces, etc., take up each one in 
the order in which they appear. The rule is we take up each 
section and consider each article section by section. If that rule 
was enforced we would have to consider the whole catalogue of 
subjects in this one section. I ask unanimous consent that it be 
taken up that way. 

MR. OATES—I presume that he means to read each one of 
the paragraphs and pass them one by one. 

THE PRESIDENT PRO TEM. (Mr. Foster.)—The gentle¬ 
man asks unanimous consent that the first sub-division be taken 
up- 

MR. O’NEAL—I ask the passage of the first sub-division 
granting divorces. 

MR. WILLIAMS (Marengo)—I have a short resolution that 
I wish to introduce. 

To which objection was made. 

MR. OATES—I want to make a suggestion to the chairman 
of the committee with reference to the mode of procedure. I do 
not desire to interfere with the resolution proposed to be offered 
by the gentleman from Marengo, but I will suggest that you can 
go on with the reading of this section, slowly reading each sub¬ 
division and if no objection is raised, it will be considered as passed 
and that will save time, rather than taking a vote on each sub- 
division. 

MR. O’NEAL (Lauderdale)—I accept the suggestion of the 
gentleman and it will probably save time. 



CONSTITUTIONAL CONVENTION, 1901 


1789 


MJv. 1JEMJN (Chambers)—1 hope the objection will be 
w ithdrawn to the* resolution offered by the gentleman from Maren¬ 
go. 1 he purpose of the resolution is to extend the privileges of 
the floor to Mr. Bernard Harwood. 

MR. \\ 11,LI AMS ( Marengo)—1 have a short resolution to 
introduce, and I ask tor a suspension of the rules. 

The resolution was read as follows: 

Resolution No. 232. by Mr. Williams, Marengo. 

\\ hereas. thi> Convention is in session by virtue of an act of 
the* last General Assembly commonly called and known as “The 
Harwood Bill." so-calUd from the name of the author of the bill, 
the Hon. Bernard Harwood, the distinguished member of said As¬ 
sembly from the county of Greene, and whereas, this member of 
the Assemble is at present in Montgomery. 

Now be it resolved, that the privilege-of the floor of this Con¬ 
vention he and is extended to the Hon. Bernard Harwood of 
(ire( lie. 

A vote being taken the rules were suspended and a further 
vote being taken the resolution was put upon its immediate pas¬ 
sage. 

MR. (PXEAL—I now suggest that we proceed with the con¬ 
sideration of this section. 

MR. WEATHERLY—Before that is done. I would like to 
rise to a question of personal privilege. Following the suggestion 
of the gentleman from Walker, I have taken occasion to read mv 
speech that I made yesterday. I find that the reporter has made 
one error that I cannot allow' to go overlooked. He has me stating 
that “jury trials protect those who are unpopular in the communi¬ 
ty. who would otherwise he oppressed under the laws of God/' I 
don't want to be put in the attitude of going down in history as 
making that charge (and I say it with all reverence) against the 
Lord God Almighty; because 1 believe we are always under His 
protection and loving care. \\ hat I said \v r as: Who are unpopular 
in the community and who would be oppressed otherwise; but un¬ 
der the Providence of God there is always one man, at least, can 
be found who will stand up for the right. I would like for that 
correction to be made. 

THE PRESIDENT PRO TEM.—The stenographer will make 
the correction, under the rule. 

MR. HOWELL (Cleburne)—Before w r e proceed further with 
the consideration of this question of local legislation, I would like 
to ask the Chairman of the Committee on that subject a question, 
being a legal gentleman. This State is all covered with local acts 



1790 


OFFICIAL PROCEEDINGS 


from the mountains to the Gulf. In case this Article is adopted 
and goes into the Constitution and the Constitution is ratified, 
will the Legislature be authorized to repeal local acts now in force, 
many of which are vicious? 

MR. O’NEAL—The Section expressly provides for that. 

The Clerk then proceeded to read the Ordinance Concerning 
Local Legislation by sections, as follows: 

AN ORDINANCE 
Concerning Local Legislation. 

Be it ordained by the people of Alabama in Convention as¬ 
sembled, That the following article op Local Legislation be in¬ 
serted in the Constitution : 

Article-. 

* Local Legislation. 

Section 1. The General Assembly shall not pass a special, 
private or local law in any of the following cases: 

First—Granting a divorce. 

Second—Relieving any minor of the disabilities of non-age; 

Third—Changing the name of any corporation, association or 
individual; 

Fourth—Providing for the adoption or legitimizing of any 
child; 

Fifth—Incorporating a town, city or village; 

Sixth—Granting a charter to any corporation, association or 
individual. 

Seventh—Establishing rules of descent or distribution. 

MR. ASHCRAFT—I do not understand just how we are pro¬ 
ceeding. I thought the entire Section was just now read, and that 
we were to pass upon this Section paragraph by paragraph. 

THE PRESIDENT PRO TEM—The rule requires that the 
whole Section be passed upon. This Section is divided into sub¬ 
divisions. The rule adopted by unanimous consent a few minutes 
ago was that £ach subdivision was to be read slowly and unless 
objection was made, or amendment offered, to proceed with the 
reading until the end of the Section was reached. Then the ques¬ 
tion would be upon the adoption of the Section as a whole. 

MR. ASHCRAFT—When the reading is concluded, amend¬ 
ments will not be in order then? 



CONSTITUTIONAL CONVENTION. 1901 


1791 


THE PRESIDENT PRO TEM—I think not. 

MR. O’NEAL—I rise to make an inquiry: Amendments 
would be in order to add to the Section, hut not change what has 
been passed? 

THE PRESIDENT PRO TEM—The Chair would hold that 
an amendment to the entire Section would be in order. 

MR. ASHCRAFT—I did not so understand. I desire to offer 
an amendment to the Fourth Section by striking out the word 
legitimizing and inserting in lieu thereof the word legitimation. 

The clerk then read the amendment offered by Mr. Ashcraft 
as follows: 

Amend subdivision 4 of Section 1 by striking out “legitimiz¬ 
ing” and inserting in lieu thereof “legitimation.” 

THE PRESIDENT—The queston is on the adoption of the 
amendment offered by the gentleman from Lauderdale. 

MR. ASHCRAFT—By an examination of the derivation of 
these words, it will be seen that “legitimizing” really has no ety¬ 
mological history. “Legitimation” is the word which has been 
sanctioned by legal usage, as will be shown by reference to the 
dictionary. We have a word here which has been given a meaning 
by custom rather than by good usage. 

MR. JONES—Will the gentleman permit an interruption? 
Can’t the Committee on Harmonics settle this discord between our 
two distinguished friends without taking up so much time of the 
Convention ? 

MR. ASHCRAFT—I don’t think the words “adoption or 
legitimizing” in the Article should be associated as they are. It is 
a rare usage of the word, and the fact that it is not good grammar, 
are both reasons why I think the Committee ought to accept the 
amendment. 

MR. WATTS—The objection of the gentleman from Lauder¬ 
dale to the language used is simply hypercritical. The dictionary 
which I produced here a few moments ago says that legitimizing 
is correct. It is not the only one but it is so stated in Worcester 
and it is also stated in Webster; and this Committee put these 
words in there advisedly; I don’s see any necessity of taking up the 
time of this Convention by simply substituting another word which 
means identically the same thing, and I move to lay the amend¬ 
ment on the table. 

And upon a vote being taken the motion was carried. 

The Clerk then read Subdivision 8 as follows: 

Eighth—Regulating the time within which a civil or criminal 
action may be begun. 



1792 


OFFICIAL PROCEEDINGS 


MR. JENKINS—I wish to offer an amendment. 

The amendment was read by the Clerk as follows: 

“To amend by striking out Subdivision 8.” 

MR. JENKINS—The reason I offer that amendment is there 
are a great many courts of law and equity in this State and the 
practice and procedure in a great many of those courts is not the 
same as in other courts and there might be desired changes to be 
made that would not suit all the courts in this State. They might 
want to change the City Court, the County Court or the Circuit 
Court. We do not know what the Judiciary Court will report as 
to that. 

MR. O'NEAL—This is merely a statute of limitations. I think 
the gentleman misunderstands this Section, to regulate the time 
in which civil and criminal actions may be begun. You can not 
pass any limitation for any county different from the limitations 
which apply to the whole State. It has no reference to the regular 
procedure in court. It is the exact language in which you find 
in the Code, regulating the time in which action may be begun. 

By unanimous consent the amendment offered by Mr. Jenkins 
to Section 8 was withdrawn. 

Ninth.—Exempting any person, corporation, county, township, 
municipality or association from the operation of any general law. 

MR. CUNNINGHAM—I desire to offer an amendment to 
that subdivision. 

The Clerk then read the amendment as follows: 

Amend Subdivision 9, Section 1, Article on Local Legisla¬ 
tion. Add at the end of said subdivision the following words: 
“Provided, that this section shall not apply to the regulation of 
the same as spirituous, vinous or malt liquors. 

MR. CUNNINGHAM—It appears to me that prohibits the 
regulation of the sale of spirituous, vinous, and malt liquors, by 
high license, dispensary, prohibition or otherwise. The general 
law of the State provides how whiskey, spiritous, vinous and malt 
liquors can be sold. If a community asked for the establishment of 
a dispensary, under the provision of this subdivision, it cannot be 
granted. If they ask for the high license. Now, I do not want 
to oppose leaving this matter with the communities by popular 
vote, in the event they want to pass upon this great question ; and 
I am unwilling to allow the adoption of that provision without my 
humble protest, in the Constitution we are now framing, that will 
estop the Legislature in the protection and reformation of some 
of this great evil I for one believe the communities have the right 
to pass upon these great questions. 



CONSTITUTIONAL CONVENTION, 1901 


1793 


AIR. SANDERS—I would like to ask the gentleman if he has 
read line 39 of this first section, which provides that “The General 
Assembly shall pass general laws for the cases enumerated in this 
section?” There was no attempt, in reporting this subdivision, on 
the part of the committee, to interfere with any dispensary system 
or license system whatever in Alabama. I will state that I, for 
one, am a firm believer in the dispensary. I believe very much 
in the importance of that system for the small communities in cer¬ 
tain counties in the State; and I certainly would not have consent¬ 
ed to any subdivision, which, in my opinion, would attack the dis¬ 
pensary system in Alabama. We provided at the foot of this sec¬ 
tion that it shall be the duty of the General Assemblv to pass gen¬ 
eral laws providing for all the matters enumerated in this section. 
In other words, no dispensary now established shall be affected 
by this subdivision; and hereafter if any municipality or county 
desires to establish a dispensary system, the Legislature shall pro¬ 
vide a general law by which all persons who desire to come within 
that system, by complying with the requirements, mav be able to 
do so. 

AIR CUNNINGHAM—Suppose the General Assemblv fails to 
do that, what would be the course of the community that may 
want a dispensary or a high license or prohibition? I am not a 
lawyer and I am free to confess that I don t know exactly what 
this 9th provision expresses; but when you authorize a municipality 
to deal exclusively in the sale of spirituous, vinous and malt liquors, 
you are conferring upon that municipality a special privilege. There 
is no doubt about it. I do not want to submit at this time to the 
people of Alabama a great question such as this, without their 
having an opportunity of realizing the fact that in the future they 
shall have the same privileges as in the past in regulating this 
question. 

I am perfectly willing to yield to the opinion of the distin¬ 
guished lawyers on this floor as to what this 9th section means; 
but to the unsophisticated element, like myself, it strikes me that 
it knocks in the head all these great questions; and I am unwilling 
to sit by and allow it to be done without protesting. If I am wrong 
in my assumption I don't insist on the amendment; but if I am 
right I do insist upon it ; and I say this Convention should not go 
before the people of Alabama with any masked designs upon the 
moral reformers of this State. 

MR. deGRAFFENREID—Whether you are right or wrong, 
the amendment makes it plain. 

MR. CUNNINGHAM—It occurs to me that it does. 

MR. deGRAFFENREID—And it cannot do any harm if you 
are wrong. 



1794 


OFFICIAL PROCEEDINGS 


MR. CUNNINGHAM—In anv event it expresses it prettv 
plainly and I introduce the amendment for discussion with the 
hope that you will leave this thing- open so the communities in 
this State can settle this question. 

MR. O'NEAL—You don’t think this would interfere with a 
dispensary now established by law? 

MR. CUNNINGHAM—Certainly not. I want to sav if the 
people of this State approve of this as a method of reforming the 
liquor traffic, and it is a good one, it should not stop where it is 
now. but should he permitted to extend its beneficent effects over 
every community in the State of Alabama; and the time will come 
vvhen !t would be a good thing to apply it to the whole State from 
the Tennessee River to the Gulf. I don’t want anvthing in the 
Constitution that prohibits any community from passing upon this 
great question; and therefore I shall insist upon the amendment. 

, MR. deGRAb b ENREID—I rose for the purpose of offering 
the same amendment that was offered bv the gentleman from 
Jefferson except with a different idea in view. I reside in a com¬ 
munity where the sale of liquor is prohibited bv law. where we 
don t have a dispensary and don’t want it even sold there by a dis¬ 
pensary; and there are a great many sections of Alabama’ in the 
same condition. In fact, it is very doubtful whether the sale of 
liquor is a good thing in any town that is not able to afford police 
protection to its inhabitants. I know it is not a good thing in anv 
Black Be t town. Now it seems to me that if this section is passed 
without the amendment of the gentleman from Jefferson the proba¬ 
bility is that the Legislature will be inhibited from exemptiim 
towns, from the operation of the general law of the State, which 
permits the sale of liquor upon a license issued for that purpose, 
bor that reason I am heartily in favor of the adoption of the amend¬ 
ment offered 1 ) 3 ' the gentleman from Jefferson. 

MR. MALONE—I want to say a few words in behalf of this 
amendment from a defensive standpoint. I hate to sav anything-, 
but as most of these gentlemen know, I come from the first place 
that established a dispensary in Alabama, where it has been a most 
wonderful success. I have studied the question carefully and I 
am thoroughly convinced and I think it is one question that ought 
to )e regulated entireL locally. In the first place, it ought not to 
be put on a community that does not want it. I also question its 
success when forced on a community that does not want it in anv 
way. I recognize that it does not interfere with the general propo¬ 
sition. But the main reason is this: that the general law bri.U 
it into local politics; and I think I can appeal to anv man on this 
floor who is familiar with it and he will sav that under the general 
law it is a most impossible to keep that question out of politics. 
Under the local law, if any community wants it, you can establish 



CONSTITUTIONAL CONVENTION, 1901 


1795 


it. It is a fact that a great many of the dispensaries, which were 
established under the general law, have changed to a local law. A 
local law can be so framed so as to practically keep it out of your 
other matters. Personally, I started the dispensary question in 
our community. I have studied it from a business standpoint and 
1 am willing to stand upon the reputation and success of ours; 
and from my intercourse with it, I do not believe it is a success 
or ever will be a success if adopted by the State and county or 
anything else except purely under local option in the hands of 
those people right there, whether they want it or whether they 
do not. There is a certain amount of interest that is absolutely 
necessary to take in it; and you can not arrive at it in any other 
way, except by having this personal interest in it and any proposi¬ 
tion that will take it out of local hands and put it into politics. I 
think, in my opinion, will be a curse upon the country; and I hope 
from that standpoint the amendment will be adopted. 

MR. WILSON (Clarke)—I offer a substitute for the amend¬ 
ment proposed by the gentleman from Jefferson. 

The President here resumed the chair. 

The substitute was read as follows: “Amend by striking out 
sub-division 9,” 

THE PRESIDENT—The question is on the substitute for 
the amendment of the gentleman from Jefferson. 

MR. WILSON (Clarke)—There are two phases to this propo¬ 
sition. It seems to me to illustrate the unwisdom, if I may use 
that word, of putting that subdivision in the Constitution. It has 
been called to the attention of the Convention that it would not be 
wise to put such a clause in the Constitution which would operate 
against whiskey laws. That. Mr. President, is only one subject of 
legislation I believe it would he unwise to force upon the whole 
State and ever}' community in the State alike. I believe there are 
other subjects of legislation which cannot be framed under a gen¬ 
eral law to operate on every community, every person, every town¬ 
ship, and every county in this State alike. This subdivision, it 
seems to me, if allowed to stand, would prevent you from exempt¬ 
ing from any general law on any subject, any community in this 
State. Now it seems to me, with the great diversity of interests 
which exist in the different sections of the State, the Pine Belt, the 
Black Belt, and the mineral district, in the larger cities, and in the 
thinly settled counties it would be unwise to say that whatever 
general law is passed must operate upon every community in this 
State alike, and cannot be repealed for any community in this State, 
and no community in this State can be exempted from it. 

The argument against including in this subdivision whiskey 
laws illustrates just one branch of legislation that should not be 



1796 


OFFICIAL PROCFEDIX(S 


hampered in this way. [t strikes me that (jiiarantine is another 
subject that might be added, and no doubt there are many otlnrs 
which may be added, which should be exempted trom this propo¬ 
sition, and I believe the safest plan is to strike out this subdivision, 
which forces you to make a general law apply to every comnuinitv 
alike and prevents anv community from getting out from under 
the influence of it. It seems to me we would sufficiently restrict 
local legislation when we name the many subjects we propose to 
name in here, about which there shall be no local legislation. Now, 
why say that every general law must apply to every communitv 
alike ? 

MR. DENT—I have an amendment which \ propose to offer, 
but I am perfectly willing to vote for the amendment offered bv 
the gentleman from Clarke. If that amendment is adopted 1 am 
satisfied, but even then I would like to have the privilege of 
offering an amendment to the section. It seems to me, Mr. Presi¬ 
dent, that the reasons given by the gentleman from Clarke are 
potent. This system of procrustian legislation is not wise, and it 
is not desirable. \Ye cannot make a suit to fit evervbodv. on 
every occasion and under all circumstances, and there should be 
some exceptions. The debate upon this floor in reference to the 
question of taxation of cities, and their rights, demonstrated that, 
and I beg the Convention not to be hasty in adopting this class of 
legislation. We sometimes get a little too democratic, we want 
everybody to be the same size, to wear the same size clotlus. and 
sleep in the same length bed. It is not a w ise thing to do. and I 
hope that the amendment of the gentleman from Clarke will pre¬ 
vail. 

MR. O’NEAL—I do not think this subdivision is susceptible 
of the construction which has been given to it. It certainly was 
not the intention of the Committee to interfere with the laws in 
reference to dispensaries or the liquor traffic. Suppose this is 
stricken out, we know^ that one of the ways by which local law's 
are passed by the General Assembly, is the passing of the general 
law and then exempting from its operation all cities or towns or 
counties, where the members do not wash the law' to apply. The 
General Assembly passes the general law' and the gentleman from 
Jefferson or some other county will rise and move to except that 
county, and so county after county is excepted, and there you have 
a local law under the guise of a general law'. The purpose of this 
is to prohibit legislation of that kind. 

MR. VAUGHAN—I want to ask if the adoption of this section 
would refer to the bird law? 

MR. O’NEAL—It would have to be provided for bv a general 
law, and provide some mode by which it will operate in the differ- 
ent counties as their necessities may require. 



CONSTITUTIONAL CONVENTION, 1901 


1797 


MR. VAUGHAN—Could Dallas County have a different bird 
law from the State bird law? 

MR. O’NEAL—There was an effort made to incorporate in 
the report of the Committee some provision about game laws and 
it was defeated in the Committee upon the grounds stated. 

MR. VAUGHAN—Then would the State law apply to all of 
the counties alike? 

MR. O’NEAL—If there is a State game law it must be a gen¬ 
eral law. 

Now the exemption of any person, corporation, county, town¬ 
ship, municipality or association from the operation of any general 
law is prohibited. Argument was made before the Committee that 
this might interfere with the sale of liquor in the counties, local 
option and so on. That was not the purpose of this subdivision. 
The Legislature can pass a law about local option by which local 
influence can adopt it by an election of the people. 

MR. CUNNINGHAM—Suppose the Legislature were to re¬ 
fuse to do that, what would be the status of the community that 
wanted it, the Legislature to the contrary notwithstanding? 

MR. O’NEAL—If the Legislature refused to pass a general 
law, the people would defeat the Legislature, if the}' did not respond 
to their wishes. Of course, we cannot guarantee that the Legisla¬ 
ture will carry out the wishes of the people on all subjects. 

MR. CUNNINGHAM—I desire to ask one more question. 
Suppose a bill is introduced as has been done, for a State dispen¬ 
sary law. Under this subdivision, if I happened to represent the 
county of Jefferson, I could not move to strike it out of the bill. 

MR. O’NEAL—No, you could not. 

MR. CUNNTNGHAM—Then that takes away from communi¬ 
ties the right of local self-government on this question or any other 
question ? 

MR. O'NEAL—No, the result would be that no general law 
would be passed except in this way. The general law might be 
passed on the subject of dispensaries which would provide that 
any county which desired to avail itself of the dispensary might 
do so by submitting the question to a vote of the people. That 
could be done under a general law and that is the proper way in 
which it should be done. I do not think it was the intention that 
this subdivision should apply to dispensaries, but even assuming 
that it does have reference to the dispensary, as the gentleman 
from Jefferson has assumed, the Legislature could then pass a 
general dispensary law by which any county in the State could 
adopt the provisions of that law by a vote of its people. You 



1798 


OFF I Cl A L, PROC K KI.) 1 X('»S 


could pass a general law to that effect in reference to local option, 
instead of coming down here and fighting before the committees 
in the Legislature to get a dispensary in your county, a general 
law would be passed and you could go hack to your people, and 
if your people wanted a dispensary, they could secure it bv an 
election. 


MR. BOONK—This Section reud> "Exempting any person, 
corporation, county, township, municipality or association from tilt- 
operation of any general law." Would that prohibit the (*eneral 
Assembly from regulating the courts of the State in a special wav? 

MR- O NEAL l hat is especially excepted. It the gentleman 
will turn to Section 3b he will see that it reads "no special, private 
or local law, except a law fixing the time of holding courts, shall 
be enacted in any case. that is therefore, expresslv excepted. 

MR. BOONE But the exception covers oulv the time- of 
holding court and would not cover any special court in anv county 
where the needs of the people might require a special court, but 
the courts of the whole State would have to he the same. 

MR. O’NEAL—You mean as to the- rules of procedure? 

MR. BOONE As to the organization of the courts in the 
several counties. 


MR. O NEAL That would not have anv effect on that This 
says excepting any county from the operation of anv general law ” 
fhe purpose of that Section as I stated, was to prevent the Legis¬ 
lature, under the guise of a getter 1 ’ • 


mu . u i T L". trom passing- a local law 

Tha has been the way in which the prohibition against local laws 
has been evaded in nearly all of the State, of the Union. \ mem¬ 
ber introduces a general law, and then exception after exception is 
made, until you have nothing but a local law. 

It seems that the argument of the- gentleman from Jefferson 

beXcXon e ST ,Vmff " thC C ° nStrUCti0n " hlCh he 


MR. PILLANS— 1 would ask if. in the case of the passage of 
the law introduced as a general law. and one countv or a number 
of counties were excepted, would that not make it a local law so 
as to fall within the prohibition? For example: Suppose V game 
or bird law such as the one that was introduced two sessions back 
were passed, with the exception of \Iont?nmPrv p A , , 

not .ha, be a local law uadi, the 

havent you got ample provisions in your Section'to reach that’case 
of a bill original y framed as a general law, becoming a local law 
by the taking out of one or more counties? K ai 13 



CONSTITUTIONAL CONVENTION. 1901 1799 

MR. O’NEAL—That was incorporated in there because nu¬ 
merous decisions of the courts of the States have held that where 
a general law is introduced and the exception of town after town 
or city after city has been made, that it still remains a general 
law within the meaning of a Section like the one in the present 
Constitution, and out of abundant caution we have incorporated 
this provision into this Article. 

MR. PILLANS—May I ask another question? Do you not 
think that the same result that you desire to reach could he better 
attained by a clause which would distinctly show that it was 
levelled at that particular sort of evil and not a Section so broad 
as this. 

MR. O’NRAI.—I do not think this is too broad, Mr. President. 
As 1 was going b> -say. the argument was made in the Committee 
that the reason why there was objection to local option laws and 
prohibition, was because frequently the counties could get relief 
before the Legislature that they could not get before the people. 
That if the matter was left to the people the local option law would 
probably be defeated, and that the Legislature would sometimes 
grant local option when the people would defeat it. That did not 
appeal to my sense of right, because I think that where the people 
of a county will not vote for local option, the Legislature should 
not foist such a law upon them. I believe all these dispensary laws 
and local option laws ought to be left to the people of the particu¬ 
lar community which is affected. I say if you give this Section 
the construction given it by the gentleman from Jefferson even, 
the Legislature can pass a general law providing that any countv 
in Alabama can, by a submission of the question to the vote of its 
people, take advantage of the benefit of a dispensary, or the local 
option law, and there is absolutely nothing in the Section to pre¬ 
vent it. 

MR. CORNWELL—In Section 5 of this Article don’t you 
think that you have provided for all the objections that have been 
raised ? 

MR. O’NEAL—I think so. If the Legislature should do that. 

I think it will answer most of these objections. 

MR. SANDERS—I desire to ask the gentleman a question. 
If the Legislature should refuse to pass a general law for the sub¬ 
jects enumerated in this Section, would not the members thereof 
thereby violate their oath to support the Constitution? 

MR. O’NEAL—Yes sir. 

MR. SANDERS—It is not optional with them, but is it not a 
command for them to pass a general law? 



1800 


OFFICIAL PROCEEDINGS 


MR. O’NEAL—In answer to the gentleman from Limestone, 
by reading the whole section it will be seen that it is made the 
absolute duty of the General Assembly to pass general laws on 
every subject as to which they are prohibited from passing local 
laws. You take up this whole list and while the Legislature is 
forbidden to pass local laws on these subjects, they are required 
if this section is adopted to pass a general law covering the subjects. 
Thty would violate their oaths if they did not do so. 

MR. COLEMAN (Greene)—I would like to hear your opinion 
in regard to the privilege taxes in the different municipalities 
throughout the State. Do you want to pass a general law fixing 
the rate of privilege taxing power of the cities and towns in the 
State of Alabama? 

MR. O’NEAL—You might classify the cities and pass such 
laws. 

MR. COLEMAN (Greene)—You might. Every town and 
city in the State have different privilege tax laws. How would 
you make a general law' cover tht.se cases? 

MR. O NEAL—That will be provided for when the Legisla¬ 
ture passes a general law^ fixing the powers of each city in the State 
of the different classes. The cities in the State will be classed 
and there will be a charter passed providing for the needs of each 
city and town in the State and giving them their rights and defining 
their powers, and there will be a general law. Such a law would 
give them power to levy license taxes on any subject. I will ask 
the gentleman from Greene why could that not be done, and would 
it not be done? 

MR. COLEMAN—\ou would have a general law that would 
allow any city or town to pass anv license law that thev saw 
proper? 

MR. O’NEAL—You might limit it to such subjects that the 
general law might provide for. 

MR. WALKER—Why would not it be competent for the 
Legislature to pass general laws under which the local authorities 
could make different regulations upon the subjects that have been 
mentioned here, in reference to the sale or use of intoxicating 
liquors, in reference to bird laws, and in reference to privilege 
taxes. It would not require at all. that the same regulations should 
prevail all over the State, but a general law would provide for the 
regulation of those matters by the local authorities. 

^^^L I am obliged to the gentleman for the sugges¬ 
tion. That was the idea of the committee, that it would be the 
duty of the Legislature to pass general laws giving the local au¬ 
thorities authority to pass such laws as the demands and necessi- 



CONSTITUTIONAL CONVENTION. 1901 


1801 


ties of the particular community might require, so that every com¬ 
munity could have its local laws, without applying to the General 
Assembly for them. 

THE PRESIDENT—The time of the gentleman from Lau¬ 
derdale has expired. 

MR. ASHCRAFT—The question which has been raised in con¬ 
nection with this clause as to the regulation of the liquor traffic 
is one of great importance. We are told that the Legislature may 
pass general laws, whereby particular localities may enact such 
liquor laws as will suit their own ideas. Now, sir, if this law shall 
be enacted into the Constitution, and at the next Legislature a bill 
should be introduced authorizing every county, municipality or 
district to take a vote in that particular community, as to whether 
or not prohibition should be put into effect the result would be 
that the large cities and towns in this State, where it is exceedingly 
difficult to regulate the liquor traffic, would be opposed to giving 
the people of other communities the opportunity they desired. The 
liquor traffic, if it is ever regulated in this State, must be regulated 
first in the small communities, and as the general idea of temper¬ 
ance grows, to reach the larger ones gradually. When you propose 
this general law giving every community the right to vote for or 
against prohibition, you will at once have arrayed against that 
general law' the strong whiskey interests in the State, and the result 
would be that no such general law' could be passed notwithstanding 
that a multitude of small communities might like to have the privi¬ 
lege and opportunity of voting upon the question themselves. 

MR. WALKER—Is it not a fact that in States in which pro¬ 
visions such as this prevail, that there is a successful regulation of 
the liquor traffic by the communities, under the general laws? 

MR. ASHCRAFT—I am not prepared to answer that ques¬ 
tion. I understand that so far, in human experience, no successful 
regulation has ever been made of the liquor traffic. I understand 
however, we are growing in that direction, and I believe, Mr. Presi¬ 
dent, that the enactment of this clause will cut off for many years 
to come the growth that we are making in this direction, because 
it will deprive the smaller communities of the opportunity of ex¬ 
ercising the privilege that they have of securing from the Legis¬ 
lature local option. 

MR. O’NEAL—I desire to ask the gentleman a question. Does 
he think that the Legislature ought to grant to any community 
local option or a dispensary contrary to the wishes of a majority 
of the people in that community? 

MR. ASHCRAFT—No. sir; I do not think that the Legislature 
ought to grant any particular community any privilege contrary 
to the wishes of a majority in that community, but I do think that 



1802 


OF FICIA L P ROC KK I) IX (; S 


the Legislature ought to grant to a community privileges that they 
may desire, but which may be against the wishes of a majority of 
the whole State to have applied to their localities, and the propo¬ 
sition here is that before we can do anything in any particular 
locality, we must get the consent of the whole State to have a 
general law passed giving the same right in every locality. That 
is the point that I am making, Mr. President. 

MR. O’NEAL—If the gentleman will allow a suggestion, I 
desire to say that if he will read this section he will see that we 
absolutely require the Legislature to pass general laws on everv 
subject enumerated in this section. Then if the section would have 
the effect which the gentleman claims, to prevent a countv from 
having a dispensary unless there was a general law on the subject, 
it would be the duty of the Legislature, under their oaths to pass 
a general law by which the county could secure the benefit of a dis¬ 
pensary, and by the same law the Legislature could provide for 
its adoption by a vote of the people or in some other manner. Cer¬ 
tainly that is the matter which may be left to the Legislature, ft 
was not the purpose to prevent any county or any communitv from 
having a local option law or a dispensary, or to have the control 
of the liquor traffic in any mode or manner that the people might 
wish. 


MR. ASHCRAFT I did not say, when I yielded, that I would 
allow the gentleman to make a speech in mv time. Mr. President 
the conflicting interests between the large cities and the small cities,’ 
and the country communities, would be so great that no general 
law could ever be passed that would provide for the different lo¬ 
calities m this State, and for taking such action as suited the par¬ 
ticular localities, because the action taken in the localitv must be 
adjusted to the state of the public sentiment in that locality. 


MR. WEATHERLY—Would an amendment of this kind 
answer any of the objections you have offered. Amend sub-division 


‘general law 


9 Section 1, by adding immediately after the words K . llciai 1UU 
the following: Hereinafter enacted, provided that the Legislature 
may enact such special laws, provided for the exemption of am- 
county, township, or municipality, from the operation of anv gen- 
eral law, by submitting: any such special law to the vote of the 
people to be affected thereby, for ratification or rejection under 
proper regulations, as may be prescribed bv law " 


• , MR ' J^ SHCRAFT — 1 do not think that would meet the ob¬ 
jection. There are so many other questions besides the question 
of local option. I mentioned that as one particular instance but 
there are a multitude of objections. And the regulation of the mr 
'icular needs of villages and small towns, an,I ol va ous ocah e ' 
can never be provided for under a general law. It could never he 
provided that they could express their choice in regard to certain 



1803 


CONSTITUTIONAL CONVENTION. 1901 

things, or lay out for themselves certain plans, without laying open 
that same privilege to certain other large and controlling com¬ 
munities which would always prevent action by the smaller com¬ 
munities. 

MR. LONG (Walker)—If the gentleman will allow a sug¬ 
gestion, would not the operation of this prevent the Legislature 
from granting any license to Confederate soldiers, or anyone else? 

MR. ASHCRAFT—I cannot answer the question. 

MR. O’NEAL—Not at all. 

MR. SANFORD (Montgomery)—I wish to make the sug- 
gestion that this discussion upon the striking out of the ninth sub¬ 
division has degenerated into a question of local option, or antf- 
local option, dispensary or anti-dispensary. If you strike that out, 
this committee on Local Legislation was constituted in vain. You 
might strike out every one of the twenty-six sub-divisions there 
where you say the Legislature cannot act, because you can exempt 
every one of them on the ground that it is merely a local question. 

I su £gest that the motion of the gentleman from Clarke be laid 
upon the table. It strikes out the whole object of the Committee 
on Local Legislation. I withdraw the motion if Mr. Watts wishes 
to make any remarks. 

MR. SMITH (Mobile)—So far as I am concerned, I hardly 
know what the limitations of this provision are. I have not given 
it any very great consideration, but it seems to me that there are 
quite a number of questions that will arise and create a difficulty 
which we will not be able to obviate. Take, for instance, the ques¬ 
tion of arranging the judiciary of this State. If this section stands, 

I do not see how it is going to he arranged so as to meet the views 
of at least twenty-five different portions of the State, nor do I 
know about the other seventy-five portions. Certainly, on the 
Committee on Judiciary the lawyers from seventy-five different 
portions of the state seem to want different arrangements in re¬ 
gard to the judiciary, and if those seventy-five portions of the 
State of Alabama cannot in any possibility be exempted from a 
general statute, it seems to me that according to the sad stories I 
have heard, we will be in a deplorable condition in that respect at 
any rate. 

Take, for instance, the passage of a general law dividing the 
State into as many judicial circuits, and providing that each such 
circuit shall contain a definite number of counties, and then leave 
this section in, that no county can be exempted from that law, and 
one of two conditions will exist; either you will have Circuit Courts 
and Chancery Courts in certain counties that have no use for them 
and which are fully provided for by these inferior courts, or else 
you would have to abandon a system which seems to have grown 
in favor, that of having separate and special courts in certain 



1804 


OFFICIAL PKOCKKDINV.S 


counties which are sufficiently large and have sufficient population 
to maintain such separate courts. Now. as I understand the ex¬ 
perience of the bar in this State, it has been that these special courts 
for such counties as are able to maintain them, have become a 
great convenience, and these counties would not do w ithout them 
under any circumstances, vet with this provision, we will either 
fasten for all time upon these counties a double judiciary, which is 
entirely unnecessary, or strike down this special system that has 
obtained such favor among the people. The same condition of 
affairs exists as to the Chancery Court. Then, I take it, there is a 
feeling in this Convention that there ought to be some elasticitv 
about the system, so that common law jurisdiction in some case-, 
could he conferred upon the Chancellor, and chancery jurisdiction 
upon the common law judges. That, howexer, could onlv he done 
in a certain number of counties. It would be practicable onlv 
where some special arrangement was made with regard to that 
particular territory. Under this provision, as I understand it. no 
such arrangements could be made. And from what I have heard, 
the Justice of the Peace, w ho has 1km n a subject of much anguish 
and tribulation among the fraternity in this Convention, some un¬ 
willing to do any hardship to those gentlemen who occtipv that 
exhaltecl position, while others are willing to consign their names 
to perdition. There will necessarily have to he some special pro¬ 
vision in regard to that matter in one portion of the State, and 
another portion of the State. That, as 1 understand it, under this 
section, could not be done. 1 hen. again, the quarantine law has 
been suggested- 

MR. O’NEAL—If the gentleman will allow an interruption 
suppose an amendment striking out the words "county, township! 
municipality," is offered, would not that meet your objections? 

that I^have^ITH wi ll never meet every objection 


MR. O’NEAL—And insert the word "private" before "c 
poration. 


cor- 


I hat is the effect of my amendment. 


MR. WEATHERLY 

like th u e Y'ntleman's permission, I would 

bke to suggest to him along that line, of striking out the word 
Per* 00 ,, and inserting the word “individual." and striking out the 
words county, township and municipality." and we would have 

ofAnkUU' 51011 ,S m tHC present Constitution, in Section 2d 

MR SMITH (Mobile) Of course I do not know what is the 
sense of the Convention in regard to that matter. If an amend 
ment to that effect is adopted. I shall certainly have no objection 
to the provision, but if it stands as it is without going into the 



1805 


CONSTITUTIONAL CONVENTION, 1901 


c^etai s i will call attention to the fact that the quarantine law 
cannot be uniform. If you were to undertake to fasten upon Mo- 
1 e only such quarantine laws or provisions as are necessary for 
other portions of the State, neither ourselves nor the balance of 
t e State would be protected. We must have something- beyond 
t le general provision. If, on the contrary, you should fasten on 
the whole State the provisions which are necessarv in order to 
giiaid the entrance, why you would have the whole State subject 
to unnec es>ai y hardships and restrictions. The question of dispen- 
>ar\ ha> been discussed by other. Then there is the question of the 
juiy law. In the County of Mobile we have a special jury law, one 
that has worked to very much greater satisfaction, than the general 
law> ot the State. \\ hether it could be operated in other counties, 
I doubt. ( hir ow n courts have not been in favor of enforcing the 
special jury laws that prevail in Mobile County, knowing that the 
other counties are not situated as that county is. I should certainly 
teel it a great calamity to strike down such law’s as those wdiich I 
ha\e mentioned. I he jury law has protected us from professional 
jurors, and from a number of evils that are incidental to the gen¬ 
eral system. I heretore as the subdivision now stands I am very 
much opposed to it, but amended according to the suggestions 
which have been made. I would have no opposition to it. 


MR. WATTS—I wall address myself, first to the objection of 
the gentleman from Mobile, Mr. Smith, as to the organization of 
the Circuit and Chancery Courts. It is well known to every law¬ 
yer that when an instrument is considered it is taken altogether. 
The Constitution of 1875 had a provision in it “Nor shall the oper¬ 
ation of any general law he suspended by the General Assembly for 
the benefit of any individual, corporation or association.” Now if 
we put into the Constitution the 9th subdivision wdiich w'e have in 
this report, prohibiting the exemption of any person, corporation, 
county, township, municipality or association, from the operation 
of any general law', and we afterwards put into this Constitution 
the matters which the gentleman suggests about circuit and chan¬ 
cery courts and the legislature establishing inferior courts, or other 
sort of courts, when the court takes this whole instrument up for 
construction, it will say that this means that the legislature shall 
not exempt any municipality, county or corporation, from the 
operation of any general law', except in the particular matters, 
w'hich this Constitution points out in other parts of it can be done. 
In other words, the whole matter will be considered inpari materia, 
and make it harmonize as one whole, and not make it operate in 
the manner wdiich the gentleman has suggested. 


MR. SMITH (Mobile)—I would like to ask the gentleman 
if his experience in the law justifies him in feeling such a great 
confidence in his prophecy as to what the Supreme Court w r ill de¬ 
cide in the next thirty or forty years, and I will further ask the 
gentleman whether or not he considers it wise to put conflicting 



1806 


OFFICIAL PROCEEDINGS 


provisions in the Constitution because he knows what the Supreme 
Court will do in untangling them. 

MR. WATTS—I will answer both of the questions. Judge 
Rice on one occasion when he was asked whether or not courts 
were presumed to know the law said that they were, but some¬ 
times it was a very violent presumption. Therefore. I cannot say 
what the courts will decide, except I believe that they will decide 
what is right. 

As to the other proposition, I do not think this at all conflicts 
in the manner in which the gentleman contends. 

It is a well known fact, Mr. President, that in a General As¬ 
sembly, there are frequently introduced laws which are intended 
to be of general operation, and immediately there is a jumping up 
here and there throughout the House of Representatives, or the 
Senate, as the case may be, and there is an exception of this county 
or that, or the other county from the operation of the general law, 
and the result is that no man, be he as old as Methusalah or as 
wise as Solomon, can ever tell what the law is in any particular 
part of the State, unless he has made a particular study of it. 

MR. PILLANS—Your sixth section declares what a local law 
is does it not? 

MR. WATTS—Yes, sir. 

MR. PILLANS—Can that not be so framed as to make it 
perfectly plain, that if a law is passed which calls itself a general 
law, but contains the exception of some part of the State, that it 
will fall within the inhibition as a local law. 

MR. WATTS—I have no doubt that some amendment of this 
question can be made which will be satisfactory to this Conven¬ 
tion. 


MR. PILLANS—And reach that difficulty? 

MR. WATTS— Yes, sir. We have plenty of illustrations of 

the operation of this particular ninth subdivision. We have trot a 
general law on our statute books now, preventing the relieving of 
minors of the disabilities of non-age; we have got a general law 
providing for the organ.zation of different kinds of corporations • 
we have got a general law providing for the corporation of cities 
and towns; we used to have a general law to relieve married 
women of the disabilities of coveture, and we have a general law 
in reference to divorce and alimony. The object of this provision 
is for the legislature to make some general provision which applies 
to the whole State in reference to particular matters and not to 
have the acts of the legislature covered with laws affecting Mont¬ 
gomery County, or Mobile County, or Lee County and the various 



CONSTITUTIONAL CONVENTION, 1901 


1807 


other counties of the State. We have got two other provisions in 
here, where we say that the General Assembly shall pass a gen¬ 
eral law covering the matters which we have prevented them 
making the subjects of local legislation, and then further in Sec¬ 
tion 5 of this report, we provide, that the General Assembly may, 
by general law, confer upon the courts of county commissioners, 
Boards of Revenue or other courts, such power of local legislation 
and administration touching all matters and things not provided 
for by general law, and not inconsistent with the provisions of this 
Constitution, as the General Assembly may from time to time deem 
expedient. That means that the legislature may pass a general 
law by which they may provide for all such subjects as they cannot 
cover by a general law, such as the provision of my friend from 
Jefferson in relation to liquor. They can provide that the courts 
of county commissioners or the board of revenue in the respective 
counties, or some other court, shall have the right to determine in 
their particular community, what shall prevail, local option or 
otherwise. 

Now we are not striking at the dispensary, and we are not 
striking at the sale of liquor, any more than we are striking at 
anything else, but all of you know that about one-half of the time 
of the General Assembly for twenty-five years past has been taken 
up in passing local laws of some sort, kind or character, and a 
great deal of the valuable time of the State of Alabama has been 
expended in determining whether or not liquor should be sold 
within two or three miles of the Black Jack Stop on Jim Jones's 
plantation, or some other such foolishness. 

Now the intention of this Convention, we took it, when the 
Committee on Local Legislation was appointed, was to put some 
safeguard around this matter which would prevent a waste of the 
people's money. If you are going to strike down this subdivision, 
and if you are going to say that the legislature may still continue 
to except from the operation of the general law, any locality, any 
individual, any corporation or any association, why then what is 
the use of having a Committee on Local Legislation at all. Why 
not turn the doors wide open and tell them to go ahead as they 
have done in the past, making the general laws about the size of 
Webster's spelling book, and the local laws about twenty times 
their size. As shown the other day by my distinguished friend 
from Montgomery, Governor Oates, when he exhibited the general 
laws, you saw they were about as thick as my finger while the 
local laws were about six inches thick. The object of this Com¬ 
mittee is to break down this practice of passing local laws and 
wasting the people's money and to direct the legislature to some¬ 
thing that is important to the whole State instead of providing 
some measure to please some particular locality. 



1808 


OFFICIAL PROCEEDINGS 


MR. FITTS—I move the previous question upon the suit- 
division and both of the amendments. 

MR. WILSON (Clarke)—I hope the gentleman will withdraw 
the motion as I want to ask unanimous consent to withdraw niv 
amendment and offer this. It seems to meet the views of certain 
members. 

MR. O’NEAL—I ask unanimous consent to read an amend¬ 
ment which I think will cover the objections made and which will 
be acceptable to the entire Convention. 

The amendment of Mr. Wilson of Clarke, was read as follows: 

Strike out the word “person” and insert in lieu thereof the 
word “individual; strike out the words “county, township, munici¬ 
pality.” where they occur in subdivision 9. and insert the word 
“private” before the word “corporation.” 

MR. O’NEAL—That is exactly the amendment which I de¬ 
sired to offer. 

MR. WILSON (Clarke)—I ask unanimous leave to withdraw 
my substitute heretofore offered. 

MR. FITTS—Now I renew the motion tor the previous ques¬ 
tion. 

MR. BANKS—I hope the gentleman will withdraw that a 
moment. As a member of the Committee, I want to say a word 
or two. 

THE PRESIDENT—The gentleman from Clarke asks unani¬ 
mous consent to withdraw the amendment offered by him and 
insert in lieu thereof, the amendment which has just been read. 
Is there objection? 

MR. HOWZE—I object, because I would rather have it strick¬ 
en out than to have it amended. 

MR. BROOKS—I now move under rule 24, that the gentle¬ 
man from Clarke be allowed to withdraw his amendment. 

Upon a vote being taken the motion was carried. 

MR. WILSON (Clarke)—Now I offer the substitute which 
has just been read. 

MR. BANKS—I do not propose to detain you with anything 
like a speech. I only want to make an explanation. I want to 
say in behalf of certain members of the Committee that they do 
not agree to this subdivision. There was a difference of opinion 
in the committee. This question was discussed before the com¬ 
mittee, and I think it was the consensus of opinion that the ef¬ 
fect of the adoption of this sub-division would be just as has been 
stated by those who have opposed it upon the floor; that it would 



CONSTITUTIONAL CONVENTION, 1901 


1809 


have the effect to restrain any further local legislation on the sub¬ 
ject of whiskey, and on all other subjects that would have to be 
provided for by general law. It was the opinion of the commit¬ 
tee that there was a general law providing for the sale of whiskey. 

MR. O’NEAL—Will the gentleman allow an interruption? 
MR. BANKS—Yes, sir. 

MR. O'NEAL—I desire to call attention to the fact that the 
particular section under discussion was read to the committee 
and adopted without objection. 

MR. BANKS—I hope that the chairman will remember that 
I voted against it to the very last. 

MR. SAM FORD (Pike)—I rise to a point of order. Mat¬ 
ters which were before the committee are not proper to be stated 
before this house. 

THE PRESIDENT—The point of order is well taken. 

MR. O'NEAL—I rise to a point of order. I understood the 
gentleman to make a statement that the committee had never 
adopted it, and I did not want to let the statement pass unnoticed 
that the committee had reported a provision which has not been 
adopted. 

THE PRESIDENT — The gentleman stated that the com¬ 
mittee was not entirely unanimous. 

MR. O’NEAL — Then I misunderstood the gentleman and 
withdraw what I said. 

MR. BANKS—It was understood by the committee that the 
effect the provision would have would be just as stated to the Con¬ 
vention, and there were members of the committee that objected 
to it on that account. It is urged by those who advocated the 
adoption of this sub-division that these questions are provided 
against in Sub-division 39. As has been said upon the floor of 
this Convention, this is only advisory. It does not compel the 
General Assembly to adopt laws at all, and it is with the General 
Assembly as to whether it does that or not. In Section 5 of this 
report, it says that the General Assembly may, by general law, 
confer upon the courts of County Commissioners, Boards of Rev¬ 
enue and other courts. It grants to the General Assembly the 
power to do that thing, but it does not impose the absolute duty 
and requirement that they shall do it. I am opposed to the sub¬ 
division as it stands. I would be in favor of it with the amend¬ 
ment that was offered by the gentleman from Jefferson. That is 
all that I wish to say. 

MR HOWZE—It strikes me that this is one of the most 
important sections in this whole Article. I think without this, the 



1810 


OFFICIAL PROCEEDINGS 


work of this committee will have been in vain, as my friend from 
Montgomery has said. I see no reason in the world why ^ny 
county, any municipality or any individual should be exempted 
from a good general law. I do not think any general law ought 
to be passed unless it is a good one, and unless it is necessary, 
and I do not think any community or any county should be ex¬ 
empted from it. Suppose, for instance that a general law should 
be passed on any matter, why should any county or municipality 
be exempted from the operation of the law. A general law is pass¬ 
ed against gambling, why should any county be exempted from 
the operation of that law? Therefore, why could not a general 
law be framed so as to meet the requirement of every communi¬ 
ty in the State? 

I do not think that this sub-division affects the matter of 
liquor traffic. If it did, I should certainly oppose it, but as I con¬ 
ceive it means simply this, that a general law may be passed upon 
this subject. For instance, if the Court of County Commissioners, 
or other authorities of the county, may, on a request of a majority 
of the people of the county, have prohibition, have a dispensary, 
or local option, but it ought to be a general law all over the State, 
covering the whole State, and there should be no reason why any 
county should be exempted from the operation of such a law. It 
is not the working of the law, but it is the manner of creating the 
law that you desire to reach, and that you desire to make uniform 
throughout the State. 

As to this matter of quarantine, why should not the general 
quarantine law be established in such a way that it will operate 
properly in every county in this State? Why should there be 
any county or municipality from the operation of the law. As 1 
said in the beginning, no general law should be passed that is not 
for the good of the whole State. We cannot guarantee, of course, 
that the general law shall be passed, but we make it the duty of 
the Legislature to pass general laws upon all questions that may 
arise in the State, and we require that those general laws shall 
be uniform throughout the State. My friend has mentioned the 
matter of the bird law. It should not operate to affect that in 
the slightest, because a general law can be passed so as to pro¬ 
vide for a bird law to be established in any community, or in any 
county or district in the State; but that law should be uniform. 
The only thing that I have heard against this provision which 
casts a doubt upon my mind at all, is the matter of the judiciary, 
but as my friend from Montgomery has suggested, that is arrang¬ 
ed for by a subsequent section of the article. Therefore I can¬ 
not see, to save my life, why this provision which is intended to 
remedy such a great evil should be condemned by this Conven¬ 
tion. As my friend from Montgomery said, wherever a general 
law, even though it is a good one, is offered in the General As¬ 
sembly, it is a constant thing to see members rise up and exempt 



CONSTITUTIONAL CONVENTION, 1901 


1811 


their counties from it. The result is a confusion of the law, and 
no lawyer in the State knows what the law in the different coun¬ 
ties is in which he goes to practice. He has to learn it before he 
goes there. We have a confusion of the law by reason of the 
fact that the different counties have different laws all over the 
State. I think it is highly important that this subdivision of the 
article should be allowed to remain as it is, and I hope that this 
Convention will vote down the substitute and the amendment. 


Mr. Jones secured recognition. 

MR. JONES (Montgomery)—I will yield to the gentleman 
from Lauderdale to make a statement. 


MR. O’NEAL—I stated just now that the committee would 
accept the amendment offered by the gentleman from Clarke, but 
on a conference with the committee, I find that they are opposed 
to it. I desire to say, however, that the committee is willing to 
accept the amendment suggested by the gentleman from Jefferson, 
Dr. Cunningham. 

MR. JONES (Montgomery)—I move to lay upon the table 
the original subdivision, the substitute and all of the amendments, 
my reason for that is that the debate shows that we do not know 
what we are doing in respect to this matter- 

MR. WATTS—I make the point of order that the gentleman 
cannot discuss a motion to table. 

MR. JONES (Montgomery)—I will make the statement and 
then I will make my motion afterwards. 

A DELEGATE—Move to recommit the subdivision. 


MR. JONES (Montgomery) — No, I won’t, I am going to 
make the motion that I got up to make. It is very evident that 
we are shooting in the woods and do not know who we are going 
to hit and the apprehension among intelligent lawyers and intel¬ 
ligent business men as to what this thing means is a sufficient 
reason why this Convention should go slow. Now I move to table 
the subdivision, the substitute and all of the amendments. 


MR. WATTS—I call for the ayes and noes on that, and a di¬ 
vision of the question. 

MR WHITESIDE—I make the point of order that you can¬ 
not lay a part of a section on the table. This is only a subdivision 
of the section. 


MR FITTS—In response to that I make the point of order 
that before the section was started into, at the request of the com¬ 
mittee it was by unanimous consent agreed that each subdivision 
should be treated as a section, and so disposed of. 



1812 


OFFICIAL PROCEEDINGS 


MR. WHITESIDE—Not voted on as a section. 

MR. O'NEAL—But considered as a section. 

THE PRESIDENT—The present occupant of the Chair was 
not in the Chair when that agreement was arrived at but it seems 
in view of the agreement that the point of order would not be well 
taken. 

MR. REESE—I desire to make an inquiry. Suppose the 
amendments offered are not laid upon the table, and yet the origi¬ 
nal subdivision is laid upon the table. You have got an amend¬ 
ment hung up in the air with the section gone. 

THE PRESIDENT—A division of the question has been call¬ 
ed for and the Chair will submit the questions in their order. 

MR. REESE—That was the point I desired information on. 
Suppose the Convention refuses to table the amendment and vet 
they table the original subdivision? 

THE PRESIDENT—That is a complicated state of affairs 
that the Chair will deal with when it arises and not anticipate it. 
The ayes and noes are demanded, the question is. is the call for 
the ayes and noes sustained? 

The requisite number arising the call w r as sustained. 

THE PRESIDENT—The Chair will submit first the ques¬ 
tion on the motion to table the substitute offered by the gentle¬ 
man from Clarke. As many as favor laving the substitute on the 
table will sav aye and those opposed no as vour names are called. 

AYES 


Bartlett, 

Heflin, of Randolph. 

Porter, 

Blackwell, 

Hinson, 

Reynolds (Henry), 

Byars, 

Howze, 

Robinson, 

Case, 

Inge, 

Rogers, of Sumter, 

Chapman, 

Jenkins, 

Sanders, 

Cofer, 

Jones, of Montgomery, 

Sanford, 

Cornwall, 

Jones, of Wilcox, 

Sentell, 

Craig, 

Kirkland, 

Smith, Mac A., 

Davis, of Etowah, 

Kyle, 

Smith, Morgan M., 

Duke, 

Long, of Butler, 

Sollie, 

Espy, 

MacDonald, 

Spears, 

Foshee, 

Malone, 

Waddell, 

Gilmore, 

Martin, 

Walker, 

Glover, 

Oates, 

Watts, 

Greer, of Calhoun, 

O’Neal, of Lauderdale. 

Whiteside, 

Haley, 

Phillips, 

NOES 

Wilson, of Washington, 
TOTAL—48 

Ashcraft, 

Barefield, 

Becldow, 

Banks, 

Beavers, 

Bethune, 



CONSTITUTIONAL CONVENTION, 1901 


1813 


Boone, 

Bro< »ks, 

Hrowin*. 

Bulger, 

Burns. 

Carmichael, <»! Colbert, 
( arnathon, 

Cul>b, 

C oleman, of Greene. 
Cunningham, 

1 )avi>, of DeKalb, 

1 lent. 

<le( jraf leni'eid. 

Kiev. 

Ky ster. 

Ferguson, 

Kitts. 

Kle teller. 

Foster. 

K rceman, 

(IrayMin, 

(ireer, of Kerry, 
Harrison. 

Heflin, of Chamber^. 


I lodges, 

1 I ood. 

Hov.ell. 

I aek son. 

J(»nes. of Bibb, 

Jmies. of Hale, 

Kirk, 

Knight, 

1 .edbetter, 

1 .eigli. 

Long, of Walker, 

I .ow e, of Jefferson, 

I .owe, of Lawrence, 
McMillan, of Wilcox, 
Maxwell, 

M or rill. 

Miller, of Wilcox, 

M urphree, 

NeSmith, 

Norman. 

Norwood, 

1 'aimer, 

Parker, of Cullman, 
Parker, of Klmore, 


Pearce, 

Pettus, 

Pillans, 

Pitts, 

Reese, 

Renfro. 

Reynolds, of Chilton, 
Rogers, of Lowndes, 
Samford. 

Searcy, 

Selheimer, 

Sloan, 

Smith, of Mobile, 
Sorrell, 

Spragins, 

Stewart, 

'Thompson, 

Vaughan, 

Weatherly, 

Williams, of Barbour, 
Williams, of Marengo. 
Wilson, of Clarke, 


TOTAL—76 


ABSENT OR NOT VOTING 


Messrs. President, 

Almon. 

Altman, 

Burnett, 

Carclon, 

Carmichael, of Colbert, 
Coleman, of Walker, 
Graham, of Montgomery, 
Graham, of Talladega. 
Grant, 
f I and ley. 

So the motion to 


Henderson, 

King, 

I .ocklin, 

Lomax, 

McMillan (Baldwin), 
Miller, of Marengo, 
Moody, 

Morrisette, 

M id key, 

O'Neill (Jefferson), 
Opp, 

table was lost. 


O’Rear, 

Proctor, 

Studdard, 

Tayloc, 

Weakley, 

White, 

Willet, 

Williams, of Elmore, 
Winn. 


MR I ONES—For the purpose of simplifying matters, 1 ask 
unanimous leave to withdraw the motion to table the original sub¬ 
division ami the amendment offered by the gentleman from |ef- 
ferson. 


To which objection was made. 

MR O’NEAL—I move that the rules be suspended and the 
leave be given the gentleman to withdraw his motion. 




1814 


OFFICIAL PROCEEDINGS 


MR. JONES (Montgomery)—It will simplify matters and 
save time. 

THE PRESIDENT—It is moved that the gentleman be per¬ 
mitted to withdraw his motion to table the amendment of the 
gentleman from Jefferson, and the original subdivision. 

Upon a vote being taken the consent was given. 

MR. REESE—I move the previous question on the pend¬ 
ing substitute and the original Section and amendment. 

MR. LONG (Walker)—I make the point of order that the 
gentleman from Dallas is out of order, because we have not dis¬ 
posed of the motion to lay on the table at this time. 

THE PRESIDENT—The motion to table with withdrawn 
by consent of the Convention. 

MR. LONG (Walker)—That applied to the amendment but 
not to the original proposition. 

THE PRESIDENT—It applied to the motion to table the 
original Subdivision 9 and the amendment of the gentleman from 
Jefferson. The other part of it the Convention has refused to lay 
upon the table. 

MR. CUNNINGHAM—The purpose for which the amend¬ 
ment offered by myself having been accomplished in the amend¬ 
ment offered by the gentleman from Clarke, I ask unanimous con¬ 
sent to withdraw the amendment offered by me. 

MR. PETTUS—I rise to a parliamentary inquiry. 

THE PRESIDENT—The gentleman will state the question 
of inquiry? 

MR. PETTUS—Was not the amendment proposed by the 
gentleman from Clarke offered as a substitute for that offered by 
the gentleman from Jefferson, and would not the adoption of the 
substitute get rid of the amendment proposed by the gentleman 
from Jefferson? 

THE PRESIDENT—It seems to the Chair it would have 
that effect. 

MR. CUNNINGHAM—Before the motion for the previous 
question is put I desire to ask the gentleman from Dallas to with¬ 
draw one moment that I may ask one question of the Chairman 
of the Committee. 

MR. REESE—You will renew the motion when you con¬ 
clude? 



CONSTITUTIONAL CONVENTION, 1901 


1815 


MR. CUNNINGHAM—Yes, I will. The amendment now 
pending, offered by the gentleman from Clarke, includes the word 
“association. * Does not that mean benevolent associations, 
Knights of Pythias, Knights of Honor, United Order of Red Men, 
and the various other sort of folks, Woodmen of the World, Odd 
Fellows, whose express purpose is one of benevolence. Will not 
that mean that they shall not be exempted from taxation and 
other privileges and immunities that are now granted by the gen¬ 
eral law of this State. I would like to have an answer to that 
question. 

MR. O'NEAL—It is not my understanding that it has any 
such meaning. Of course, you could not pass any law giving the 
Knights of Pythias of Lauderdale County privileges which you 
did not confer on them in Jefferson County. You would have to 
pass a general law giving the Knights of Pythias privileges in the 
State, and could not pass local laws for particular lodges in par¬ 
ticular localities, hut you could pass a general law covering the 
State, and there is no reason why a general law would not cover 
every subject that is now covered by law. 

MR. REESE—I desire to ask the Chairman of the Committee 
if that is not a matter that is provided for in the Article on Taxa¬ 
tion. Are these associations not already exempted from taxation 
in the Article on Taxation? 

MR. O’NEAL — They are exempted under the Article on 
Taxation. 

MR. REESE—I move the previous question. 

MR. CUNNINGHAM—I beg the gentleman’s pardon. I had 
forgotten. 

THE PRESIDENT—The question is shall the main question 
be now put? 

MR. LONG (Walker)—I move to lay Subdivision 9 of Sec¬ 
tion 1 on the table. 

MR. O’NEAL—I rise to a point of order, that the question 
now. is upon the substitute offered by the gentleman from Clarke. 
That is the matter pending before the House. 

MR. LONG (Walker)—I move to lay the amendment to the 
subdivision, and the original subdivision on the table. 

MR. O’NEAL—That is out of order. We have just passed on 

that. 

THE PRESIDENT—The Convention has just refused to ta¬ 
ble the substitute offered by the gentleman from Clarke. The 
question is shall the main question be put. 



1816 


OFFICIAL PROCEEDINGS 


The main question was ordered, and upon a further \ote 
being taken the substitute of the gentleman from Clarke was 
adopted. 

MR. WATTS—I move to lay on the table Subdivision 9 as 
amended, because it is of no value whatever with the amendment 
in it. 

THE PRESIDENT—The question is on the amendment of 
the gentleman from Jefferson as amended by the amendment of 
the gentleman from Clarke. 

A reading of the amendments was called for. 

MR. O’NEAL—There is some confusion as to the question 
before the House. I ask the Chair to state it again. 

THE PRESIDENT—The Chair understood the gentleman 
from Jefferson to offer an amendment, and the gentleman from 
Clarke to offer a substitute to that amendment; the question now 
is on the amendment offered by the gentleman from Jefferson, 
as modified by the substitute offered by the gentleman from 
Clarke. 

MR. O’NEAL—I rise to a point of order. I understood the 
gentleman from Jefferson to state that the substitute covered his 
amendment, and hence his amendment was no longer before the 
House. 

THE PRESIDENT—It does not change the necessity of sub¬ 
mitting the question to the Convention. 

MR. LONG (Walker)—A point of order. I moved to lay on 
the table awhile ago, and the Chair ruled the question was on the 
amendment of the gentleman from Clarke, and we took a vote 
and adopted that amendment. The gentleman from Jefferson 
withdrew his amendment and therefore the question is not on 
the adoption of an amendment at all. 

THE PRESIDENT—The gentleman is mistaken, the gen¬ 
tleman from Jefferson has not withdrawn his amendment. The 
Chair will remind the gentleman from Walker that the gentle¬ 
man from Jefferson stated that he would withdraw the amend¬ 
ment and asked leave to do so, but it was suggested that the 
adoption of the substitute would cover the ground, and he with¬ 
drew his request to withdraw the amendment. The question now 
is upon the amendment offered by the gentleman from Jefferson 
as amended by the substitute offered by the gentleman from 
Clarke. As many as favor the motion to adopt the amendment 
as amended will say aye. 

And the motion was carried. 



CONSTITUTIONAL CONVENTION, 1901 


1817 


MR. O’NEAL—Do I understand the amendment of the gen¬ 
tleman from Jefferson is adopted by this vote, or this substitute 
is in lieu of his amendment? 

THE PRESIDENT—The amendment offered by the gentle¬ 
man from Jefferson is adopted as modified by the substitute of¬ 
fered by the gentleman from Clarke. The question now is upon 
Subdivision 9 as amended. 


MR. WATTS—I move to lay it on the table. 

THE PRESIDENT—A motion to table is not in order after 
the previous question has been ordered. 

MR. WATTS—Then I call for the ayes and noes. 


The call for the ayes and noes was not sustained, and upon 
a vote being taken. Subdivision 9 as amended was adopted. 


MR. DENT—I rise to a parliamentary inquiry. I under¬ 
stand that the Convention had just voted to adopt the substi¬ 
tute offered by the gentleman from Clarke not encumbered by 
the amendment offered bv the gentleman from Jefferson. I would 
like to understand just exactly what the record shows. That was 
my understanding and I think the understanding of the majority 
of the Convention, that the amendment offered by the gentle¬ 
man from Tefferson was not a part of the Section, and I would 
like to know what the record shows upon that question. 


THE PRESIDENT—The gentleman from Jefferson offered 
his amendment to Subdivision 9, thereupon the gentleman from 
Clarke offered his substitute. The substitute struck out certain 
words, but the Chair does not remember whether it struck out 
the identical words included in the amendment offered by the gen¬ 
tleman from Tefferson or not. If it did, then the amendment of¬ 
fered by the gentleman from Jefferson is disposed of. otherwise 

it has been adopted. 

WTI SON ( Clarke)—I would like to ask the President 
if the^ substitute offered by iuysetf was adopted, if the substitute 
did not then become the amendment. 

THE PRESIDENT—The substitute of the gentleman from 
Clarke was adoptedln lieu of the amendment offered by the K en- 
tleman from Jefferson. 

MR. DENT—And the amendment offered by the gentleman 
from Jefferson is not a part of this subdivision. 

THE PRESIDENT—It is not. 


MR. DENT—All right. 

Subdivision 10 was read as follows: 



1818 


OFFICIAL PROCEEDINGS 


Tenth—Providing’ for the sale of property of any individual 
estate. 

THE PRESIDENT—The question is on the adoption of Sub¬ 
division 10- 

MR. deGRAFFENREID — You were not in the Chair this 
morning when the House suspended the rules under a motion, by 
which it was agreed that each subdivision should be read, and 
unless there was objection or amendment offered to the subdivi¬ 
sion, it should be taken as passed by the House without a vote. 

THE PRESIDENT—The Chair will continue the same meth¬ 
od that the House agreed upon this morning. 

Subdivision 11 was read as follows: 

Eleventh—Changing or locating a county seat. 

MR. PILLANS—I move to strike out Subdivision 11. 

Mr. Pillans amendment was read as follows: 

Amend Section 1 of Article on Local Legislation by striking 
out Subdivision 11. 

MR. PILLANS—This amendment contains no criticism of the 
Committee. The object they seek to obtain, however, will prob¬ 
ably be better secured by the adoption of some such Section as 
the Committee on State and County Boundaries has reported, 
which will provide that a change of county seats shall only be 
made after an election by the people. If that plan is adopted of 
changing county seats only after an election, with either a ma¬ 
jority or a two-thirds majority of the people assenting thereto, 
there will be no occasion for putting this clause in the Constitu¬ 
tion. making this restriction on local legislation, for the reason 
that the clauses which has heretofore existed would no longer 
exist. Moreover, if you undertake to provide by general law for 
changing of county boundaries by the Court of County Commis¬ 
sioners it will invite a struggle in every county in the State of 
Alabama. I take it if you pass a general law inviting the coun¬ 
ties to pass on the question of changing the court houses, you 
would cause a great deal of dissention, whereas, if you leave it 
out of this part of the Constitution and leave it in the other as 
my friend says it will be productive of good results. Then when¬ 
ever a court is desired to have a county seat changed, or suppose 
that such a thing was desired in the county, the Legislature will 
act upon the bill which the local member offers, pass it, and then 
leave the matter to the people of the county, and those people will 
either defeat it or ratify it as they please. That is my reason for 
striking it out here. 



CONSTITUTIONAL CONVENTION, 1901 1819 

MR. deGRAFFENREID—I move to lay the amendment of¬ 
fered by the gentleman from Mobile on the table. 

Upon a vote being taken a division was called for and by a 
vote of 54 ayes and 32 noes the amendment was tabled. 

MR. BA REFIELD—I offer an amendment. 

The amendment was read as follows: By striking out the 
word “seat” and adding the word “site.” 

MR. WATTS—I move to lay the amendment on the table. 

MR. COBB—I desire to call the attention of the Convention 
to the fact that the Committee on County Boundaries has dealt 
with this whole question and this section is not at all necessary. 

MR. deGRAFFENREID—Does it conflict with their report? 

MR. COBB—I do not know that it does, but it may. 

MR. WADDELL—I ask the gentleman from Macon does not 
this really give it more force and effect? 

MR. COBB—I do not know that if does, without having the 
report of the Committee on County Boundaries before me, but if 
it is in order. I move to defer the further consideration of this sub¬ 
division until the Committee on County Boundaries reports. 

MR. O’NEAL—I want to say that it is impossible for any 
member of this Convention to forecast what a committee is going 
to report or what action the Convention is going to take in ref¬ 
erence thereto. There can be absolutely no objection to this pro¬ 
vision. It is simply prohibiting the Legislature from passing a 
law changing the county site of any particular county. They 
can do it by general law, because we require here that on all these 
subjects as to which we prohibit the Legislature from passing 
local laws, that it is their duty to pass general laws. We want 
to prevent another Shelby County case. 

MR. WEATHERLY—I rise to a point of order. There is 
nothing before the Convention. 

MR. O’NEAL—There is a motion before the Convention to 
indefinitely postpone the consideration of this subdivision. 

THE PRESIDENT —The Chair will overrule the point of 
order. 

MR COBB_Will the gentleman from Lauderdale allow me 

just a moment? There is a conflict here between these sections 

MR O’NEAL_We have a committee here for the purpose 

of reconciling these conflicts. 



1820 


OFFICIAL PROCEEDINGS 


MR. COBB—That committee cannot strike out where this 
House has adopted. Where they conflict, they will have to come 
back to this Convention to have a reconciliation. They are in¬ 
vested with no such power as I understand it, and what I want to 
suggest to my friends- 

THE PRESIDENT — The gentleman from Lauderdale has 
the floor. 

MR. COBB—By his consent I simply desire to say in this re¬ 
port from the Committee on County Boundaries it is provided 
it may be submitted to a vote of the people in the county, the ques¬ 
tion of changing a county site. 

MR. O’NEAL—That is absolutely not in conflict. We say to 
the Legislature you must not pass any local law. You can pass 
a general law by which you submit to the people of any county 
in the State the question of whether they desire to move their 
local court house. That is no conflict at all. 

MR. OATES—The gentleman from Lauderdale has made the 
point that I was about to suggest. The two are not in conflict. 
This simply provides against the Legislature changing a county 
seat. The other provision from the County Boundaries Commit¬ 
tee provides the method by which it may be changed bv a vote 
of the people. 

MR. JENKINS—I would like to make a suggestion. My 
recollection of the report of the Committee on County Boundaries, 
is that the representative of each county must first introduce a bill 
referring this matter to a vote of the people. Now this says there 
shall be no special act changing a county seat. 

MR. O’NEAL—Would that be a special act? 

MR. JENKINS—Would not there be a conflict if the repre¬ 
sentative introduced a special act? 

MR. O’NEAL—Not at all. Let me ask the gentleman this 
question. Suppose the Legislature should pass the general sta¬ 
tute that no county seat shall be removed unless such question of 
removal is first submitted to the people of that county, would not 
that be a general law. Of course that would be and there would 
absolutely be no conflict between that section and this when we 
say they must provide a general law for that matter. 

MR. JENKINS—But they must put the procedure in force 
by a special act in each county? 

MR. O’NEAL—Oh, no; we simply here say to the Legisla¬ 
ture that you shall not pass a law by which the county of Lauder¬ 
dale, or any other county in the State, can change its countv site. 



CONSTITUTIONAL CONVENTION, 1901 


1821 


m it ted To a'v5 e a o fThe^peopTe b> Wh ' Ch ^ qUestion can be sub ' 

thf* motion ?^ 0 ' v ^ renevv my motion to lay on the table, 

tlu motion to defer the consideration of this subdivision. 

this Convention. 1 * 1 h ° Pe that the * entIeman do "’t want to gag 
froin^Dallas ^ ^ * u,b withdraw in favor of the gentleman 


I ,V ’ L , )HH , 1 . <les | re t0 ask th e gentleman a question. Un- 
dtr the statement that has just been made what becomes of Sec¬ 
tion 6 where you define a general and local law. You say a gen¬ 
eral law within the meaning of this act shall be a law which ap¬ 
plies to the whole State and a local law is a law which applies 
to any political subdivision or subdivisions less than the whole 
Now is not a county less than the whole? 


MR. C) NJvAL Certainly, but let me put this proposition to 
you. Suppose the general Assembly should pass a law that here- 
after before anv county site can be removed in this State, the mat¬ 
ter must be submitted to a vote of the people within the county 
and providing the machinery for the election. Is not that a gen¬ 
eral law? 


MR. COHH—No, sir. 

MR. ( )’NEAL—W hy isn’t it? 

J HIv PRhSIDKN J—Will some of the gentlemen who are 
occupying the floor please be seated. The gentleman from Lau¬ 
derdale has the floor. 

MR. COBB—I am up with his permission. You were asking 
me a question. 

MR. O’NEAL—Would not that be a general law? 

MR. COBB I think not, because it is the law affecting only 
a subdivision of the State of Alabama. 

MR. O’NEAL—It affects the whole State. 

MR. COBB—How can the removal of— 

MR. O’NEAL—It affects the whole State. 

MR. O’NEAL—The gentleman don’t gather the idea I am 
trying to convey. You provide by a general law that hereafter 
when the people of a county desire to remove a county seat it 
shall be done by submitting the question to a vote of the people 
of that particular county, and you can provide the mode by which 
the election machinery can be carried out. 



1822 


OFFICIAL PROCEEDINGS 


MR. HEFLIN (Chambers) — Under the rule the house 
stands adjourned. 

THE PRESIDENT—It is not 1 o’clock yet. 

MR. REESE—I rise to a question of personal privilege. 

THE PRESIDENT—The gentleman will state the question 
of privilege. 

MR. REESE—I requested the gentleman from Lauderdale 
to withdraw his motion to table, and I have stood on my feet since 
that time, and the gentleman was in his chair. 

The clock struck one. 

MR. HEFLIN (Randolph)—I renew the point, that the House 
stands adjourned. 

Thereupon the Convention adjourned until 3:30 o’clock p. m. 


AFTERNOON SESSION 

The Convention met pursuant to adjournment, there being 
100 delegates present upon the call of the roll. 

Leave of absence was granted to Mr. Burns for today on ac¬ 
count of sickness. 

MR. LONG (Walker)—I rise for the purpose of introduc¬ 
ing a resolution. 

There being no objection, the resolution was read by the 
clerk as follows: 

Resolution No. 233, by Mr. Long of Walker: 

Resolved, That in order to save some of the precious time 
of this Convention, and at the same time afford opportunity to the 
parliamentary tacticians of the Convention to display their tal¬ 
ents with typewritten speeches, Monday in each week, without 
pay to speakers, be and it is hereby set apart and consecrated to 
the exclusive use of the said parliamentary tacticians. 

Resolved, further. That on said day all delegates except the 
tacticians, be and they are hereby excused from attendance; and 
that no deduction from their pay shall be made on account of 
their absence. 

Resolved, further, That the day set apart to the tacticians 
shall not be deducted from the total number of working days for 
adopting ordinances and other incidental business of the Conven¬ 
tion. 



CONSTITUTIONAL CONVENTION, 1901 


1823 


Referred to the Committee on Rules. 

1 HE PRESIDENT—The pending question is the motion 
of the gentleman from M acon to postpone consult ration of Sub¬ 
division 11 until the Committee on State and County Boundaries 
takes up the consideration of the report of that committee. 

MR. COBB (Macon)—I ask unanimous consent to withdraw 
the motion to postpone. 

There being no objection, the motion to postpone was with¬ 
drawn. 

MR. REESE—1 think the more this provision is understood 
the more it will recommend itself to this Convention. As a mem¬ 
ber of the Committee on State and County Boundaries, I have 
given this matter some consideration and thought. The purpose 
is the withdrawal of this matter from the Legislature and plac¬ 
ing it back with the people. The argument that was urged be¬ 
fore the Committee on State and County Boundaries was the 
question of the removal of the court house which so frequently 
enters into politics. The selection of members of the Legisla¬ 
ture was made with a view as to whether the court house should 
or should not be removed. To remove that condition, Mr. Presi¬ 
dent, the committee reported Section 6 of an Article that no coun¬ 
ty site shall be removed except by a two-thirds vote of the quali¬ 
fied voters of the county, ami it prescribes that there shall be an 
election- 

MR. BOONE—I rise to a point of order. 

THE PRESIDENT—The gentleman will state his point of 
order. 

MR. BOONE—The point of order is this, that there was 
an amendment offered to this section which was voted down. 
Judge Cobb then made a motion to indefinitely postpone, and 
that, by unanimous consent, was withdrawn. There is no oppo¬ 
sition to it, and by the agreement of this morning where there 
is opposition or amendment to a section of this ordinance, we 
pass on to another one, and that is the attitude now as I take it, 
no objection appearing. 

MR. REESE—If there is no objection, I do not desire to 
speak. 

THE PRESIDENT—It seems there is no objection. The 
Secretary will read the next section. 

MR. JENKINS—I desire to offer an amendment. 

The clerk read the amendment as follows: Amend Subdi¬ 
vision 11, “except upon a two-thirds vote of the people of the 
county to be effective.” 



1824 


O FF1 Cl A I. P R< )C 1-: K1) I N<S 


MR. JENKINS—The reason I offer this amendment is this: 
1 here might be a general law passed upon the subject of remov¬ 
ing a county seat, leaving it to the Board of Revenue, as I under¬ 
stand, to order this vote. I believe that it would be unwise to 
leave that question to the Board of Revenue, but leave it to the 
respective counties of the State. 

MR. SAMFORD (Pike)—Will the gentleman permit a ques¬ 
tion? 

M R- JENKINS Allow me to make a statement first. 

MR. SAMhORl)—I think if vou will answer m\ question. 
I would offer a suggestion, and the Section would read this wav 
with your amendment: “The C.eneral Assemble shall not pass 
a special, private or local law for the purpose of changing or lo¬ 
cating a county seat except upon a vote of two-thirds of The vot¬ 
ers of the county. 

MR. JENKINS—To be effective. 

MR. SAMFORD I will ask the gentleman how the legisla¬ 
ture is to know about two-thirds of them voting. This is to pro¬ 
hibit them from passing any sort of a law for removing the coun¬ 
ty court house. 

MR. JENKINS—It could be put in the bill. 

MR. SAMhORD—This is as I understand it only a local law. 

MR. JENKINS—Let me make mv statement. If this h\ V 
passes like it is there can be no special act changing a countv scat 
passed by the legislature. It is to he done bv a general act all 
over the State of Alabama something like tliis: that whenever 
a majority of the citizens of a county petition the legislature or 
board of revenue, that there shall be a vote upon the question in 
the respective counties. A great manv counties do not want to 
be put under a general provision, they do not desire any change 
of county seat, and they would only be put in a position of in¬ 
viting a vote upon the question. I want to fix it so that any one 
county can authorize a special act authorizing the removal of a 
County seat, but I want it provided so that that act is not valid 
U JJ* e . ac * sa ys upon a two-thirds vote in compliance with 
this Constitution. If you leave it like it is, they cannot have that 
special act starting this movement for a vote for each county 
that desires it, you will have to pass a general law all over the 
Mate of Alabama inviting a question of the removal of the county 
seat in every county in the State, and there will be confusion 
and a discord in every county over the question. 

MR REESE—Will the gentleman allow me to ask him a 
question? 



CONSTITUTIONAL CONVENTION, 1901 


1825 


I HE PRESIDENT—Will the gentleman permit an inter¬ 
ruption? 

MR. JENKINS—Certainly. 

MR. REESE What would be the objection to passing a 
general law providing that no election for this purpose shall be 
held in a county unless a certain proportion of the qualified voters 
of that county sign a petition to the court of county commission¬ 
ers, say two-thirds or whatever proportion you desire to fix? 

MR. JENKINS—That is my objection, it would invite a 
vote in every county. 

MR. O'NEAL—Permit me to ask a question. 

MR. JENKINS—Certainly. 

MR. O’NEAL — Do you favor the legislature having the 
power to pass any law they please changing or locating a county 
site in any county in the State? 

MR. JENKINS—Yes, upon a two-thirds vote of the people 
of the County to be effective. 

MR. O’NEAL — That is a different proposition entirely— 
that is a matter for general legislation. 

MR. JENKINS — If this amendment goes through it will 
force them to put that in the law. 

MR. GREER (Calhoun)—Don’t you think it would be wise 
to prevent any more Shelby County cases coming up in the fu¬ 
ture? 

MR. JENKINS—I would rather not pass on that right now. 
It is a very serious proposition and when it comes up we will 
give it careful consideration. 

MR. PILLANS—Will there be a Shelby County case, or any 
controversy like that, under that amendment if adopted, where it 
is submitted to the vote of the people? 

AIR. JENKINS—No, there can be no Shelby County case be¬ 
cause the man that comes to the legislature knows that when he 
passes a bill changing the county seat it has to go back to the 
people and be voted upon by a two-thirds vote, and he is not go¬ 
ing to introduce a bill calling for the removal of the county seat 
unless he knows there is an overwhelming sentiment in the coun¬ 
ty for it, it would be suicide and political death to him to do it. 

MR. FOSTER—Permit me to ask a question. Would not 
that be the effect of the adoption of this Section and the Section 
in the report of the Committee on State and County Boundaries? 



1826 


OFFICIAL PROCEEDINGS 


Would it not have the same effect, that is a general law providing 
that the county seat should not be changed without a vote of two- 
thirds of the qualified votes of the county? 

MR. JENKINS—I will answer the gentleman this way; that 
report does not say how the two-thirds shall he obtained. 

MR. FOSTER—Could it be in any other way than by an 
election? 

MR. JENKINS—They might leave it to a general law to 
determine it, but I insist that it is the intent of that report for it 
to come through the Legislature. Why? Because along with it 
is this proposition, that no new county seat can be created except 
upon a two-thirds vote of the people, but before they can pass on 
it, the Legislature must pass an Act authorizing a vote in the 
counties—by inference, though not in so many words, to apply 
to the county seats, the beginning of the movement should come 
from the Legislature. 

MR. COLEMAN (Greene)—May I ask a question? 

MR. JENKINS—Certainly. 

MR. COLEMAN—Are you in favor of refusing to a majority 
of the qualified voters of a county the right to change the countv 
seat ? 

MR. JENKINS—Well. I had the amendment originally draft¬ 
ed for the majority of the voters, but the Committee on State and 
County Boundaries fixed a two-thirds vote, and, in order to be 
in harmony with it, I changed that and made it a two-thirds vote, 
to be in harmony with the majority report. 

MR. COLEMAN—Are you in favor of the majority of the 
qualified electors, if they see proper, to change their county seat? 

MR. JENKINS—Yes, I would favor that. 

MR. COLEMAN—Then I do not see how you can ask for 
this amendment. 

MR. JENKINS—I yielded to the majority of the committee 
and voted for the two-thirds rule. 

MR. DAVIS (DeKalb)—I move to lay the amendment on the 
table. 

A vote being taken, the amendment was laid upon the table. 

The clerk read Sub-divisions 12, 13 and 14 as follows: 

Twelfth—Providing for a change of venue in any case. 

Thirteenth—Regulating the rate of interest. 



CONSTITUTIONAL CONVENTION. 1901 


1827 


Fourteenth—Granting any exclusive or special privilege, im¬ 
munity or franchise whatever. 

MR. ASHCRAFT—I desire to offer an amendment: Amend 
Paragraph 14 by inserting after the word “granting” the follow¬ 
ing words: “to any individuals, private corporations or associa¬ 
tions.” 

MR. O’NEAL—I move to lay that amendment on the table. 

Motion to lay on the table was withdrawn on request. 

MR. ASHCRAFT—That amendment is offered so as to make 
it harmonize with the same principle that is involved in Para¬ 
graph 9 which has been adopted. They struck out the words 
“county, township, municipality” for certain reasons which were 
well made out before the Convention, and now down here is: 
“Granting any exclusive or special privilege, immunity or fran¬ 
chise whatever.” Certainly, the Legislature ought not to be pre¬ 
vented from granting to the counties or the municipalities the 
right to regulate the liquor traffic. The Avhole value of our work 
under Section 9 would be lost if we allowed Section 14 to be 
adopted in its present form. There never could be another dis¬ 
pensary established, of course, because that is granting to the 
municipality a special privilege or immunity or franchise. For 
that reason, I think it is important that the amendment should be 
allowed, otherwise it would shut off all possibility of municipali¬ 
ties regulating the liquor traffic along lines that are being now 
tried in this State. 

MR. CUNNINGHAM—I desire to offer a substitute. 

The clerk read the substitute as follows: “Amend Sub-di¬ 
vision 14 of Section 1 by adding after the word “whatever” the 
provisions of the sub-division “shall not apply to any township, 
municipality or benevolent association.” 

MR. CUNNINGHAM—I agree heartily with the gentleman 
from Lauderdale in his statement that under Sub-division 14 it is 
absolutely impossible to ever establish in the State of Alabama 
another dispensary to be operated exclusively by any county, 
township or municipality, or any other political sub-division of 
the State. It absolutely prohibits any' further dispensaries, there 
is no question about that. The amendment offered by the gentle¬ 
man from Lauderdale, or that offered by myself would obviate 
that inhibition. 

MR. O’NEAL—Would the gentleman permit me to call at¬ 
tention to Section 23 of the Declaration of Rights: “that no ex 
post facto law, or any law, impairing the obligations of contracts, 
or making any irrevocable or exclusive grants of special privileges 
or immunities, shall be passed by the General Assembly.” 



1828 


OFFICIAL PROCEEDINGS 


MR. CUNN INGHAM—I understand that cities and lo\\n> 
have not any bill of rights, [f 1 am not mistaken as to what a 
bill of rights means, it has reference to the people, and not to any 
organization for the government of the people? 

MR. FOSTER—May 1 ask a question? Do you know of 
any instance in which an exclusive franchise has been granted 
to towns or municipal corporations:' 

MR. CUNNINGHAM — Every towns in the State of Ala¬ 
bama if it is operating a dispensary today is operating under an 
exclusive franchise. 

MR. FOSTER—Is that a franchise, or delegation of power 
to the government itself? 

MR. CUNNINGHAM—If 1 understand it, that is what it is. 

MR. FOSTER—It is a delegation of police power and not a 
franchise. 


MR. CUNNINGHAM—I believe that the amendment offer¬ 
ed by myself, or that offered by the gentleman from Lauderdale, 
will obviate the mystery that is clouded in Subdivision 14. If 
there is any negro in the wood pile for which of course the com¬ 
mittee is not responsible, why this kills the negro—that is all I 
am after. I disclaim any responsibility on the part of the com¬ 
mittee for it. 

MR. O’NEAL—I hope the Convention will not adopt the 
amendment. As I stated, in the Bill of Rights, we have practi¬ 
cally the same provision that the Legislature shall ntver grant 
“any irrevocable or exclusive grant or special privileges or im¬ 
munities.’’ The only word we add is “franchise.’’ Every gentle¬ 
man knows that the right of a city or a county to sell liquor is a 
police power, a police power granted bv the Legislature to that 
subdivision of the State. It is not a franchise. This provision 
has been in the Bill of Rights ever since Alabama was a State 
and now we are asked to strike out one of the fundamental prin¬ 
ciples of the Constitution, a Bill of Rights which has existed here 
from the time to which the memory of man runneth not to the 
contrary, simply because it might interfere with a local liquor 


MR. ASHCRAFT—If already in the Bill of Rights whv do 
you want to repeat it? 

locaMaw ^ (1 ° not want tlle Legislature to pass any 

vr A R ; ASHCRAFT ~ If the y are prohibited bv the Bill of 
Rights from granting any special privileges, then why should we 
put it in here again that they should not be allowed to grant anv 
special privileges? 



CONSTITUTIONAL CONVENTION, 1001 


1*29 


MR. O’NEAL—Because the Bill of Rights did not use the 
word “franchise” that is the reason we added this provision. 

MR. ASHCRAFT—Then strike it out. 

MR. O’NEAL—We do not want any special franchise. 

MR. ASHCRAFT -—- Will you consent to have the words 
special immunities and privileges stricken out? 

MR. O’NEAL—No. sir. 

MR. ASHCRAFT — Then, why put it in the Constitution 
twice ? 

MR. O’NEAL—So that the Legislature shall not pass any 
local law granting any special franchise or immunity whatever, 
and the word “franchise” is added to it. 

MR. ASHCRAFT—T desire to ask a question. 

MR. O’NEAL—Certainly. 

MR. ASHCRAFT—The right granted by the Legislature to 
a municipality to conduct a dispensary is a special privilege 
granted by the Legislature to the municipality, is it not? 

MR. O’NEAL—No, I think not, it is a part of the police 
power of the government which is delegated to a subdivision of 
the State government. I think where the Legislature grants to 
a town or a county the right to sell liquor, it is granting a part of 
the police power. 

MR. SMITH (Mobile)—I wish to call attention to an error 
in the statement as to what is contained in the Bill of Rights 
which reads “an exclusive grant of special privileges or immuni¬ 
ties.” In this paragraph it reads “granting any exclusive or spe¬ 
cial privilege.” 

MR. O’NEAL—Granting any franchise or special privilege 
in this provision. 

MR. SMITH—That’s a different thing in your article the 
word “or” takes the place of the word “of.” 

MR. O’NEAL—“Exclusive grants of special privileges or 
immunities” and this says “Granting any exclusive or special 
privilege immunity or franchise whatever,” I cannot see any dif¬ 
ference in the two, except that we add “franchise.” I move to lay 
the amendment and the substitute upon the table. 

A vote being taken, the amendment and substitute were laid 
on the table by a vote of 53 ayes to 47 noes on a division. 

MR. O’NEAL—I move the adoption of that subdivision, 
and on that I call for the previous question. 



1830 


OFFICIA L P Rt )C F K D l X (.; S 


THE PRESIDENT—The Chair had recognized the gentle 
man from Hale. 

MR. deGRAFFENRKl D—1 move to lay Section 14 on the 
table. 

MR. BLACKWELL—On that 1 call for the ayes and noes. 

On the motion to table, the call for the ayes and noes was sus¬ 
tained. 

Upon the call of the roll, the vote resulted as follows : 


Ashcraft, 

Banks, 

Beavers, 

Bethune, 

Blackwell. 

Boone, 

Brooks, 

Carmichael, of Colbert, 
Cunningham, 

Dent, 

deGraffenreid, 

Duke, 

Eley, 

Eyster, 

Foshee, 


Messrs. President, 
Almon, 

Barefield, 

Bartlett, 

Beddow, 

Browne, 

Bulger, 

Burns, 

Byars, 

Carnathon, 

Chapman, 

Cobb, 

Cofer, 

Cornwall, 

Craig, 

Davis, of DeKalb, 
Davis, of Etowah, 
Espy, 


AYES 

Graham, of Talladega, 
Greer, of Perry, 
Heflin, of Randolph, 
Hodges, 

Jones, of Wilcox, 
Kirkland, 

Knight, 

Kyle, 

Ledbetter, 

Long ( Walker), 

Me MilIan ( W'ilca x ). 

M alone, 

Merrill, 

Murpbree. 


NOES 

Fletcher, 

Foster, 

Freeman, 

Glover, 

Graham, of Montgomerv. 
Grant, 

Greer, of Calhoun, 

FI a ley, 

Harrison, 

Heflin, of Chambers. 
Hinson, 

Flood, 

Howell, 

Howze, 

Inge, 

Jackson, 

Jenkins, 

Jones, of Bibb, 


X or man, 

Norwood, 
f kirker ( Elmore ), 

I ’earee, 

I ‘illaiis, 

U obinson, 

Rogers { I.owndes >. 
Rogers (Sumter), 
Sarn ford, 

Smith (Mobile ), 
Smith, Morgan M., 
Stewart, 

Thompson, 

Wilson (Clarke), 

TOTAL—43 


Jones, of Hale, 

J ones, of ^ 1 on t go mery, 
Leigh, 

Long ( Butler). 

Lowe (Jefferson), 

Lowe ( Lawrence), 
Macdonald, 

Martin, 

Maxwell, 

Miller (Wilcox), 

Oates, 

O N T eal (Lauderdale). 
Palmer, 

Parker (Cullman), 
Pettus, 

Pitts, 

Porter, 

Renfro, 




183! 


CONSTITUTIONAL CONVENTION, 1901 


Reynolds (Henry), 
Sanders, 

Sanford, 

Searcy, 

Sclheinier. 

Sen tel I, 

Sloan. 


Smith, Mac. A., 
Spears, 

Spragins, 

Vaughan, 

Waddell. 

Walker, 

Watts, 


Weatherly, 

White, 

Whiteside, 

Williams (Harbour). 
William s (Elmore). 


TOTAL—73 


ABSENT OR NOT VOTING 


Altman, 

Burnett, 

Cardon, 

Carmichael, of Coffee, 
Case, 

Coleman, of Greene, 
Coleman, of Walker, 
Ferguson, 

Fitts, 

Gilmore, 

(jrayson, 

Handley, 

Henderson, 

King. 


Kirk. 

I .ocklin. 

Lomax, 

McMillan (Baldwin), 
Miller (Marengo), 

Moody, 

Morrisette. 

M ulkcy, 

XeSniith. 

O’Neill (Jefferson). 

Opp, 

O’Rear, 

Phillips. 

Proctor. 


Reese, 

Reynolds (Chilton), 
Sol lie, 

Sorrell, 

Sorrell, 

Sfuddard, 

Tayloe, 

W ,T eakley, 

Willet, * 

Williams (Marengo), 
Wilson ( Washington), 
Winn, 


rB ^EAL—riurc seems to he some confusion as to the 
which we adopted this morning. The agreement was that 
we read each of these sub-divisions, and unless objection was 
made they were considered as passed. To obviate any further 

ofThkoIh r n - th,S ’ 1 mo ; e the prev '°us question on the adoption 
. s ibdiyision. I call for the previous question now. it seems 
to me that is the only plan. 

MR. PETTUS I would ask if the gentleman objects to ac- 
ceptmg an amendment: Provided, it shall not applv to any mu¬ 
nicipalities. - ' 

for. T IR °’^ EA] r—We have already voted that down, there¬ 
fore I move the adoption of this subdivision, and upon that I call 
the adoption of this subdivision. 

THE PRESIDENT The Chair does not understand the rule 
under which we are pursuing. Are we adopting each of the sub- 
dmsions as we come to them? The whole Section will he sub¬ 
mitted and we have not taken any vote on the other subdivision. 

MR. O NEAL I move, then, that we pass to the next sub- 
division. 

fh rJ R ' SA ,i VI1 * c R , D v ( Elke )— Do I understand the ruling of 
the Chair is that Subdivision 14 is to he considered adopted with¬ 
out a vote on it. when objections has been made to it? 



1832 


OFFICIAL PROCEEDINGS 


THE PRESIDENT—The present occupant of the Chair was 
out when the consideration of the matter was entered upon. The 
understanding of the Chair was that the Convention would pass 
from one to another of these subdivisions, and when the Section 
was completed there would be a motion to adopt the Section. 

MR. SAMFORD (Pike)—My understanding of the agree¬ 
ment was that where there was no objection or amendment to a 
subdivision when read, that it would be considered as adopted, 
and whenever there was an objection or amendment that a vote 
would be taken on the subdivision and that these subdivisions for 
the purpose of passing them are being treated as Sections of this 
Article. 

THE PRESIDENT—We cannot adopt a Constitution by an 
understanding; there must be a vote of the Convention. 

MR. SAMFORD—I understood it was unanimous consent. 

MR. REESE—I rise to a point of inquiry. 

THE PRESIDENT—The gentleman will state the point of 
inquiry? 

MR. REESE—Do I understand our rules are suspended? 
Then, by what sort of vote can we get back to our system of vot¬ 
ing? I move that we resume the rule of this Convention. 

MR. SAMFORD—As I understand it, I still have the floor, 
I have not yielded to anybody. 

MR. FOSTER—Will the gentleman allow me to interrupt? 

MR. SAMFORD—Certainly. 

MR. FOSTER—I desire to state to the President that my 
understanding was as the gentleman from Pike says, that when 
the subdivision was read and there was no objection nor amend¬ 
ment offered, it was considered adopted until the end of the Sec¬ 
tion was reached, and then the whole Section was to be voted on. 

MR. SAMFORD—I desire to offer an amendment. 

MR. O’NEAL—I rise to a point of order. 

THE PRESIDENT—The gentleman will state his point of 
order. 

MR. O’NEAL—I have called for the previous question on 
the adoption of that Section. 

MR. SAMFORD—The call has not been sustained. 

MR. O’NEAL—It has not been put to a vote of the House— 
before the gentleman took the floor. I had made the motion. The 



CONSTITUTIONAL CONVENTION, 1901 


1833 


agreement made this morning was, if no objection was made to 
a subdivision when read, it was considered adopted, and in event 
objection was made the same rules as applied to a Section would 
apply to this. 

I made a call for the previous question, and I insist on that 

call. 

MR. SAMFORD—I insist on holding the floor. My under¬ 
standing was that the gentleman called for the previous question 
and that the call was not sustained, and that the floor was yielded 
and I got the recognition of the President, and as long as I have 
the floor I have a right to offer an amendment to the Section, 
as I understand the rules of the Convention, 

MR. O'NEAL—Let me call attention to the fact that he rose 
to a point of order to demand the yeas and nays. 

THE PRESIDENT—It is exceedingly difficult for the Chair 
to enforce a rule made in his absence, and the limits of which are 
not yet clear to the Chair. 

MR. OATES—The delegate from Tuscaloosa stated it cor¬ 
rectly. I move that that be considered the rule in the considera¬ 
tion of these subdivisions. He stated it with perfect correct¬ 
ness, everything that was read passed, but wherever objection 
was made or amendments offered a vote will be taken on that. 

THE PRESIDENT—That a special vote might be taken on 
that ? 

MR. OATES—Yes. 

MR. O'NEAL—I move the previous question. The gentle¬ 
man from Pike rose to a point of order before the Chair had an 
opportunity of putting my motion. When the Chair disposed 
of his point of order, the question recurred upon my motion de¬ 
manding the previous question. 

THE PRESIDENT—The understanding is as stated by the 
gentleman from Montgomery, that wherever there was objecton, 
that a separate vote should be taken on that subdivision. Then 
it seems to the Chair that the gentleman from Lauderdale was 
in order in moving the previous question on this subdivision, and 
it would be the duty of the Chair to put that motion. The gen¬ 
tleman from Pike arose and the Chair inquired for what purpose? 
The Chair's recollection was to make a point of order. 

MR. GREER (Calhoun)—He arose to demand an aye and 
no vote, that was the purpose of his rising. 

MR. SAMFORD—At that time I rose to demand an aye and 
nay vote and gained the recognition of the Chair. 



1834 


OFFICIAL PR< )CKKD1XCiS 


THE PRESIDENT—The Chair would rule that tin quotum 
would be upon the motion of the gentleman from Lauderdale. 
The question is, shall the main question be put, and upon that 
the gentleman demands the ayes and nays. 

MR. SAMFORD—I do not care to demand the ayes and 
noes upon that, but I trust the Convention will not sustain the 
call for the previous question, so that an amendment may be of¬ 
fered to this Section. 

THE PRESIDENT—The question is, shall the main ques¬ 
tion be now put? 

MR. BROOKS—I would like to know whether the demand 
for the previous question is on the entire Section or subdivision? 

THE PRESIDENT—The previous question on the subdi¬ 
vision. 

A vote being taken, there were forty-six ayes and fifty-eight 
noes and the call for the previous question was not sustained. 

THE PRESIDENT—The gentleman from Pike is recogniz¬ 
ed. 


MR. SAMFORD—I desire to offer an amendment: Amend 
> adding after the word whatever the following: Provided 
however, the legislature shall not he prohibited from authorizing 
any municipality or county from conducting a dispensary." 

MR- O NEAL I rise to a point of order. 

THE PRESIDENT-State the point of order. 

MR. O’NEAL—The Convention has already passed upon the 
same proposition made by the gentleman from Calhoun 

•""" •" •">' .He point of 

ma„™m th ' 

offered by the K e„,le ma „ , rom 'tte'dSwfS! 

whoYs R so S a^fu?^,^J r here 1S n ° member o{ this Convention 
I am/but w X hen US th°e r 

clause or a Section that is susrentili f Legislation reports a 
limit the legislature of this Staf#. f 1 3 co . nstruct,on ‘hat would 

a great reform that has been started Tn ?£""«* ^ ^ ^ ° f 
few years I rise for 0^ " ” d ' n th is State within the last 

whenever ’such provisions are'Sffere? bv^ c* m >t pr °^ St ’ and 

lerecl by a committee, it occurs 



CONSTITUTIONAL CONVENTION, 1901 


1835 


to me that it is at least due to the Convention, composed of sen¬ 
sible men, that amendments and discussions should not be cut 
off on the important questions that are presented to it. Now, if 
it is not the object of this Committee to forbid the Legislature 
of this State from delegating the authority for the operation of 
dispensaries in the different localities in this State, then where is 
the objection to the amendment that I offer? If it is not the in¬ 
tention of this Committee to estop the Legislature of this State 
from creating dispensaries in the different localities, then I say, 
gentlemen of the Convention, that this amendment offered by me 
should be adopted. It can do no harm, and it certainly may pre¬ 
vent the doing of a great deal of harm by the Section as offered 
by the Committee on Local Legislation. Mr. President, I hope 
the amendment will be adopted and I now move its adoption. 

MR. WALKER—It does not strike me that an amendment 
of this kind is at all necessary to accomplish the object of the gen¬ 
tlemen who have introduced amendments for this same purpose 
during the consideration of this article of Local Legislation. It 
is no more necessary, it seems to me, to reserve to the Legisla¬ 
ture the right to pass local and special laws in reference to dis¬ 
pensary or any other method of dealing with the liquor traffic, 
than it is to reserve the right of establishing a stock business or 
a school business by general laws. 

There are provisions in this Section, if you are looking to the 
establishment of local or special laws, that would not prevent the 
establishment of sock districts or school districts, but prevent their 
establishment by this particular means, local legislation. 

MR. SAMFORD—Will the gentleman permit an interrup¬ 
tion ? 

MR. WALKER—Yes sir. 

MR. SAMFORD—Whenever a dispensary is established in 
a county, is it not the usual custom or method of the Legislature 
to give it the exclusive right to sell and the exclusive privilege 
of selling whiskey of all kinds within the limits of the county and 
within the territory that it expects to supply with liquor? 

MR. WALKER—Yes, the usual method of doing it is by lo¬ 
cal or special laws. 

MR. SAMFORD — Won't this bar them from granting a 
special or local law? 

MR. WALKER—I will answer the gentleman's question in 
the course of my remarks. Now the object aimed at and the ob¬ 
ject these amendments, is not to tie the hands of the localities so 
that they can not dispose of these matters themselves. The op¬ 
eration of this article upon any county is not such as to prevent 



1836 


OFFICIAL PK< tCF.KDINGS 


these objects from being carried out by special or local laws. Now 
it has been suggested that the custom heretofore has been to car¬ 
ry out objects of this kind by special and local laws; but the peo¬ 
ple of Alabama have forgotten that such objects can be accomp¬ 
lished under a general law. Prohibition, such as provided in this 
Section in reference to local anil special legislation has been in 
the Constitutions throughout the country. But at the same time 
there are found in the laws of various States provisions under 


which objects of this kind are as fully in the hands of the locali¬ 
ties as they can possibly make them by local or special legislation. 
Alabama has been so accustomed to having each community to 
get its desires only through the avenue of local or special legis¬ 
lation, that it has forgotten and practically lost sight of the fact 
that these objects can be better accomplished under general legis¬ 
lation. Now the very object that has been mentioned here is 
that the liberty of the people should be preserved. 1 submit that 
it would be better accomplished by general legislation upon the 
subject. The object of securing localities the privilege of dealing 
with the liquor traffic in such a way as may suit the wishes of 
that locality, would be fully and completely accomplished under 
general legislation; and it is done, as a matter of fact, in other 
States of the country where they have prohibition against local 
or special legislation generally. It is not at all necessary. It is 
not at all necessary for the different communities of the State de¬ 
siring different regulations in reference to the liquor traffic or in 
reference to anything else, that their local desires shall not he 
accomplished by reason of the fact that local and special legisla- 
,? n I s prohibited All of these things can be provided for and 
all of them can be prescribed by the Legislature, under which 
he people, acting as a body, or through their constituted authori¬ 
ty, can established such rules and regulations upon these subjects, 

S he >' see fit to establish, and it is not at all necessary- to pre- 
serve the verdict of the people in reference to these matters to 
tie the hands of the Legislature. Now I submit what has been 
the character of the legislation upon the matter of the dispensary 
upon the matter of local districts in reference to prohibition or 
the regulation of the sale of liquor. Why it has been the locali¬ 
ties simply speaking through the Legislature as their tnouth- 

It^has hi ha ?F n °i t b< i en thC aCt, ° n of the kgislative body itself 
It has been the locality speaking through it^ members and th- 

It g h S as b e b °1 dy f S a ": hole has practically nothing to do with it 
t has been local regulation pure and simple. What is the wis 

dom of perpetuating a system of that kind. Of fixing it so hat 
the localities cannot act themselves directly- nnnn th* ifn- ? ** 

ters that they wish to act in reference jo In?, f h Ie . ma '' 
through one spokesman in the Legislature ,h„ ", mU! * K° 

be'saT/'thaTS' .““W •£? Sft, S 

be said that all of these objects cannot be accomplished so as to 



CONSTITUTIONAL CONVENTION, 1901 1837 

leave complete freedom to the locality so as to disabuse their 
minds of the idea that to get relief in reference to these matters, 
they have got to go to the Legislature? It is not necessary at all, 
and whenever the Legislatures of Alabama are confronted with 
the situation that the different localities desire to make different 
regulation, each satisfactory to itself, provision will be made by 
general law for localities expressing their desires in some mode 
prescribed by a general law. That has been the course in other 
States. That will be the course in this State. Now the prohi¬ 
bition here of granting special privileges by means of local or 
State laws will not affect in any manner the sale or the prohibi¬ 
tion of the sale of liquor in localities, but it will simply prohibit 
localities seeking to secure regulations that they desire for them¬ 
selves, not among themselves, but through the Legislature. That 
is not at all necessary. Regulations can be made by which they 
can speak their minds, and make such regulations as they desire, 
and there can be no doubt but that the Legislature of Alabama 
will do as much as other States have uniformly done who make 
provision for the expression by localities, of their own desires 
in reference to these matters. Now that is the object that is 
sought to be accomplished by the amendments that have been made. 
Each one of them has suggested that you do not want to deprive 
any locality of its freedom of action in reference to these mat¬ 
ters. The best way to do that is to provide by a general law for 
those localities expressing their desire in reference to these mat¬ 
ters directly and not through one spokesman in the Legislature. 

MR. ROGERS (Sumter)—If we say that no community shall 
have any exclusive privilege how could a general law reach it 
if you say in the Constitution that they could not have it. I want 
to know how the legislature could give an exclusive privilege if 
we sav in the Constitution that they cannot have it. 

MR. WALKER—I do not see the object aimed at by these 
amendments, are in the nature of exclusive privileges at all. They 
are simply methods of local regulations of matters. Certainly 
the liberty to different localities to make regulations satisfactory 
to themselves upon the liquor question or upon the question of 
killing birds, or anything of that kind, is not a special privilege. 

MR. HARRISON—I will ask the gentleman if the first line 
of this section does not limit each of these subdivisions. It reads 
the General Assembly shall not pass a special or private, or local 
law in any of the following caes. 

MR. WALKER—Certainly it is simply the prohibition of pri¬ 
vate or local law. It is not in any respect a regulation upon 
prohibition of the Legislature to provide complete regulations 
to cover these matters. 



1838 


O FFIC1A L P ROC K KI > IN <»S 


MR. CUNNINGHAM — Suppose that some county, mu¬ 
nicipality or community were to ask for an immunity from the 
sale of liquor, that is to say, for prohibition, in a local communi¬ 
ty within a certain distance of a church or something of that 
kind. Would not that be a special immunity to ask for that? 

MR. WALKER—I think not. 

MR. CUNNINGHAM — Would the Legislature have the 
right under that section to grant it within three miles of Bethel 
Church. 

MR. WALKER — Certainly, but they would not have the 
right to grant it by means of a local or special law, but they 
might pass a general law by which all objects of that kind could 
be accomplished, such as is done everywhere else, by the pas¬ 
sage of a general law under which the citizens of a particular lo¬ 
cality can have their desires in reference to these matters com¬ 
pletely effectuated without the necessity of going to the Legislature 
to do what the community itself ought to be allowed to do for 
itself. I submit, gentlemen of the Convention, that you are los¬ 
ing sight of the fact that the prohibition here is not against anv 
of these objects at all but is simply against a certain objection¬ 
able method of obtaining those objects. 

MR. ASHCRAFT—When you undertake to pass any gen¬ 
eral liquor law by the Legislature, wouldn't you be confronted 
with a powerful whiskey lobby which you would have to overcome 
to get any favorable local liquor legislation? 

MR. WALKER—No more so than you would be confront¬ 
ed by a powerful liquor lobby in reference to exempting anv par¬ 
ticular locality in reference to a liquor law. 

MR. ASHCRAFT—Would a lobby come here to defeat the 
enactment of a liquor law for Center Star in Lauderdale countv 
for instance. 

MR. W/ALKER—I suppose not. Not for Center Star. 

MR. ASHCRAFT—W r hat we are trving to do is to protect 
those particular localities from the influence of whiskey lobbvists. 

MR. WALKER—Well, cannot that be done? Has the Legis¬ 
lature of Alabama become so paralyzed that they cannot adopt 
legislation which leaves to localities freedom of action in refer¬ 
ence to these matters, so that they must perpetuate the system 
that has prevailed in this State, of localities not speaking directly 
upon these matters, but of getting relief only through the action 
of the local member of the Legislature, that is not necessary at 
all. 



1839 


CONSTITUTIONAL, CONVENTION. 1901 

MR. OATRS I would like to ask the gentleman a ques- 
1011. vou were asked just now about exclusive privileges. That 
means exclusively for a person or a particular locality. It does 
not mean that a general law could not be passed by which they 
can reac t e objects desired that would be called exclusive un¬ 
der a local law. That is not the fact. 

MR. WALKER—Certainly. 

MR. MALONL You said that there are localities operat¬ 
ing under general laws. Is there any locality except South Caro¬ 
lina that is operating under a general law? 

MR. WALKER—On the dispensary question, you mean? 
MR. MALONE—Yes, sir. 

MR. WALKER—I do not know of any State that has a dis¬ 
pensary system prevailing throughout the State except South 
Carolina, and I do not understand that it is the object of anybody 
here to establish in this Convention, or in the Legislature, a dis¬ 
pensary system to be operated throughout the State of Ala¬ 
bama. What I say is this, that under general legislation and 
under general laws provision can be made for the verdict of the 
action of each locality, to have a dispensary, or not to have it. 

MR. MALONE—I'he gentleman misapprehends the entire 
question. It is the management of the dispensary in a manner 
that brings it into local politics that we are trying to avoid. Don’t 
you know that is the trouble in South Carolina and under the 
general State laws it builds up a great machine? Would not 
that he the same case as if a general provision regulating how 
these various people should be elected in the counties? Right 
then, that would bring it into politics. That is the point; how 
are you going to keep the election of the officers out of politics 
except by a local law? 

MR. WALK ICR—W ? ell, under the method that has prevail¬ 
ed heretofore, the dispensary and other methods of dealing with 
the liquor question have been purely as a matter of fact ques¬ 
tions of local regulation. No such system has ever prevailed 
when the locality did not demand it. 

MR. MALONE It is the election of the officers we are 
trying to get at. 

MR. W’ALKER—The election of the officers and all of the 
details, everything, if you establish by an act of the Legislature 
in any county in Alabama, a dispensary, unless it is satisfactory 
to the county in which it is established they will, at the next ses¬ 
sion of the Legislature proceed to legislate upon it locally by 
electing a member of the Legislature who will come down here 
and pass a bill through disposing of it. It is practically nothing 



1840 


OFFICIAL PROCEEDINGS 


in the world but local legislation, and you cannot make it any¬ 
thing else. The mind of the Legislature does not come in con¬ 
tact with these questions so far as they effect localities, blit it is 
left entirely in the hands of the local member. As it has been 
demonstrated, it has been purely and simply a local question, 
and the Legislature has been made simply the mouthpiece of the 
different localities, and this prohibition, special laws, with ref¬ 
erence to this matter would simply relegate this matter to the 
community where it really belonged, and not leave the Legisla¬ 
ture any longer the mouthpiece of the particular community. 

THE PRESIDENT—The time of the gentleman has expired. 

MR. HARRISC)N—I move that the time of the gentleman 
from Madison be extended. 

MR. WALKER—I thank the Convention, but I will be con¬ 
tent with my ten minutes. I have about finished my remarks. 

Mr. Boone offered an amendment as follows : 

Amend the amendment by adding the following words: “nor 
to abrogate any special privilege now existing in any county, city 
or town by charter or statute.” 

MR. PETTUS—I move to lay that amendment on the table. 

MR. WATTS—It has been explained two or three times that 
Section 4 of this report proposes to deal with these local matters 
in no other way than through the Legislature; and [ simplv call 
attention to that again that it may be noticed as we go along; and 
I move to lay the amendment of the gentleman on the table. 

MR. deGRAFFENREID—And on that I call for the aves 
and noes. 


On a vote being taken, the call was not sustained. 


On the motion to table, a division was called 
suited in 54 ayes and 53 noes ; and the motion to 
ried: 


for, which re¬ 
table was car- 


O NEAL I move the previous 

division. 


question 


on 


the sub- 


MR. REESE—I move to table the subdivision. 


MR. O’NEAL—You can’t do that, 
vious question. We have voted on that 
a vote of 73 to 38, it was defeated. 


I have moved 
very proposition 


the pre- 
and, by 


MR. CUNNINGHAM I make the point of order that in¬ 
tervening business has occurred since the motion to table 

THE PRESIDENT—In the ooinion of a. i. • , L 
of order is well taken. The point oforder is to'ta^SuWivS 



CONSTITUTIONAL CONVENTION. 191)1 


1841 


MR. CUNNINGHAM—I call for the ayes and noes. 

MR. HARRISON—I call the gentleman’s attention to the 
fact that that same motion has been made and voted on. 

MR. BROW NK—I make the point of order that the point of 
order made that other business had intervened has no effect up¬ 
on it, and does nut apply to make a motion to lay anything upon 
the table the second time. That only applies to motions for ad¬ 
journment. 

MR. RKESE—I move that the section be indefinitely post¬ 
poned. 

THK PRESIDENT—In the opinion of the chair, the mo¬ 
tion to table will not now be in order. It was the first impres¬ 
sion of the chair, when the gentleman made his point of order, 
that it was well taken ; but upon consideration, it seems to the 
chair that it is not well taken; and the chair will overrule the 
point of order. The question will he upon the previous question, 
which has precedence over the motion to indefinitely postpone. 
The question is. shall the main question be put? 

On a vote being taken, a division was called for. 

THE PRESIDENT—Ayes, 60. and noes, 49; and the pre¬ 
vious question is ordered. The question now is upon the adop¬ 
tion of the sub-division. 

MR. ROGERS—And on that the ayes and noes are called 

for. 

The call was sustained, and upon the call of the roll the vote 
resulted as follows: 

AYES 


Almon, 

Barefield, 

Bartlett, 

Browne, 

Byars, 

Carnathon, 


Grayson, 

Greer, of Calhoun, 
Haley, 

Harrison, 

Hinson, 

Hood, 


Chapman, 

Cofer, 

Cornwall, 

Craig, 

Davis, of DeKalb, 

Davis, of Etowah, 
Fletcher, 

Glover, 

Graham, of Montgomery, 
Grant, 


Inge, 

Jackson, 

Jenkins, 

Jones, of Bibb, 
Jones, of Hale, 

Kyle, 

Leigh, 

Long, of Butler, 
Long, of Walker, 
Lowe, of Lawrence, 


Macdonald, 

Miller (Wilcox), 
Oates, 

O’Neal (Lauderdale), 
Palmer, 

Phillips, 

Porter, 

Renfro, 

Reynolds, of Henry, 
Robinson, 

Sanders, 

Sanford, 

Searcy, 

Selheimer, 

Sloan, 

Smith, Mac. A., 



1842 


OFFICIAL PROCEEDINGS 


Spragins, 

Waddell, 


Messrs. President, 
Ashcraft, 

Banks, 

Beavers, 

Beddow, 

Bethune, 

Blackwell, 

Boone, 

Brooks, 

Bulger, 

Burns, 

Carmichael, of Colbert, 
Case, 

Cobb, 

Coleman, of Greene, 

Cunningham, 

Dent, 

deGraffenreid, 

Duke, 

Eley, 

Eyster, 

Espy, 


Walker, 

Watts, 


NOES 

Fitts, 

Foshee, 

Graham, of Talladega, 
Greer, of Perry, 

Heflin, of Chambers, 
Heflin, of Randolph, 
Howell, 

Howze, 

Jones, of Montgomery, 
Jones, of Wilcox, 

Kirk, 

Kirkland, 

Knight, 

Ledbetter, 

Lowe, of Jefferson, 
McMillan (Wilcox), 
Malone, 

Martin, 

Maxwell, 

Merrill, 

M urphree, 

Norman, 


Whiteside, 

Williams (Marengo), 

TOTAL—54 


Norwood, 

Parker (Cullman), 
Parker (Elmore), 
Pearce, 

Pettus, 

Pillans, 

Pitts, 

Reese, 

Rogers (Lowndes), 
Rogers (Sumter), 
Sam ford, 

Sentell, 

Smith (Mobile), 
Smith. Morgan M.. 
Stewart, 

Thompson, 

Vaughan, 

White, 

Williams (Barbour), 
Williams (Elmore), 


TOTAL—64 


ABSENT OR NOT VOTING 


Altman, 

Burnett, 

Cardon, 

Carmichael, of Coffee, 
Coleman, of Walker, 
Ferguson, 

Foster, 

Freeman, 

Gilmore, 

Handley, 

Henderson, 

Hodges, 


King, 

Locklin, 

Lomax, 

McMillan, of Baldwin, 
Miller (Marengo), 
Moody, 

Morrisette, 

Mulkey, 

NeSmith, 

O’Neill, of Jefferson, 
Opp, 

O'Rear, 

Proctor, 


Reynolds (Chilton), 
Sol lie. 

Sorrell, 

Spears, 

Stoddard, 

Tayloe, 

Weakley, 

Weatherly, 

VVillet, 

Wilson (Clarke), 
Wilson (Washington), 
Winn. 


The clerk then read sub-division 15, as follows: 


“Fifteenth—Fixing the punishment of crime or misdemean- 



CONSTITUTIONAL convention 


1901 


1843 


, W ALKhR I offer an amendment to that sub-division. 

u clerk then read the amendment as follows: 

Amend b> striking out the words ’or misdemeanors.”’ 

that We accent We~ 1 ( l es ire to state, on behalf of the Committee, 
Madison (Mr WalterT"' by the from 

information*/' AsW umkrWanTC ^ ^ C ° ni,T1 . ittee for 

not ,,ropoi ---x nt ’-t n h t a h : 

and if so there Jin 1 l ° PdhS ’, l<>Cal la " s wlth reference to liquor, 
tion of such laws ^ ’ ,tnallies attache <* for the intrac 

fered J lWtheWeWl Di:N l W rh A question is on the amendment of¬ 
fered b> the gentleman from Madison to strike out the words “or 

thC * -te being taken 

subdivision hW MlCHAEL (Colbert >~ 1 now Illove to strike out 


Upon a vote being taken the motion was lost. 

MR. O’NEAL I move the adoption of the subdivision 
amended. 


as 


And the same was adopted. 

The clerk then read subdivision 16 as follows: 

“16. Providing for or regulating either the assessment or 
collection of taxes.” 

MR. SMITH I desire to offer an amendment to subdivision 


The Clerk read amendment to subdivision 16 as follows: 

“Amend subdivision 16 of Section 1 of the report of tht Com¬ 
mittee on Local Legislation. 

First, by substituting a comma at the end of the subdivision 
for the semi-colon now there. 

“Second by adding at the end of the subdivision the follow¬ 
ing. viz: ‘Except in connection with the readjustment, renewal 
or extension of existing municipal indebtedness created prior to 
the adoption of the Constitution of 1875.” 

MR. O’NEAL—I desire on behalf of the Committee to ac¬ 
cept the amendment offered by the gentleman from Mobile (Mr 
Smith). ‘ 



1844 


OFFICIAL PR()CKKI)I\(»S 


MR. SMITH (Mobile)~I desire to state the purpose oi tin* 
amendment. Prior to the Constitution of 1875 the city ot Mo 
bile was indebted in a very large sum of money, and for the pur¬ 
pose of compromising that indebtedness with her creditors, there 
was an adjustment act passed by which it was provided that 
three-quarters of one percent special tax should be allowed to that 
city, and it was stipulated in that settlement and adjustment that 
three-quarters of one per cent should be devoted exclusively to the 
payment of that indebtedness. The compromise was made upon 
that basis and there has been a special system for the collection 
of that particular tax since that time, and it goes into the hand- 
of the trustee for the benefit of the creditors of the city of Mobile. 
That indebtedness will mature in 1906, I believe, when it will 
have to be readjusted, and it may be, and probably will be, that 
in order to do this upon anything like an advantageous basis, it 
will be necessary to continue that special system, that the city 
is now under. For that reason I do not desire that that section 
should affect that particular indebtedness, or that particular sys¬ 
tem for the collection of this tax. As it reads it says providing 
for or regulating either the assessment or collection of taxes, in 
the readjustment of that indebtedness it would be necessary tor 
the new act to provide, as the old act, and as the contract with 
the creditors provides, for a machinery whereby there may be 
a special system for the collection of the tax different from any 
other in the State of Alabama. I do not know whether there 
were any other indebtednesses at that time applicable to other 
municipal corporations or not. But I think there ought to be an 
exception made to the city of Mobile. 

MR. KIRK—What is the scope and purpose of this subdi¬ 
vision? 

MR. O’NEAL—The purpose has been stated clearly by Mr. 
Smith. If the gentleman had listened he would have known. It 
is to prevent interfering with debts which existed at the time of 
the ratification of the Constitution of 1875. 

MR. KIRK—What is the purpose of the subdivision as re¬ 
ported by your Committee? 

MR. O’NEAL—It is to prevent passing a law for one par¬ 
ticular section different from that of another. In other words, 
you cannot pass a law for Florence different from any other 
town or city. It prohibits the legislature from passing a law, 
special or private, which will apply to one particular locality 
different from other localities in reference to the collection and 
assessment of taxes. 

MR. ASHCRAFT—Are there any special laws now relat¬ 
ing to the assessment and collection of taxes? 



O INSTITUTIONAL CONVKNTION. 1901 


1845 


MK. ONhAL 1 don’t know of any special laws now; hut 
we want to prevent tin in in future. If there are any special laws 
the\ are not attccted by this, provision. 

MK. SAM FORI) 1 will state that there are some special 
laws and they ought to he repealed. 

M K. OXl.AL 1 lie idea is this: W hen a man wants to as¬ 
certain in regard to the assessment and collection of the taxes 
the same law prcvaiK throughout the State. We don’t want to 
have a mass of confusing laws in every locality, one different 
from the other. 

MK. H >S 1 KK- I )oe> this affect the* regulation of the as- 
>essinent or collection ol anv special tax authorized by the legis¬ 
lature? 1 say doe- it prevent the legislature from authorizing 
the levy of any special tax? For instance: Your town is au¬ 
thorized te» levy three-quarters of 1 per cent., instead of one-half 
of 1 per cent.? 

MK. ()*NEAL- -It don’t apply to cases of that kind. It pro¬ 
vide- for the assessme nt and collection of taxes. In other words, 
it must he uniform throughout the State. 

The* Chair here* informed the gentleman that his time had 
expired. 

MK. EARNER (Cullman)—I move the previous question 
on the subdivision and the amenelment. 

MR. FOSTER—I hope the gentleman will withdraw that 
until I can offer a short amendment. 

MR. CUNNINGHAM—While the gentleman is preparing 
his amendment. I desire to ask the Chairman of the Committee 
a question. 

MR. O'NEAL—Certainly. 

MK. CCXXINGHAM—I simply ask the question for infor¬ 
mation. I understand the time for assessing taxes for Jefferson 
County shall he the same as for Winston County? 

MR. ()'NEAL—It is now. 

MR CUNNINGHAM—And limit it as to when it shall he 
completed ? 

MR O'NEAL_No, the General Assembly can pass a law 

allowing a time in which they can be assessed in all the towns 
and cities in the State and do do it. 

MR CUNNINGHAM — I was going to say that in the larger 
counties there would have to be more time, or there would be an 
assessment fee upon the people of 50 cents. 



1846 


OFFICIAL PROCEEDINGS 


MR. O'NEAL—Different laws applicable to different towns 
and in larger cities. 

The Clerk then read the amendment as follows: 

“An amendment to an amendment by Mr. Foster to subdi¬ 
vision 16: Amending by striking out the words ‘providing for 
or/ ” 


MR. FOSTER—That is to prevent any possibility of a con¬ 
struction of that subdivision which would prevent the Legislature 
from authorizing the collection of any special tax which might 
be authorized by this Constitution or by the laws of the Legisla¬ 
ture. 


THE CHAIR—The question is on the amendment to an 
amendment offered by the gentleman from Tuscaloosa. 

MR. REESE—I hope the Convention will adopt the amend¬ 
ment offered by the gentleman from Mobile (Mr. Smith.) That 
provides that the Legislature can pass a special law regulating the 
collection of taxes in certain cases of a debt made prior to 1875. 
The city that I represent has a debt of about $325,000 created prior 
to that time. There is a special act that regulates and guarantees 
the collection of taxes for the payment of interest upon these bonds 
and there is a sinking fund to redeem the bonds. When the time 
has expired—when these bonds mature, it will be necessary, in 
order to refund these bonds at a fair price and under favorable 
conditions to our city, that there be such another law passed as the 
one under which the taxes are now being collected to pay this debt. 
I hope the Convention will embrace the few cities that will be 
exempted by the provisions of the amendment offered by the gentle¬ 
man from Mobile. 

MR. KIRK—I move to lay the subdivision and the amend¬ 
ments on the table. 

MR. O'NEAL—I call for an aye and nay vote on that. 

The call was not sustained. Upon a vote being taken upon 
the motion to table the amendments and sub-division, a division 
was called for, and, by a vote of 33 ayes and 54 noes, the motion 
to table was lost. 

MR. O'NEAL—I move the previous question on that sub¬ 
division, 16, and the amendments. 

The main question was ordered, and a reading of the amend¬ 
ment called for. 

The amendment by Mr. Foster was read. Upon a vote being- 
taken, a division was called for, and, by a vote of 49 ayes and 38 
noes, the amendment was adopted. 



1847 


O INSTITUTIONAL CONVKNTION, 1901 

ment offcrecMn^ th^e *gentleni^ < | uestu ^ ^curs upon the amend- 
a.n. of 'll,,- ^.lemanTromTa"™!^ 18 amemM ^ ' he 

uoon^-^f urther^v la J< ei b. tlie amendment was adopted, and 

adopted ° ’ 11 w u ,slon as amended, was thereupon 

Sub-division 17 was read as follows: 

str U mem nte ‘ nth ~ ( ' iVinR effCCt t0 invalid wil >- deed or other in- 


MR. (>’N HAL—1 


. .. (loin* to amend that sub-division bv adding 

the word an —giving effect to “an” invalid deed. 


1 here being no objection, the amendment was allowed, and. 
upon a vote being taken, the sub-division was adopted. 

Sub-division 18 was read as follows: 


high teen th- -Legalizing the invalid act of anv officer. 
MR. JONHS (Montgomery)—! have an amendment. 
The amendment was read as follows: 


Amend Section 1 by striking out the 18th sub-division. 

MR. JONHS (Montgomery)—My reason for offering that is 
that there are cases where the Legislature ought to have the right 
to validate the invalid act of an officer, and not have to put it in 
the general law. I will recall one of two instances to illustrate 
the impropriety of that provision. In 1892 the Legislature spent 
about $15,000 more than the appropriations. The Treasurer and 
Auditor, however, realizing that it was an honest debt, and that 
the State would have to pay it, paid the debt, and afterwards the 
Legislature was asked to ratify that invalid act. Now it did that 
by what was called a special act. I recall another instance where 
a State Board of Assessors of Railroads, by some accident, met at 
the wrong time, and we got a special act legalizing the invalid act 
of those officers. Now you have a revenue law declared invalid 
now and then, there might be an assessment or some part of some 
act of some officer that was perfectly invalid and illegal in itself 
that the Legislature might want to make valid. Then another 
objection is that you do not want to pass general laws legalizing 
invalid acts. The Legislature wants to be the judge and jury of 
each particular case. It might put a premium upon the commission 
of illegal acts, if you pass a general law in advance, provided that 
those acts and all others like it may be validated, and that is the 
reason I think no useful purpose can be obtained by putting that in 
the Constitution. We do not have a great deal of that anyhow. 



1848 


OFFICIAL PROCEEDINGS 


MR. MACDONALD—It is not very often that [ impose upon 
the patience of this Convention, but it occurs to me that the sug¬ 
gestion made by the delegate, Mr. Jones, is fraught with great 
danger. The duties of officers are pointed out in the law, and it 
is their absolute duty to follow the path that the law prescribes. 

MR. JONHS (Montgomery)—Does not the gentleman think 
it would be better, if it is done at all. that in each special case 
there should be a special act, rather than a general law upon the 
subject? 

. . MR- MACDONALD No, sir; I do not. 1 do not think am 
officer should be allowed to violate the law with the idea that af¬ 
terward the Legislature can come along and validate his acts. It 
holds out a reward to men to do that which is not in the line of 
their duty. It is a dangerous thing. It is fraught with very grave 
consequences, to say that an officer who does an unlawful act. 
may depart from his duty, and then go to the Legislature and ap¬ 
peal to them and to their sympathy, or upon any other ground, 
get them to ratify that act and put it in his power to again violate 
the law, and for others to violate the law with the hope of haviim 
their conduct ratified. 

MR. REESE—How many acts have the Legislature validated 
in the last twenty years? 

MR. MACDONALD—I have not the slightest idea. I am 
speaking about the principle. 

MR. JONES (Montgomery)—There are only ten or twelve 
that I know of. 


MR. MACDONALD—If it is only one it don’t do. 

MR. JONES (Montgomery)—This provision requires vou if 
you want to validate an act to do it by a general law instead of 

having a special law in each particular case where thev want to 
do it. • 

MR. MACDONALD—Yes, sir; and I question the wisdom of 
doing it. Either to do it by a general or a special law, but especial- 
ly by a special law, because I say the man who violates his dutv 
and then afterwards appeals to the Legislature to validate that 
aC u- k r ! n £ s to l )ear upon the Legislature influences of svmpathv 
which is improper, and it seems to me that no better rule'could be 
laid down for public officers than to strictly follow the path pointed 
out to them by the law, and not to permit them to speculate upon 
the idea that any Legislature could say whether or no thev did 
wisely. They had better keep in the middle of the road than to 
have any such provision as that in the fundamental law of the 
State. 



CONSTITUTIONAL CONVENTION. 1901 


1849 


MR. COBB—It must strike the mind of any fair-minded in¬ 
dividual that there are two propositions that ought to be considered 
in connection with this motion to strike out this section. One 
is that it is not prudent to pass a general law providing for the 
validating of illegal acts. To do that would be extending an in¬ 
vitation to officers to act illegally. That we do not wish to do. 
The other proposition is that it must be clear to the mind of the 
prudent thinking man that there are occasions which may happen, 
when it is right and proper to make valid the act of an officer 
which when it was committed was invalid. 

I will not detain this Convention by attempting to illustrate 
the proposition. It will suggest itself to any thinking man. Now, 
as suggested by my friend from Dallas, this appeal to the Legisla¬ 
ture rarely occurs. The Legislature of Alabama is never called 
upon to validate the illegal act of an officer, unless that illegal act 
was performed under circumstances which made it justifiable in a 
sense. Illegal it may be, technically, or under some extreme cir¬ 
cumstances, when in the performance of a high duty, a duty to 
the public and to the State, he took the responsibility of violating 
the law or acting without the law. When that sort of condition is 
presented to the Legislature, why should not they, representing 
the majesty of the State, relieve him from the consequences of 
his act, when it is clearly shown that it was done out of the high¬ 
est motives and for the purest interests of the public. I think the 
subdivisions ought to go out. 

MR. O'NEAL—I do not think this Section should be stricken 
out. It seems to me, as the gentleman from Montgomery has just 
suggested, it would encourage officers to violate the law with the 
hope that they could apply to the Legislature, and through local 
influence, and other agencies which are generally brought to bear 
upon a local member, secure the authorization of an illegal act. 
Now this provision is found in the constitutions of nearly all of 
the States. Some States have an exception which I will call at¬ 
tention to “legalizing as except against the State, the unauthorized 
or invalid act of any officer” that exception might be incorporated, 
but the Section as a whole should not be stricken out because it 
works a good purpose. If an officer violates the law, he has done 
wrong to somebody. Why should the Legislature put a premium 
upon the officers violating the law in this State. Why should the 
Legislature say to an officer if you violate your duty, violate the 
plain laws of the land, come to us and we will give you the relief 
from your unauthorized and illegal acts. I can see no justice in 
such a proposition. In an exceptional case of course it can be pro¬ 
vided by a general law. and it is proper to provide for it bv a 
general law, because the minute you permit special and local laws 
on the subject you invite all the evils which special and local laws 
create. You make the local member the arbiter and not the Gen¬ 
eral Assembly. 



1850 


OFFICIAL PROCEEDINGS 


MR. WHITE—How could you In a general law provide for 
a particular act? 

MR. O’NEAL—If it ought to be done, it can be provided for. 
If it ought not to be done by general law it ought not to be done 
by a special law. 

MR. WHITE—How can you do it by a general law ? 

MR. O’NEAL—The same as by a special law. 

MR. WHITE—For a particular act? 

MR. O’NEAL—Yes, for a particular act. You can apply a 
general law to all persons of a general class doing certain invalid 
acts. If a Treasurer, for instance, pays money by mistake, you 
can pass a law which provides that whenever the Treasurer does 
so and so- 

MR. WHITE—But suppose the Tax Assessor of one countv 
were to make a wrong assessment, how could you provide bv a 
general law for that? 

MR. O’NEAL—Why, you can certainly pass a general law 
that whenever a Tax Assessor makes a wrong assessment that the 
money shall be refunded by the Probate Judge and that would b- 
a general law. 

MR. WHITE—That encourages them more than the other, 
don’t it? 

MR. O NEAL That would leave it to the Legislature acting 
as a whole. With a general law, you get rid of the danger of the 
local influence. We know under that system now prevailing when 
a member goes to the Legislature and asks for the passage of a 
local bill validating the act of an officer, the Legislature as a 
whole accepts the wishes of the local member, but when you re¬ 
quire the whole Legislature to pass upon the question thev will 
scrutinize and examine it carefully and they won’t give their sanc¬ 
tion to the act unless it is such as appeals to their sense of justice 
sitting as legislators for the whole State. 

MR. BEDDOW I would like to ask the gentleman if this 
very Section, in the last line of the Section, don’t provide that the 
Legislature can pass general laws covering all these cases? 

MR. O’NEAL—Certainly it does, and I thank you for the 
suggestion, we simply say that these amendments are continually 
proposed, you destroy the very purpose of this Article. The Article 
is to prevent local legislation for certain enumerated subjects, and 
it directs and commands the Legislature to pass general laws on 
those subjects. You can pass general laws then to legalize such 
acts of an officer as are invalid in the judgment of the Legislature, 
and should be legalized. 



CONSTITUTIONAL CONVENTION, 1901 


1851 


II this amendment is adopted striking out this Section, you 
may as well strike out the other sections of the Article. The whole 
argument here that has been made in favor of all these amend¬ 
ments, is on the ground that it might cause some hardship to some 
officer, county, or individual. That argument can be made for 
every local or special law, ever proposed in a Legislature. We 
answer that argument by saying that the Legislature can now pro¬ 
vide by general law, and will provide by general law for these 
things, and this will present the corruption, the jobbery and log¬ 
rolling, the intrigueing that exists in every General Assembly of 
this State, and will continue to exist as long as there is no re¬ 
striction upon local and private legislation. We do not want to 
trust these matters to the local member. Now he is a Czar. He 
has dictatorial powers about every matter of legislation that ef¬ 
fects his county. The Legislature of Alabama is the member from 
that one county, so far as local matters are concerned. Custom 
and usage make it so. We want to overcome that and we cannot 
overcome it unless we say to the Legislature on all these subjects 
you must pass general laws. Then you have the concurrent wis¬ 
dom of the entire Legislature. All of their judgments, all of their 
views are brought to bear upon the particular subject, instead of 
the judgment and view of one particular man. 

MR. WILLIAMS—Do you propose to pass that general law 
before the act or after the act. Do you propose to make the law 
general, so as to apply to acts or mistakes which are to be made 
in the future, or after the mistake is made, do you then propose to 
pass a general law so as to apply in that case? 

MR. O’NEAL—Why, of course, if occasion should arise in 
a Legislature, if a case should occur in which an officer had per¬ 
formed an invalid act, done it in good faith and no harm had come 
to the State, the Legislature in order to give him relief, instead of 
passing a special law, would pass a general law, which would em¬ 
brace him and all others under like circumstances. Who can ob¬ 
ject to that. The distinguished gentleman from Montgomery said 
that you ought not to pass general laws. I say if you do not pass 
a general law in legalizing an invalid act, then you should not pass 
a special law. Is it to be contended that the Legislature ought to 
pass a law which is local and vicious in its nature, if they ought 
not to do that, as to a general law, they ought not to do it as to a 
local law. I submit whenever a case does occur, under this Article 
the Legislature has full power to provide a general law, for the 
circumstances of that particular case, and they can give the neces¬ 
sary and required relief. 

MR. JONES (Montgomery)—I do not wish to detain the 
Convention. I do not think the Committee ought to take that po¬ 
sition, because some of us differ with them as to particular sections, 
that we are destroying the whole report and trying to break down 



1852 


OFFICIAL PROCEEDINGS 


all the efforts at reform in matters of local legislation. I hat has 
not been the purpose I am sure of those of us who have differed 
with the Committee. 

MR. O’NEAL—If the gentleman will allow an interruption. 
I desire to state that I made that as a general remark and that it 
had no personal application. I am sure that the gentleman was 
actuated by the highest motives in w hat he did. I do not question 
it in the least. 

MR. JONES—I submit it is bad policy to lay down in advance 
where officers fail to do their duty, the method by which their act 
will be validated. It might be wise for the C.eneral Assembly to 
say to the Board of Railroad Assessment, you met at the wrong 
time last year, and you brought the facts before me and in that 
particular case I ratified your acts, but it is different for an officer 
to know that there is something laid down in advance which says 
that he can break the law. and that he does not act at his peril. 
I want to illustrate why a general law would not do any good. 
We had a revenue law which was declared unconstitutional some 
time ago. An officer of the law in the utmost good faith levied on 
certain property. The levy was all right under the statute as it 
was. The Supreme Court declared it unconstitutional. A client 
of mine wanted to sue for trespass and I said no, that is wrong, he 
is doing his duty. The Legislature is going to pay that thing back, 
but if there are many suits of this sort brought the Legislature will 
ratify the tax and make it go backwards. 

MR. WATTS—Did not the Tax Collector of Dallas countv 
come up here and go to the Legislature two years ago to pass a 
law relieving him from a misappropriation of the public fund, and 
did not the Legislature pass a law giving him that relief, and the 
act was vetoed by Governor Johnson? 

MR. REESE I would like to ask the gentleman the name of 
that tax collector? 

MR. WATTS—I am informed that the Tax Collector of Dallas 
county deposited certain State funds in the Commercial Bank which 
was, under a Supreme Court decision, a conversion, and that the 
Legislature passed an act relieving him from liability for it. 

MR. REESE—Was not that W’ilcox county? 

MR. WATTS—I don’t recollect, but I think it was Dallas. 

MR. JOfrES—I submit that I have the floor. There has been 
no great evil in this matter. I don’t know of a case of that sort 
unless it had abundant merit in it, that was not buried overwhelm¬ 
ingly in the Legislature, either on the direct passage of the law. or 
on the Governor’s veto, but the Legislature represents the sover¬ 
eign power of a sovereign State and it ought to have some power 



CONSTITUTIONAL CONVENTION, 1901 


1853 


to pass upon this question, and the whole question is if you are 
going to put a matter of this sort in its hands and say that it shall 
not act except by a general law. 

The question being upon the adoption of the amendment, by a 
vote of 74 ayes to 26 noes the amendment was adopted. 

Subdivision 19 was read. 

MR. SMITH (Mobile)—I desire to offer an amendment. 

The amendment was read. 

Amend subdivision 19 of Section 1 of the report of the Com¬ 
mittee on Local Legislation, the following, viz: “except in connec¬ 
tion with the readjustment, renewal or extension of the existing 
municipal indebtedness, created prior to the Constitution of 1875. 

MR. O'NEAL—I am instructed by the committee to say that 
we accept that amendment. 

MR. MALONE—It looks to me like this whole question has 
been settled by the Committee on Taxation and Municipal Corpor¬ 
ation and I therefore move that this subdivision be stricken out. 

MR. SMITH (Mobile)—I want to state that the purpose is 
simply the same as my amendment to Section 16. 

THE PRESIDENT—The pending question is the amendment 
offered by the gentleman from Mobile. 

MR. MALONE—My motion is to strike out the whole thing. 

THE PRESIDENT—You cannot strike out the amendment 
because it has not been adopted. 

MR. MALONE—Then I move to table it. 

MR, O’NEAL—I hope the gentleman will give an opportunity 
to discuss this matter. It is one of the most important matters in 
the report. 

MR. LOWE (Jefferson)—I rise to call attention to the fact 
that it will be practically impossible to dispose advantageously of 
municipal bonds without the sanction of the General Assembly in 
each specific case. It seems to me that that should not be a ques¬ 
tion of general legislation nor should it be a question of obnoxious 
special legislation. Municipal governments are part of the State 
government and it is the duty of the General Assembly to look 
after them. That is one of the highest duties of the General As¬ 
sembly. We know that when we come to issue bonds, it is not 
only necessary to have the authority to issue them, but it is neces¬ 
sary to have the authority to do so in such a manner as to make 
them attractive to investors. Bond buyers in this country are a 
class, which always reserves the right to dictate the terms and 



1854 


OFFICIAL PROC E 1'.DINC. S 


conditions under which they will purchase. It is an advantage to 
a city that its securities be in such shape that they will bring the 
higliest price upon the market. That is axiomatic. I believe that 
the General Assembly ought to be allowed the power specifically 
to authorize each and every issue of bonds by municipalities. 1 
believe it would increase the price at which the bonds could In- 
sold. It will give additional security to require the sanction of the 
General Assembly in every particular case. The matter has al¬ 
ready been safeguarded bv the adoption of the report of tin- Com¬ 
mittee on Taxation. 

MR. O’NEAL—Will you please state what that provision is. 
It has escaped my recollection. 

MR. LOWE (Jefferson)—It is the limitation upon the power 
of municipalities to issue bonds at any rate. 1 believe that this 
provision will simply interfere with the sales of the bonds, and if 
that should be so there is no reason whatever why the General 
Assembly should not be allowed and required specifically to au¬ 
thorize the issue of bonds in each case. It seems to me that it 
would be extremely difficult to frame a general law to give that 
sanction and security which the purchasers and dealers in bonds of 
this character would naturally expect before they put their money 
into it. 

It has consumed much of the time of the General Assembly, 
but they should not be permitted to issue any bonds at all except 
that it is by the sanction of the General Assembly for a specific 
purpose and I think that this section should be laid upon the table. 

MR. ESP\ One of the crying evils from which the people 
of Alabama were suffering before this Convention was called, was 
the excess of local legislation. It has been announced time and 
again upon this floor, that it was next to the suffrage question as 
one of the most important, questions that could possibly come be¬ 
fore this body, and yet when the report of the Committee on Local 
Legislation is here for adoption, it seems that a majority of the 
delegates here are determined that the privilege of local legislation 
shall not in any particular be cut off or reduced. This has fur¬ 
nished in the past the most prolific source of local legislation. 
Town after town desires to issue a new series of bonds. They come 
to the legislature and they make their application. Their cause is 
a just one and the result is that the entire session of the legislature, 
or nearly all of the session of the legislature is devoted to local 
legislation. Now what can be the possible objection to enacting a 
law for the State of Alabama authorizing every township, every 
city, every subdivision of the State, to issue bonds and that kind 
of a law would certainly make the bond as valid as if it were enact¬ 
ed by a special law, or by a special enactment of the General As¬ 
sembly. It would be just as valid. The bond would sell just as 
readily. It would bring just as good a price as if they were issued 



CONSTITUTIONAL CONVENTION. 1901 


1855 


under a special act. Another remarkable things I find that gentle¬ 
men here who have been praising past legislatures and saying that 
they have all the virtues of the whole country embodied in them, 
are now afraid to risk the legislature for anything. Some gentle¬ 
men ask the question when the subdivisions are presented for 
adoption, suppose the legislature should not enact a general law. 
Certainly, Mr. President, legislatures of the future will be as good 
men and can be trusted as far as the legislatures in the past, and 
at the rate we are proceeding here we might just as well wipe out 
this report and not try to incorporate it into the Constitution at 
all, because everything here which has been a source of prolific 
legislation in the past, is stricken out by this Convention just as 
soon as they heard it read. I do hope that the Convention will not 
strike out this particular subdivision but that they will adopt it 
with proper amendment. 

MR. WATTS—The object of the including of this provision in 
this report is not on account of the issue of bonds by any town or 
city, but simply to keep the legislature from taking the public time 
in passing a special law in each particular case. The legislature 
of 1896-7 passed eleven of those acts, and the legislature of 1898-9 
passed 43, and the last legislature, I am informed, passed about 
twice that many. We understand that the Committee on Munici- 
pay Corporations has presented a report here which requires the 
legislature to divide the cities and towns of this State into classes 
and to prescribe the powers of each class. Necessarily the legisla¬ 
ture will prescribe what powers each class has to issue bonds and 
will provide that each class, if it has an indebtedness now can issue 
bond for the renewal law passed as recommended by the Com¬ 
mittee on Municipal Corporations, will give any city or town in 
this State that has the right to issue bonds, or which may have a 
right in the future to issue bonds, or as great a right and as sacred 
a right to issue them as a special act could in each instance. Fur¬ 
thermore, this general law which would provide the issue of bonds 
by municipalities, might prescribe the time those bonds should run, 
in which amount they should be issued, what rate of interest thev 
should bear, and what conditions they should have prescribed, gen¬ 
erally, for the issue of bonds just as well as they could if each par¬ 
ticular locality, and then each city and town in the State will know 
and every bond-buyer will know the conditions which apply to 
the issue of bonds in our State and they will not be required to look 
into the provisions of the special acts passed for special cities. 

MR. LOWE (Jefferson)—The gentleman says that generally 
the cities will derive the same benefit under a general law that thev 
will under a special law. To illustrate the difficulties which are in 
the way I will ask the gentleman to state how he expects by such 
a law to regulate the rate of interest. One municipality may bor¬ 
row money at a considerably lower rate of interest than another. 



1856 


OFFICIAL PROCEEDINGS 


MR. WATTS—They can determine that by providing in the 
general law that the bonds issued by the municipalities at such a 
rate of interest as the local authorities may determine. 

MR. LOWE (Jefferson)—You want to throw the whole re¬ 
sponsibility, then, of issuing the bonds upon the local authorities, 
and you will not come to the General Assembly, but you want all 
of that authority to be stated in the general law? 

MR. WHITE—The general law will provide the machinery 
by which the bonds will be issued. 

MR. LOWE—You cannot designate the amount of the bond, 
you cannot provide whether it will be a gold bond ur whether they 
shall issue a currency bond. 

MR. WHITE—The object of the Committee is to make all 
bonds issued by municipalities in the State upon practically the 
same terms and conditions. 

MR. LOWE—You want to fix the Constitution so that every 
municipality in the State of Alabama must issue bonds on the same 
conditions, under the same terms, regardless of what the purchaser 
wants, or w T hat the city may design. 

MR. WATTS—No, but that they shall issue them in accord¬ 
ance with the general law enacted applying to the different lo¬ 
calities. 

MR. LONG (Walker)—Is it not a fact that the school bonds 
in some localities had a mortgage upon the school building, in 
order that the bonds may be placed, therefore, would all school 
bonds in the State have to be issued on the same basis? 

MR. WATTS—I do not know of anv city that has been so 
unfortunate as to issue bonds that way. 

MR. LONG (Walker) Is it not a fact that bond buyers 
usually want and nearly always want a special act passed, regu¬ 
lating the issue of a certain class of bonds? 

MR WATTS—I do not think we are legislating especially 
for the bond buyers, but that we are legislating specially for the 
interests of the people of Alabama. 

MR. LONG (Walker)—Is not the interests of the people of 
Alabama in the best price that you can get for these bonds? 

MR. WATTS—Yes, I think so. 

MR. LONG (Walker)—Do you think that a little town out 
here can borrow money on bonds as cheap as the city of Mont¬ 
gomery? J 

MR. WATTS—In proportion to its revenue, yes. 



CONSTITUTIONAL CONVENTION. 1901 


1857 


MR. O’NEAL—One of the greatest evils in Alabama has been 
the unlimited issue of bonds by the counties and municipalities of 
this State. If you take the record of the last few Legislatures you 
will find that over eight millions of indebtedness has been created. 
The result has been that the people of Alabama have demanded 
that the power of the Legislature to issue these bonds shall be 
curtailed. They have demanded that before any city or town in 
Alabama, or count)’, shall have the privilege of issuing bonds, that 
the question shall be submitted to a vote of that particular locality 
that may be affected. Then if a law of that kind is passed and it 
has been reported by the Committee on Municipal Corporations, a 
general law will be passed on the subject, requiring every city, 
county and town in Alabama before they issue a bond, to submit 
the question to a vote of the people to the particular locality that 
will be affected. 

The Legislature will pass a law prescribing the terms in the 
bonds. They can provide that the rate of interest at which the 
bonds shall be issued, shall be determined by an ordinance of the 
particular town or city affected. They can provide that when the 
bond issue is authorized, that fact can be certified to the Secretary 
of State by the Mayor or Probate Judge, and what more evidence 
would a bond buyer want than that certificate? You have that 
certificate to show the election of a Governor. You have it to 
show the election of every official in this State, and why should we 
go to the bondholder or to the bond-buyer with more evidence than 
we give upon the election of the most important officials in this 
State? 

Now I sav if you strike out this provision you leave it in the 
power of the Legislature to authorize the issuance of bonds, in any 
town, city or county in the State, absolutely without restriction 
or limitation. You allow the local member to come to Montgom¬ 
ery and without consulting his constituents, without seeking to 
know their wishes in regard to the issuance of bonds, he secures 
the issuance of bonds in anv amount that may suit his pleasure and 
the people are without remedy. 

MR. LONG (Walker)—Is it not a fact that a limitation was 
placed upon the power of counties and municipalities to issue bonds 
in one of the other reports? 

MR. O’NEAL—It is not a fact, as I understand it. There was 
nothing in the report of the Committee on Taxation on this subject 
which has ever been adopted by this Convention. There is only a 
limitation in the report of the Committee on Taxation, that no city 
or town shall exceed 7 per cent of the assessed value of its property 
and there is a limitation upon the rate of taxation, but there has 
been no limitation upon the power otherwise. 



1858 


OFFICIAL PROCEEDINGS 


MR. BOONE—I read to you from the report of the Committee 
on Municipal Corporations. 

Sec. 7. No county, city, town, village, district or other politi¬ 
cal subdivision of a county shall have authority or be authorized 
by the General Assembly after the ratification of this Constitution 
to issue bonds, unless such issue of bonds shall have first been 
approved by majority vote by ballot of the qualified voters of such 
county, city, town, village, district, or other political sub-division 
of a county voting upon such proposition. In determining the 
result of any election held for this purpose, no vote shall be counted 
as an affirmative vote which does not show on its face that such 
vote was cast in approval of such issue of bonds. 

MR. O'NEAL—-It occurs to me if the gentleman had been 
giving proper attention to the proceedings, the gentleman would 
have known that that section had not been adopted. 

MR. BOONE—I know that very well, sir. I think I have 
given as much attention to the proceedings as you have. I said 
that it had been reported by the Committee on Municipal Corpora¬ 
tions for the favorable action of the Convention. 

MR. O'NEAL—I understood the gentleman to say that it had 
been adopted. 

MR. BOONE—I did not. I said that it had been introduced 
by the gentleman from Greene and reported by the committee. 

MR. O'NEAL—It seems to me if it has been reported by the 
committee, the gentleman is a very wise man to know that this 
Convention will adopt the report of the committee. 

The clock here struck the hour of 6 and the Convention there¬ 
upon adjourned until tomorrow morning. 


FORTY-FIRST DAY 


MONTGOMERY. ALA.. 

Wednesday. July 10. 1901. 

The Convention met pursuant to adjournment, was called to 
order by the President, and opened with prayer, by the Rev. Mr. 
A. F. Dix as follows : 

Our Father and our Lord it becometh us to approach Thy 
presence with reverence for Thy majesty, and with awe for Thy 
holiness in Thy government. It becometh us also to approach 
Thee with confession, for our own consciences tell us of sin, but 



CONSTITUTIONAL CONVENTION, 1901 


1859 


we thank Thee that we may approach Thee with confidence that 
Thou hast provided the means whereby Thou canst forgive sin 
and accept the presence of those who have transgressed Thy laws, 
if they rely upon the merits and advocacy of Him whom Thou hast 
sent forth. Look upon us this morning in our needs we pray Thee 
and confer upon us such graces as are requisite for the discharge 
of our duties, before God and the world. Do Thou bless this con¬ 
vention in all its membership. Do Thou confer upon Thy servant, 
the President of this body, the wisdom requisite that his rulings 
may be right, and upon all the members that zeal for good which 
can meet the divine approval, and may Thy wisdom be conferred 
upon them, and may they be enabled so to discern the future and 
its needs and the wants of the people for whom they are framing 
fundamental law and do Thou enable them to adjust measures that 
the growth of our great State may be accomodated, that the de¬ 
velopment of its industries may be encouraged, that the people 
may grow in righteousness and in the qualifications of good citi¬ 
zenship, that our future laws may be such as shall be commended 
to human conscience and to divine judgment. We ask now our 
Father in behalf of all the interests of these men, help them we 
pray Thee to discharge the varied duties that rest upon them as 
citizens and as standard bearers in the respective communities, and 
may all the interests of the rising generation be subserved and mav 
the interests of Thy kingdom, O Lord, our Father, be enhanced 
for Thy name's sake. Amen. 

Upon the call of the roll, 122 delegates responded to their 
names. 

The report of the Committee on Journal was read, stating 
that the journal for the fortieth day of the Convention had been 
examined and found to be correct, and the report was adopted. 

Leave of absence was granted to Mr. Jenkins of Wilcox for 
today and tomorrow. 

MR. WILLIAMS (Elmore)—I move the reconsideration of 
the vote. Mr. President, by which sub-division 14 of section 1 of 
the report of the Committee on Local Legislation failed of adoption 
on vesterday, and I vield the floor to the gentleman from Lauder¬ 
dale, Mr. O’Neal. 

MR. deGRAFFENRElD—I rise to a point of order. 

THE PRESIDENT—The gentleman will state his point of 
order. 

MR. deGRAFFENRElD—My understanding is that the gen¬ 
tleman from Elmore voted against the adoption of the resolution. 

MR. WILLIAMS—I voted on the winning side. 



1860 


OFFICIAL PROCEEDINGS 


MR. deGRAFFENREID— My recollection was if he did not 
change his vote just before the vote was announced, that he \ oted 
against the adoption. 

MR. PILLANS—He said that he voted on the winning side. 

THE PRESIDENT—The gentleman's statement is sufficient. 

MR. PILLANS—He voted on the winning side, and if he did 
he cannot make a motion to reconsider. 

MR. O’NEAL—I simply desire to call the attention of the 
Convention to the effect of its vote on yesterday. Section 14 pro¬ 
vides against any local legislation which grants any special or ex¬ 
clusive franchise whatever. By striking out that provision, with¬ 
out any amendment you say to the Legislature of Alabama that 
you can now grant a special franchise to any corporation in this 
State. You can grant a special franchise or exclusive franchise to 
a corporation to establish a street car system, electric light or 
water works. I am sure that was not the intention of the Con¬ 
vention. The idea seemed to prevail that the purpose of this sub¬ 
division was to prevent the City of Mobile from retaining the liquor 
license tax of the State, and the fear on the part of the advocates 
of the dispensary that it might prevent the establishment of dis¬ 
pensaries in cities and towns of this State. The Supreme Court 
has expressly decided in a recent decision that the right to create 
a dispensary is the right of a State to exercise police power in 
reference to the liquor traffic, and the right to confer upon a muni¬ 
cipality or county the authority to establish a dispensarv is merelv 
the transfer of a part of the police power of the State to that par¬ 
ticular county or locality. Now if the gentlemen are apprehensive 
that this provision will affect dispensaries, why cannot it be amend¬ 
ed by providing that the Legislature shall not grant any special 
franchise to any corporation, and leave out city, town or count}". 
Then you say to the people of Alabama in the future we do not 
intend that one of the great evils of local legislation consists in 
lobbies coming to the General Assembly, and by intrigue and log¬ 
rolling secure for a few favored individuals or corporations special 
privileges and immunities and franchises which they could not 
obtain under the general law. Now I am sure an amendment of 
that kind can be made to meet all the objections— 

MR. SAMFORD (Pike)—Will the gentleman permit an in¬ 
quiry? 

If this section is reconsidered will the committee consent to 
the amendment suggested by the chairman of the committee? 

MR. O’NEAL—They will. 

MR. SAMFORD—That is all right. 



CONSTITUTIONAL CONVENTION, 1901 


1861 


MR. O’NEAL—But in the attitude we are in now, you say 
private corporations can secure any special privileges the Legisla¬ 
ture may be willing to grant. 

MR. O’NEAL—I have not finished my remarks. I retain the 
floor unless that is agreed to. 

MR. ASHCRAFT—On yesterday I offered an amendment 
which limited this power to individuals, by the corporations and 
asosciations in accordance with the former action of the Conven¬ 
tion. There was nobody on this floor more stoutly opposed to that 
amendment than you were. Are you willing to accept the amend¬ 
ment this morning? 

MR. O’NEAL—I did oppose it. and I am still opposed to it, 
but I yield to the wishes of the Convention. As far as I am con¬ 
cerned I am opposed to a dispensary being established in any coun¬ 
ty; until it is established by a vote of the people of the county or 
town. 

MR. ASHCRAFT—I am satisfied the Convention will consent 
to a reconsideration if that amendment will be adopted. 

MR. BOONE—Mr. President, under the present Constitution 
of Alabama, the Supreme Court of Alabama, in the case of the 
Birmingham Street Railroad in 79 Ala., expressly decided that the 
General Assembly—opinion by Justice Somerville—had not the 
power to grant to any corporation, individual or association an 
exclusive privilege or franchise, and the court based that decision 
upon— 

MR. O’NEAL—Will the gentleman permit an interruption? 

THE PRESIDENT—Does the gentleman yield? 

MR. BOONE—Certainly. 

MR. O’NEAL—My recollection is it prohibited the granting 
of an “exclusive” franchise, but did not hold that the Legislature 
could not grant a “special” franchise. 

MR. BOONE—No, it held it could not grant an exclusive 
franchise. 

MR. O’NEAL—In the slaughter house cases the Supreme 
Court of Illinois decided that a State, unless there was a prohibi¬ 
tion on the power of the Legislature, could grant municipalities as 
it did in Illinois, for slaughter houses. 

MR. BOONE—No question about that. The Supreme Court 
in the case of the Hamilton Gas Light & Coke Company, 146 U. S-, 
held that the State could grant an exclusive privilege unless in¬ 
hibited by the Constitution. My point is under the Bill of Rights, 
which we have adopted, there is an express provision which pro- 



1862 


OFFICIAL PKOCKKDiNCiS 


vides that no irrevocable or exclusive privilege or immunity should 
be granted by the General Assembly, and the latter part of Section 
23 of the Bill of Rights provides that no special franchise or grant 
should be made which the Legislature did not have the power at 
any time to amend or revoke. Now, Mr. President, it seems to 
me that we are going too far to entirely exclude and prohibit the 
Legislature at any time in the development of this great State, 
from granting a privilege subject at all time> to revocation, amend¬ 
ment or repeal by the Legislature? We cannot tell what the de¬ 
velopment mav be in the State within the next fifty years, and 
what should be done to foster and encourage that development. 
Now I say we cannot grant an exclusive privilege even under the 
old Constitution, and it does seem to me to be going too far to sav 
you cannot grant any special privilege because it might be neces¬ 
sary to grant for a temporary time a special privilege to do a cer¬ 
tain thing. 

MR. O’NEAL—I desire to a>k the gentleman a question. I 
desire to call your attention to the exact language of the preamble 
which we have adopted. It says this: “That no ex post facto law, 
or any law, impairing the obligations of contracts, or making any 
irrevocable or exclusive grants of special privileges or immunities, 
shall be passed by the General Assembly ; and every grant of a 
franchise, privilege or immunity, shall forever remain subject to 
revocation, alteration or amendment.” Now that says making any 
irrevocable or exclusive grants of special privileges. 

MR. BOONE—Yes. 

MR. O’NEAL—It only prohibits the Legislature making a 
special privilege that is irrevocable or exclusive? 

MR. BOONE—“Or”—it is disjunctively stated. 

MR. O NEAL—Granting special privileges that are irrevoca¬ 
ble or exclusive, it does not prevent the Legislature from granting 
a special privilege that is not exclusive or irrevocable. 

MR. BOONE—That is what I am arguing. 

MR. KIRKLAND—I rise to a point of order. The gentleman 
from Lauderdale rose to ask a question, and instead of asking the 
question he is making a speech. 

MR. O NEAL I am simply calling his attention to the pre¬ 
amble and asking a question. 

AIR. BOONE I thought I was addressing myself to that verv 
question, in favor of the retention by the General Assembly of the 
power to grant a special privilege provided it was not irrevocably 
granted, and provided further, it was not exclusive in its character. 



CONSTITUTIONAL CONVENTION. 1901 


1863 


THE PRESIDENT—Ruling on the point of order of the 
gentleman from Dale, the gentleman who is interrupted is the 
only person who can complain of the length of the interrogation. 

MR. O’NEAL—I did not finish my interrogation. 

MR. BOONE—I hope the gentleman will make his sentences 
as brief as possible, as I have only a short time to speak, if he will 
express them in a sentence or two. 

MR. O’NEAL—We did not prohibit the General Assembly 
from granting the special privileges, we simply say you shall not 
grant a special privilege to one corporation in one locality which 
you do not grant to another. 

MR. BOONE—Exactly. I think I understand the question. 
I say that is what we ought to allow the Legislature to retain. I 
have no patience with the seeming sentiment among delegates in 
this Convention that the whole wisdom and conscience and common 
sense of the State now and in times to come is embraced here on 
this floor, and that we will never at any time hereafter have in 
this hall men who have the interest of the State at heart. I be¬ 
lieve, Mr. President, that at all times we will have men in both 
branches of the General Assembly who are as patriotic, who will 
have just as much learning, and who will do what they think is for 
the best interests of all the people. We cannot tell, what the de¬ 
velopment of fifty years will be, and it may be wise to do a certain 
thing in a certain county in this State it may be wise to have a 
dispensary there or some other thing, and no man can tell in this 
day and generation what ten years of innovations in the rapid 
thought for the good of humanity will bring forth, and so I say 
that we do not want to put bands upon the General Assembly and 
say that at no time must they do anything to develop the State. 
It may be there would be a great railroad to come through here, 
or some great business enterprise that operated in one or two coun¬ 
ties, and the General Assembly might say we will give you a cer¬ 
tain privilege, guarding the interests of the State and the citizens, 
for a short time, and safeguarding it in every way so that it would 
be highly beneficial to the State, but under the report of the Com¬ 
mittee anything of that kind will be shut down, and I hope the re¬ 
consideration will not be adopted. 

MR. HEFLIN (Chambers)—I call for the previous question 
on the motion to reconsider. 

MR. ROGERS (Sumter)—Please withdraw that a moment. 

MR. HEFLIN—I yield to the gentleman from Sumter on the 
understanding that he will move it afterwards. 

MR. ROGERS—I will renew the motion for the previous ques¬ 
tion. I just want to say to the Convention, after mature considera¬ 
tion, because we thought there was a nigger in the wood-pile, we 



1864 


OFFICIAL P K O C K K l) IN <'»S 


decided to strike sub-division 14 from the report ot the Committee 
on Local Legislation. Everything i> granted to us under Section 
23 of the report of the Committee on Preamble and Declaration of 
Rights that is necessary to prevent the granting of exclusive rights, 
therefore let us not now reconsider this motion, let us stand bv 
our action on vesterday. because there i> no necessity to reconsider 
the action by which this section was knocked out. And now 1 move 
the previous question upon this section. 

A vote being taken the previous question was ordered and a 
further vote being taken the motion to reconsider was defeated bv 
59 noes to 47 ayes. 

The next order of business wa- a cal! ot the roll for the intro¬ 
duction of ordinances, resolutions, etc. 

MR. ASHCRAKT—1 desire to vield tn\ call to the gentleman 
from Talladega, Mr. Graham. 

Resolution No. 234 by Mr. Graham < lalladega.) 

Resolved, That beginning with next Monday at 8:30, this Con- 
vention shall hold evening session- each day from 8 :30 to 10 o’clock. 

Referred to Committee on Rule>. 


MR. GRAHAM—I am requested by the Committee on Educa¬ 
tion to ask leave to sit this morning during the morning session of 
the Convention, and I ask unanimous consent. 


Leave was granted. 

MR. SMITH ( Mobile) — 1 he Committee on Rules desires to 
report favorably on resolution NT. 228. bv Mr. White. 

The Secretary read the n solution as follows; 


Resolved, 1 hat the President ot this Convention appoint a 
committee of live, whose duty it shall be to see that all ordinances 
adopted by this Convention are properlv engro s s ed. said committee 
to be known as the Committee on Kn^ro'snient. 

The report ot the committee was adopted. 

MR. SMITH (Mobile) -The Committee on Rules desire to 
report favorably resolution So. 22 { ). 


The Secretary read the resolution as follows: 

Resolved, That when any article has been adopted. 300 copies 
thereof shall be printed tor the use of the members of this Con- 
vention. 


• T R :A MI T H ~I. m T . the a,k T tK)n that resolution. I de- 

Stated tnth* pT n cha ! rman , ot th ^ Committee on Harmonv 
stated to the Rules Committee that it was not practicable for his 



CONSTITUTIONAL CONVENTION. 1901 


1865 


committee to review properly these reports unless each member of 
the committee had a copy of the corrected ordinance as finally 
amended, and it is to enable the members of the committee to do 
their duty that the resolution was offered. 

MR. OATES—The committee would not need that number. 

MR. SMITH—They are to be distributed among the delegates 
—those not needed by the committee. 

MR. WHITE—I would state that there are twenty-five mem¬ 
bers of the Committee on Harmony and Consistency. We cannot 
take one bill or ordinance or article and do anything with that. 
There are twenty-five men on that committee, and each man will 
want to see the article as it is printed. Besides if we take the 
original the probabilities are that it would be lost. Besides that 
every member of this Convention ought to have his mind at work 
on the article after it is comoleted. When the article is completed 
it is not the one brought in by the committee at all, in many re¬ 
spects it is entirely changed, and every member of the Convention 
ought to have his printed copy before him so he could make any 
suggestions that he thought proper to make ; therefore, I thought it 
necessary to have these printed. 

The report of the committee was adopted. 

MR. SMITH—I am instructed by the Committee on Rules to 
report resolution No. 213 without recommendation. 

The clerk read resolution No. 213 by Mr. Fletcher, as follows: 

Resolution No. 213, by Mr. Fletcher: 

Whereas, This Convention was called chiefly to make a con¬ 
stitution regulating suffrage and taxation. 

And, whereas, more than one-half of the time allotted for its 
work by the enabling act has been consumed in the passage of one 
article. 

And, where, expedition is plainly essential to the carrying out 
of the purposes for which this Convention assembled, and to econo¬ 
mize expenses to the State. 

And, whereas, it is believed that the consideration and dispo¬ 
sition of the Suffrage Article as soon as possible will greatly facili¬ 
tate and hasten to completion the business now before the Conven¬ 
tion ; therefor be it 

Resolved, That after the adoption of the article now being dis¬ 
cussed, the article on Suffrage shall be taken up for consideration, 
and continued until finally disposed of. 



1866 


O F FI CIA I. PROC) '. K DINGS 


Be it further resolved. That all articles heretofore made special 
orders shall be postponed and taken up in their regular order alter 
the article on Suffrage shall have been adopted. 

MR PETTUS—-I move to lay the resolution on the table. 

MR. COLEMAN (Greene)—I hope the gentleman will with- 
draw that motion for the present. 

The motion to table was withdrawn. 

MR. COLKMAX—Mr. President and Delegates of the Con¬ 
vention, I was authorized this morning by the Committee on Suf¬ 
frage and Elections to request that the report of that committee 
be taken up for consideration on next 1 uesday. 1 could urge many 
reasons why this course should be adopted, but unless there is some 
objection, some disposition to want to know the reasons, why I 
prefer to let them remain unsaid. As stated in that resolution be¬ 
fore us, and when the Committee on Suffrage and Elections sub¬ 
mitted its report it was requested that it lie upon the table subject 
to the will of the Convention. We believe that next Tuesday, by 
that time ample time will have been given to every delegate of this 
Convention, and everybody else, to have fully informed themselves 
of its provisions, and we are satisfied that ample time will be given 
during the week to determine what disposition shall be made of 
the report of the committee. I therefore move, Mr. President, that 
the report of the committee on Suffrage and Elections, and the 
minority report, be set for hearing at 11 o’clock, and be the regular 
order of business on next Tuesday. I move that as a substitute. 

MR. PETTUS—I move that the substitute be laid upon the 
table. 

MR. OATES—Please withhold that for a moment. I wish to 
get in a qualification, I am in favor of fixing Tuesday if the report 
of the Committee on Suffrage and Elections but-- 

THE PRESIDENT—Does the gentleman withdraw the mo¬ 
tion to table? 

MR. PETTUS—Yes. If the gentleman wants to discuss it. 

MR. OATES—No discussion on it at all—if this Convention 
be in the midst of the consideration of the report of the Committee 
on Legislative Department, that will not be chopped in two and 
laid aside before the other is taken up. I hope it can be done be¬ 
fore that time, but I want it understood that the report of that Com¬ 
mittee will not be laid aside. 

MR. PETTUS I move to take the amendment, the substitute 
and the resolution. 

MR. WADDELL I rise to a point of order. 



CONSTITUTIONAL CONVENTION, 1901 


1867 


1HE PRESIDENT—The gentleman will state the point of 
order. 

MR. WADDELL—All motions were out of order, because be¬ 
fore they can make a motion, they will have to reconsider the ac¬ 
tion whereby the different reports of these committees were set 
for special orders. 

MR. COLEMAN—I think the gentleman from Russell is mis¬ 
taken. This report was laid upon the table by unanimous consent, 
to be taken up at the will of the Convention, that is the order and 
rule under which it was laid upon the table.. 

THE PRESIDENT—It seems to the Chair that the point of 
order is not well taken for the reason that when the Convention 
has made any matter of business a special order, it is in the power 
of the Convention to change its settings and postpone further con¬ 
sideration, or set a different time without reconsidering the vote. 
The point of order for that reason will be overruled, and the ques¬ 
tion is on the motion to table. 

MR. JACKSON (Lee)—On that I call for the ayes and noes. 

THE PRESIDENT—The question is on the motion to ta¬ 
ble the resolution reported by the Committee on Rules without 
recommendation and the substitute offered by the gentleman 
from Greene, and the amendment offered by the gentleman 
from Montgomery, and the ayes and noes are called for and the 
question is, is the call sustained. 

The call for the ayes and noes was not sustained. 

A vote being taken the motion to table was adopted by a 
vote of 65 ayes to 45 noes. 

MR. BEDDOW—I rise to a question of personal privilege. 
I desire to correct the stenographic report of yesterday. I am 
reported as having said that owing to the force of the discussion 
of the convict question on yesterday I believe, Mr. Samford of 
Pike and myself, have concluded to offer an ordinance looking 
to the improvement of the convict system of the State of Ala¬ 
bama. What I did say was the following: ‘‘Owing to the course 
the discussion on the convict question took on yesterday, my be¬ 
lief is that Mr. White of Jefferson and myself, have decided to 
offer an ordinance looking to the improvement of the convict 
system in Alabama. 

THE PRESIDENT—The official stenographer is requested 
to make a note of the correction of the gentleman from Jefferson. 

MR. SAMFORD—I will ask to have it published in bold 
type. 



1868 


OFFICIAL PROCEEDINGS 


MR. COLEMAN—I rise to a question of information. The 
report of the Committee on Suffrage and Election has had no 
special order made with reference to it. Is it necessary that we 
now say when it shall he taken up. or what order it shall follow, 
what course of business? 

THE PRESIDENT—It would he in order for the gentle¬ 
man from Greene to move that it he made a special order after 
the consideration of matters already made a special order. 

MR. COLEMAN—I do make that motion. 

THE PRESIDENT—It is moved by the gentleman from 
Greene that the consideration of tin* report of the committee on 
Suffrage and Election be made a special order to he taken up 
immediately on the conclusion of the special orders which are 
now set by the Convention. 

MR. WATTS—I move to amend by making it a special 
order that the reports of the Committees on Judiciary and Cor¬ 
porations and Education and the other special orders already 
made by the Convention. 

MR. SANDERS (Limestone)—I am opposed to making the 
report of the Suffrage Committee a special order in this Conven¬ 
tion at all. I believe Mr. President, that on the conclusion of the 
consideration of that report it will he impossible to obtain a quo¬ 
rum of this Convention at any day thereafter. I dare say. Mr. 
President, that there is no member of this Convention who is 
more desirous of concluding its labors and getting home than 
I am, but I do not believe that we can discharge the duties for 
which we were sent here, properly, unless we conclude the labors 
of this Convention on all other matters before the Suffrage Report 
is taken up. I think, Mr. President, that the consideration of 
this report should be left to the wisdom of the Convention to 
be taken up or not as they see fit later on. without any special 
order, and I therefore move to table the resolution and the amend- 
ment. 


MR. DUKE I ask for a division of that question. 

( OAT p * , nse to a P oi nt of order the gentleman calls 

for a di\ lsion of a subject embraced in a motion to table. The mo- 

cmLoU h 6 ,S 6 ° ng, i nal m0ti ° n ’ and the substitute and the 
call for a division cannot be entertained—I don’t believe so. 

PRESIDENT Under the rules anv delegate mav de¬ 
mand^ division of a question where the sense of the matter per- 

MR. HOWZE—I rise to a point of order 
order THE PRESIDENT -™= pieman win sta ,e his point of 



CONSTITUTIONAL CONVENTION. 1901 1869 

MR. HOWZE The motion of the gentleman from Mont¬ 
gomery as I understand it, embraces the report of the Commit¬ 
tee on Education and on Judiciary. These reports have no stand- 
mg' in this Convention until they are reported to the Convention, 
and can this report of the Suffrage Committee be deferred until 
after reports of committees not in or submitted to the Conven¬ 
tion. 


THE PRESIDENT—It is within the power of the Conven¬ 
tion to resolve that this report will lie upon the table until those 
reports are considered. 

MR. HOW ZE Rule 47 requires when reports are made they 
shall lie upon the table until in regular order it shall be taken 
up. Now there is no report from either of those committees be¬ 
fore the Convention, and can they be considered now as being 
before this Convention and impede the progress of a report that 
is in the Convention t That is the point that I make. 

MR. COLEMAN—I hope the gentleman will withdraw the 
motion to table for the present. 

MR. SANDERS—Will the gentleman renew it for me? 

MR. COLEMAN—I will give you the opportunity of doing 
it; 1 will yield to you that you may do it. 

MR. W 7 ADDELL—I rise to a point of order. The regular 
order has not been dispensed with and I call for the regular order. 

THE PRESIDENT — The point of order is too late; the 
question is on the motion to table. The chair is inclined to sus¬ 
tain the point of order made by the gentleman from Jefferson 
against the amendment of the gentleman from Montgomery. 

MR. O’NEAL—I did not understand what the gentleman 
from Jefferson said but I know under the rules of this Conven¬ 
tion these reports are considered in the order in which reported, 
unless a special order is made. The report of the Committee on 
Suffrage and Elections will be considered in the order in which it 
was submitted except special orders. The gentleman from Mont¬ 
gomery is undertaking to suspend the rules of this Convention, and 
under the rules of this Convention the report of the Committee on 
Suffrage comes up in the order in which it was reported, and we 
cannot change that order except by suspending the rules of the 
Convention. 

MR. COLEMAN (Greene)—That is what we understood to 
be the meaning of the rule, but it seems that is not so. I under¬ 
stood that the report of the Committee on Banking preceded sev¬ 
eral of these reports which have been made. And the point was 
made that these other special orders had been given precedence 
over it. If it be true that the report is to be taken up in the or- 



1870 


OFFICIAL PROCEEDINGS 


der in which it is reported, why the Committee on Suffrage and 
Elections is sustained—If that is the ruling of the President. 

THE PRESIDENT—In the opinion of the chair it is in the 
power of the Convention to set these reports, and make them a 
special order for any particular time. Now the motion is that the 
report be made a special order after the special orders already 
set have been disposed of, and the motion of the gentleman from 
Limestone is to lay that upon the table. 

A vote being taken the motion to table was adopted bv 5 ( ) 
ayes and 49 noes. 


MR. FLETCHER—With reference to the report of the Com¬ 
mittee on Banking I thought the article would he considered in 
the regular order, but it seems that it has to be set dow n at a 
specific time and I would therefore ask that it be set down. 

THE PRESIDENT—The chair will state for the information 
of the gentleman that reports have to be set down and consid¬ 
ered in regular order when reached, unless displaced by a special 
order which this Convention makes, but it is in the power of the 
Convention to set the consideration of these reports for any time 
it pleases. 


MR. COLEMAN—Does not that require a two-thirds vote to 
suspend the rules? 


THE PRESIDENT-—To make a special order? 

MR. COLEMAN—Yes, the rules alreadv fix the order in 
which they shall be taken up. 

THE PRESIDENT—I would call the attention of the gentle- 

m A n u t °, I ? Ule 30: “ Any matter may. by a vote of the majority 
of the delegates present, be made the special order for anv hour 
which shall take precedence at that hour of any other business’ 
except a motion to reconsider.” 


, PR ^ IDENT —The Secretary will continue the 

of the roll of delegates for introduction of resolutions, etc. 

MR. BURNS—I desire to introduce a resolution. 

Resolution No. 235, by Mr. Burns: 


call 


Resolved, That the Committee on Fees, Printing etc 
port to this Convention what it cost per day to run the Con 
ti°n, and recommend some reduction of expenses. 


re- 

ven- 


Expense^ rrCd ^ C ° mmittee on Schedule. Printing and Incidental 


Mr. Carmichael (Colbert) Yielded his call to Mr. Kirk. 
Resolution No. 236, by Mr. Kirk: 



CONSTITUTIONAL CONVENTION, 1901 


1871 


Relating to the powers of Municipal corporations to create 
debts. 

Whereas, Section 10 of the Article on Taxation adopted by 
this Convention on Friday, the 5th day of July, 1901, providing 
a debt limit for Municipal corporations, makes an innovation of 
the laws of this State as heretofore existed, under which many of 
the towns and cities have created obligations which exceed the 
debt limit, and 

A\ hereas, Such towns and cities under the operation of Sec¬ 
tion 10 are prevented from creating any additional debt, and are 
unable to protect themselves from extortion in the matter of se¬ 
curing water, light and sewerage. 

Now. inasmuch as the cities of Sheffield and Tuscumbia have 
requested that they be allowed to pay off and adjust their obli¬ 
gations under the laws as they existed at the time their debts were 
created. 

A I herefore be it resolved. That the cities of Sheffield and Tus- 
cmnbia be exempt from the operation of Section 10. of said article 
on Taxation. 

Referred to Committee on Taxation. 

MR. KIRK—I send up a petition which I ask be read and 
referred to the committee. 

The petition was read as follows: 

Office of City Clerk, Sheffield, Ala., July 8, 1901. 

To the Hon. James T. Kirk, Montgomery, Ala.: 

Dear Sir—At a special meeting of the City Council of Shef¬ 
field held this day for the purpose of taking some action with 
regard to the limitation to be placed on the debt-creating power 
of municipalities, the following was unanimously adopted: 

The City Council of Sheffield views with great apprehension 
the action of the Constitutional Convention in limiting the amount 
of indebtedness that the municipality can make, and it asks its 
representatives in said Convention, Hon. James T. Kirk and Hon. 
A. H. Carmichael, to do their utmost to relieve it from the burden 
of those provisions. 

The debt of the city at the present is about fifteen (15) per 
cent, of its assessed values, and the character of its growth will 
necessitate its making the debt larger, or it will be smothered in 
its infancy. With the limitations provided for in the proposed 
article, the debt of the city will be more likely to grow from the 
defaulted interest; the real danger will be that these provisions. 



1872 OFFICIAL PROCEEDINGS 

though of some good effect elsewhere, will result in death to our 
municipal life. 

In municipalities like this unlike those of slower growth, the 
ordinary rules do not and cannot be made to apply. 1 he work 
ordinarily done gradually must here be done at once. Its public 
duties must be performed, or if not, the law will place on it an 
involuntary indebtedness, against which the provisions of the 
Constitution cannot protect it. 

We ask that the debt-making power of Sheffield be limited 
only by its borrowing capacity, believing that with the limitation 
provided for on the power of taxation there is no danger of its 
unduly mortgaging its future. 

Yours very obediently, 

J. R. Coleman. 

Clerk of the City of Sheffield. 

Referred to the Committee on Taxation. 

The hour of 10:30 having arrived, the Convention under the 
rules suspended the call of the roll for the introduction of reso¬ 
lutions, etc. 

THE PRESIDENT—The special order is the consideration 
of the report of the Committee on Local Legislation. The ques¬ 
tion is on the amendment offered by the gentleman from Mobile 
to sub-division 19 of Section 1. 

MR. EYSTER—I have a substitute to offer to subdivision 19 
and the amendment thereto. 

The clerk read the substitute as follows: “Resolved, That sub¬ 
division 19 of Section 1 be stricken from said section/' 

THE PRESIDENT—The question will be on the substi¬ 
tute offered by the gentleman from Morgan. 

MR. O’NEAL—I believe I have the floor, ’Tis not my pur¬ 
pose to trespass on the time and patience of this Convention, and 
I regret the necessity of my appearing so often, but I do not 
think that a single delegate on this floor can deny the fact that 
the evils arising from the unlimited power of cities and counties 
in this State to borrow money by mortgage should be remedied. 
We are all bound to recognize the fact that this evil has become 
alarming in Alabama. The last two Legislatures, as I am in¬ 
formed, created bonded debts in this State for counties and mu¬ 
nicipalities exceeding $8,000,000. It is not the purpose of the 
Committee by this Section to prohibit counties or cities from cre¬ 
ating a bonded debt, but to prevent the creation of that bonded 
debt by a local or special law. Now the gentleman from Jeffer- 



CONSTITUTIONAL CONVENTION, 1901 


1873 


son argues that the bond buyers will not purchase a bond which 
is not issued under a special law. If that be true, and the gen¬ 
tleman from Jefferson is always conservative, and there is some 
force in his remarks, this Section could be amended so as to ob¬ 
viate his objection, but to strike out this Section would be to say 
to the Legislature of Alabama, von can continue issuing bonds 
without any authority from the people of the locality or county 
that may be affected. Now if you make an amendment such as 
1 have prepared on the subject, it would certainly meet the ob¬ 
jection made by the gentleman from Jefferson. Amend Section 1. 
Sub-division 19, of the Article on Local Legislation by adding 
the word "county” before the word “township” and adding at the 
end of said subdivision the following: ‘Except in cases in which 
the issuance of said bonds or other securities have been authoriz¬ 
ed by a vote of the duly qualified electors of such county, town¬ 
ship. city or village at an election held for such purpose in a man¬ 
ner that may be prescribed by law; provided, the General As¬ 
sembly may pass special laws to refund bonds issued before the 
date of the ratification of this Constitution.” That would simply 
he saving to the Legislature that you must not pass a special 
law authorizing the issuance of a bond in any city or county in 
this State until it is authorized by an election of the people held 
in the manner prescribed by law, and we will leave it to the Leg¬ 
islature to prescribe the manner in which such election can be 
held, and the vote he shown affirmatively—of course that is a 
matter of legal detail, as to how it can be shown. The gentle¬ 
man from Morgan moves to strike out, and so does the gentle¬ 
man from Henry. I assure the Convention that this provision 
does not interfere with dispensaries. There seems to be an idea 
prevailing in this Convention that to prevent the possibility of an\ 
provision in reference to local law affecting dispensaries, to strike 
down every safeguard which we have incorporated in this pro¬ 
vision against the evils of local legislation. Everything else must 
be subordinated to the liquor traffic in this State and the evils of 
Local Legislation, lobbying, intrigue exists in other States must 
be ratified in this Convention for fear of interfering wth some 
dispensary or local liquor law in some county. This provision has 
nothing to do with a dispensary or liquor traffic, and I beg this 
Convention to pause long and well before they strike down this 
provision, because—gentleman look at this book of acts of the 
last Legislature—over three-fourths of this book consists of char¬ 
ters of corporations authorizing the issuance of bonds. Each 
of these acts, according to the Secretary of State, costs $50 to 
$150, so the people of Alabama are taxed with thousands of dol¬ 
lars for the issuance of these bonds, and in the list of Acts of the 
General Assembly the local laws are four times that of the others. 
Three-fourths of them consisting of acts authorizing the issuance 
of bonds and charters of corporations. Now we don t propose to 




1874 


OFFICIAL PK()CFF.mNC.S 


say that you shall not allow corporations, cities or counties to 
issue bonds, but we do say that you ought not to permit it to 
be done until the authority comes from the people of a county 
or the locality to be affected. If you do not put in this safeguard, 
it will result in bankruptcy to many cities and towns in this 
commonwealth. Whenever you say to the people of Alabama in 
every county, district, city, or municipality in this State, if von 
desire to create a debt, a bonded debt, let the people of your lo¬ 
cality ratify and sanction it. and then the Legislature can pass a 
special law and meet the objection made by the gentleman from 
Jefferson, that bond buyers won't purchase bonds that are not 
issue by special act of the Legislature. All we seek to do is to 
1 emedy this evil. It is an evil which the people of Alabama are 
demanding with one voice that we remedy. Now. we heed their 
appeal, an appeal coming from every portion of the State, which 
we pledged upon the stump we would grant them when this 
Convention was held—we come here and strike down the onlv 
provision in this article on local law which gives you relief from 
this great and alarming and dangerous evil in this commonwealth. 

MR. OATES—Will the gentleman permit an interruption ? 

I simply want to suggest to the delegate from Lauderdale that 
in his amendment he makes the same provision, almost identical, 
with the Constitution and law of the great State of Illinois, and 
it has been tried there with great satisfaction, ft is a proper 
safeguard to throw around the people. 

MR. O'NEAL—You will find the same provision in nearlv 
every Constitution that has been adopted in the past twentv-fivc 
years. 

MR. BOONE—May I ask the gentleman a question? I favor 

your amendment, and I wish to ask if you have offered it_1 did 

not hear you offer it. 

MR. O’NEAL—I cannot offer it now. because there is an 
amendment and substitute, but if the Convention will vote down 
the amendment and substitute I will offer it now. One word 
more we all recognize the fact that the greatest evil from local 
legislation arises from counties and cities coming before the I e<'- 
lslature in the guise of local laws to secure special privileges and 
advantages. If you strike down this provision you allow that 
to be done: and any county in the State or anv citv or Board of 
Aldermen or Commissioners’ Court mav go to their representa¬ 
tives and ask them to go down to Montgomery and authorize the 
issuance of millions of dollars of bonds. And the people of your 
county would wake up some morning and find that they were 
saddled with a bonded debt. They protest against it But what 
is the necessity of their protesting? You are too late the law 
has passed. I desire to make a motion to lay the amendment and 
substitute on the table. 



O >XST!Tl TlOXAh COXVKXTJOX, m\ 


1875 


M I\ 1 I movr to table the amendment and substitute. 

MR. PR KSII) EN 1 —- I'ln* gentleman from Harbour (Mr. Dent) 
moves to table the substitute and amendment. 

Ami upon a vote being taken it was carried. 

MI\. < ) N LA L 1 niter thb aniemlmeiit to Section 1. Subdi- 
\ i>i <mi l ( k 

The Ch rk then read the amendment a> follows: 

Amend Section 1. Subdivision l ( h Article — Local Legis¬ 
lation. 1>\ adding the word “county" before the word “township" 
and adding at the end of said subdivision the following: “except 
in cases in which the Nominee of said bonds or other securities 
has been authorized by a vote of the* duly qualified electors of 
Mich countv, township, citv, town or village, at an election held 
for such purpose in the manner that may be prescribed by law. 
Provided, the General A>senibly may pass special laws to refund 
bonds. isMied before the date of the ratification of this Consti* 
tution. 

MK. PR KSI I )K\T The question is on the adoption of the 
amendment proposed by the gentleman from Lauderdale. Is the 
Convention ready tor the question." 

MR. SAMI ; < >RI)—I would like to ask the gentleman to allow 
me to add one word to his amendment. I call attention to the fact 
that at the last ('.eneral Assembly and in General Assemblies be¬ 
fore that time, in addition to making special laws for the issuance 
of bonds for towns, cities, counties, etc., that private corporations 
were having priv ate hills—I don t know that it would come in in 
that connection and I see that it would not make good sense in 
there; so I will not offer it. 

MR PRESIDENT—Is the Convention ready for the ques¬ 
tion ? 

And on a vote being taken the amendment offered by Mr. 
O’Neal was adopted. 

MR. PRESIDENT—The question recurs on the subdivision 
as amended. 

MR. DENT—I move its adoption. 

And on a vote being taken the motion prevailed. 

MR deORAFFENREID—I ask unanimous consent to be 
allowed to introduce a short resolution, and ask that it be referred 
to the Committee on Rules. 

Consent being given, resolution No, 237. by Mr. deGraffenre.d, 
as follows, was referred to the Committee on Rules: 




1876 


OFFICIAL PROCEEDINGS 


Resolution No. 237, by Mr. deGraffenreid: 

Resolved, That after the present week, this Convention shall 
dispense with all clerks of committees except the clerk of the Com¬ 
mittee on Rules and a clerk for the Committee on Order, Harmony 
and Consistency of the Whole Convention. 

Resolved further, That the clerks of the Committee on Rules 
and of the Order, Harmony and Consistency of the Whole Consti¬ 
tution shall serve the chairman of the other committees when their 
services are required. 

Referred to the Committee on Rules. 

MR. SAMFORD—I move a suspension of the rules for the 
purpose of putting that resolution on its passage. 

THE PRESIDENT—The resolution has already been re¬ 
ferred. 

The Clerk then read Subdivision 20. as follows: 

“Amending, confirming or extending the charter of any cor¬ 
poration or remitting the forefeiture thereof." 

The Clerk then read Subdivision 21, as follows: 

“Creating, extending or impairing any lien.” 

MR. SPRAGINS—I move to amend Subdivision 20 bv in¬ 
serting the word “private” after the word “any.” 

Mr. deGraffenreid here took the chair. 

MR. O’NEAL—We accept that. 

THE PRESIDENT PRO TEM.—The question is upon the 
adoption of the amendment which has been accepted by the com¬ 
mittee. The Clerk will read the subdivision as amended. 

MR. O’NEAL—On behalf of the committee I accepted that, 
but on reflection I find that we cannot do so, for the reason that 
it proposes to amend the amendment “extending the charter of 
any corporation.” That is what we want to prevent the Legisla¬ 
ture from passing all these private charters of cities and towns; 
and if we add this word “private,” the evils of creating local char¬ 
ters would still exist. I say on reflection the committee cannot 
consent to the amendment. This section prohibits the Legislature 
from passing local laws “amending, confirming or extending the 
charter of any corporation.” And one of the largest evils of local 
legislation consists in doing that thing. If we confine it to private 
corporations, they could continue to amend the charters of munici¬ 
pal corporations and fill up more space in the acts of the Legisla¬ 
ture than anything else. That all can be accomplished by a gen¬ 
eral law; and therefore we cannot consent to it. 



CONSTITUTIONAL CONVENTION, 1901 


1877 


MR. DENT I move to lay the amendment on the table. 

I HE PRESIDENT PRO TEM.—There is no amendment be¬ 
fore the Convention. The gentleman is reducing his amendment 
to writing. As soon as he does the Chair will recognize the gen¬ 
tleman from Harbour (Mr. Dent), for the purpose of making that 
motion. 

MR. DEN 1—1 don’t think we ought to wait upon the gentle¬ 
man to put his amendment in writing. ] move the adoption of the 
subdivision as it stands. 

MR. HEREIN (Randolph)—I move that the gentleman he 
allowed time in which to write his amendment before it is voted 
down. 

The Clerk then read the amendment offered by Mr. Spragins, 
as follows : 

“To amend Subdivision 20 by inserting the word “private” 
before the word corporation in the first line.” 

MR. SPRAGINS—My idea was that the committee intended 
that that subdivision referred to private corporations and had by 
negligence left out the word “private.” The first part of the sub¬ 
division seems to refer to any corporation, either private or public ; 
and the second part of the sub-division seems to refer only to pri¬ 
vate corporations with reference to the forfeiture of charter. My 
idea in asking that the word “private” be inserted before the word 
“corporation” was, in the event that some municipal corporation 
might desire to change the corporate limits of the city by extending 
them. And it is the purpose of my amendment to fix it so that 
the Legislature could authorize this to be done. 

MR. DENT—It seems to me that the object sought to be 
secured by the gentleman, who offered the amendment (Mr. 
Spragins) can be secured under a general law. That is one of the 
very things that we want to stop the Legislature from acting upon; 
and if- you give them the power to act, why they could just change 
the whole thing. Besides, the provision prevents the Legislature 
from remitting the forfeiture of any chartei. I think it is a ver} 
wise provision, and I renew my motion to table the amendment. 

MR. O’NEAL—Will the gentleman permit a suggestion? 

MR. DENT—Certainly. 

MR Q’NF \L_My attention has been called to the fact that 

the Supreme Court has decided that the word “corporation” does 
not mean municipal. It means to imply private corporations. 1 he 
intention was to read private corporations. 

MR. FLETCHER—The Committee on Banking have made a 
report and this report has not been adopted. Under the old Con- 



1878 


OFFICIAL PROCEEDINGS 


stitution, there is an old clause which says that all bank charters 
shall expire after a limitation of twenty years, unless extended by 
the Legislature. How does this affect that? 


MR. O’NEAL—I think after the expiration of a charter of am 
bank, the Legislature would have to pass a general law providing 
for the extension of the charters of institutions of that character. 
There is a general law on that subject which provides for the ex¬ 
tension of banks at the expiration of their charters. 

THE PRESIDENT PRO TEM.—The question is upon the 
adoption of Sub-division 20, as amended; and the clerk will read 
the sub-division, as amended. 


u . O’NEAL—We ask unanimous consent to add the words 

private or municipal” corporations. The consent was granted. 


THE PRESIDENT PRO TEM.—The question is upon 
amendment of Mr. Spragins. 


the 


ZANDERS—The question is upon the substitute as ot¬ 
tered by the gentleman from Lauderdale (Mr. O’Neal). 

MR. O’NEAL—What is his amendment? 


THE PRESIDENT PRO TEM.—My recollection is that it 
was not to extend to any private corporations. You want to amend 

V f ddl " g u he ,Y° rd “municipal.” Do you ask unanimous consent 
that that should be done? 


MR. O’NEAL—I 
man- 


move to lay the amendment of the gentle- 


(Cries of no ! no !). 

MR. O NEAL Well, have his amendment read, 
as followsT* ' hen rMd the ame,ldn ' ent by Mr. Spragins 


i t bo amend Sub-division 20 by inserting the word “private" 
before the word corporation,’ in the first fine.” P 

f hiI MR r ?’ 1 X EAL ~ We acce P t that amendment. I call attention 
alreaX t a here hat amendme "‘ « made the word “private" is 

to ad“*o™fc^' aCCeP ' ' he W ° rd b “‘ request 

una„™ E us^e S it DENT ^ TEM - Tha ' baa to be done bv 

MR. WATTS It reads now “private or municipal.” 

MR. BROOKS—I understand the act of the committee on 
this proposition, as amended, is to prevent the Legislature from 



CONSTITUTIONAL, CONVENTION, 1901 


1879 


passing * n re gard to the amending, confirming or 

oc enc ing e c <irter of any private or municipal corporation. 
Now it is possible that this Convention may adopt ordinances giving 
the General Assembly power or making it incumbent upon the 
General Assembly to incorporate by general laws, cities of differ¬ 
ent sizes or of different importance, as regards population, etc.; 
but in doing that it may be necessary for the General Assembly, 
in passing these general laws, to except from the provisions of the 
general laws such particulars as may be necessary for them to 
have the regulation and control over the charters of corporations 
or municipalities. Questions may arise at subsequent periods 
which are not now dreamed of; and under the general law there 
may be no way to amendment of existing charters. My idea is 
that whatever general law the General Assembly may pass in re¬ 
gard to incorporating towns, cities and villages, there ought to be 
some room left to the General Assembly to make such changes 
as in its wisdom it may see fit, when under the general law these 
changes can not be made bv the people of these respective com¬ 
munities. J herefore, I am opposed to putting in here the word 
“municipal” in regard to municipal corporations. 

MR. BOONE—1 move the previous question on the adoption 
of the section as amended. 


MR. SPRAG1NS—Unanimous consent was never given the 
committee to insert the word municipal. 

THE PRESIDENT PRO TEM.—The word “municipal” has 
been inserted by unanimous consent and was so placed before the 
Convention ; no one objected. The question is whether the previous 
question shall be put. 

And upon a vote being taken the previous question was or¬ 
dered, and upon a further vote, the sub-division was adopted. 

Sub-divisions 21, 22 and 23 were read by the clerk as follows: 

Twenty-first—Creating, extending or impairing any lien. 

Twenty-second—Chartering or licensing any ferry, road or 
bridge. 

Twenty-third—Regulating the jurisdiction and fees of Justices 
of the Peace or the fees of constables. 

MR. LONG (Walker)—I desire to offer an amendment to Sub¬ 
division 22. 

The clerk then read the amendment offered as follows: 

“To amend Sub-division 23 by striking out the words “juris¬ 
diction or” in the twenty-eighth line.” 



1880 


OFFICIAL PROCEEDINGS 


MR. WATTS—There is an error there, and after jurisdiction 
should be “or.” 

THE PRESIDENT—Does the gentleman ask unanimous 
consent to make the correction? 

MR. WATTS—Yes, sir. 

THE PRESIDENT PRO TEM.—Unless there is objection 
made, the correction will be made. The chair hears no objection 
and the clerk will make the correction. 

MR. WATTS—To strike out the word ‘"and" and insert the 
word “or” after the word “jurisdiction.” 

MR. LONG (Walker)—I offer that amendment because it is 
necessary for the Justices of the Peace, in some localities in Ala¬ 
bama, to have more jurisdiction than in others. In some of the 
rural districts in our State they have jurisdicton as to prohibition 
laws, while in other counties and cities it may not be necessary for 
him to have this jurisdiction. I call the attention of the Conven¬ 
tion to that fact. I think it is an important amendment; because 
I think there are places in Alabama where the jurisdiction of the 
Justice of the Peace is just as important as one in New York; 
and in the mining camps in Alabama, where they have a court 
every six months, Justices of the Peace should have more jurisdic¬ 
tion than in the city of Montgomery or Mobile, and each county 
should be allowed to regulate this. 

MR. WATTS—Never in the history of the State has a Justice 
of the Peace in one part of the State been given different jurisdic¬ 
tion from another part. 

MR. LONG (Walker)—The gentleman is mistaken. 

MR. WATTS—If so it ought not to be and this is to prevent 
it in the future. 

MR. FITTS—The gentleman is very much mistaken. In 
Pickens County the Justices of the Peace have very large juris¬ 
diction. 

MR. WATTS—I thank the gentleman for calling my attention 
to it. That is a good reason why this sub-division should be 
adopted; and I move to lay the gentleman’s amendment on the 
table. 

MR. NeSMITH—I wish to offer a substitute to the amend¬ 
ment. 

The Clerk read the substitute as offered by Mr. NeSmith as 
follows: 



1881 


CONSTITUTIONAL CONVENTION, 1901 


To amend Subdivision 23 of Section 1, so as to make the 
same read as follows; 23. Regulating the jurisdiction of Justices 
of the Peace, except in precincts, in whole or in part, within towns 
of 2,500 inhabitants, or more, and regulating the fees of Justice of 
the Peace or the fees of constables,” 


MR. SAM TORI)—I rise to a point of inquiry. 

THE PRES1DETN PRO TEM—The gentleman will state 
the point of inquiry, 

MR. SAM FORD—I was engaged at something else a moment 
ago and I failed to catch the amendment that was offered to the 
Subdivision, and 1 would like for the Clerk to read the amendment 
again. 

The Clerk then read the amendment offered by Mr. NeSmith 
to Subdivision 23 of Section 1. 


MR. SAMFORD—Not that one. I heard that one. 

The Clerk then read the amendment offered by Mr. Long 
(Walker) to Subdivision 23. 

MR. NcSMITH—I am a member of the Judiciary Committee 
and that Committee has decided to report favorably the Section 
providing that anv precinct lying in whole or in part, within a 
town of 2.500 inhabitants, or more, the General Assembly may es¬ 
tablish an inferior Criminal Court to absorb the jurisdiction of the 
Justices of the Peace within that town or those towns or the pre- 
ciiicts within those towns. It seems to me that Section 23 as re¬ 
ported bv the Committee. w<ml<l perhaps be m conflict with that 
provision; ami the exception that ! have offered to except from 
ibis provision precinct- lying in whole or in part within a town of 
2,500 inhabitants or more, would prevent that conflict, and I of 
the amendment. 

MR WADDELL—If the plan was adopted, that you suggest, 
would this in the least conflict with the establishment tiLpe^ 
courts? This does not mention anything but Justices of the 1 eace. 

MR NeSMTTH— Possibly in those towns in force in Alabama 
confers upon Inferior Criminal Courts additiona mr.s.hcon : but 
I doubt whether it could he done under this Sect! . 

MR O'NF 'XL— The system that is now in force in Alabama 
to confer upon justices of the Peace in different 
feren, ci.iel different junsd.ct.on Wu un i almost £' > 

county in Northern Albania t ha ; ur jsdiction concurrent with 
the Peace in certain counties "ho ) - there are many 

the Circuit Court; a^ev^onerf-ktmwfta. ^' 
acts on the subject of confer themselves don’t know' what their 

S", lawyer to ascertain the 



1882 


OFFICIAL PROCEEDINGS 


different powers of the Justices of the Peace in the different coun¬ 
ties in Alabama. The result is that it is confusing. 

MR. COLEMAN (Greene)—Is there anything in this subdi¬ 
vision that will prevent the Legislature, if they see proper to do 
so, to alter the jurisdiction and fees which now prevail in particular 
counties? Suppose some county has conferred jurisdiction of mis¬ 
demeanors upon Justices of the Peace and increased the fees? 

MR. O’NEAL—The provisions are that any local law that 
now exists would be repealed or can be repealed by local law. We 
know that in a great many cities of this State the administration 
of the law by the Justices of the Peace has become to be a great 
evil. There are more frivolous prosecutions brought in these courts 
than any other tribunal in this State. They have become to be a 
source of oppression on the poor, helpless and ignorant negro, as 
well as the laboring man, who are constantly dragged into court 
by these officials whose fees depend upon a conviction. I sav it 
is a consensus of opinion of the people of Alabama that it would 
be a wise step for this Convention to relegate the Justices of the 
Peace to days gone by when they only had the power to bind over 
offenders to the higher court and to divest them entirely of juris¬ 
diction in civil cases. They deprive men of property and though 
it be a small amount of property, it would be a large amount to 
some poor man and if you are going to vest this jurisdiction in 
anybody, place it with men who are learned in the law. 

MR. COBB—Under this provision, would not the Legislature 
have the power to destroy any jurisdiction of Justices of the Peace 
in certain localities? 

MR. O’NEAL—Not at all. This don’t destroy, but it says 
that you cannot give the Justices of the Peace in one county juris¬ 
diction different from the jurisdiction of Justices of the Peace in 
other counties. It is a regulation of the jurisdiction and fees of 
the Justices of the Peace; in other words, it prevents this mass of 
confusion and this uncertainty which exists in the minds of the 
people by having local laws in every county giving Justices of the 
Peace from one county jurisdiction different from other counties. 
We want the laws uniform. If you want to establish a court, place 
the jurisdiction in a man learned in the law and do not select some 
magistrate whose fees depend upon his conviction or his deciding 
in favor of a party having the most money or power. 

MR. COBB—Suppose that court was established, could you 
take away entirely the jurisdiction of the Justices of the Peace. 

MR. O'NEAL-—’Yes sir, you can take it away. 

MR. COBB—Under this regulation? 

MR. O'NEAL—Yes, sir, but you would have to do it all over 
the State. 



1883 


t C )\ STLTUTIONAL CONVENTION 


1901 


MR. COBB—That’s the point. 

I he President here resumed the Chair. 


Mk. \ou could if you wanted to do away with 

U ^ w ?! C f Ce 111 a coun ty ; you could do it under this pro¬ 
vision. e ia\e lere that no local law can be passed on any sub- 
ject m>t prov ided tor. If the gentleman from Macon will give me 
his attention one minute, I will explain that. That won’t prohibit 
the .tgi> atuie tiom passing a local law which regulates the juris¬ 
diction. V\ e don t say that the Legislature cannot pass a local 
law, a lolishnig the fees of the Justices of the Peace of a certain 
cirunty. 1 hat can be done by a local law, but the local law will 
have to be published in the county newspaper as per Section 3, 
which reads as follows: “The General Assembly may repeal any 
special, private or local law upon notice being given and shown 
as provided in the last preceding Section.” 


MR. C < >BB—But this is not a local law. 

MR. ONIvVI, 1 understood your question was if the peopl" 
of a county desired to take away the jurisdiction of the Justices of 
the Peace, they would have to do it. 

MR. C< >BB—If the Chair will recognize me, I will explain 
myself w ithout taking up so much time. 


MR. O’NEAL—I have no disposition to cut you off. 

MR. COBB—There is a great sentiment, Mr. President, in 
this State, in sections of it, at least, to take away from the Justices 
of the Peace all jurisdiction. And in that direction the Committee 
on Judiciary have prepared and they propose to submit to the 
Convention allowing justices of the Peace to be abolished in sec¬ 
tions where their duties can be better performed by some other 
courts, particularly in the cities. This is done in view of the many 
evils to which the gentleman has referred, that is, the abuse of 
the power by the Justices of the Peace, in some cities in this State. 
Now, the proposition which I submitted or the question I propound¬ 
ed, was if this article remains as it is, whether the powder would re¬ 
main with the Legislature to take away from the Justices of the 
Peace all jurisdictions in certain localities. 

MR. WALKER—Will the gentleman permit an interruption? 


MR. COBB—Certainly. 

MR. WALKER—The provision as will be suggested by the 
Judiciary Committee, will confer upon the Legislature, in some 
instances, specific power. It is a general provision and certainly 
would not abridge the power that was specifically conferred upon 
the Legislature by the provision that will be reported by the Ju¬ 
diciary Committee and for that reason it will not conflict. 



1884 


OFFICIAL PROCEEDINGS 


MR. COBB—If this provision does not conflict with the idea 
of allowing- the Legislature to withdraw from the Justices of the 
Peace, in certain localities, all jurisdiction, I would he perfectly 
content. 

MR. WILLIAMS (Marengo)—How would it suit you to 
amend by adding at the end of the subdivision “except said office 
of Justice of the Peace may be abolished in certain sections?” 

MR. COBB—That is the amendment offered by my friend 
on the right here. 

MR. O’NEAL—I am willing to accept that amendment. 

MR. COBB—My own opinion is, if you strike out the two 
words “jurisdiction” and “or,” as proposed by the amendment of 
Mr. Long of Walker, that would relieve the whole difficulty and 
still leave it in the power of the Legislature to control the jurisdic¬ 
tion of the Justices of the Peace in those localities where it is 
wise to abolish their jurisdiction altogether. 

MR. WATTS—I move to lay the amendment on the table. 
THE PRESIDENT—Both of them? 

MR. WATTS—Yes, sir. 

MR. NeSMITH—I ask for a division of the question. 

THE PRESIDENT—It is moved that the substitute offered 
by the gentleman from Lamar and the amendment offered bv the 
gentleman from Walker be laid upon the table, and a division of 
the question is called for. The question will be first upon the mo¬ 
tion to table the substitute. 

And on a vote being taken, the motion prevailed. 

THE PRESIDENT—The question now is on the motion to 
table the amendment offered by the gentleman from Walker. 

And on a vote being taken, the motion prevailed. 

MR. WILLIAMS (Marengo)—I wish to offer an amendment. 

The clerk then read the amendment offered by Mr. Williams 
of Marengo as follows: To amend Sub-division 23 by adding at 
the end of the sub-division, “except said office of Justice of the 
Peace may be abolished in certain sections.” 

MR. deGRAFFENREID—I move to lay the amendment on 
the table. 

And on a vote being taken, the motion prevailed. 

MR. WATTS—I move the adoption of the sub-division and 
call for the previous question. 



1885 


CONSTITUTIONAL CONVENTION, 19U1 

MR. JONES (Bibb) I desire to amend Sub-division 23 by 
striking out Sub-division 23, Section 1. 

MR. WADDELL 1 move to lay that amendment on the 
table. 

And on a vote being taken, the motion prevailed. 

MK. W A I I S I move the adoption of the sub-division and 
call for the previous question. 

And on a vote being taken. Sub-division 23 was adopted as 
amended. 


I he clerk then read Sub-divisions 24 and 25 as follows: 

“ 1 wenty-fourth—Establishing separate school districts.” 

“ 1 wenty-fifth—Establishing separate stock districts/’ 

MR. WATTS—At the end of Sub-d ivision 25, I suggest that 
it should be amended to read as follows: “To amend Sub-division 
25 so as to read as follows: “Establishing districts in which stock 
shall or shall not run at large.” 

MR. SAM LORD—I move the adoption of the sub-division as 
it stands. It is a mere matter of verbiage, and I reckon everybody 
knows what a stock district is in Alabama. They do in my county. 

The clerk then read the amendment offered by Mr. Watts, to 
amend Sub-division 25, as follows: To amend Sub-division 25 so 
as to read “establishing districts in which stock shall or shall not 
run at large.” 

MR. GRANT—I move to lay the amendment on the table. 

And on a vote being taken, the amendment was tabled. 

MR. SAMFORD—I move the adoption of the subdivision. 

And a vote being taken, the subdivision was adopted. 

MR. BLACKWELL—I desire to offer an additional sub¬ 
division. 

MR. WATTS—I would suggest that an additional sub-division 
is not in order until we get through with the sub-division in the 
report of the committee and the supplemental report of the Com¬ 
mittee on Legislation. 

THE PRESIDENT—It seems to the chair that the point is 
well taken. 

The clerk then read Sub-division 26 as follows: 

Twenty-sixth—Creating, increasing or decreasing fees, per¬ 
centage or allowances of public officers. No special, private or 



1886 


OFFICIAL PROCEEDINGS 


local law, except a law fixing the time of holding courts, shall be 
enacted in any case, which is provided for by a general law, or 
when the relief sought can be given by any court of this State, 
and the courts and not the General Assembly shall judge as to 
whether the matter of said law is provided for by a general law 
and as to whether the relief sought can be given by any court; 
nor shall the General Assembly indirectly enact an 3 r such special, 
private or local law by the partial repeal of a general law. The 
General Assembly shall pass general law's for the cases enumerated 
in this section. 

MR. SANDERS—The report from the Legislative Depart¬ 
ment is added, by agreement with the chairman, after the words 
“public officers/' in Sub-division 26, Section 1, as recommended 
by the Legislative Department, and should be taken up now. It 
reads as follows: 

“Now, in pursuance to an understanding and agreement with 
the chairman of that committee, your Committee on Legislative 
Department instructs me to report and recommended for adoption 
the following additional restrictions upon the power of the Leg¬ 
islature to enact local, special or private laws to come in after the 
words “public officers’' in Sub-division 26 of Section 1, of the Ar¬ 
ticle already reported by said committee, to wit/' 

THE PRESIDENT—The next will be No. 27, as reported by 
the Committee on Legislative Department. It seems to the chair 
that this report should be offered as an amendment in some way. 

MR. HARRISON—I desire to make an inquiry of the chair¬ 
man of the committee: Your Section 1 says: “The General As¬ 
sembly shall not pass a special, private or local law in any of the 
following cases." I don’t exactly understand this, whether it in¬ 
cludes Sub-division 26. Then you start off on a different line by 
saying “the General Assembly shall pass general laws for the cases 
enumerated in this Section/' That does not seem to be proper 
and germane at all. 

MR. O'NEAL—I know all about that and I desire to state— 

THE PRESIDENT—The Chair will state that the Conven¬ 
tion now has under consideration the report of the Committee on 
Legislation; and if different paragraphs are to be added, they 
should be added by amendment, 

MR. O'NEAL—I desire to state to the President, that we 
agreed to accept this amendment; and it was accepted by unani¬ 
mous consent on the part of the Convention at the time this report 
was made. It was agreed that the report of the Committee on 
Legislative Department, would be considered as an amendment to 
our report—as a supplemental report. 



CONSTITUTIONAL CONVENTION, 1901 


1887 


THE PRESIDENT—Was the amendment adopted by the 
Convention? 

MR. WADDELL—Yes, sir; by unanimous consent. 

MR. O’NEAL—The amendment was adopted with the un¬ 
derstanding* that it should be treated as a part of the report. That 
is my recollection. 

THE PRESIDENT—The Chair inquires whether the Journal 
sustains the recollection of the gentleman from Lauderdale? 

The Chair will state that the journal shows that the action of 
the Convention was, that the report should be considered in con¬ 
nection with the report of the Committee on Local Legislation. 
Hence, it would seem necessary that the Convention take some 
action in adopting this as an amendment or as an additional sub¬ 
division to the report. 

MR. O’NEAL—I move that it be considered as a supplemental 
report. 

MR. OATES—In order to avoid any difficulty in that way in 
considering Section 26 as it stands here in type, we could take up 
items of sub-divisions reported by the Committee on Legislative 
Department, and the arrangement of the numbers will present no 
difficulty. We can settle that hereafter, we can consider sub¬ 
divisions and such amendments as are desired and then take up 
the other. 

MR. PRESIDENT—It would be perfectly competent for the 
Committee on Local Legislation to propose to add this sub¬ 
division. 

MR. O’NEAL—In view of the suggestion from the Chair, I 
will make that motion, though we do not concur in the latter part 
of this report. 

MR. PRESIDENT—How far does that concurrence extend? 

MR. WATTS—To the subdivision. 

MR. PRESIDENT—Thirty-five? 

MR. WATTS—Yes, sir. 

MR. O’NEAL—Section 35, down to where it says, “Your Com¬ 
mittee do not concur in section 5 of said Article as reported by the 
Committee on Local Legislation and recommends as a substitute 
therefor Section 25 of Article 4 of the present Constitution.” 

MR. PRESIDENT—The Committee on Local Legislation con¬ 
curs in subdivisions 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34 and 35? 



1888 


OFFICIAL PROCEEDINGS 


MR. O’NEAL—We are willing to adopt that as an amend¬ 
ment to the report of the Committee on Legislation and be con¬ 
sidered subdivision by subdivision. 

MR. HARRISON—I desire to enquire of the Chairman of 
the Committee on Local Legislation if the copy of the printed re¬ 
port as furnished us is the report of the Committee on Legislation? 
Section 26, as it is reported, are we to consider that as the official 
report of the Committee? 

MR. O’NEAL—Certainly, sir; that’s what we are on now. 

MR. HARRISON—I renew my suggestion to the Chairman 
of the Committee, if I understand subdivision 26. it is improperly 
there and is not germane. 

MR. WALKER—There are two reports now being considered 
by the Convention. The first is the report of the Committee on 
Legislation down to subdivision 26; and then the purpose is to 
take up the report of the Committee on Legislative Department 
and consider that report. 

MR. HARRISON—That’s what I did not understand, sub¬ 
division 26 as printed here in the report of the Committee on Local 
Legislation. 

MR. PRESIDENT—The report of the Committee on Legisla¬ 
tive Department taken up after the word “officers” in subdivision 
26. 


MR. HARRISON—After the word officers: The point I de¬ 
sire information on, if it be reported as printed here, there are six 
or eight other lines that precede the conclusion of that whole sub¬ 
division. 

THE PRESIDENT—The gentleman from Limestone called 
the attention of the Chair to the understanding with the Chairman, 
and the Chair having stated this matter, they have provided that 
the report of the Committee on Legislative Department should be 
taken up at that point, after the word “officers.” 

MR. HARRISON—I would like to ask if the other part of 
this subdivision 26, as printed, is being considered? 

MR. O’NEAL—It will be considered. 

MR. PRESIDENT—It will have to be re-numbered. 

MR. OATES—There is no reason to misunderstand that. The 
remaining portion of the subdivision is to be considered. But, as 
I understand the statement of the Chairman on Local Legislation, 
he proposes to leave that as it is until subdivisions numbers 27, 28, 
29, etc., reported by the Committee on Legislative Department, are 



CONSTITUTIONAL CONVENTION, 1901 


1889 


considered; and then go back to subdivision 26 of that section and 
go on through with the report. 

MR. PRESIDENT—Wouldn't it be necessary to change the 
number of that section? 

MR. OATES—It may or it may not. 

MR. PRESIDENT—Part of subdivision 26 would stand as 
subdivision 28 and then subdivision 27 would succeed it? 

MR. OATES—Yes, sir. 

THE PRESIDENT—What would you do with the balance 
of subdivision 26? Will it not have to be renumbered to make it 
in order? 

MR. OATES—It may. Depends on the action of the Con¬ 
vention. 

MR. O'NEAL—We don't desire to put it in a separate sec¬ 
tion, because it is in the proper section now. 

THE PRESIDENT—It can succeed these other subdivisions? 

MR. O'NEAL—Yes, sir. 

THE PRESIDENT—The Committee on Local Legislation 
offers as an amendment to Section 1, Subdivisions 27, 28, 29, 30, 
31. 32, 33, 34 and 35, as reported by the Committee on Legisla¬ 
tive Department. 

The Chair will state that these subdivisions will be open to 
amendment, as stated heretofore. 

MR. WEATHERLY—I desire to offer an amendment. There 
is an incongruity in it and it ought to be considered as a whole. I 
therefore move that these subdivisions, as reported by the Com¬ 
mittee on Legislation, be taken up after Subdivision 25. 

MR. WATTS—The difficult that seems to be on your mind 
and on the mind of the gentleman from Lee, will be obviated by 
simply, when we get to it, inserting “Section 2" before the words 
“No special, private or local law shall be passed on any subject 
not enumerated, etc." 

MR. HARRISON—Exactly. 

MR. WATTS—We will do that when we get to it. 

MR. HARRISON—And go ahead and transform line 39. 

MR. WEATHERLY—I move that we begin the consideration 
of the subdivisions as reported by the Committee on Legislation. 
You have a lot of stuff in there that don’t belong in there. 



1890 


OFFICIAL PROCEEDINGS 


MR. O’NEAL—The subdivision ends after the word "offi¬ 
cers.” 

MR. WEATHERLY—It don’t end that way in my report. 

MR. O’NEAL—It is printed badly. 

MR. WEATHERLY—I move that the consideration of thi- 
subdivision be postponed to be taken up after Subdivision 35. 

THE PRESIDENT—The gentleman from Jefferson moves to 
postpone the consideration of Subdivision 26 as it appears in the 
printed report. 

MR. HARRISON—I would suggest to the gentleman from 
Jefferson on that proposition that it would be better to adopt so 
much of the Subdivision 26 as is printed- 

MR. SANDERS—I call for the previous question. 

THE PRESIDENT—The motion of the gentleman from Jef¬ 
ferson is to postpone the consideration of Subdivision 26 until the 
subdivision as reported by the Committee on Legislative Depart¬ 
ment has been considered and passed upon. 

And upon a vote being taken the motion was lost. 

MR. HARRISON—I do not remember, and I ask the Chair 
for information, if the latter part of that section has not been 
stricken out or what are we adopting as Section 26? 

THE PRESIDENT—The Convention seems to be wholly 
unable to determine what it wants to do with Section 26. 

MR. HARRISON—I move that so much of Section 26 as is 
in the copy before us be adopted as is embraced between the 
words "creating” and "officers” on the first line. 

MR. O’NEAL—That is the whole of Subdivision 26. It is sim¬ 
ply due to an error in printing. 

THE PRESIDENT—Will the gentleman from Lee reduce 
his motion to writing. The Chairman of the committee is mis¬ 
taken, it is not due to the printer, but it is due to the original copy, 
and there is no paragraph at all in the original copy. 

MR. deGRAFFENREID—I move that Section 26 be referred 
back to the committee. 

To which were expressions of dissent. 

MR. O’NEAL—I move to lay that motion on the table. 

The motion was carried. 

MR. SAMFORD—I move to lay 26 on the table. 



CONSTITUTIONAL CONVENTION, 1901 


1891 


The motion was lost. 

MR. HARRISON—I offer this amendment. 

The amendment was read. Amend subdivision 26 by striking 
out all of the subdivision after the word “officers.” 

MR. WATTS—I really don’t understand how it is that you 
cannot understand that Section is comprised alone of the words 
“creating, increasing or decreasing fees, percentage or allowance 
of public officers.” That is the whole of Subdivision 26. W 7 e do 
not want the balance of Section 1 stricken out. We are willing to 
consider Subdivision 26 just as I read it, and afterwards consider 
the balance of Section 1. 

MR. COBB—I move to amend the motion of the gentleman 
from Lee. 

The amendment is simply that Section 26 be considered as 
consisting only of that first sentence and the balance be numbered 
27. 


The amendment was declared out of order because not in 
writing. 

MR. HARRISON—In support of my amendment, I desire to 
say that the other can be considered as a separate section. My 
amendment is not perfect because I should have moved to strike 
out all down to the word “law” in the 38th line. 

MR. COLEMAN (Greene)—The committee has reported as 
Subdivision 26 these words: “creating, increasing or decreasing 
fees, percentages or allowances of public officers.” The report of 
the Legislative Committee begins there and goes on. The Com¬ 
mittee on Local Legislation has accepted that and after we pass 
upon the 26th subdivision we will go back and consider beginning 
at the words “no special, private or local law,” which may be num¬ 
bered as Subdivision 36. 

MR. O’NEAL—The last subdivision offered by the Legisla¬ 
tive Department is 35, then beginning with “no special” that will 
be numbered 36 and the whole report of the committee will be uni¬ 
form and there is no difficulty in the whole matter. I adopt the 
motion of the gentleman from Greene and on that I call the pre¬ 
vious question. I ask unanimous consent to settle the controver¬ 
sy, that the words “creating, increasing or decreasing fees, per¬ 
centage or allowances to public officers, be made subdivision 26. 

THE PRESIDENT—Does the gentleman ask unanimous con¬ 
sent to withdraw temporarily the balance of the subdivision as it 
is printed? 

MR. O’NEAL—Yes, sir. 



1892 


OFFICIAL PROCFFDlNC*S 


To which no objection was made and upon a vote being’ taken 
subdivision 26 was thereupon adopted. 

Subdivision 27 was read as follows: “Exemption of propertv 
from taxation or from levy or sale.” 

MR. DAVIS (Etowah) — I offer an amendment, which will 
be a separate subdivision. 

THE PRESIDENT—It is not in order at this time. 

MR. PILLANS—I ask to amend that subdivision by making 
it read exempting property, instead of exemption of propertv. 

MR. O'NEAL—We accept that. 

THE PRESIDENT—The Chair cannot entertain amendments 
that are not in writing, because it would be impossible to keep the 
journal straight. 

The amendment was prepared and read as follows: “Amend 
subdivision 27 by striking out ‘‘exemption of” and inserting “ex¬ 
empting.” 

MR. WATTS—I move its adoption. 

Upon a vote being taken the amendment was adopted, and 
upon a further vote the subdivision was amended as adopted. 

Subdivision 28 was read as follows: “Exempting any person 
from jury, road or other civil duty.” 

There being no amendments or objections offered, subdivision 
29 was read as follows: “Laying out, opening, altering, or work¬ 
ing roads or highways.” 

MR. DENT—I send up an amendment. 

The amendment was read as follows: “Amend subdivision 29 
Article I. by adding at the end of the subdivision the following 
words: “Provided, that this subdivision shall not affect counties 
which already have special laws on the subject of public roads." 

MR. OATES—I am satisfied that amendment is wholly un¬ 
necessary. This only prohibits the legislature, after its ratification, 
from doing these things. It does not have the effect of repealing 
any existing law. and it don’t follow that the legislature must do 
it, and therefore there is no necessity for the amendment. 

MR. DENT—If that construction is put upon it. I withdraw 
the amendment. 

MR. HARRISON—I would like to inquire of the Chairman 
of the Committee, what necessity exists in the opinion of the 
Committee, for including this subdivision in the law? 



CONSTITUTIONAL CONVENTION, 1901 


1893 


MR. O’NEAL—The Chairman of the Committee on Legisla¬ 
tive Department inserted that, and he will answer the interroga¬ 
tory. 

MR. OATES—In the opinion of two Committees of this house, 
it was thought well to put it there, simply to prevent local legis¬ 
lation, making special provisions in local laws, for the laying out, 
opening, altering or working roads or highways. It was to pre¬ 
vent the legislature from passing laws operating differently in 
different localities, as there is no necessity for it. 

MR. HARRISON—I asked the gentleman a question, and 1 
desire to say that I do not think the explanation shows a sufficient 
necessity for the incorporation of this provision. The question of 
improving the public roads is a live one in this State, and some 
counties have made great progress in this direction. I do not want 
to interfere with it, and hope to see the day when other counties 
will move forward in this direction. Situated as we are, with a 
diversity of climate, and diversity of soil, from Tennessee to the 
Gulf, I apprehend it will be very difficult to adopt any provision 
that would be applicable to all of the counties in this State. So 
far as my recollection goes, the past history of legislation upon 
this subject has shown that it has given very little trouble, and I 
can see very little necessity for this inhibition. Where counties de¬ 
sire to improve the road system, they would have the opportunity to 
have a different law, because a general law could not be framed to 
fit the different counties in the State, and I will be constrained to 
vote against the incorporation of this provision in the Article. 

MR. WADDELL—I would ask the gentleman if the power 
could not be conferred upon each of the courts of county commis¬ 
sioners, in the different counties in the State, to deal with road 
questions, as they saw proper, by a general law? 

MR. HARRISON—So it might, but I doubt very much the 
propriety of making a legislature out of the average commissioner’s 
court. 

MR. CARMICHAEL (Colbert)—I desire to say to this Con¬ 
vention in reference to this provision, that it seems like an ex¬ 
treme proposition. It prohibits the pasisng of a law “laying out. 
opening, altering, or working roads or highways.” I am one of 
those who do not believe that the evils of local legislation are as 
extreme as some of the members of the Convention have asserted. 
There are some matters that ought to be left open for local legis¬ 
lation. One subdivision has been adopted here that in my opinion 
is unwise, and that is on the question of locating county seats. I 
think this entire question is dangerous, and especially this sub¬ 
division. There are many counties in the State which have dif¬ 
ferent systems of keeping up their public roads. In Colbert County 
we have, as this Convention knows, contracted a large indebted- 



1894 


OFFICIAL PROCEEDINGS 


ness for turnpikes. Our condition is such that we might need 
special legislation in order to keep up these roads, I suppose there 
are other counties in a like condition. For that reason it seems to 
me unwise for this Convention to let it remain and I hope that they 
will strike it out. 

MR. OATES—I have given briefly the reasons that influenced 
two committees to recommend this provision, and I have no dis¬ 
position to consume any more time on it. I move the previous 
question. If the gentlemen do not want it they can vote against it. 

MR. WEATHERLY—I hope the gentleman will withdraw 
the motion a moment. 

MR. OATES—I will withdraw it. 

MR. WEATHERLY—This question, Mr. President, is of 
much more importance than the delegates seemed to have thought 
when they precipitately laid my motion on the table. I think this 
is one of the subjects that the legislature ought to have the control 
of by local legislation. I am very much in favor of most of these 
restrictions on local legislation, but I believe this particular re¬ 
striction is unwise. This prohibits any local law for the laying out, 
opening, altering, or working of roads or public highways. 

MR. WATTS—If the gentleman will permit a question, can't 
a commissioner’s court lay out, open and alter a road, and why 
then should the legislature undertake to pass a special law for that 
purpose? 

MR. WEATHERLY—Well, there might be a general law so 
framed as to authorize the courts of county commissioners to act 
in the matter. 

MR. WATTS—Section 5 provides for it if you will look at it. 

MR. O’NEAL—I desire to ask if striking out the word “work¬ 
ing" would obviate the objection that seems to be in your mind, 
and let the Commissioners’ Court, as they do now. lay out. open 
or alter roads. 

MR. COLEMAN (Greene)—You might strike out the words 
“altering or working.’’ 

MR. WEATHERLY—I want to call the delegate’s attention 
to the principle that once a highway is dedicated to the public, al¬ 
though it has been done often, I doubt whether the Court of Coun¬ 
ty Commissioners has a right to close it. It is dedicated to the pub¬ 
lic. It is public property, and I think the Legislature ought to be 
absolutely free under the Constitution, to close up a highway when 
it becomes of no further value to the public. There are a variety 
of circumstances and contingencies which might arise which the 
Legislature alone ought to deal with. You cannot provide for 



CONSTITUTIONAL CONVENTION, 1901 


1895 


them simply by general law, authorizing the Courts of County 
Commissioners, or the Boards of Revenue to do certain things, be¬ 
cause human judgment is so fallible that we cannot think of all 
the contingencies that might arise in respect to that matter. For 
that reason, I think that this is an unwise restriction. Certainly, 
the Legislature has been prudent heretofore with local bills of 
this character. 

MR. WADDELL—I desire to call the attention of the dele¬ 
gate to Section 2443 of the present Code, “The Court of County 
Commissioners of the several counties is invested with a general 
superintendence of the public roads within their respective coun¬ 
ties, and may establish and change and discontinue old roads, in 
the manner hereinafter provided.” 

MR. WEATHERLY—I know it does, but I doubt if under 
that statute the Court of County Commissioners could close up a 
public road, if anybody objected to it. A municipality cannot do 
it. A town cannot do it. The public acquires a right to the road 
when it is opened. Every individual composing that public ac¬ 
quire a right to the use of that public road. 

MR. WILLETT—And have an easement in it. 

MR. WEATHERLY—And they have an easement in it. 

MR. WADDELL—Here is what the Supreme Court says as 
to that: “The power herein exercised is quasi legislative, and 
other courts will not revise, except in so far as it interferes with 
property rights.” 

MR. WEATHERLY—I understand that is the effect of the 
statute, but if the gentleman remembers those decisions hold that 
so far as the municipality is concerned, or the town or city, they 
cannot close up a highway. A Board of Aldermen, or a Mayor and 
Aldermen, cannot close it up if any one objects. 

MR. BOONE—Is it not a fact that that express point has 
been decided by the Supreme Court, in the case of the City of Mo¬ 
bile, against the L. and N. R. R., in the 125th Alabama? 

MR. WEATHERLY—Certainly it was, and it has been de¬ 
cided in quite a number of other cases, and I think the same propo¬ 
sition applies to the county authorities. 

MR. BOONE—I move the previous question on the motion 
of the gentleman from Colbert. 

MR. GRANT—I hope the gentleman will withdraw that. I 
want to ask a question of the chairman of the committee. 

The motion was withdrawn. 



1896 


OFFICIAL PROCEEDINGS 


MR. GRANT—I want to inquire if the effect of this sub¬ 
division here would be to prevent the General Assembly from pass¬ 
ing a special road law for any county of the State? 

MR. O'NEAL—It does. 

MR. GRANT—If that is the case, Mr. President, I am in favor 
of striking that sub-division out, and for these reasons. The move¬ 
ment for good roads in this State has always met an opposition 
from the people of the county who have to endure the taxes to get 
the roads. I remember in our county, and we are one of the coun¬ 
ties that, by a system of taxation, has the best roads in that section 
of the State, and the first bill looking to taxation for the improve¬ 
ment of the roads aroused furious indignation among the taxpay¬ 
ers in the county. A subsequent Legislature, in obedience to that 
sentiment repealed the law. The Legislature following reinstated 
it, and now Calhoun County has the best roads in Northeast Ala¬ 
bama by a system of taxation adopted especially as to that county, 
and there is now no tax that the people of the county pay with 
more cheerfulness and no people take greater pride in their roads. 
As has been stated by the gentleman from Lee, different counties 
need different conditions and laws, and I do not believe that any 
general law can be passed that will suit all counties alike in this 
State. One tax for Calhoun would do the work, but the same tax 
for Cleburne, or any of the adjoining counties would be too much. 
I believe the Legislature ought to be able to deal with this question, 
where it embraces as large a territory as the counties of the State. 
It seems we are cutting off all local legislation entirely. I think 
the Legislature ought to be left free in some measure for the adop¬ 
tion of local legislation on so important a question as the public 
roads of the State. For that reason, I want to say that I will vote 
for the motion to lay the subdivision on the table. 

MR. OATES—I yielded to the gentleman from Calhoun. I 
have a few words to say in reply. I do not agree with the answer 
that he received, that this provision would prevent legislation such 
as he stated might be desirable for his county. This is to prevent lo¬ 
cal acts for the laying out, opening, altering, working roads or high¬ 
ways, but where such legislation was desired by the county, as in¬ 
dicated by the delegate from Calhoun, this does not inhibit that, 
and he will find that there is another provision here, a proposition 
that we have not come to yet, and which doubtless will be adopted, 
providing that where any thing is desired in the way of local legis¬ 
lation which has not been or cannot be properly provided for by a 
general law, that local legislation may be had to effectuate it. It 
would be nonsensical to tie up the Legislature so that it never 
could pass an act in any case. That is not what is intended. It is 
to stop unnecessary acts. For instance, a member may get up and 
desire to introduce a bill to exempt A, B and C in his county, from 
road duty, and, as a matter of courtesy, as the thing is now, he 



CONSTITUTIONAL CONVENTION. 1901 


1897 


would be exempted. We do not want to have that kind of legis¬ 
lation. There has been much more of it than gentlemen claim 
upon this floor, and there would be a general law authorizing the 
County Commissioners to do all of these things. You will find that 
under a general law that they would be authorized to do these 
things, and, therefore, there would be no necessity for special 
enactment, but in cases where the county desires to make large 
improvements in its roads, and it cannot be effectuated under the 
general law, that is the best of reasons and is covered by a propo¬ 
sition which this Convention will soon be called upon to enact, 
that the legislative hands are to be untied and they may pass a local 
law to meet such exigencies. 

MR. HARRISON—Please point us to the provision to which 
you refer, leaving it to the discretion of the Legislature to say 
when they should do that. 

MR. OATES—It is in several sections here. 

MR. HARRISON—Of this report? 

MR. OATES—Yes, and in the Legislative Department, too. 

MR. HARRISON—Then under the decision of the Supreme 
Court, would not the Legislature have the full authority to act 
upon it? 

MR. OATES—They will not have their hands tied as I stated 
just now. The gentleman’s proposition as I said a few minutes 
ago, ought to have satisfied the gentleman from Lee, and that is, 
for instance, where a Court of County Commissioners or a Board 
of Revenue have not the power under a general law to accomplish 
what is desired in the county, and the general law cannot be framed 
or has not been framed or enacted, the Legislature is perfectly 
free to enact a local measure to accomplish what is desired. There 
is no doubt about that. Now as there is no amendment pending. 
I move the adoption of this subdivision, it is as good as a motion 
to lay on the table or anything of that kind because if the gentlemen 
do not want it they can vote it down. I move the adoption of this 
subdivision. 

MR. BEDDOW—The gentleman from Calhoun moved to lay 
Section 26 on the table. 

MR. OATES—The gentleman did not do so, and I did not 
yield the floor to him for any such purpose. 

MR. GRANT—No, I said I would be in favor of such a mo¬ 
tion. 

MR. OATES—I move its adoption. If it is not acceptable to 
the Convention let them vote it down and go on. 



1898 


OFFICIAL PROCEEDINGS 


MR. DENT—I send up an amendment. 

The amendment was read as follows: 

Move to amend Subdivision 29, by striking out Subdivision 
29 of Article I., now under consideration. 

MR. DENT—Mr. President, I think enough has been shown 
in the discussion of this question to indicate that this is at least, 
of doubtful propriety. The distinguished gentleman from Mont¬ 
gomery who last addressed the Convention said that this was pro¬ 
vided for, as I understood him, in Section 2 of this Article. That 
is under certain conditions that a county could get a local law. 
I do not so read that Section. The Section 2 which I will read a 
line or two from is as follows: “No special, private or local Jaw, 
shall be passed on any subject not enumerated in Section 1." It 
not only prevents the passage of special laws upon all the subjects 
enumerated, but then it goes further and says that it shall not be 
done upon subjects not enumerated, except under certain condi¬ 
tions. If we pass this subdivision, it seems to me that it will be 
in conflict with any effort to have a special law of any kind. 

MR. OATES—Will you read this amendment. Thi s is what 
I was going to offer. 

MR. DENT—I will read it. “There shall be appointed in each 
House of the Legislature a standing Committee on Local and Pri¬ 
vate Legislation, the House Committee to consist of nine Repre¬ 
sentatives and the Senate Committee of five Senators. No local or 
private bill shall be passed by either House, until it shall have 
been referred to such committee thereof, and shall have been re¬ 
ported back with the recommendation in writing that it be passed, 
stating the reasons therefor and why the ends to be accomplished 
cannot be reached by a general law, or by a proceeding in court, 
or if the recommendation of the Committee be that the bill do not 
pass, then it shall not pass the House to which it is so reported, 
unless it be voted for by a majority of all the members elected 
thereto.” 

MR. O’NEAL—I desire to say on behalf of the Committee on 
Local Legislation that the Committee cannot accept that amend¬ 
ment, but will oppose it, because the effect of that amendment 
would completely destroy the Article. 

MR. HARRISON—I desire to ask permission of the delegate 
from Barbour to request in connection with the argument he was 
making when interrupted by the gentleman from Montgomery, 
that he read the first clause of the Article we are working on. 

MR. DENT—Yes, I think that is very plain. Besides we see 
there is going to be opposition to that. It is speculative to speak 
of what will be done in the future, and we cannot stand upon that. 



CONSTITUTIONAL CONVENTION. 1901 


1899 


As has been said upon this floor, the effort to secure good roads 
in this State has been commenced, and I think that it is one of the 
most important things that can be started in Alabama. If we 
had good roads in every county of the State, I am satisfied that it 
would increase the value of the lands in every county. I am satis¬ 
fied that it has done this in Calhoun, as stated by the delegate, and 
I am satisfied that it is doing it in Montgomery County. We are 
beginning the movement in Barbour, and I believe if we can suc¬ 
ceed in establishing good roads in that county, that it will increase 
the value of our lands, but while I am in favor of striking down so 
much local legislation, I think this is going too far. I do not believe 
that this Convention should put so many unelastic provisions in 
this Constitution. I renew the motion that the Section be stricken 
out. 

MR. O’NEAL—I desire to state to the Convention that this 
question was considered by the Committee on Local Legislation 
and there was so much opposition to it in the Committee that we 
declined to make any report on the subject. We accepted this 
supplemental report out of deference to the superior judgment and 
wisdom of the Committee on Legislative Department, but that 
Committee did not alter our views as to the propriety of that pro¬ 
vision. In the county of Lauderdale we have a special law on the 
subject of roads, which is working admirably, though some amend¬ 
ment to it is desirable. This provision would prevent any amend¬ 
ment to that law. I think the discussion has consumed sufficient 
time, and I now move the previous question on the subdivision 
and the pending amendment. 

Upon a vote being taken the main question was ordered and 
upon a further vote being taken the amendment offered by the 
gentleman from Barbour was adopted. 

Subdivision 30 was read: 

Providing for the management or the support of any common 
or private school, incorporating the same, or granting such school 
any privileges. 

MR. MERRILL—I have an amendment. 

The amendment was read as follows: 

Amend Subdivision 30 by adding at the end thereof, “not 
now provided for by law.” 

MR. MERRILL—There are in the State of Alabama several 
cities which enjoy under the present state of the law what ought 
to be termed special privileges. Among those cities is the one 
from which I come. I will be said by some that the adoption of 
this Section will not impair the right now held and enjoyed by 
those cities, while it will be held by others that this does and will 



1900 


OFFICIAL PKOCF.FDlX(*S 


impair the right that I speak of. Therefore, the question will be 
one of construction and for the purpose of putting it beyond that 
and making assurance doubly sure, I ask that this amendment be 
adopted. If it be true that the adoption of the Section without 
being amended will interfere with the rights and privileges that I 
speak of, then it cannot be gainsaid that those rights can ever be 
changed by an amendment or affected in any way by a statute. 
Suppose as in the city of Kufaula, where the school which is lo¬ 
cated there is supported by money arising from licenses, that the 
city increases and grows; suppose it is desired that the licenses 
should be increased far above where they now stand. If that was 
sought to be done with this section in here as it now stands, we 
would have to stop right there. I do not suppose it is the desire 
of the Convention to go so far in the framing of this Constitution, 
as to tear down or interfere with or cripple the institutions in the 
State that are now prospering. Among those institutions, as I 
say, is the school in the city from which I hail, a public school that 
is supported almost exclusively from the revenue obtained from 
the traffic in whiskey. The city has built a beautiful school house 
and it is filled to overflowing, and now they are building an addi¬ 
tion to that school house, and it is filled, not alone with children 
that live in Eufaula, but those who come from the surrounding 
country, because its doors are open and the tuition is free. It lias 
become an institution in our city that the people regard and con¬ 
sider with the same reverence and respect that they do their church¬ 
es, and it will be a grievous error if anything were done in this 
Convention that would impede the progress of that and other 
schools in this State. This would certainly be a backward step 
in the cause of education, and therefore I ask the Convention to 
adopt this amendment. Do not let our anxiety go so far as to 
local legislation that we will impair or obstruct the progress of 
these institutions that have been living and prospering on the 
money derived from license taxes. Not only in the city of Kufaula, 
but there are other cities in like condition, and with this placed in 
the Constitution, those institutions will be stricken down. Leave the 
matter where it belongs, in the hands of the General Assembly. 
If they see in their wisdom that we are enjoying privileges that 
ought to be taken away from us let them do so, but do not let a 
body of men which met for the purpose of making an organic law, 
put into it any clause, or any paragraph that looks like a striking 
of local institutions. 

MR. SMITH (Mobile)—I am aware of the fact that this pro¬ 
vision applies only to the passage of such acts, and I am aware 
that the passage or adoption of this particular section would not 
at this time affect the public schools of the city of Mobile. Never¬ 
theless it seems to me that there is a danger in this provision to 
that system, and I am opposed to the section as originally drafted, 
on account of that danger. The system that we have in our city 



CONSTITUTIONAL CONVENTION, 1901 


1901 


and county, is the result of a growth, under a system of law, as I 
understand it, which has obtained ever since 1854. From that time 
down to the present, there have been innumerable legislatures 
which have made attacks upon that system, and while it is true 
up to this time the representatives of our county have always been 
able to satisfy the General Assembly that it was to the interest of 
the State to permit that system to be maintained in its integrity, 
yet it is also true that except for the continued watchfulness of the 
r( pre>entatives from our city, it might have been undermined in 
material particulars at any given time, upon a misunderstanding 
of the system and its operation. It may be that in the future Mo¬ 
bile will fail to be represented by watchful representatives as she 
has been in the past, and on an occasion of that sort, when the 
matter is not properly laid before the General Assembly that act 
may be in some material respects altered or amended. If such 
was the case, and that alteration or amendment were made it 
would be impossible ever to redeem her position and get back to 
the status where she now is and has been since 18^4. For that 
reason it seems to me that this is an extremely dangerous provision 
to the school svstein of the city of Mobile, and I oppose it on that 
ground, and also because of the danger that would threaten every 
other school svstem which enjoys a special privilege in the State 
of Alabama. They will not be stricken down by this provision n 
it is incorporated into the Constitution, but it will stand as a menace 
over their heads from the day of its adoption, until the Constitution 
is altered in that respect. If they are ever stricken a blow in this 
matter, thev will never be able to recuperate, and for my part 
desire to see the Constitution in such a condition that if they are 
stricken a blow by the Legislature, there will be an opportunity 
for them to be restored to their present status. 


In justification to the Mobile school system I want to say 
that it was the first public school system that was inaugurated in 
the State of Alabama. It was inaugurated long before 1854, by 
contributions from the people, maintained by the people at a 
heavv expense, expensive buildings were erected, and its system 
has been fostered and protected, and it has been and is today a 
school svstem that this or any other State in the American bn.on 
might well be proud of. Now, not only is it a public school system 
for the county of Mobile, hut it is conducted so far as the High 
Schools are concerned, as a Normal School and its influence is not 
confined to either the city or county of Mobile but its doors are 
open to the child of any citizen in the State of Alabama, to receive 
without charge or expense of any kind the benefits of ^cation. 
In recent years we have had a large number of scholars, com¬ 
ing from other counties. They are freely admitted without 
charge, and educated, and sent throughout the State of Alabama 
as teachers in the public schools. I am reliably informed that 
today there are more teachers in the common schools of Alabama 



1902 


OFFICIAL PROCEEDINGS 


who receive their education at the High Schools in the city of Mo¬ 
bile, than there are from all of the other Normal Schools in the 
State combined. 

MR. COLEMAN—Does not the argument that you have 
made, as well as the remarks of the gentleman from Barbour ap¬ 
ply with equal force to institutions which might hereafter desire 
to be incorporated for educational purposes? Why limit it then 
to schools which now exist? Would it not be safer to strike out 
the provisions entirely? 

MR. SMITH (Mobile)—What the gentleman from Oreene 
says is true, but so far as I am concerned, it has always been a 
rule of my life not to fight any more men than I have to meet, as 
I believe such a principle is a bad one. I believe in maintaining 
the school. I do not believe in putting any restriction upon the 
right of the State of Alabama to improve her system of educa¬ 
tion, whether that system is in Mobile or elsewhere, but the gen¬ 
tleman from Barbour has introduced this resolution and it was 
sufficiently broad to protect the schools in his town and suffi¬ 
ciently broad to protect the schools in my county. I beg this 
Convention not to strike down or to hamper the efficiency of our 
schools in Mobile. I do not rise to defend the section in any part 
or parcel thereof, and to conclude I move to lay the amendment 
and the subdivision upon the table. 

MR. OATES—May I ask the delegate from Mobile to with¬ 
draw that for a few minutes? 

MR. SMITH (Mobile)—I will withdraw the motion. 

MR. OATES — I want to give the Convention the reasons 
why the committee recommended the provision, and then if the 
Convention sees proper to strike it out, all right, I will have done 
my duty. The gentlemen are aware who are opposing it actively, 
that it is not so framed that this sub-division would have any 
retroactive effect, and as to the schools of which they speak, they 
would not be affected at all. 

I am not unfamiliar with the system which Mobile has. and 
has had for so long, that it is almost like the common law. I 
remember in 1870, and 71, when I had the honor of being a mem¬ 
ber of the Lower House of the Legislature, that I co-operated 
with the members from Mobile, Judges Semmes and Harry Toul- 
min, when an assault was made upon Mobile's city schools, and 
aided them in sustaining and retaining it as it was" There is no 
disposition to break it down, but this thing grows and the acts of 
the Legislature are passed in favor of this locality and the other, 
granting them peculiar privileges, in many instances, without go¬ 
ing into the particulars to enumerate them, to the detriment of 
other matters and of the school fund. 



1903 


CONSTITUTIONAL CONVENTION, 1901 

MR. I-OSTKR What was meant by the word “common” 
there as applied to schools. Does it mean the public schools of 
the State? H 

MR. OATES-Yes, that is the meaning. 

MR. EOS 1 ER—Don’t you think that the Legislature, which 
supports those schools entirely, ought to have control of them? 

MR. OATES— They ought not to grant any special privilege 
to one over another, hut they ought to treat them all alike. At 
least, that was the view of the committee. It was to secure great¬ 
er uniformity in education touching the matter of legislation. Not 
to suppress it, not to injure any particular school, but as this 
thing seemed to be continually growing, giving particular locali¬ 
ties favoritism and advantages not enjoyed by people generally, 
and it ought to be stopped as far as future legislation is concern¬ 
ed. I have no idea that any number of the committee intended 
anything of detriment whatever to the existing schools, but only 
that that practice should be stopped and not indulged in by any 
other Legislatures. That was my view of it, and I think I state 
the view of the committee correctly. 

MR. BOONE—Governor, I will ask you if, under this Sub¬ 
division 30, as argued by my colleague, Mr. Smith, if the Legis¬ 
lature should repeal the Act of 1854 with reference to the schools 
of Mobile County, could the General Assembly thereafter, with 
that provision in the Constitution, renew or re-enact the present 
system ? 

MR. OATES—I think they could not pass any original law, 
if it was once repealed, though the enactment of this provision, 
nor its absence, would prevent the General Assembly from re¬ 
pealing the law. It does not affect that question at all. 

MR. MACDONALD—I will ask the chairman of the com¬ 
mittee whether it was not the purpose of his committee to direct 
this sub-division merely against private schools as contradistin¬ 
guished from public schools. When it speaks of common schools 
or private schools, it speaks of schools organized and started by 
private individuals. Is it not to prevent the incorporation or 
granting of special privileges to such private schools as contra¬ 
distinguished from the public schools of the State? 

MR. OATES—That was one consideration. 

MR. MACDONALD — That was my understanding when I 
voted for it. 

MR. OATES—I will say that my friend was on the commit¬ 
tee and participated in the discussion and understands it. 



1904 


OFFICIAL PROCKKDIN’C.S 


MR. LONG (Walker)—I would like to know why you do 
not put normal colleges and universities in as common schools? 

MR. OATES—I cannot give you any reason. I do not know 
why they are not in there. They are generally established under 
charters, like other schools that have been mentioned, and this 
provision was not intended to have any retroactive effect at all. 
I do not care to say anything more, but 1 desire to yield the 
floor to the gentleman from Mobile, who withdrew his motion at 
my request. 

MR. WHITE—I desire to ask the gentleman if this is adopt¬ 
ed will it not give Mobile and Eufaula an exclusive right along 
that line of special privileges that no other town or citv can ever 
get. Those that have special privileges now. will they not con¬ 
tinue to possess the special privileges until the Legislature shall 
repeal the law, under this provision, and at the same time will 
it not prevent any other town or city from securing a similar 
privilege? 


MR. OATES—That was the leading object of the commit¬ 
tee, to put a stop to it w'here it is. 

MR. WHITE—I would like for it to go on a little longer 
until it strikes my end of the country. 

MR. OATES—The delegate from Mobile yielded to me with¬ 
drawing his motion to table, and I now yield the floor to him. 

MR SMITH (Mobile)—If the gentleman from Jefferson will 
renew the motion. I will withdraw it. 


MR. WHITE—I will do so. I am in favor of tabling the 
proposition and will gladly make the motion, but I am in favor 
of it for a different reason than those who have favored it here- 

1 am in [ avor ? f because I do not think that the schools 
that ha\e special privileges at the expense of the State ought to 
be left permanently to enjoy those privileges when other cities and 
towns can never have the opportunity of enjoving them. In other 
words if Mobile is to enjoy the entire amount of liquor licenses 
collected in that city and apply them to her local schools and if 
Eufaula is allowed the same privilege, or any other town’or city 
is allowed that privilege, just as soon as we can do it I want to 

8 hn,?J rm, r g K I" th ? dass - 1 do not ^e any reason why we 
should not be put in that class, and I would like to see the cRy 

of Montgomery enjoy the same privileges. I believe in schools 
as much as any delegate upon this floor but I believe in schools 
being maintained upon terms of equality and right and for m 
life I cannot see why the richest city in Alabama the citv of Mo- 
bile having more wealth per capita than any other city in the State 
of Alabama, should retain for its local schools the exclusive use 
of the liquor licenses derived in that city, when every other dty 



1905 


CONSTITUTIONAL CONVKNTION, 1901 

in the State, with a few exceptions, pour it into the general fund. 
They say that it ought to be left to the Legislature. I say, Mr. 
President, that if the Legislatures had the opportunity since 1854, 
and have not acted up to this time, it is time that the Constitu¬ 
tion makers should take charge of it. 

MR. OA 1 KS I will say that instead of going backward, that 
the Legislature has been progressing in that direction, and ex¬ 
tending these privileges to one place after another. 

MR. \\ HI Th—Yes, and it is perfectly right, if they are to 
enjoy it, then the others ought to be allowed the same privileges. 

1 hat would equalize it possibly to some extent. 

MR. KYLL—I would like to ask the gentleman if it is true 
that a great wrong has been done the people of the State by these 
special privileges, why should not this Convention abrogate those 
special privileges and put the people upon a plane of equality? 

MR. WHITE—That is what I advocate, and I say that I am 
in favor of striking down this provision, because it will continue 
to give these cities these advantages and these special privileges, 
and would never allow any other city to go in that class. 

MR. KYLE—Is it not best to wipe out these privileges and 
start new and give everybody a fair chance. 

MR. WHITE—Exactly, and when we get there I am going 
to be there with you, but I am talking about the question which 
is before the Convention. I believe in the equality of things, and 
I do not believe there should be special privileges for any city or 
any town or any man or any set of men. 

MR. O’NEAL—If the Convention had not stricken out the 
provision incorporated in the Article on Local Legislation, pro¬ 
hibiting any town, or city, from being granted any special privi¬ 
lege or franchise, would we not have reached Mobile? 

MR. WHITE—Well, I doubt that because this Constitution 
will only act upon future legislation. 

MR. O’NEAL—We would have prevented it in the future. 

MR. WHITE—That is the trouble, but if Mobile is going to 
enjoy it, I want Montgomery and Birmingham and Anniston and 
every other city in Alabama to enjoy it. 

MR. O’NEAL—I agree entirely in your view and will sup¬ 
port any amendment that will reach that result. 

MR. WHITE—That is the reason that I am opposed to this 
section. If it passes and becomes a part of the organic law, then 
we are left in a position where we can never enjoy the privileges 
which they enjoy. 



1906 


OFFICIAL I'KOCEKDINV.S 


MR. O’NEAL—Why do not you amend this section >o as to 
reach the end you seek? 

MR. WHITE—I think the best plan is to lay the section on 
the table, and then when we get to the other proposition, to lay 
that out as well. 


MR. PRESIDENT—Does the gentleman make that motion? 


MR. WHITE—Yes, sir; I agreed to do it and it affords me a 
very great pleasure to do so. 

MR. KYLE—Will the gentleman withdraw and let me in¬ 
troduce an amendment providing that all special privileges which 
are now enjoyed are hereby annulled? 

MR. WHITE—I think that will come up better at a later time. 
I do not think that this is a proper place for that. 

Upon a vote being taken the motion to table was carried. 

Subdivision 31 was read as follows: Granting anv land own¬ 
ed by or under control of the State to any person or corporation. 

Mr. Watts offered an amendment which was read as follows: 
By adding the following: “Provided, rights of wav over public 
lands may be granted.’’ 


MR. SAMFORD (Pike)—I rise to ask the gentleman a ques¬ 
tion. Isn’t that already the law. Haven't we got a general law 
that permits a right of way over public lands? 

MR. WATTS Here is an inhibition against granting anv 
land owned by or under control of the State for any purpose. 

• SAMFORD But haven’t we a general law providing 
a right of way over the lands of the State? 


MR. WATTS—Yes, 
not contravene the other, 
consistent. 


sir; and consequently this section would 
If you put it in as it is it will be in- 


MR. LONG (Walker) — Would not that prevent the State 
from deaims ,n .te coal lands? The State hk some valuable 

£nds? nd a " d W ° Uk '* n0t prevent lhc Slat <- from leasing those 


MR. OATES—Not at all. 
lands, but herely controls them 


T he State does not own the coal 
as trustee. 


MR. O’NEAL—Would it not be better 
nate. You grant land by deed. 


to use the 


word do- 


MR. OATES—I have no objection to that word. 



o institutional convention. 1901 


1907 


THK PRESIDENT - 

consent to strike out the 
“donating ? M 


- Does the gentleman ask unanimous 
word “granting" and insert the word 


MR. OATES—Yes, sir. 


There being no objection tile amendment was allowed. 

MR. WAT IS—I desire to withdraw my amendment with 
the consent of the Convention. 


There being no objection the amendment was withdrawn. 


MR. BURNS—I offer an amendment as follows: Amend 
subdivision 31 by adding the following: Except the biennial grant 
of State lamK to Emma Sansom Jackson, as now provided by law. 

MR. BURNS I don’t suppose there will be any objection to 
that amendment and that it will be unnecessary to make any re¬ 
marks. It there be any opposition to the amendment, I will take 
great pleasure in referring the Convention to the distinguished 
ex-attorney general who is authority on the subject of heroism. 

MR. OATES -The amendment has no operation. The grant 
of land by the State to Emma Sansom, the maiden name of that 
lads', ha> never been complied with, because the State has not got 
the land. Thev cannot find the land to give it to her. I am very 
sorry to say and this has no retroactive effect, and would not 
affect that at all. and therefore, I move to lay the amendment on 
the table. 


MR. BURNS—Will the gentleman withdraw one moment, 
in order that the gentleman from Tuscaloosa may say a few words 
upon this subject? 

MR. OATES—I withdraw the motion, Mr. President. 


MR. HEFLIN (Chambers)—I understand that the motion 
is withdrawn— 

MR. BURNS—I hope that the gentleman from Tuscaloosa 
will explain— 

THE PRESIDENT — Does the gentleman from Chambers 
desire to debate this question? 


MR HEFLIN (Chambers)—The people of our State know 
nothin* of the intense suffering of the majority of the delegates 
this Convention. Their suffering from heat, and suffering 


in this ccumiuiun. xn^n —-- ' . 

from the continued flow of impassioned speech. We arc• cha,ne(i 
here bv the side of the dashing torrents of unrestrained and tear- 
stained eloauence, Mr. President, and under its mighty power 
the delegates of this Convention are physically weakening and 
withering day by day. We ask humbly that the judgment of the 



1908 


OFFICIAL PROCEKDINT.S 


people of the State be suspended, and that sympathy be allowed 
to shed a tear. Unless the people were here, Mr. President, and 
could see as we see, feel as we feel, and suffer as we >utftr, they 
cannot know our hardships and our struggles, but they cannot be 
here, Mr. President. 

The dew drop that laughs on the lily s cheek, can never 
know the story of the sea; the violet that blooms by the babbling 
brook, knows nothing of the ebb and flow; the “joree ’ that bounds 
among the brier blossoms knows nothing of the eagle’s mountain 
dream. There are times when we would gladly exchange places 
with the dew drop, swop places with the violet, exchange places 
with the “joree” in the brier patch, and from the city’s busy hum, 
and from the chain of debate break loose, and go where the cat 
can climb the catnip tree, and the gooseberry clings to the goose ; 
where the partridge drums his drum, and the wood chucks his 
wood; where the dog devours the dogwood bloom, in blissful soli¬ 
tude. 

There are times when delegates are seated immediately in 
front of a speaker, when there is no possible way of escape from 
his seat, and he must sit, look up and listen throughout the length 
of the fence corner debate. On yesterday I saw a sad, sad sight. 
A delegate fastened down immediately in front of an impassioned, 
earnest speaker, there was no way of escape, he had to sit and 
listen to the speech and at the conclusion of it he expired. Slow¬ 
ly and sadly the delegate fell, he squirmed, he wept, and he sigh¬ 
ed, and his strength being gone he broke the spell, folded his arms 
and died. Mr. President, it was not shortness of breath that took 
my friend away, but it was the talking of a man entirelv to death 
by a delegate that hot day. 

I therefore, Mr. President, move to lav the amendment on the 
table. 

Upon a vote being taken the motion to table was carried. 

MR. BURNS—I desire to call the Chair’s attention to the 
fact that I voted aye for the purpose of moving a reconsideration. 

MR. OATES—I now move the adoption of the subdivision as 
amended. 

Upon a vote being taken a division was called for and bv a 
vote of 73 ayes to 9 noes the Section was adopted. 

The clock striking 1, the Convention thereupon adjourned 
until 3 :30 this afternoon. 



1909 


CON'STITI’TIO.NAI. CONVENTION. 1901 


AFTERNOON SESSION 

1 he (.onuntion nut pursuant to adjournment, there being 
delegate?, present upon the call of the roll. 

Lea\e> of alienee were granted as follows: Indefinite leave 
lor Mr. Lock 1 in, on account of sickness; Mr. Weatherly of Jef¬ 
ferson, lor this afternoon; Mr. Sollie of Dale, for today; Mr. Tay¬ 
lor, for today. 

MR. LOWE (Jefferson) — 1 ask unanimous consent to intro¬ 
duce an ordinance. 


Leave \va> granted, and the Clerk read the ordinance as 
follows: 


( hdinance No. 417 by Mr. Lowe (Jefferson). 

An ordinance to amend Section 13 of an ordinance entitled 
"An ordinance to create and define the Executive Department.” 


Be it ordained by the people of Alabama in Convention as¬ 
sembled: That Section 13 of an ordinance heretofore adopted by 
this Convention and entitled an ordinance to create and define 
the Executive Department, be amended so as to read as follows: 


Sec. 12. Every bill which shall have passed both Houses of 
the General Assembly shall be presented to the Governor. If he 
approves, he shall sign it; but if not, he shall return it with his 
objections to that House in which it shall have originated, who 
shall enter the objections at large upon the Journal and proceed 
to reconsider it: if. after such reconsideration, a majority of the 
whole number elected to that House shall agree to pass the bill 
it shall be sent, with the objections, to the other House, by which 
it shall likewise be reconsidered; if approved by a majority of the 
whole number elected to that House, it shall become a law; but 
in such case, the votes of both Houses shall be determined by 
veas and nays: and the names of the members voting for or 
against the bill shall lie entered on the Journals of each House 
respectively. Anv bill which shall have been vetoed by the Gov¬ 
ernor mav be amended and again presented to the Governor for 
his approval; in which event the provisions of this section shall 
in all respects apply thereto. If any bill shall not be returned by 
the Governor. Sundavs excepted, within six days after it shall ha\e 
been presented, the'same shall become a law m like manner as 
if he had signed it, unless the General Assembly by their adjourn¬ 
ment or recess, prevent its return, in which case it shall not be a 
law: but bills presented to the Governor within five days before 
the adjournment of the General Assembly may be approved by 
the Governor at any time within ten days after the final adjourn¬ 
ment, if approved and deposited with the Secretary of State with¬ 
in that time. Every vote, order or resolution to which concur- 



1910 


OFFICIAL PROCEEDINGS 


rence of both houses may be necessary, except questions of ad¬ 
journment, and the bringing on of elections by the two Houses, 
and amending this Constitution shall be presented to the Gov¬ 
ernor; and, before the same shall take effect, be approved by him; 
or being disapproved, shall be re-passed by both Houses according 
to the rules and limitations prescribed in the case of a bill. 

Referred to the Committee on Executive Department. 

MR. HEFLIN (Randolph)—1 desire to make a report from 
the Committee on Schedule, Printing and Incidental Expenses. 

The Clerk read the report as follows: 

MR. PRESIDENT — The Committee on Schedule. Printing 
and Incidental Expenses have instructed me to make the following 
partial report, viz.: 

The Committee has audited the accounts hereto attached and 
find that the State of Alabama is indebted to the Brown Printing 
Company, of Montgomery. Ala., in the sum $176. < K) for printing. 

We find that said State is indebted to J. W. Terry of Mont¬ 
gomery, Ala., for the use of a typewriter from May 24 to June 24. 
in the sum of $5. 

We find that said State is indebted to Ed. C. Fowler Co., of 
Montgomery, Ala., in the sum of $8.60. 

We find that said State is indebted to J. \Y. Terry of Mont¬ 
gomery, Ala., in the sum of $16 for services rendered Rules Com¬ 
mittee up to May 27, 1901. 

We find that said State is indebted to W. W. Havgood of 
Montgomery, Ala., in the sum of $1.25. ' . 

We find that said State is indebted to Miss Eunice Richards 
for typewriting done for Committee on Preamble and Declara¬ 
tion of Rights in the sum of $7.50. 

We find that said State is indebted to Marshall & Bruce Co., 
of Nashvdle, Tenn., in the sum of $48.25. 

We find that said State is indebted to Ed C. Fowler Co, of 
Montgomery, Ala., in the sum of $4.75. 

We find that said State is indebted to Jos. E. Longstreet in 
the sum of $8 for services rendered to the Committee on Suffrage 
and Elections, in making fifty-four copies of the Report of said 
Committee. 

We find that said State is indebted to (Miss) Georgia Con¬ 
nelly in the sum of $6 for stenographic work done for Committee 
on Suffrage and Elections. 



1911 


l'< »NSI ITUTlONAl. CONVKNTION. 1901 


V* an,ount s are for printing done, for articles 

rurrii-hed State of Alabama for use of Constitutional Convention, 
and tor m-i vrx^ rendered to Committee of said Convention, and all 
of tile above amounts are itemized as shown by bills hereto at¬ 
tached. lotal amount ($282.25) two hundred and eighty-two and 
25-100 dollars, and we recommend the payment of the same, all of 
which is respectfully submitted. " John T. Heflin. 

Chairman Committee on Schedule, Printing and Incidental Kx- 

penses. 

MR. HRhLIN I move that the report take the usual course, 
lie on the table and he printed. 

The motion was adopted. 

MR. PROCTOR—The Committee on the Journal asks unani¬ 
mous consent to make a favorable report on Ordinance No. 409. 

Leave was granted, and the Clerk read the report as follows: 


Ordinance No. 409. bv Mr. Carmichael (Colbert) : 

To provide for the filing and arranging of the papers and 
documents pertaining to the Constitutional Convention; also to 
provide for the delivery by the Secretary of a correct copy of the 
journal of the Convention to the Public Printer with a proper in¬ 
dex thereto: also to provide for the superintendence of the print¬ 
ing of said Journal by the Secretary; also to make appropriations 
for the compensation of said Secretary for his services. 

He it ordained by the people of Alabama in Convention as¬ 
sembled. That the Secretary of this Convention shall within forty 
flays after its adjournment, file, label and arrange the Journal of 
said Convention and all the papers and documents pertaining to 
said Convention in the office of the Secretary of State. He shall 
also copy and deliver to the Public Printer the Journal of said 
Convention with a proper index thereto within said forty days. 
He shall also superintend the printing, and read and correct the 
proof of said Journal. 

He it further resolved. That for the services herein required 
of said Secretary he shall receive the sum of five hundred dollars 
($500.00) and upon the production by the said Secretary of the 
receipt of the Secretary of State for such papers. Journal and docu¬ 
ments required to be filed and labeled together with the receipt 
of the Public Printer for a copy of the Journal of the Convention, 
the State Auditor shall draw his warrant upon the State Treasury 
for said amount herein provided, and the said warrant shall he 
paid by the State Treasurer. 

Be it further resolved, That there is hereby appropriated out 
of any money in the State Treasury not otherwise appropriated, 



1912 


OFFICIAL PROCKKDIN< '■ S 


the sum of five hundred dollars ($500.00) for the compensation 
of the said Secretary for the said services herein required of him. 

THE PRESIDENT— The ordinance will lie on the table and 
be printed. 

THE PRESIDENT— The special order will be the considera¬ 
tion of the report of the Committee on Legislative Department 
to be considered in relation with section on Local Legislation. 
The Convention had already reached Subdivision 32: "Remitting 
fines, penalties or forfeitures." 

There being no objection or amendment, Section 32 was adopt¬ 
ed. 

The clerk here read Subdivision 33. 


33. Providing for the conduct of elections, or designating 
places of voting, or changing the boundaries of wards, precincts 
or districts, except on the organization of new counties. 

MR. THOMPSON (Bibb)—I offer an amendment to strike 
out the words "providing for the conduct of elections, etc." Under 
that, the Legislature could not pass a local law to provide for the 
vote of a county as to whether they should issue bonds, or a mu¬ 
nicipality as to whether they should have a stock law, dispensary, 
prohibition or local option or anything along that line, and I do 
not see how it would be possible for the General Assemble to 
provide for those cases under a general law, and therefore 1 hope 
that the amendment will be adopted and those words stricken out. 

MR. OATES — I have great respect for the opinion of mv 
young friend, the delegate from Bibb, but I cannot see the force 
of the amendment to strike out “Providing for the conduct of 
elections or because then if the amendment be carried, striking 
out providing for the conduct of elections locally and exceptions 
to the general rule. This of course prohibits the passage of anv 
local law providing for the conduct of elections to designate the 
place of those voting or changing the place of voting, except up¬ 
on the organization of new counties. If there be good reasons 
for the amendment of my friend. I would not object to it. but I 
have not seen one of them yet in his statement. I don't know why 
it is he wants to knock out providing for elections of a local char¬ 
acter, it is not intended to interfere with general provisions for 
elections at all. 


MR. HARRISON I would like to know from the Chairman 
of the committee, the necessity for this provision. Under the 
general law it provides that they should be all elected. 


MR. OATES Of course, and the Constitution in another 
part will provide—the old one had it no doubt—that laws govern¬ 
ing elections shall be general. This has no field of operation ex- 



CONSTITUTIONAL CONVENTION, 1901 


1913 


cept to prevent local legislation, to regulate elections in the lo¬ 
cality different from the general law, and it provides not only 
for the conduct of elections, but changing the boundaries of pre¬ 
cincts, etc., except the organization of new counties—that part is 
not objected to nor proposed to be amended. I am not able to 
see the reason for the amendment, therefore I don’t think it ought 
to be adopted. 

MR. SAMFORD (Pike)—1 desire to say to this Convention 
that 1 see this thing like the gentleman from Hibb. It occurs to 
me that if this subdivision prevails in its present form without the 
amendment, that the Legislature would be prohibited from pro¬ 
viding for any election for local matters. 

MR. WALKER (Madison) —- Would the gentleman permit 
me to make a suggestion? Would there be any difficulty at all in 
providing for holding local elections, etc.? 

MR. SAMFORD—Well, it is so much easier, Mr. President, 
whenever the Legislature is providing for the holding of an elec¬ 
tion, for them to provide for the holding of an election at that 
time, than it would be to pass a general law that would be ap¬ 
plicable to every phase of local matters, I do not see any necessity 
for this section. 

MR. O’NEAL—Will the gentleman permit an interruption? 
If you wish to pass a special law, could you not incorporate into 
it a provision as to elections? 

MR. SAMFORD *— I doubt whether you could under this 
clause. 

MR. O'NEAL—Certainly, if you pass a law about whiskey 
you would have the right to provide for an election in it. 

MR. SAMFORD—I may be in error about it, but it occurs 
to me you could not do it with a direct prohibition in the funda¬ 
mental law of the State. Suppose a county wanted to issue bonds. 
You have provided that it shall not be done without an election, 
and yet you go on here and say if the Legislature fails to pass a 
general law covering all of these local elections that then there 
would be no way of fixing by law for a county to vote for the 
issuance of bonds, or a town, municipality or anything else. 

MR. OATES—You are mistaken in that, because no report 
has been made yet that does not contain a clause that if these 
things are not provided for by general laws that the Legislature 
has full power to pass local laws. 

MR. O’NEAL—That provision for bonds requires a general 
law on the subject of elections, provides a law before bonds are is¬ 
sued, and after the election authorizes the issuance of bonds. The 
Legislature can pass a special law authorizing it. 



1914 


OFFICIAL FROCKKDIXOS 


MR. SAMFORD—For that or for any other local matter, and 
it is at least susceptible of these constructions, and, therefore, I 
do not see any necessity for putting a clause in the Constitution 
that is susceptible of two constructions where injury might result 
from it. I did not desire to cut off debate, and, therefore, did not 
move to lay the matter on the table for that reason, if anybody 
wishes to discuss it. 


THE PRESIDENT—The question is on the amendment of¬ 
fered by the gentleman from Bibb. Is the Convention ready for 
the question? 

The previous question was ordered, a division called for and. 
by a vote of 40 noes to 32 ayes, the amendment was defeated. 

MR. OATES—I move the adoption of the sub-division. 

MR. PARKER (Cullman)—I desire to offer an amendment. 

The clerk read the amendment as follows: 

Amend Sub-division 33 by adding to the same the word “and 
changing the lines of old counties." 


MR PARKER—That is offered for the reason that in the re¬ 
port of the Committee on State and Countv Boundaries we have 
a provision for a special election upon boundary lines of old coun¬ 
ties, and this is so that there will not he a conflict. 


MR OATES I have no objection to the amendment, ex¬ 
cepting that I see it is provided for in another place. I have no 

a s^a mended* ** * ^ 1 m ° Ve the atlo P tion of t,le Sub-division 


adopted™* S3 aye^and l^noIs^nfdlSon ** "' a * 

«ha t r q u“» d AEL pom. o,' order 

sarv— 1 the r rf ESIDE th T ~~ The chair wiH count a quorum if neces¬ 
sary there is more than a quorum in the House. 

MR. O NEAL I rise to a point of order. 

THE PRESIDENT—The gentleman «dll -m* , • 
order. gentleman uni ^tate his point ot 


MR. O'NEAL—Is there any rule requiring a quorum to vote? 
THE PRESIDENT—The chair think* 

rum be present. th k not ’ P rovi ^<ng a quo- 

MR. O’NEAL Does the chair count a quorum? 



CONSTITUTIONAL CONVENTION, 1901 


1915 


THE PRESIDENT—The chair will count the members pres¬ 
ent and not voting, 

MR. COBB—I wish to make a motion to reconsider the vote 
by which the amendment of the gentleman from Cullman was 
passed. Let it go over until tomorrow. On the whole section as 
amended. 

THE PRESIDENT—Would you prefer it to go over until 
tomorrow or to suspend the rules and consider it now? 

MR. COBB—Let it go over until tomorrow. 

The clerk read Sub-division 34 as follows: 

Thirty-fourth — Restoring the right to vote to persons con¬ 
victed of infamous crimes or involving moral turpitude. 

MR. WATTS —I have an amendment. 

The clerk read the amendment as follows: Amend Subdivision 
34 by inserting “crimes” between “or” and “involving.” 

MR. OATES—That is an omission in the printing and the 
amendment is entirely proper. 

A vote being taken, Sub-division 34, as amended, was adopted. 

The clerk read Sub-division 35 as follows: 

Thirty-fifth—Refunding money legally paid into the State 
Treasury. 

MR. PILLANS—I should be glad to hear from the gentleman 
who reported this. It strikes me that that is rather a dangerous 
section. For example, the Legislature that sat—not the last one, 
but the one prior to that—there was attempted to be passed a li¬ 
cense law. It was not lawfully passed, but it went into the print¬ 
ed statute books and the money was collected wrongfully and paid 
by the Probate Judges into the State Treasury. The State of 
Alabama could not have restored to the citizens the money which 
have been wrongfully extracted from them had this clause been 
in operation at that time. 

MR. WATTS—Could not the Legislature have passed a gen¬ 
eral law that wherever taxes had been paid in the manner de¬ 
scribed that they could be returned by the different Probate 
Judges? 

MR. PILLANS — It may be that this is confined to local 
laws. I just asked for information. 

MR. FITTS—I think this section is too far-reaching. There 
are times, it seems to me, when special bills could be enacted to 
pay money out of the treasury when money has gotten into the 



1916 


OFFICIAL PROCEEDINGS 


treasury technically in an illegal way, and there is one pending 
now which ought to be expected in this stanza or paragraph. It 
is a well-known fact that there is now in the Treasury of the State 
the sum of $56,000 which was paid in there by the Sloss-Sheffield 
Company in purchase of certain University lands, and that the 
controversy between that company and the University has been 
settled, and that a part of the settlement is that that money shall 
be by special act of the legislature paid back to the Sloss-Shef¬ 
field Company. The very fact that we are now face to face with 
one state of facts which will require a payment out of the State 
treasury by a special act, shows us that circumstances may arise 
of a similar nature in the future. Occasion may arise when money 
will be paid into the State treasury which ought to, and will have 
to be in all fairness and justice paid back, and such being the 
case. I do not think this Section, sweeping as it is. should be put 
into the fundamental law. 1 would like to hear from Mr. l)avis. 
a Trustee of the University, if any provision has been made to get 
that money out of the treasury except by special act? 

MR. DAVIS—I think not. 

MR. FITTS—And will it not require a special act of the legis¬ 
lature to get it out? 

MR. DAVIS—It has already been passed. 

MR. PETTUS—I will state to the gentleman that the act 
was passed bv the last legislature. 

MR. FITTS—My information was that the case had been 
settled, but if it has been passed the mere fact that we were so 
recently face to face with a situation of that kind shows that there 
may be circumstances come about in which such things are im¬ 
portant and necessary. 

MR. OATES — I think the delegates are very much under 
misapprehension about this provision if they will only think about 
it for a moment. “Refunding money legally paid into the State 
treasury.’’ Now, in the case stated by the delegate from Tusca¬ 
loosa—I do not know because I have never investigated it—but 
my information was that that money was paid in there before the 
transaction was entirely consummated, and that it never was paid 
to the credit of the State in the ordinary way. but laid there for 
the completion of the transaction. But without regard to that, 
if gentlemen will think for a moment, taxes or any money legally 
paid into the treasury shall not be taken out. Why, sir. if money 
be collected under a lawful tax law and paid into the Treasury, 
it don’t leave a semblance of a doubt that there is no obligation 
on the part of the State to pay back that money at all. and ought 
not to be, and in the case supposed by my learned friend or stated 
by him, of money wrongfully collected bv probate judges from 



O IXSTI'I ITIONAJ. CONVKNTION, 1901 


1917 


people who paid it over to the probate judges acted in good faith 
no doubt in paying the money into the treasury, it was money il¬ 
legally collected, and there is nothing in this provision to prevent 
the legislature from passing laws to refund or pay back money 
that is illegally collected. It is only when it is legally collected 
and paid into the State treasury that it shall not be refunded. 

MK. t < >LhM AN (Greene).Money collected under the law 

i-n t it legally collected at the time until the law is declared 
unconstitutional--how is that? 

MR. < ).\TKS Xo, it is collected under a law, but that law 
ultimately fails, and that reaches back and shows it was illegally 
collected. 'Pile gentleman cannot deny that proposition? 

MR. COLEMAN—The proposition is when that comes up in 
the probate court, they make the assessment, judgment is render¬ 
ed. taxes are paid under the law as it is at the time, and there is 
a valid decision by the court. 

MR. OATES—Yes, very often decisions of that kind made 
which fail on appeal to the court of last resort, are held to be no 
law—that is an illegal collection. 

MR. COLEMAN—I don’t know about that. 

MR. OATES—While it was legal at the time and the of¬ 
ficers were not trespassers, still it was not legally collected, if 
the law be subsequently declared to be no law, and this will not 
prevent the legislature in any case where money is illegally paid 
into the treasury, and that reaches back to where it was illegally 
collected. If such be the case, the legislature with this in force 
is perfectly capable of passing a law to refund it. but if legally 
collected—suppose in the case just now stated by the delegate 
from Greene that the law is upheld—is there any reason then, 
why it should be paid back? 

MR. COLEMAN—Permit me to ask a question again. 

MR. OATES—Certainly. 

MR. COLEMAN—To make the question plain: The circuit 
court has jurisdiction of the law, it declares the law to be consti¬ 
tutional and money is collected under that law. If there is no ap¬ 
peal, it is legally collected because it is under a judgment of a 
court that had jurisdiction. If it stops there, it is legally paid. 
If that law is declared unconstitutional subsequently, what are 
you going to do? 

MR. OATES—It does not change the proposition I asserted 
at all. Although it is so far legally enforced that the officers are 
not trespassers, would not be guilty of damage of responsibility 
in damages for a trespass, yet when the law is subsequently de- 



1918 


OFFICIAL PROCEEDINGS 


dared to be unconstitutional, it is no law, and never was any law, 
and it naturally goes back that this money was illegally collect¬ 
ed by the man coerced by a judgment which would not have 
stood before the court. The Legislature in such case, even where 
this is adopted, is perfectly competent to refund that money. 

THE PRESIDENT—The gentleman from Montgomery has 
consumed his time. 

MR. OATES—I was going to yield to the gentleman from 
Mobile. 

MR. PILLANS—I wish to ask a question of the gentleman. 

THE PRESIDENT—Proceed and ask the question. 

MR. PILLANS — Is there not a plain distinction between 
money illegally collected and money lawfully paid over. That was 
the distinction that I sought to draw. Where money was law¬ 
fully paid over to the Probate Judge it might be an illegal collec¬ 
tion, but when paid to the. officers of the Treasury, was it not a 
legal payment? 

MR. OATES—I will answer that by saying I don't think any 
court on the facts would so hold. 

MR. HARRISON—I think the question of the delegate from 
Mobile very pertinent, and I think the argument of the gentleman 
from Montgomery who argued that if money was legally col¬ 
lected you would have to make a decided difference from the sub¬ 
division as drawn when he uses the words legally paid into the 
State Treasury. But my objection goes further than any tech¬ 
nicality, even if it were amended. I don’t believe that this sub¬ 
division should be engrafted into the Constitution. 

I am heartily in favor of all reasonable curtailments of local 
legislation, but there is an article in our present Constitution, and 
one already adopted by this Convention forbidding the State of 
Alabama from ever being made a defendant in any suit. Cases 
frequently occur in the Legislature where a Chancery Court upon 
hearing would refund money although legally paid. I remember a 
case last session where representations were made by the officers 
of the State as to the sale of mineral lands, and these statements 
were false. The papers had all passed. The facts were presented 
to the Legislature, and there was no Chancery Court but would 
have refunded the money, and the Legislature of Alabama is the 
only representative of the State to pass on these cases. They say 
in one Section of the Constitution that Alabama shall not be 
sued. 

MR. OATES—Would not that be a legal collection? 



CONSTITUTIONAL CONVENTION, 1901 


1919 


MR. HARRISON — Certainly it would be legally collected. 
As well said by the gentleman from Greene in his inquiry, and 
also by the gentleman from Mobile, as long as a court of com¬ 
petent jurisdiction hold the tax claim valid, that it was legally 
collected, certainly when paid over to the Probate Judge or other 
officer, it was legally paid into the Treasury, and under the lan¬ 
guage of the subdivision itself, it could never be taken out by any 
local law, and consequently we do not wish to place in the Con¬ 
stitution an inhibition that will require the Legislature to pass 
on claims. How can they classify all claims illegally paid into the 
Treasury and pass a general law to cover such cases? I think it 
would be wrong and a hardship, and this Convention ought not 
to say to its citizens or anybody else dealing with the State of Ala¬ 
bama, independent of the legality of it, that if they have any 
equitable claim on the State of Alabama, holding as we do an in¬ 
hibition in the Constitution that the State shall not be made de¬ 
fendant in any suit, we should at least have some tribunal to pass 
upon the equity of claims made for money paid into the Treasury. 

MR. COLEMAN—I take issue with the delegate from Mont¬ 
gomery in his exposition of the law. There is no doubt in the 
world it is a principle of the law that if a question arises between 
two parties, and it is tried before a court of competent jurisdiction 
and judgment rendered, that that is final unless it is appealed as 
between those parties, and if subsequently the same question 
arises between different parties and the question is appealed to 
the Supreme Court between the latter parties and the Supreme 
Court holds that the law is unconstitutional, the first litigant in 
the first instance has no recourse—he has adjudicated. 

MR. OATES—May I interrupt you just there. I never said 
that he had any, but in the form of law wasn’t it illegally collect¬ 
ed? 

MR. COLEMAN—No, sir; legally done and so pronounced 
by a legal court. I go further. There are cases, an abundance 
of them, where rights have been adjudicated and so held by the 
Supreme Court of the United States, and the question would come 
up subsequently between other parties and a new phase of the 
case be presented to the Supreme Court, and the Supreme Court 
would reverse its decision and declare the law unconstitutional 
that had been declared constitutional. It was legally paid. Any 
money is legally paid that is paid under a court of competent 
jurisdiction unreversed, so it is dangerous to put this proposition 
here. 

MR. VAUGHAN (Dallas)—I move to lay Section 25 on the 
table. 

Motion to table was carried 



1920 


OFFICIAL PROCEEDINGS 


MR. BLACKWELL—I desire to offer an additional subdi¬ 
vision. Amend Section 1 of the report of the committee after line 
14, Subdivision 35, “declaring who shall be liners between coun¬ 
ties.” 

MR. OATES—We have not reached that subdivision. 

MR. FITTS—I raise the point of order that the proposition 
he suggests is an independent subdivision and can only come up 
when these subdivisions have been considered. 

MR. OATES—We are to go back to Subdivision 26, as I 

understand. 

MR. BLACKWELL — This is an additional subdivision to 
this section. 

THE PRESIDENT—It seems to the Chair that it would be 
in order at this time. 

The clerk read the amendment as follows: Amend Section 1 
of report of Committee on Legislation after line 14, Subdivision 
35, declaring who shall be liners between counties. 

THE PRESIDENT—That should be addressed to the re¬ 
port of the Committee on Local Legislation, that is the report 
under consideration. 

MR. WILLIAMS (Marengo)—There is a subdivision 36, sub¬ 
division 26 was subdivided into 26 and 36. 

THE PRESIDENT—No, it was withdrawn temporarily by 
the committee and not numbered at all. Subdivision 35 was 
stricken out. 

MR. WATTS—The Committee on “Harmonics” will straight¬ 
en them out, all right. 

THE PRESIDENT—The question is on the adoption of the 
amendment to be added as Subdivision 36. 

MR. JONES (Montgomery)—I would like to inquire from 
my friend from Morgan how you are going by a general law to 
provide for liners? 

MR. BLACKWELL—This is a prohibition to stop local leg¬ 
islation if it cannot be done by a general law the Court of County 
Commissioners is a better place to have this done than the Legis¬ 
lature. 

MR. HARRISON—I call for the reading of the amendment. 

The amendment was read again. 

THE PRESIDENT—The question is on the adoption of the 
amendment. 



CONSTITUTIONAL CONVENTION, 1901 


1921 


A vote being taken, the amendment was adopted. 

MR. DAVIS (Etowah)—I desire to offer an amendment. 

The Clerk read the amendment as follows: Amend Section 1 
by adding after Subdivision 36 “ 37 . Regulating the catching or 

hunting of game.” 

MR. DAVIS—I wish to say that I am in thorough accord 
and harmony with the effort to restrict local legislation. I have 
noticed numerous statutes about game; every county in the State 
seems to have a different law about it. There is no reason why 
there cannot be framed a general law to make all the counties in 
the State alike. This general law may be applied to counties, 
thereby putting a check on local legislation. 

MR. O’NEAL—I call for a reading of the amendment. 

The amendment was again read. 

MR. O’NEAL—I desire to say that the Committee on Local 
Legislation considered that section very carefully and rejected it 
for this reason, that we recognized that it is different in different 
counties. Some counties have no game, and some have a great 
deal of game, and that to secure a general law would be a mat¬ 
ter of great difficulty. We thought it proper in counties where 
they desired to protect game to allow them to have local laws. 
There are some communities in a county desiring game laws 
while probably the balance of the county are indifferent on the 
subject, we thought it proper if there was a community that de¬ 
sired to protect the game to allow them to do it, other counties 
having no game would oppose any law of that sort. 

MR. COLEMAN—The remarks of the chairman of the com¬ 
mittee are very pertinent. In many of the counties there are 
communities, certain localities, where game abound, and it is pre¬ 
served there. People who reside in the county or outside the coun¬ 
ty would destroy the game there if permitted to interfere. You 
cannot get a general law that would protect beats and parts of 
beats and certain boundaries where the game is preserved, and I 
think it would be unwise to interfere, particularly where people 
have incurred great expense in securing and providing for the 
maintenance and protection of game, I think the committee did 
wisely in leaving it out, thought I did not know that they had it 
under consideration. 

MR. HARRISON Does not the time for killing game vary 
in the different parts of the State? 

MR. COLEMAN—Of necessity. You would be authorized 
to hunt certain game in certain days and months—quail at one 
time, wild turkey at another time, and deer at another time, and 
in different localities of the State they come earlier and later. It 



1922 


OFFICIAL PROCEEDINGS 


seems to me to be almost impossible to have a general law which 
would apply to communities. If you have a State law, you will 
have to go to the expense probably of having a game ordinance. 
We have not reached that stage yet. I would be glad if the amend¬ 
ment were not adopted. 

MR. ESPY—To my mind, the amendment is one of the best 
provisions contained in this section of the Article. It is not sought 
here to prevent legislation for the protection or for the catching 
of game, that is not it at all. The proposition involved in the gen¬ 
tleman’s amendment simply says that it shall not be done by a 
local law. If this Convention votes down that amendment, it will 
put itself in a remarkable position. It has already gone on and 
said that they would not pass any local laws establishing school 
districts in which children could go to school. 

MR. COLEMAN—Have you any game laws in your county 
and community? 

MR. ESPY—No, sir. 

MR. COLEMAN—Aou know nothing about it, then. 

MR. ESPY—I know something abou't game laws, perhaps 
I know too much about it is the reason I insist upon this amend¬ 
ment going in. 

MR. O’NEAL—We examined very carefully the provisions 
of every Constitution in the United States on that subject, and 
we did not find that provision in a single Constitution, because 
all the States recognized the fact that that was a matter for special 
legislation. 

MR. ESPY—I hope the gentleman did not go through books 
and hunt for what other States have done, and failing to find it 
there, not put it into this Constitution. We certainly ought to 
have some originality ourselves, and we certainly ought to be able 
to find something or know something except what you get by the 
example of others. As I was going on to say, this Convention 
has decided that no district in which children go to school shall 
be established by any special law. They have said that no special 
law shall be enacted prohibiting or permitting stock to run at 
large. Now', then, if they vote down this resolution, they will say 
that the birds and game of this country are of more importance 
and entitled to more protection under the laws of this State than 
the children and the stock. That is the inevitable position to which 
these gentlemen have been driven. 

MR. DAVIS—I want to suggest that the title of one the acts 
of the last Legislature was "to regulate the hunting of the opos¬ 
sum in Pickens County.” 



CONSTITUTIONAL CONVENTION, 1901 1923 

MR. ESPY—Mr. President, if this Convention were to get 
the game that was passed by the last Legislature, I think that 
that would in itself be a complete answer. I think that game law 
is known as the Wallace Law, from Madison. I dare say that that 
law itself has cost the State of Alabama $200 or $300, that one 
law, and it has never been worth 5 cents to anybody and it never 
will be. Now, if people want to have game laws, provide by gen¬ 
eral laws by which the Commissioners’ Court or the Board of 
Revenue of the various counties can enact bird laws, live stock 
laws, and establish school laws and things of that kind. 

MR. BAREFIELT)—I would like to ask if it is not a fact that 
this thing of opossum hunting in the fall is not one of the greatest 
curses that the farmer has? That it results in burning up his 
fances, and everything else? 

MR. ESPY—No, that is taking too narrow a view of the mat¬ 
ter. I am sorry for a man whose soul gets so small that he ob¬ 
jects to a nigger catching an opossum on his plantation. That 
is entirely too narrow a view to take of the matter. That is all 
] desire to say. 

MR. CUNNINGHAM—I am heartily in favor of this amend¬ 
ment, and in support of my position will give a little personal ex¬ 
perience. When I returned home to my county in 1897, among 
the many sins which I had to answer for was a game law for Jef¬ 
ferson County. I denied that there was any such statute passed 
by the General Assembly, as I thought I was aware of all meas¬ 
ures of that kind. A gentleman said it was in the acts. 1 said it 
is some local law providing for the protection of game in some 
other county, and that somebody had amended it in the House by 
adding Jefferson. He said no it was an original bill introduced 
for Jefferson. Looking into the facts I found that such was the 
case, that there was a bill to protect the game in Jefferson Coun¬ 
ty, one provision of which was to prevent a boy from catching 
partridges on his father's own land in a trap. Seeing that I was 
in a trap myself I concluded to see how I had voted on the subject, 
and bv reference to the Senate Journal, I found that 1 voted for 
the bill that passed just before this particular measure, and the 
one just afterwards. Some kind Senator, while I was in the smok¬ 
ing room for a few moments, probably called up House bill so and 
so, and I had no idea that it had become a law, over the Senator 
from Jefferson when he was not present. I am in favor of this 
provision in the Constitution, because I believe that it would then 
be impossible for such a terrible accident as that to befall a Sen¬ 
ator from Jefferson County. 

MR. deGRAFFENRElD—I move to lay the amendment on 
the table. 

Upon a vote being taken the motion to table was carried. 



1924 


OFFICIAL PROCFFDI \V,S 


MR. PETTUS—I rise to a point of inquiry. Where is the 
latter part of Subdivision 26, and when will it come up? 

THE PRESIDENT -It is in suspension. 

MR. O'NEAL—I move now that we take up the latter part 
of Section 1, which has not been disposed of. 

THE PRESIDENT—Amend Section 1 by adding that part 
after the words “no special,” etc." 

MR. O’NEAL—Yes, sir. 

MR. PETTUS—I desire to offer an amendment. 

MR. O’NEAL -As l understood the motion this morning, it 
was to suspend the consideration of that matter temporarily. It 
was withdrawn by unanimous consent and 1 now ask unanimous 
consent to offer it for the consideration of the Convention. 

There being- no objection, it was read as follows; 

Twenty-sixth — Creating, increasing or decreasing; fees, per 
centage or allowances of public officers. No special, private or lo¬ 
cal law, except a law fixing the time of holding courts, shall be 
enacted in any case, which is provided lor 1>\ a general law, or 
when the relief sought can he given by any court of this State, and 
the courts and not the C.eneral Assembly shall judge as to whether 
the matter of said law is provided tor by a general law and as to 
whether the relief sought can be given by any court; nor shall 
the General Assembly indirectly enact any such special, private 
or local law by the partial repeal of a general law. The General 
Assembly shall pass general laws for the cases enumerated in 
this Section. 


MR. PET fUS' I offer an amendment. 

i I he amendment was read as follows: “Amend Article on 
ocal legislation by striking out from the proposed ordinance the 
words and the courts and not the General Assembly shall judge 
as to whether the matter of said law is provided for'bv a -mural 

imwt- ‘ K i S AM’fT U rdief sol, S h t can he -iven bv anv 
court, in line 33. 34. 3a, 3o and 37 of subdivision 26.” 

m P nt MR r° A f T !' S ' rI dcsi r t0 offer an amendment to his amcnd- 

nrf \ 1 ° ‘ St , rik c e u - OUt )Ut m - v amendment shows what I pro¬ 

pose to insert, if this is stricken out. 

oor t ili e o? m a n dm r,- Was read as follmvs : F >y striking out all that 
portion of said subdivision after the word “State” in line 35 down 

thereof ThT^U W °<l“ COUrt " in lin ^ 37. and inserting in lieu 
of the le^llt ? here - sha11 be appointed in each House 

Le,is a o g Sl l T a Sta " dln ^ Committee on Local and Private 
Legislation, the House Committee to consist of nine Representa- 




CONSTITUTIONAL CONVENTION. 1901 


1925 


tives and the Senate Committee of five Senators. No local or pri¬ 
vate bill shall be passed by either House, until it shall have been 
referred to such Committee thereof, and shall have been reported 
back with the recommendation in writing that it he passed, stating 
the reasons therefor and why the ends to be accomplished cannot 
be reached by a general law, or by a proceeding in court, or if 
the recommendation of the Committee be that the bill do not pass, 
then it shall not pass the House to which it is so reported, unless 
it be voted for by a majority of all the members elected thereto. 

MR. PETTUS—I am inclined to think that I shall oppose 
the amendment proposed by the gentleman from Montgomery, 
and favor the amendment as I offered it originally, but I do not 
know that I care to discuss his amendment at this time and I 
vield the floor to him, as the question will be on the adoption of 
his amendment. 

MR. O’NEAL—I think the adoption of the amendment of¬ 
fered by the gentleman from Limestone, would destroy the chief 
purpose of this article in preventing local legislation. I desire to 
call the attention of the Convention to the fact that in the Con¬ 
stitution of 1875, the following provision is to be found. 

23. No special or local law shall be enacted for the benefit 
of individuals or corporations in cases which are or can be pro¬ 
vided for by a general law, or where the relief sought can be given 
by any court of this State; nor shall the operation of any general 
law be suspended by the General Assembly for the benefit of any 
individual, corporation or association. 

Now, the effect of the amendment of the gentleman from 
Limestone is simply to reincorporate that section of the old Con¬ 
stitution into the article reported by the Committee on Local 
Legislation. 

Now, what is the objection to that old section in the old Con¬ 
stitution? It is simply because the courts of Alabama decide that 
whether a case can be provided for by a general law or not is a 
question of legislative discretion. Now if you leave it as the 
amendment of the gentleman from Limestone would make it, you 
say to the General Assembly that it is a matter entirely within 
their discretion as to whether they can provide for a local condi¬ 
tion by a general law, and of course they would always, as they 
have done in the past, pass local laws, and there would be no 
remedy. It was to overcome that decision of the court that we 
introduced the provision that the courts and not the General As- 
sebly should determine whether the local condition could be pro¬ 
vided for by a general law. 

MR. JONES (Montgomery)—Would it not be considered that 
the Constitution had adopted that section in the light of the rul- 



1926 


OFFICIAL PKOCKKDINi-S 


ing of the Supreme Court. that that a niatu r entirely tor the 
legislature ? 

MR O’NEAL -Whv. of cour.-e. u> my di-tmgui>hed triend 
from Montgomery -ugge-t>. it y»n adopt tin- provision, it would 
be a recognition that tin- v.onw-niioii adopted the dim-ion of the 
Supreme Court in respect t <> that a ction. v\ Inch -a\ s to the legis¬ 
lature of Alabama that although the Constitution provides that 
you shall not pa-.- Real law - on a -uL|ect it i- a matter within 
vour discretion, and it w e ica\ it t<> then oi-cietion it breaks 
down every barrier which wc haw enacted against tin* evils of 
local legislation. Therefore. I m<-w to la\ both • the am- ndments 
on the table. 

MR. EKTTCS-I a.-k the gentleman from Lauderdale to yield 
the floor to me. 


MR. O'NEAL—Certainly, it an\"iic d<-ire- to di-cu-> it. 

MR. O'NEAL —1 (le>ire to -a\ a word before 1 yield, how¬ 
ever. The amendment offered U\ the gentleman from Montgom¬ 
ery might not be objectionable i; it was put in a separate place, or 
as a separate section, but if it i- incorporated as part of this sec¬ 
tion, it will destroy the meaning. If the gentktnan will offer 
that as a separate section. 1 ha\e no doubt that no objection will 
be made, for it provides safeguard- again-t local legislation, to 
provide that the legislature shall haw special committees, clothed 
with quasi judicial power to decide these matter- as to what are 
proper subjects for local legislation. 

MR. HARRIS* )X—Is not the present Article w hich has just 
been adopted different from our present Constitution? and isn't 
it a positive inhibition upon the pas-age of local laws prescribed 
in thirty odd sections which are not contained in the other? 

MR. O'NEAL Certainly. 

MR. HARR ISON- - Then there is no great necessity for such 
a provision as this? 


MR. O NEAL A < >. there is. I will sav in response to the 
gentleman there might be a local matter which we have not pro¬ 
vided for, and while we -ay to the legislature that von must pro¬ 
vide for all local matters by general laws if it is possible, we do 
not propose to say it is a matter left to vour discretion, but it is 
a matter for the courts to determine whether or not vou could 
have earned out that injunction of the Constitution. That same 

pro\ i-ion as to general laws is found in the Constitution of Mis¬ 
sissippi. 

GARRISON- I see here thirty odd provisions in which 
they are positively prohibited from legislating bv local laws. Will 
they be dependent upon the provision you are now discussing? 




CONSTITUTIONAL CONVENTION, 1901 


1927 


MR. O'NEAL—Not at all, hut this is simply to provide for 
local laws. The legislature might otherwise say that they did 
not provide for it by a general law, because it was a matter within 
their discretion as to whether it could be provided for by a gen¬ 
eral law and in the exercise of that discretion we decided that we 
could not do it and there is no appeal from that legislative dis¬ 
cretion, according to the decisions of our court. In reference to 
that a decision has been handed me in reference to sustaining a 
special law in the case of ex parte State of Alabama in re Knox, 
the Supreme Court in considering this same provision of the old 
Constitution said : 

“It is the suspension, the temporary stopping of existing laws 
for the benefit of individuals or corporations the Constitution for¬ 
bids, not the power of the General Assembly when enacting gen¬ 
eral laws, to determine whether there may or may not be persons 
or subjects, which ought to be excepted from their operation/* 

Now, you find that we provide that the general laws shall not 
be suspended for the benefit of an individual and the latter part 
of this provision is “nor shall the General Assembly indirectly 
enact any special, private or local law, by the partial repeal of a 
general law.” The purpose of that was to prevent a general law 
from being introduced into the Legislature and then county after 
county being excepted from its operation, thereby creating a local 
law. 


I yield to the gentleman from Limestone with the understand¬ 
ing when the gentleman from Montgomery himself conclude their 
argument he will renew my motion to lay on the table, or vield 
to me for that purpose. 

MR. PETTUS—I will have no objection to his renewing the 
motion. 

It seems to me that the committee in its zeal to stop local 
legislation has taken a step which will prove rather dangerous. 
We have in the declaration and Bill of Rights which we adopted 
the other day a section which declares that the judicial shall never 
exercise the legislative and executive powers, or either of them, 
to the end that it may be a government of laws and not of men. 
It seems to me that if we adopt this section as reported by the 
committee and authorize the courts to pass on the questions of 
whether or not a law could have been provided for by a general 
law, or whether or not the courts would have afforded the relief 
in that particular instance, that we clothe the courts with legisla¬ 
tive powers and authorize them to repeal an act which has been 
passed with all of the forms of law by the General Assembly, a 
long time after that act has become a law. 



1928 


OFFICIAL FR<K'KKDIX* ’.S 


MR. O’NEAL—Do not the courts exercise a quasi legislative 
power in declaring laws to be unconstitutional: Do they not in 
effect repeal them when they declare such laws to he unconstitu¬ 
tional? 

MR. PETTUS—I do not understand that they do, and even 
if that be true no Constitution before has set traps tor the General 
Assembly to fall into for the purpose ot giving courts the pleas¬ 
ure of repealing acts. Now it se ems to me it an act was passed 
by the General Assembly in good faith, then though the court in 
its greater wisdom might have found a method to provide for the 
relief sought, or decided that it could be done by a general law, 
under the act as passed, transaction-, may take place and rights 
and interests accrue and it might go on for years and \ ear- and 
at the end of seven or ten years if the question was brought be¬ 
fore the courts and the court upon a state of facts different from 
those that confronted the General Assembly at the time they 
passed the act, either because it spent more time in the investiga¬ 
tion of th;e; facts of the case, or else because some of the facts# 
were not before the court that were before the General Assembly, 
the court should declare that the case could have been reached' 
by general law, and therefore the act is void and unconstitutional. 
It would be void ab initio and it seems to me that the rights that 
probably have accrued under the act would he invalidated and "it 
would develop dangers to the material welfare and interest of the 
State. 


MR. BANKS—This section here doer 


not sav that the court? 


are to decide whether a general law may provide for the matter 
m question, but whether a general law has already provided for it. 

MR PLOTUS — I understand it provides as to whether a 
general law has already been provided, and as to whetlnr relief 
could be given by any court, hut I submit that does not remedy 
the objection to the section is reported by the committee. Now. 
the committee.has specified some 36 kinds of local legislation bv 
y a y e ; tl ? e subjects which most frequently arise to encumber our 
statute books, and has absolutely cut them off and prohibited 
them, and I submit that is far enough to go. and we might to 

LeHsktureTn r th- " ^ ^ P ° U ' Cr to 1 >ass u Pon the acts of the 
-Lyegisiature m this manner. 

MS. COLEMAN If the Legislature can determine whether 
or not any act is a ocal act or a general law. what is to prevent 

lhami ,he <’-• »"<■«» »Y 

and flagrant violation of the Constitution, w e s pecifkaHy 
and directly prohibited by name. I think that the decisfon of the 



CONSTITUTIONAL CONVKNTION. 1901 


1929 


court that the Legislature is the judge in the first instance of 
whether or not this can be done is eminently correct. If the law 
is passed under this section as reported by the committee, it will 
stand as a law until it is carried before a court, and it is decided 
that some court could have given the relief, or that there was some 
general law upon the subject, and I submit it is a dangerous sec¬ 
tion, and should be stricken out. 

MR. OATHS—Two questions are presented by the proposi¬ 
tion reported by the Committee on Local Legislation and the 
amendments. The proposition reported provides for the courts 
to judge and pass upon questions, by the use of the following lan¬ 
guage: “and that the courts and not the General Assembly shall 
be the judges of whether the subject of any local law is provided 
for by any general law and whether the relief sought can be grant¬ 
ed by any court/' will, in the opinion of the committee, very ma¬ 
terially aid in preventing local legislation. 

Now there is no provision that the courts or that the Judge 
of any court should pass upon that and give his opinion before the 
Legislature acts. Then necessarily as it stands, when the Legis¬ 
lature acts and passes a law and it comes under the review of 
the court—before the court, the court would have to pass upon 
that question or those questions. Now a certain law may have 
stood for ten years and rights may have been acquired under it; 
and transactions had involving questions of great importance, and 
at last it is brought before the court, which holds that the law 
should not have been passed because it could or was provided 
for by a general law. That is the great objection to it. Now sir, 
the amendment which I sent up there is substantially, with a few 
verbal changes only, the provisions in the Mississippi Constitu¬ 
tion. In their new Constitution they preceded this provision by 
several inhibitions upon the Legislature passing local laws; and 
it seems to me it is a wise provision. It is substantially this: That 
there shall be a committee in each house, nine in the House of 
Representatives and five in the Senate, to which any bill which 
is introduced to be enacted into a local law shall be referred, 
and that committee shall pass upon it. They examine the statutes 
in existence and see whether any general law has been enacted, 
under which the relief sought by that bill can be obtained. If 
so, then it is the duty of the committee to report adversely in 
writing, stating the reasons why they won't recommend it. In 
other words, the committee is to examine into it and report wheth¬ 
er it be practical or proper to pass such a law. If the committee 
in either house reports adversely, then it requires a majority of 
all of the members elected to that house to pass the measure over 
the report. If they report adversely, it requires an affirmative 
vote of the majority of all the members elected to the house to 
pass the bill. If they report favorably, it would be accepted, no 
doubt, and the bill would be passed. 



1930 


OFFICIAL PROCEEDINGS 


MR. WALKER—Is it not the duty of the Legislature not 
to pass any local or special law, unless they find that subject can 
not be disposed of by a general law? 

MR. OATES—Such a provision is now in the Constitution. 

MR. WALKER—Isn't it a fact that that provision in the 
Constitution has been completely and notoriously ignored by the 
Legislature ? 

MR. OATES—It has. It is a method which has very largely 
prevailed. But if the committee is directed by the Constitution, 
as that amendment attempts to do, to direct them, they certainly 
would not evade that duty or disregard it, as has been insinuated 
is the probable fact in regard to the present Constitution. Now 
certainly I have no objection to the change in the phraseology of 
the provision which I think will be read a little further on in the 
report of the Committee on Local Legislation, in substance that 
if notice be given by publication in the newspaper of the intent to 
prosecute the passage of a local measure, and it is passed, if the 
record affirmatively shows that such notice was given. I would 
like to have the attention of the chairman of the Committee on 
Local Legislation on that proposition. You have said substantial¬ 
ly, but not in the exact language, that wherever a bill is passed, 
notice of the intention of the parties must be given and that the 
record shall affirmatively show it has been done. Then, of course, 
it will become a question for the courts if that be overridden, be¬ 
cause if it was disregarded, the law would be unconstitutional. I 
would favor a provision of that kind to have a committee in each 
house to pass upon these local bills, and make their reports in 
writing, which would be a safe-guard upon it. It dots nobody an 
injustice, and I think it is an entirely proper proposition to make ; 
and whether it be entirely proper in this place by striking out the 
language which they have reported, or not, if in the opinion it is 
not, then I think it ought to be put in as an independent clause. I 
certainly think that a provision for a committee in each house, as 
provided by the amendment which I have presented, ought to find 
its place in the Constitution in connection with this local legisla¬ 
tion. 


MR. O'NEAL—What is the necessity of putting a provision 
in the Constitution to create a Committee on Local Legislation? 
Would not the Legislature have the power to do that without any 
Constitutional enactment on the subject? 

MR. OATES—They certainly would in the loose way in which 
such things are usually done, but if they could not ignore the duties 
pointed out by that instrument, especially under their oath at of¬ 
fice. 


Mr. Fitts of Tuscaloosa here took the chair. 



CONSTITUTIONAL CONVENTION, 1901 


1931 


MR. JONES (Montgomery)—This is one of the most im¬ 
portant questions that has arisen in the debate on this section, 
for upon the action of this Convention on this matter may depend 
whether any of these requirements will be of any practical force. 
The gentleman from Greene made a very pertinent suggestion, 
and I want briefly to call the attention of the Convention to it. 
Now it is known to all lawyers in this body, and I think to a good 
many other delegates, that when a convention acts upon, or 
changes a section of the existing Constitution, which has been con¬ 
sidered by the Supreme Court, that they do it with reference to 
the decision of that court. Now we have had a decision of the 
Supreme Court on a section almost identical with this, and which 
would be identical if the amendment offered by the gentleman 
from Limestone is adopted. That is the question before the house, 
then. If you leave it in there you know that it is nothing more 
than waste paper, because the Supreme Court has decided that 
no matter what you say in the Constitution, it is within the pro¬ 
vince of the Legislature if they so choose, to disregard it. 


MR. OATES—Will you— 

MR. JONES (Montgomery)—I am not after your amend¬ 
ment. 

MR. OATES—I know, but I want to ask my colleague if he 
is not stating that proposition too broadly? 


MR. JONES—I think not. 


MR. OATES—Did not the Supreme Court decide in the case 
before it in regard to that local law, that they would presume 
that all was done that was necessary to be done? 


MR. JONES—No. sir; they decided that the Legislature was 
the exclusive judge, and that the courts could not revise its ac¬ 
tion At least that is my recollection of the decision. I have no 
doubt about it, and I think if my friend will read the decision, he 
will find that the Supreme Court said that when the Legislature 
acted, the matter was conclusive upon the court. 


MR. FERGUSON—The decision of the Supreme Court was 
to this effect, where the journal did not show to the contrary every¬ 
thing in favor of the regularity of a local law would be presumed. 

MR. JONES—Of course, but 1 am talking about a different 
thing. The presumption of the advertisement, if the journal did 
not show to the contrary, etc., but this is where the Legislature 
passes a special law. and the question comes up whether it could 
have been provided for by a general law. and the Supreme Couit 
said that the fact that the Legislature decided a special law was 
necessary was binding on the court, and the court could not revise 
it I do not think there is any question about that. Hie only way 
the gentleman could convince me on that is to send and get this 



1932 


OFF1CIAI, PROCF.KDIN'GS 


decision, and one or two others, and show me that it did not an¬ 
nounce that proposition. That has been the accepted action of 
the Supreme Court of Alabama for the past twenty-five years. 

MR. MACDONALD—I wish to ask the gentleman whether 
it is his view that although we have adopted these various sub¬ 
divisions prohibiting the Legislature from dealing with matters 
concerned in them, that if the amendment suggested by the gentle¬ 
man from Limestone is adopted, that it will still leave all these 
matters subject to legislative discretion? 

MR. JON ICS—My personal opinion is that it would not. but 
I said it would be in peril if we should turn the Supreme Court 
loose with this doctrine sticking to the old Constitution, that the 
Legislature was the exclusive judge, and why they could not pro¬ 
vide for the condition by a general law, and therefore they would 
provide a local law, and we are in danger of getting in the same 
condition as the framers of the Constitution of 1875. when they 
issued that elaborate address to the people and told them that thev 
felicitated them on the fact that the evils of local legislation were 
put an end thereto thereafter. Now something is said here about 
the courts exercising legislative power, but it is directly competent 
for the framers of a Constitution to put a check or balance by one 
department on another. It may be the court, or they may leave it, 
as the gentleman states, to the oath of the Legislature, or they 
may provide to let the Legislature judge in the first instance, but 
as a matter of last resort leave it to the court which passes as the 
tribunal of last resort on your life, liberty and property. There is 
nothing improper in that, and it seems to me that we had better 
strike out the whole Section altogether and have none, than to put 
in here that the Legislature shall not do certain things when we 
know that the Constitution has been construed to mean that that 
is waste paper if the Legislature chooses to do it, and for that rea¬ 
son I am heartily in favor of that portion of the Committee’s re¬ 
port, and against the adoption of the amendment offered by the 
gentleman from Limestone. 

MR. WILSON (Clarke)—I apologize to the delegates for ris¬ 
ing to discuss this question, but a sense of the great importance of 
the question has compelled me to do it. It is recognized, as the 
gentleman has said, that the courts have repeatedly held, that the 
old clause in the present Constitution says that the Legislature 
may not pass any local law which can be provided for by a general 
law, still the courts leave it exclusively to the Legislative Depart¬ 
ment to determine whether it might have been provided for bv a 
general law, and therefore permit the Legislature to pass the local 
law. To prohibit that state of affairs the Committee on Local Leg¬ 
islation has brought in a proposition here to let the courts and not 
the Legislature be the exclusive judge of whether the subject 
matter of local law could be reached by some general law in opera- 



CONSTITUTIONAL CONVKNTION, 1901 


1933 


tion. 4 he amendment proposed by the gentleman from Mont¬ 
gomery, it seems to me, will go a long ways towards checking the 
objections to the present clause, and does not contain the dangers 
which are in the arrangement proposed by the Committee on Local 
Legislation. 'Hie only objection which gentlemen of the Commit¬ 
tee on Local Legislation have urged to the amendment and in 
favor of the proposition reported by them is that if you strike out 
this part of this Section you destroy their Section. Now 1 say, 
Mr. President. I would rather destroy their Section than to destroy 
somebody's property, who has invested in good faith under a local 
law passed hy the Ceneral Assembly, and which the court some¬ 
time after has declared could have been done under a general law, 
and therefore that it is all wrong. 

MR. HANKS-—I want to call to your attention and also to 
the attention of the gentleman from Limestone, the fact that this 
Section does not say that the courts are not to decide whether or 
not a general law could have been enacted, but whether or not a 
general law has been enacted. 

MR. WILSON (Clarke)—I understand that the Section says 
that if the courts find that the relief could have been had under 
some general law in effect, that the courts can declare the law 
unconstitutional. I do not think that makes the matter any better, 
because we have general laws of some kind on almost every sub¬ 
ject, and 1 think if we put this Section in the Constitution as re¬ 
ported here by the Committee on Local Legislation, why then you 
leave the door open for some innocent purchaser, or some person 
who has acted in good faith upon the action of the Legislature, to 
be deprived of his property. I believe that is a dangerous propo¬ 
sition. Now as to the method proposed by the gentleman from 
Montgomery to meet the evil which exists in the present Constitu¬ 
tion, 1 believe there is merit. My friend on my left, the gentleman 
from Mobile, Mr. Lilians, has suggested to me that is the provision 
of the Constitution of Mississippi. He is a practicing attorney in 
the State of Mississippi and has called my attention to the fact that 
both the local and general laws of Mississippi are not larger than 
the general law's of the State of Alabama. Here are the acts of 
Mississippi from 1894 to 1900. This proposition which is proposed 
by the gentleman from Montgomery is very similar to the Missis¬ 
sippi plan. 1 believe if we have a Constitutional Committee, whose 
duty it is to examine a bill and ascertain if there is a general law 
covering the subject, which committee is required to give their 
reasons, I believe that would be a great check in this direction. Be¬ 
sides that, we have the thirty-seven other checks which we have 
put in this Article. There are thirty-seven subjects here that a 
local law cannot be passed on, about which a local law could have 
been passed under the old Constitution. That is another check. I 
think they have a proposition in here that the Journal must af- 



1934 


OFFICIAL PROCEEDINGS 


firmatively show the notice if that is adopted, that is another check. 
It might be added to that this Committee on Legislation shall 
ascertain and report whether the notice was given. That would 
be another check, but I submit, Mr. President, it is not wise to 
leave the thing so that the Legislature after it has passed a law 
and people have acted on it and put their money in it for a court 
to come along and say that the thing is all wrong after a man has 
put his money in it. 

MR. WALKER—It does not seem to me that the amendment 
proposed by the gentleman from Montgomery would, any more 
plainly, put upon the Committee that it is their duty to pass upon 
the question of whether or not the subject could be provided by a 
general law than the present Constitution puts upon the General 
Assembly the duty of ascertaining that fact. I cannot anticipate 
that the action of such a committee would be any more satisfac¬ 
tory than has been the action of the Legislature in reference to 
that matter. And the action of the Legislature in reference to their 
duty has been simply a complete and total ignoring of the duty 
imposed upon them by the Constitution. They ascertained vears 
ago that it was left in the power of the Legislature to say whether 
or not a matter shall be disposed of by a general law, and having 
ascertained the existence of the power, they" have never questioned 
projects for local legislation beyond that. The inhibition on local 
legislation has been flagrantly and completely ignored. It would be 
as completely in the power of the Committee that is proposed to 
be formed, to ignore this duty, as it is in the power of the Legisla¬ 
ture, and the sufficiency of the reasons given by" the Committee 
are not matters to be questioned by the General Assembly. All 
that this Committee would have to do in any case where a project 
of local legislation was presented to them, would be to sign a report 
presented by a member who wanted the local legislation passed 
and the sufficiency of those reasons would not have to be gone 
into. All in the world that the legislature would require is that 
the Committee would file its pro forma report required bv the 
Constitution. If that is done, they have got the power and thev 
do not have to ask any other questions. The precedent of the legis¬ 
lature of Alabama warrants me in forecasting the future in refer¬ 
ence to a provision of this kind, that it would practically amount 
to nothing. That the provision against local legislation, would 
leave it where it was before. In other words, the legislature would 
have the power to determine whether a matter could be provided 
for by general law, and if they determine that they did not think 
that it could, they would have the power to pass a local or special 
law on the subject. 

MR. SMITH (Mobile)—Suppose the legislature were to pass 
a local law which was provided for by a general law, and the Su¬ 
preme Court should subsequently so decide, what effect would it 



CONSTITUTIONAL CONVENTION, 1901 1935 

have? W ould it not have the effect to uphold the right under the 
law because it was covered by the general law? 

MR. WALKER—If it is already covered by a general law, yes. 

MR. SMITH (Mobile)—What effect on it does the decision 
of the Supreme Court have? It just simply says that it was cov¬ 
ered by a general law? 

MR. WALKER—If the Supreme Court passes upon the ques¬ 
tion whether or not the local law or special law is a valid place of 
legislation, if rights are claimed to have accrued under that local 
or special legislation, why if the local or special legislation should 
be held to be invalid, the right could not be sustained. 

MR. SMITH (Mobile)—If the court held that it was covered 
by a special law the right would be protected, would it not? 

MR. WALKER—Yes, sir. 

MR. SMITH—If. on the contrary, it held that it was covered 
by a general law, it would not be covered by the special law, so 
the adjudication of the court will be a nullity in either case, so far 
as the rights are concerned. 

MR. WALKER—I really don’t understand the purport of the 
question ? 

MR. SMTTH—If the Court decided that he had a right under 
a general law, and that it was covered by the general law, he would 
have the right under the general law. 

MR. WALKER-—Yes, if the local law did not amount to any¬ 
thing. 

MR. SMITH—And if they decided the other way, and held 
that he had the right under the special law, but that the special 
law was covered by the general law, he would still have the right, 
would he not? 

MR. WALKER—The decision of the court would show that 
this piece of legislation was wholly useless. 

MR. O’NEAL—This section provides that no special or pri¬ 
vate law shall be enacted in a case which is provided for by a gen¬ 
eral law. Now I was going to make the inquiry along the line 
suggested by the gentleman from Mobile. If you obtained your 
rights under a local law, and the Supreme Court should hold that 
that local law was unconstitutional, because the matter of that lo¬ 
cal law was already provided for by a general law, then a party 
could not be injured, because the rights were acquired under the 
local law, and he would still hold his rights under the general law 
which is in existence. 

MR. WALKER—That is true. 



1936 


OFFICIAL PROCEEDINGS 


MR. O’NEAL—Is not that a complete answer to the propo¬ 
sition that this would affect property rights? How could it affect 
property rights when, if the property rights were acquired under 
a local law, that local law was void on the ground that a general 
law existed at that time which covered the case, and the general 
law which existed would protect his property rights, would it not? 

MR. WALKER—Of course if the subject was covered entirely 
by the general law. the special legislation would amount to noth¬ 
ing. 

(Clarke)—Well. then, suppose the Court would 
hold that the relief sought could have been obtained from a court 
but the fellow went along and acted under a general law what 
would be the result? 

MR. WALKER—He would not have the relief, because he 
did not apply to the Court. He ought to have followed the law 
and not proceeded on his rights under the void act of the le^isla- 
ture. ^ k 

MR. W ILSOJ\ (Clarke) But his money is gone under that 


MR. WALKER—Certainly, and a man’s money is alwavs 
gone when he acts under a void act of the legislature.' 

MR. COLEMAN (Greene)—Not necessarily, but may be. 

, ( ON f' ( Walker )—That is the result of invalidating any 

act of the legislature. 

MR. LONG (Walker)—Mr. President, I have set here for 
forty-one days and can truthfully say that in that entire time I 
have heard a great many attacks upon the legislature The legis¬ 
lature has done many unwise things in the past. The last legisla- 
ture did many unwise things, but I am constrained to believe that 

ConventYon ° rSt ^ ^ <Ikl ^ the ca,lin - of thi * Constitutional 

f u r - Pr T d ™l’ aftc F , sta ting in Section 1 of this article 
thirty odd things that the legislature cannot do. it goes on to say 

here that they shall not be the judges of their own acts, and shall 
invite the criticism of the courts of the country as to what thev 
do. Then in the next section it says that no special, private or 
ocal law shall be passed on any subject not enumerated in Section 
1 ° f f th, f Ar * lcle ’ except in reference to courts, etc. Thev are not 
satisfied with naming everything that thev can think of,'but they 
go further and say that they shall not do anything else and then 
they want to put a special article in here that Ye courts shall 

with IT Nn S and th Y le ^ latUre sha11 kave nothing to do 

£ h ‘h ;^ n Y em , en ’ t , he dlfference between a legislature and 
this body is that the legislature represents the people, and this 



1937 


CONSTITUTIONAL CONVKNTION. 1901 

Ski t t l KSe ar ; h 1 ";- iH ' < l ,i,le ' i!ut ■* * 

le .ban .hi, assvmhl, E'ih ^',^' s 'f ure ls "* 

■ire As far I ' ’ , <ni k l1 ut ar< - <i« big as we think we 

to call the attention oVX7hol s^to’tt^ 1 "° diff * rence * but 1 want 
into Wh\ nut ol r u *1 , Le *° <langtr that we are getting- 

" " h ? • ll " l,sh 1<-B'slatur<- in its entirety. Why not 

'Vr'n." 1,1 <''“1 they shall never call another Constitu- 

„o, a! Convent,,,,,. \\ hy shoal,1 we no, sav that they shall not do 

ih,' • Hi "V >,,rC T“' ? l *' lish front the faee of 

the tarth. lut is exactly what you are driving a t in these articles. 
Jutichstinfiuished Chairmen of different Committees have con¬ 
solidated to name the things that the legislature shall not do. The 
legislature has existed ever since the Declaration of Independence 
was firmly established upon this continent. It is nearer the liber¬ 
ties of the people than any body you can get. There is hardlv a 
man from the rural districts that runs for the legislature but what 
discusses the issues all over the county. I care not what vou sav. 

I tel you that we are going too far in this effort to prohibit local 
legislation. We are trying to fix a jacket here that will do for the 
whole State of Alabama, when our interests are entirely different 
in some parts of the State as the moon is from the stars. Why 
Mississippi is no more a comparison for this State than a cur dog 
is w 1 11 1 ail elephant. Mississippi s interests are all farming inter- 
ets, so to speak. Alabama’s interests consists of her iron, coal and 
her agricultural interests. These all need different laws for their 
different sections. We cannot frame a general law' that will suit 
the whole State of Alabama. It looks as if you desire to fix it so 
that if James Smith desires to change his name to James Hancock 
you have got to provide by general law that every man in the State 
of Alabama, after that, shall be named James Hancock. 


Gentlemen, that is exactly what you are driving at. It is time 
this Convention was thinking of what it is doing. They should 
leave some liberty to the people. You have provided now for 
thirty odd shackles on the legislature and you are cursing and 
demeaning the power that created you. I want to call your at¬ 
tention to that, and one of the commandments says that you shall 
not take the name of thy Creator in vain, and if it had not been 
for the legislature you would not have sat here in this distinguished 
body of gentlemen, statesmen that you are. I have been tempted 
time and again to rise to my feet as a matter of personal privilege 
to defend the legislature of the State of Alabama. The legislature 
is not such a body of fools as you would have one to believe that 
they were, and they are not a dishonorable, disreputable class of 
ruffians that meet down here overriding the wishes of the people. 
They are nearer the people than anybody on earth. You w'ant to 
turn over as far as possible to a lot of “simlim” headed commis¬ 
sioners of a county, that cannot spell Constantinople to pass laws 
for a whole State, and for the different counties in the State. You 



1938 


OFFICIAL PROCEEDINGS 


say that my county has got to have a certain kind of a jacket, be¬ 
cause Mobile wants a certain kind of a jacket. Gentlemen, you 
are going too far. I just want to call the attention of the Conven¬ 
tion to this fact. As far as I am concerned I shall vote for the 
amendment offered by the gentleman from Limestone knocking 
that out, whether it can be considered before or after the act is 
passed. I suppose not being a lawyer it beats me both ways and 
they have got a right to consider it before and after both. 

MR. WHITE—Since hearing the gentleman from Clarke or 
the gentleman from Mobile, I believe it was, showing that the 
local laws had become cumbersome in the State of Mississippi, 1 
want to say that in that State they never have been given to local 
legislation. I served in one Legislature there. I had the honor to 
serve in their Legislature in 1876 and we did not pass a single 
local act and we would not pass one for anybody. Up to that time 
the Republicans had passed a great many, nearly as many as have 
been passed in the State of Alabama. The people of Mississippi 
became disgusted and would not pass local legislation, but there 
is something more to that than a Constitution, because there is a 
general law in Mississippi by which a great many of these things 
can be accomplished, and that general law would have to be re¬ 
pealed before you could get the local legislation. That is why 
the local legislation in Mississippi appears to be as small as it is. 
I think if we leave this provision in here we might just as well 
strike out what we have done today. If we allow a committee 
of the Legislature to determine whether or not a general law has, 
or a general law will, provide for this local legislation, we have not 
moved forward a single step. We are exactly where the Constitu¬ 
tion of 1875 left us, and if local legislation has become an evil 
then we might expect to bear that evil still. There is only one 
way to avoid it in my judgment and that is to adopt the report of 
the committee which shows this is a question for the court and not 
a question for the Legislature. 

MR. PILLANS—In as much as the gentleman from Jefferson, 
and a little earlier from Mississippi, followed the lead of the gen¬ 
tleman from Walker, I was rather surprised at his ex-state, and I 
would like to make an explanation. It has been said that Missis¬ 
sippi did not pass local laws because it was an agricultural State 
and did not need them, as I understand, but I desire to put in 
evidence the difference between the local legislation of Mississippi 
in 1890, the year they adopted a Constitution with stringent clauses 
prohibiting local legislation, and 1898 after the adoption of that 
Constitution. There is a volume as big as an old-fashioned volume 
of the acts of Alabama, along in the late 80’s. There is their volume 
of acts, 900 pages. Almost all of that volume is made up of local 
and special acts. These are acts which are not general laws apply¬ 
ing all over the State of Mississippi in their operation. In 1898, 



CONSTITUTIONAL COXYKNTION, 1901 


1939 


acting under a system and controlled by a system which is proposed 
by the amendment of the learned gentleman from Montgomery, 
that is the book of acts which was passed, a little smaller than our 
blue back spelling book containing the general acts of 1900. I do 
not care to make any further argument. 

MR. WHITE—Was not that a called session of the Legisla¬ 
ture of Mississippi? 

MR. IM LLANS—I think not. This is about the size of their 
book, and this is a general session. Now that shows that they are 
able to reduce their legislation from that weighty tone to this one 
as the result of the precise plan which is proposed by my distin¬ 
guished friend, which can be improved upon as alluded to by the 
gentleman from Clarke, bv requiring that the committee, if it shall 
be adopted as a part of the system of Alabama, must make a 
written report upon legislation. It will be improved upon if it re¬ 
quires that the committee in its report must find definitely whether 
or not the publication which may be required in certain cases has 
been made and that the other matters pre-requisite have been per¬ 
formed. 


MR. PKTTUS—I move the previous question on the section 
and the pending amendments. 

The main question was ordered. Upon a vote being taken 
upon the amendment offered by the gentleman from Montgomery, 
a division was called for and by a vote of 18 ayes and 60 noes the 
amendment was lost. 

MR. WATTS—I move to lay the amendment of the gentle¬ 
man from Limestone on the table. 

THE PRESIDENT —The previous question has been ordered 
upon that amendment as well. The Clerk will read the amend¬ 
ment offered bv the delegate from Limestone. 


MR LONG (Walker)—I ask for a reading of the section as 
it would read with the amendment. The section was read. 

MR. O’NEAL—I rise to a question of privilege. I believe 
that the chairman of the committee has a right to conclude the 
debate on this question, and I yield to the gentleman from Mont¬ 
gomery, Mr. Watts. 


MR WATTS—There seems to be some misapprehension as 
to what this law provides. It provides that no special, private or 
local law except a law fixing the time of holding court shall he 
enacted in any case, which is provided or )y a genera a^ . or 
when the relief sought can be given by any court of thjs State 
Now mark you, the language is not which can be provided h> a 
e-eneral law but it is “which is provided by a general law. lhe 
Supreme Court of Alabama in construing this language as it ap- 



1940 


OFFICIAL PROCEED!NGS 


peared in the Constitution of 1875 said that the Legislature was the 
judge of whether or not a matter before them was covered by a 
general law or whether or not the relief sought could be granted 
by any court. If we leave in the Constitution the language just 
as it was in the Constitution of 1875, we simply say to the people 
of Alabama that this Constitutional Convention adopts the opinion 
of the Supreme Court, and that hereafter, as heretofore, the Legis¬ 
lature shall be the exclusive judges of whether or not a matter 
introduced before them is provided for by a general law, or whether 
the relief sought can be granted by a court. 

MR. LONG (Walker)—Is it not a fact that we have already 
adopted about thirty odd clauses and named about thirty odd cases 
in which the Legislature cannot pass any local law, special or pri¬ 
vate law? 

MR. WATTS—That is right. 

MR. LONG (Walker)—Is it not a fact that there is a wide 
and great difference between the present Constitution and the one 
which we propose to adopt? 

MR. WATTS—It is true that we have adopted thirty odd 
absolute prohibitions upon the Legislature. 

MR. LONG (Walker)—Is it not a reflection upon the Su¬ 
preme Court for us to say that this Convention adopts a thing in 
the opinion of the Supreme Court? 

MR. WATTS—No, it simply shows the wisdom of this Con¬ 
vention when the Supreme Court, the highest tribunal in the State, 
points out a defect in the fundamental law and the people in Con¬ 
vention assembled have an opportunity to remedy it, it is their 
duty to remedy it, and if they do not do it they would be consid¬ 
ered by the Supreme Court to have agreed to the old Constitution 
and the law as laid down by the Supreme Court. 

MR. LONG (Walker)—I don't think the gentleman under¬ 
stands the question. 

MR. PITTS—If you adopt this Section as you propose to, 
what is the use of adopting the thirty-six exceptions already pro¬ 
vided for? 

MR. WATTS—The reason of adopting the thirty odd prohibi¬ 
tions already adopted was to point out specifically to the Legisla¬ 
ture the things that they could not do but this provision is to 
prohibit them from passing any law of the same nature in regard 
to other subjects which are not mentioned and which are provided 
for by the general law. 

MR. GRANT—You go on and state that the courts and not 
the General Assembly shall judge as to whether the matter and so 



CONSTITUTIONAL CONVENTION, 1901 


1941 


on. Now a man who wants to have a local measure introduced, a 
hill of doubtful character, don’t know exactly whether it is local 
or general. Now how will he get the determination of the court? 

MR. WATTS—He don’t get the determination of the court, 
but it is the presumption that in every Legislature there are some 
lawyers and if they are lawyers they will know whether or not 
there is a statute in the book which covers a proposal measure, 
and if thev are lawyers they will know whether the relief sought 
by the particular measure can be granted by any court, and not by 
the legislature, and that is the reason it is put there, because the 
Supreme Court formerly held that the right was left to the Legis¬ 
lature to determine for themselves, and we propose for the court to 
exercise the constitutional function of determining what is the 
law. 

MR. GRANT—How do you get the determination of the court 
before the legislation i> introduced.'' 


MR. WATTS—You cannot get it before. 

MR. MALONK—Have not we already refused to adopt Sec¬ 
tion 2 () - 

MR. WATTS—No sir; it simply says that the Legislature 
shall not adopt any local legislation upon a matter which is pro¬ 
vided for by a general law. 

MR. WADDELL—I make the point of order that the gentle¬ 
man's time has expired. 

THE PRESIDENT PRO TEM—The gentleman has four min¬ 
utes of his ten. 


MR WATTS—Now the Supreme Court said that you could 
not put into this Constitution a provision as to those things which 
could not he provided for by general law, because that would go 
out into the world as speculation and nobody could ever deter¬ 
mine what could be provided for by general law, and there might 
be a great deal of ingenuity in evading that. But \ou can put in 
there what is provided for by general law, because everybody 
knows that. The laws are published and you can read them and 
find whether or not a general law does provide for the matter, and 
every lawyer at least can determine whether or not the relief sought 
by the particular bill could be granted by any court. 

The President resumed the chair. 

MR PROCTOR—I desire to ask a question. To adopt the 
amendment offered by the gentleman from Limestone, would v.r- 
tually make the whole section inoperative. 



1942 


OFFICIAL PROCEEDINGS 


MR. WATTS—It would make it like it was before when the 
Supreme Court said that the Legislature was the judge and not 
the court. 

MR. PETTUS—Did the old Constitution have these thirty- 
six or seven specific kinds of laws enumerated that the Legislature 
could not pass? 

MR. WATTS—No. it did not, unfortunately. 

MR. PETTUS—Then I take it that it is different, and not as 
you answered the gentleman from Jackson. 

MR. WATTS—There is a difference, but this makes it a little 
more difficult for the Legislature to pass local legislation. 

The question being on the adoption of the amendment of the 
gentleman from Limestone, upon a vote being taken the amend¬ 
ment was lost; the question recurring on the motion to adopt the 
section, a division being called for, by a vote of 64 ayes and 3d 
noes, the section was adopted. 

MR. MALONE—I wish to state that the object I had in vot¬ 
ing ave was to move to reconsider tomorrow morning. 

THE PRESIDENT—Did the gentleman say he intended to 
move to reconsider? 

MR. MALONE—I move to reconsider tomorrow morning. 

THE PRESIDENT—The vote whereby the section was 
adopted? 

MR. MALONE—Yes, sir; this sub-division. 

MR. O’NEAL—You cannot move to reconsider it tomorrow. 
You can move to reconsider it now and it will be heard under the 
rules tomorrow morning. 

THE PRESIDENT—The gentleman can move to reconsider, 
and under the rules a motion to reconsider would go over until 
tomorrow morning. 

MR. MALONE—That is what I wanted. 

MR. SANDERS—I move that the rules be suspended and 
that the reconsideration be taken up now. 

Upon a vote being taken, by a vote of 45 ayes to 45 noes, the 
Convention refused to suspend the rules. 

Section 2 of the Article reported by the committee was there¬ 
upon read as follows: 

Sec. 2. No special, private or local law shall be passed on 
any subject not enumerated in Section I of this Article, except in 



CONSTITUTIONAL CONVENTION, 1901 


1943 


leleieme to fixing* the time of holding’ courts, unless notice of the 
intention to apply thereior shall have been published, without cost 
to the State, in the county or counties where the matter or thing 
to he attected may he situated, which notice shall state the sub¬ 
stance oi the proposed law, and be published at least once a week, 
lor four consecutive weeks, in some newspaper, or if there is no 
newspaper published in the county, bv posting the said notice for 
four consecutive weeks at five different public places in the county 
or counties, prior to the introduction to the bill; and the evidence 
that said notice has been given shall he exhibited to each house of 
the General Assembly, and the fact of said notice spread upon the 
journal. 1 he courts shall pronounce void everv local law which 
the journals do not affirmative Iv show was passed in accordance 
w ith the provision of this section. 

MR. SAM FORD—T move the adoption of Section 2 and on 
that I move the previous question. 

MR. Cl X X1 X< '.H AM—before the motion is put, I would 
hke to ask i he ch;, irmaii of the committee it the ^ub-tance of the 
proposed law means that the law itself in substance shall be pub¬ 
lished, or will the purpose of the proposed law be published. Would 
it not be better to strike out the substance and insert the purpose? 

MR. O'NEAL—The Committee did not desire that a com¬ 
munity should he mislead as to the purposes of the law r , and some¬ 
times the caption of a law is very misleading and it was to obviate 
advantage being taken of the public in the matter that it w'as writ¬ 
ten as it is. 

Upon a vote being taken the main question was ordered and 
upon a further vote the section was adopted. 

Section 3 was read as follows: 

Sec. 3. The General Assembly may repeal any special, pri¬ 
vate or local law upon notice being given and showm as provided 
in the last preceding section. 

MR. SANDERS—I have an amendment which is acceptable 
to the Committee, and I move the previous question upon the sub¬ 
division and the amendment. 

The amendment was read as follows: Amend Section 3 by 
adding after the word “repeal” in the first line thereof, the follow¬ 
ing words: “or modify any special, private or local knv. 

MR. ASHCRAFT—I would like to ask the Chairman of the 
Committee if it does not mean by the word may, that the legis¬ 
lature shall not repeal it except upon such notice? 

MR. O’NEAL—Yes, sir. It requires the same notice to repeal 
a special law that it does to enact one. 



1944 


OFFICIAL PROCEEDINGS 


MR. ASHCRAFT—Then it seems to me that it ought to read 
that the General Assembly shall not repeal a special law except 
upon notice. 

MR. O’NEAL—It seems the same thing, and the Committee 
on Harmonics can arrange the grammar. 

Upon a vote being taken, the main question was ordered, and 
upon a further vote being taken the amendment and the section 
were adopted. 

Section 4 was read as follows: 

Sec. 4. The operation of no general law shall be suspended 
for the benefit of any individual, corporation, association, town, 
city, county or township, nor shall any individual, corporation, as¬ 
sociation, town, city, county or township be exempted from the 
operation of any general law. 

MR. SANDERS—I have an amendment which is acceptible to 
the Committee. 

The amendment was read as follows: Amend Section 4 bv 
adding thereto the following words: “Provided, that nothing in 
this section or article, shall affect the right of the legislature to 
enact local laws regulating or prohibiting the liquor traffic. 

MR. O’NEAL—The Committee cannot agree to the amend¬ 
ment as it is written. 

MR. REESE—I desire to ask the Chairman of the Committee 
a question. Under that provision can you suspend the general 
jury law of the State or will every County in the State be required 
to live under the jury law of the State? 

MR. WADDELL—I move that this Convention remain in 
session until (the gentleman was interrupted bv the clock striking 
six.) 


A DELEGATE—A point of order. The hour of six has ar¬ 
rived and this Convention stands adjourned. 

And theerupon the Convention adjourned until tomorrow 
morning. 



CONSTITUTIONAL CONVENTION. 1901 


1945 


FORTY-SECOND DAY 


MONTGOMERY, ALA., 
Thursday, July 11, 1901. 

1 he Convention met pursuant to adjournment, was called to 
order by the President, and opened with prayer by the Rev. Mr 
Dix, as follows: 

O Lord, our King, our God, who are the author of law and 
who are the administrator of thine own government in the armies 
of Heaven and among the inhabitants of the earth, before Thee 
we would approach this morning, with reverence and thanksgiving 
for Thy mercies extended towards us, and with obligations for 
the bestowment of such favor and blessing as our condition re¬ 
quires. \Ye pray that Thy special favor may rest upon this con¬ 
vention. Do Thou enable its members so to regulate their action 
that the laws which shall be enacted in accordance therewith, shall 
be in accord with divine law, and that the administration of the 
future government of our State may be in accord with the divine 
administration. Unto this end we pray for righteousness among 
the people. We pray for purity not only in the ballot, but in that 
which the ballot confers. We pray that Thou wilt direct the de¬ 
sires of the people of this State, that they may not be engrossed 
in the accumulation of riches, but in the attainment of true wealth. 
We pray for purity in the home. We pray that Thou wilt above 
all things grant that purity in the church which becometh the 
body who is the light of the world. And we pray that as judgment 
shall commence at the house of God, that it may there meet that 
which conscience and divine law doth approve, and may through 
all the ramifications of our State life be found that which is pleas¬ 
ing in the sight of God. 

And now our Father be with this body in this day’s work. 
May that be done which shall be right and profitable, which the 
people out of a pure conscience shall commend, and that Thou 
shall accept. Hear us and bless us according to Thy love for the 
children of men that withheld not Thine own Son, but gave him 
that whosoever believeth on him should not perish, but have ever¬ 
lasting life, and may this be Thy gilt unto these people for Thy 
name's sake, Amen. 

Leaves of absence were granted to Mr. Chapman, for Thurs¬ 
day, Friday and Saturday; Mr. Sollie for today, and Mr. Opp for 
Tuesday and Wednesday last. 

Upon the call of the roll, 118 members responded to their 
names. 



1946 


OFFICIAL PROCEEDINGS 


The report of the Committee on Journal was read stating that 
the journal for forty-first day of the Convention had been exam¬ 
ined and found to be correct, and the report was adopted. 

MR. MALONE—I rise to make a motion which I gave notice 
of on yesterday to reconsider the latter clause of subdivision 26, 
which we adopted yesterday afternoon. 

PRESIDENT PRO TEM (Mr. Eyster)—The question is on 
the motion to reconsider whereby this Convention adopted the 
last clause of sub-division 26. 

MR. O’NEAL (Lauderdale)—I move to lay the motion on 
the table. 

(Motion was withdrawn.) 

MR. MALONE—My objection to this sub-division is that we 
have gone ahead and left out that could be regulated by local 
laws. Several provisions offered by the Committee have been 
stricken out, showing that this Convention does not favor those 
things. After we have left out everything that we can think of 
here comes another clause to take everything out, not only that 
we have voted distinctly should not be left out of this, but any¬ 
thing else that can be thought of. I am as much opposed to bring¬ 
ing matters purely local, as any other man, to the Legislature, 
but there are always certain conditions in which a local law or a 
general law cannot be as effective for the particular matter; and 
that a certain amount of elasticity is necessary. If we have left 
out anything that ought to go in, I am perfectly willing to do it; 
but to take in a clause that practically takes in the very thing 
that we have voted down here, I think is going too far. There 
are certain questions especially that I would hate to have included. 
We all know that one of the main questions in the State of Ala¬ 
bama is the liquor traffic and the regulation of it. We know very 
well that when it comes to a general law, where the combined op¬ 
position can center upon that one law, and upon that one fight, 
it is practically impossible to accomplish anything, even in a par¬ 
ticular county. I am sure that certain regulations that would be 
all right in Ashford, Ala., will not apply to Birmingham. No 
question on earth about that; and my experience shows that es¬ 
pecially in a county with a dispensary that has a general law for 
its operation and government, brings it into politics. It does not 
affect me personally or locally, for we are all right; but right there 
in an adjoining county dealing under a general law, I am told it 
took six months to elect a manager by the mode prescribed by 
law. It brought on a fight in the local courts and I don’t know 
how far it was carried. Another place just above me that went in 
under a general law, and where a fight came up, got up so much 
friction, until as a matter of fact at the end of the first year the 
whole thing was bankrupt, purely as a result of that matter; and 



CONSTITUTIONAL CONVENTION. 1901 1947 

Recognumg P thaT evirthL h oUc the r R ?° t ds l id , not Ret their mone y- 

had a law passed removing & t0 * he last Legislature and 
success. I ask that ^ l° SC ev 7 s and it is now a pronounced 

hibiting places from getting the^V" th ' S Constitution either P™- 
lating the whiskey traffic as they teTfhXIt at Ihe m ° de r "T' 

deal scheme n „Vso«h CatoLT '\Z *"L 

SSZ a ." d a 0 dap't7, iS ,o fK 

erated undue's 

tPrH*^^’ft^ ANDE ^ S ~ _ ) V i 11 n0t the amendm ent offered by me yes- 
iftnr^ afterno °"’ I” 81 before adjournment, permitting the Legis- 

objection " ° Ca 3WS re S uIatin fT the bquor traffic, meet your 


MR. MALONE—It will; but what assurance have we that 
! w 1 S~. a< °Pted. The record shows that when it was offered 

,4 . ^ as ^objected to, and I submit there is a nigger in the wood pile 
right here, and I can tell you where it is. 


MR. WATTS—By striking out the words “or article”? 

ASHCRAFT I would like to inquire how the article 
as amended will read if that is stricken out? 


PRESIDENT—If what is stricken out? 


MR. ASHCRAFT—The amendment proposed by the gentle¬ 
man from Limestone. 


MR. WATTS—The reason why the amendment offered by 
Mr. Sanders is not acceptable to the committee in its present shape 
is because it contains the words “or article,” which would mean 
if they were left in there that a liquor law would be passed with¬ 
out any notice at all. Where you strike out these words “or 
article,” leaves the Legislature with the right to pass a local law 
without giving notice. 


MR. MALONE—I am willing to remedy it in any way that 
we can. I submit that since I have taken this position the very 
people that are fighting me have come to me and said if our dis¬ 
pensary was operated like yours we would not fight you. There 
is the nigger in the wood pile. Let’s know what we are about. 
I don’t see anything at all objectionable to the amendment offered 
by Mr. Sanders. I think it covers the ground, but it does leave 
room possibly for something else to be slipped in. Therefore, I 
am opposed to accepting that amendment. 



1948 


OFFICIAL PROCKFDINGS 


MR. PITTS—I hope the convention will pardon me a few 
moments. I have not as yet consumed the valuable time of this 
Convention, and I would not open my mouth now if I were not 
firmly convinced that the Convention on yesterday evening on the 
eve of adjournment, committed a grave error in passing this sub¬ 
division 26. Now let’s see what has been done: Two committees 
have been at work on local legislation, a committee on Local Le gis¬ 
lation and a Committee on Legislative Department, and they have 
reported that they have examined the Constitution of every State 
in the United States and searched out everything that could be 
objected to on the question of local legislation, and the 1 result is 
that they have brought in here, the two committees together, 35 
prohibitions. Not satisfied with that, they have asked this Con¬ 
vention to pass a clause which says that although 35 prohibitions 
are put upon the Legislature, yet they want to say that no special 
law shall be passed whereby relief can be obtained uiuhr a general 
law or where the courts can give relief: and the court shall be the 
judge of the Legislature. I thought the Legislative Department 
was one of the co-ordinate branches of the government. I thought 
it was equal in power and I thought it had the right to control its 
own legislation, and yet this committee comes in and says that 
the judiciary shall be superior to the Legislature and that the ju¬ 
diciary shall sav which laws are local and which are not. I call 
upon the chairman of the committee, either one of these commit¬ 
tees, to name a single instance of local legislation that is not pro¬ 
hibited by this subdivision. 

MR. WATTS—Local legislation in reference to whiskey. 

MR. PITTS—The reason why the liquor traffic has not been 
interfered with is that the Convention has that specially excepted. 
I want you to name a single instance of special or local legisla¬ 
tion that is not prohibited under these 36 laws. Name one other 
—yes, there is one other, the game law, and that was tried to be 
put in, but was voted down. There are only two instances, vet 
this Convention says that no local law, however meritorous it 
might he, shall be passed by the Legislature. \\ e ought to have 
some safety valve, and we ought to have some way of relieving 
it. If they are wrong there is a remedy. What brought into 
existence the Court of Chancery? How did it originate? Recause 
the court of common law could not give remedies for the wrongs. 
This Chancery Court was established for the purpose of giving 
remedies wherein the court of common law could not give a reme¬ 
dy. What else can this great court do? It says that if it is not 
already provided for, if some emergency should arise it can be— 

Mr. President, we have gone too far. I admit that the Legis¬ 
lature for the last ten years have enacted too many local laws, 
which is remedied by these 35 prohibtions. Now why sav that the 
Legislature shall not pass any local law. don’t make any difference 
how meritorous it may be, not at all unless the court shall say 



o >\S i TITT1<)N \1, OA’VKNTK)\. 1901 


1949 


that iedie» cannot he* given." Now, this is a conservative bodv, 
1 have watched it. and ] have watched it closelv. I have been 
tempted on sew*tal occasions to get up and address the Conven- 
tion. 1 ie*cognize the" conservatism ol this bodv, and I have re- 
lraint*(l tioni consuming its time; because I assume it is conserva- 
ti\e; and I believr this Convention vesterdav evening in the hurrv 
"i a<l join ninent, and w ithout deliberation or reflection, passed this 
particular -ubdi\ Lion. 

MK. < ) XL \ L hentleinen ot the* Convention I desire to sav 
that the toinniitti-e 4 on Local Legislation studiouslv avoided in 
t he ir report an \ relrrencr to tlu* 1 iejn< >r ejuestion. While a great 
manv members <>t t!ie- Committee believed that the regulation of 
tin* liquor traffic, could be secur.fi by general laws bv which the 
present wMcin oi local option or dispensary could be continued 
m c« unitie*" ami cities ot this State, yet tliev deemed it wisest at 
tin- critical juncture in the* affair- of tlu State* to omit all mention 
ot that ejuestion and leave it to the* legislature* to pass any local 
or special law on that subject that tliev might see proper. We 
recognized tlu* fact that the paramount purpose* of this Convention 
was to reform mir uffrage and hence we thought it unwise to 
inie*ct into the C<m-litution any (jnestion which might cause di- 
\ ision and antagonism unions our people. For that reason there 
was no mention made* of tlu* liquor question in the report. Yet 
not withstanding our assurances certain delegates in the Conven¬ 
tion have* refilled to accept the good faith of our statements. Thev 
imagine that behind some of the provisions of this report is some 
masked batterv directed at tlu* dispensary or liquor (jnestion. Some 
members are* in a state* of nervous tension bordering on nervous 
prostration for fear that we will attack the liquor question and 
interfere with the right of certain localities to establish dispen¬ 
saries. Wi are between the two fires. On the one side are the 
dispensarv advocates and on the* other side those who favor allow¬ 
ing' am c 1 1 v in this State to um* tlu* general funds of the State for 
their public schools. That is the position we are in. If we at¬ 
tempt to placate the dispensary men we are met by the gentleman 
from Mobile who says that we are intrenching upon their privi¬ 
leges, and franchises to appropriate the money of the State to the 
local schools. 

Mr. Boone here arose to bis teet. 

THE PRESIDENT—Does the gentleman from Lauderdale 
yield to the gentleman from Mobile:* 

MR. O'NEAL—Not now, sir. 

MR. BOONE—I want to state that Mobile makes no such 
claim. 




1950 


OFFICIAL PROCEEDINGS 


THE PRESIDENT—The gtntleman will be in order. The 
gentleman from Lauderdale declines to yield. 

MR. BOONE—I did not hear him. I beg pardon. I meant 
no disrespect to the President or the Convention. 

MR. O’NEAL—On one side, as stated by the distinguished 
gentleman from Jefferson, are the forces of the moral reformers 
and as stated by the other gentleman from Jefferson are arrayed 
the great forces of organized greed. Now you are willing, in order 
to perpetuate the system in Mobile, to strike down some of the 
safe-guards embodied in this Constitution. You are willing to 
ruthlessly sacrifice some of the most important bulwarks that pro¬ 
tect the rights of citizens against corporate greed and rapacity in 
order to frame this Constitution to suit the needs of a certain city 
in this State. Now gentlemen, if you propose to make that the 
issue, I am ready to meet you. If you propose to strike down the 
safe guards of this Constitution and shape it and mould it to suit 
the desires of one city, in order that all other cities in this State 
can lay their hands upon the moneys of the common schools of 
Alabama, then take the responsibility. I desire to say upon the 
part of this Committee that we protest against this action. You 
have the power to do it. You formed this unholy alliance the other 
day. What did the Committee do the other day? They read you 
a provision providing that no special franchise should he conferred 
upon corporations, individuals or associations. The dispensary 
men say “we object to that because you use the word city, munici¬ 
pality and county; that it might interfere with the legislature 
granting a city or a municipality the privilege of establishing a 
dispensary. We answered that proposition by saying that the 
highest tribunals in the State have declared that the right to es¬ 
tablish a dispensary is not a privilege. It is a transfer by the State 
of a part of its police power to a political subdivision of the State. 
But if that is the only objection we will strike out cities, munici¬ 
palities, or counties. We struck it out, yet after we struck it out, 
after we placated the dispensary men, uprose the hosts from Mo¬ 
bile to lay the whole section on the table. Now there is this un¬ 
holy alliance which seems to prevail in this Convention. Y’ou 
strike down the provision which leaves the people of Alabama open 
to the legislature to pass any local law granting special privileges 
and franchises and rights to a few favored individuals or corpora¬ 
tions in this State. I say when you strike down that provision, in 
my judgment you say to every corporation in Alabama, “come to 
the legislature, they are authorized to grant you any special law 
or exclusive privilege.” This convention has sanctioned it. It has 
in solemn convention stricken down a safe-guard which has been 
in the Constitution of Alabama for over a quarter of a century. 
Now I will say to the friends of the dipensary that I am perfectly 
willing after this article is reported to put in a general provision 



CONSTITUTIONAL CONVENTION, 1901 


1951 


that nothing in the foregoing article shall prevent the legislature 
from passing any laws regulating or prohibiting the liquor traffic 
in this State; but you are not satisfied with that offer. No, the 
gentleman from Henry says there is a masked battery behind every 
provision of the repeal, there is some secret purpose upon the part 
of this Committee, which has not been declared. Our motives 
are impugned. Couldn't I say with the same justice, if I was dis¬ 
posed to question the motives of the delegates on this floor, which 
f am not disposed to do because I believe that every delegate in 
this Convention is actuated by the highest and most patriotic 
motives to do that which will subserve the best interests of Ala¬ 
bama. To question the motives of certain gentlemen and to say 
with equal propriety that you are masking behind this great moral 
reform in order to confer upon corporations privileges and fran¬ 
chises which they ought not to have. Couldn't I say it with equal 
propriety because why didn't you agree to amend it? Here is the 
provision you strike out. Let me read it to you: 

Sec. 14. Granting any exclusive or special privilege, immuni¬ 
ty or franchise whatever, to any individual, private corporation or 
association in this State." 

I offered an amendment yesterday morning limiting that to 
private individuals and corporations, didn’t T, and you struck it 
down? I excepted cities and counties. The gentleman says 
haven’t we enumerated every possible subject of local legisla¬ 
tion— 

THE PRESIDENT—The time of the gentleman from Lau¬ 
derdale has expired. 

MR. O'NEAL—I would like to be allowed to read one section. 
THE PRESIDENT—Read the section. 

MR. O’NEAL (Lauderdale)—Here is one that you “shall 
not grant to any corporation, association or individual any special 
or exclusive privilege or immunity, or to any corporation or indi¬ 
vidual the right to lav down a railroad track. That is found in the 
Constitution of twenty States, and you have stricken it out from 
our Constitution. 

MR. HENDERSON—I desire to call the attention of the gen¬ 
tleman from Dallas to the fact that in the thirty odd subjects the 
Legislature is prohibited from passing of local laws already adopt¬ 
ed by this Convention, that section two covers every other subject, 
in my opinion, that would possibly refer to the Legislature pass¬ 
ing local laws, and if the members of this Convention will read 
that section I think they will agree with me on that subject. I 
desire to yield my time to the gentleman from Mobile on this sub¬ 
ject. 



1952 


OFFICIAL PROCEEDINGS 


MR SENDERS—I move that the time of the gentleman from 
Lauderdale be extended five minutes in order that he may conclude 
his remarks. 

THE PRESIDENT—Does the gentleman from Pike yield to 
the motion to extend the time of the gentleman from Lauderdale? 

MR. HENDERSON—Yes, if the gentleman from Mobile shall 
have the balance of my time. 

THE PRESIDENT—The chair can not parcel out time so far 
ahead. 

MR. HENDERSON—Then I yield to the gentleman from 
Mobile. 

MR. SMITH—If this is in order— 

THE PRESIDENT—Does the gentleman yield to the gentle¬ 
man from Limestone? 

MR. SMITH (Mobile)—No sir. unless I am to be recognized 
afterwards. 

THE PRESIDENT—The chair does not care to make anv 
contracts with reference to the disposition of the time. 

MR. SMITH (Mobile)—I appreciate that. 

THE PRESIDENT—The question is does the gentleman 
from Mobile yield to the motion to extend the time of the gentle¬ 
man from Lauderdale. 

MR. SMITH (Mobile)—I do not. 

MR. SANDERS—I would like to amend my motion, by mov¬ 
ing that upon the conclusion of the remarks of the gentleman from 
Mobile, the gentleman from Lauderdale be recognized. 

THE PRESIDENT—In the opinion of the chair that mo¬ 
tion will be out of order. 

MR. O’NEAL—I do not care to impose upon the Convention, 
but I have not had an opportunity to discuss one phase of the 
question. 

MR. CUNNINGHAM—I rise to a point of order that the 
question before the Convention is one of reconsideration, and 
therefore not an amendment, and hence the gentleman from Lau¬ 
derdale as the chairman of the committee has half an hour to dis¬ 
cuss the question. 

THE PRESIDENT—In the opinion of the chair the point of 
order is well taken. The chair was in error in calling time upon 
the gentleman from Lauderdale, as the thirty minutes that he 



CONSTITUTIONAL CONVENTION, 1901 


1953 


would have been entitled to had not expired. Therefore the chair 
was in error in recognizing the gentleman from Pike. The chair 
was under the impression for the moment that the Convention was 
discussing this matter as upon amendment. 

MR. SMITH (Mobile)—And recognizing the gentleman from 
Pike I take it the chair will recognize the gentleman again— 

THE PRESIDENT—The chair will take his chances on that 
and see how he comes out. 

MR. O'NEAL—Mr. President, and Gentlemen of the Conven¬ 
tion. I desire to say that there was no disposition on the part of 
this committee to interfere with the right of the great city of Mo¬ 
bile, to continue the appropriation of the liquor licenses to her 
public schools. We did not propose in our report to raise any 
question in reference to that subject, but we do say to the people 
of Mobile, if in order to perpetuate that system you want to shape 
and mold the Constitution of the State of Alabama, so as to in¬ 
corporate in the fundamental law, provisions which in our opinion 
are vicious, we will resist you to the bitter end. Now that seems 
to he the purpose, so far as I can judge from what has been done. 

Now, in reference to this particular section, and I want to call 
the attention of the Convention to the fact that the motion to re¬ 
consider embraces the latter part of Section 1. What change have 
we made from the old Constitution? We have absolutely made 
but one change. The old Constitution says that no special, private 
or local law shall be enacted in any case which can be provided 
for by the general law. Mark you the difference—which can be 
provided for by general law—so that the advocate of a dispensary 
when he comes to Montgomery to secure the location of a dispen¬ 
sary in his city could not be met with the response that that 
subject can be provided for by a general law, but he could only 
be met with the objection it is provided for by general law, and if 
it is provided for by general law how could you enact any local 
law upon the subject? Now we make another provision. The 
Supreme Court in the case cited in 60 Ala., decided that under this 
provision which said no special law shall be enacted which can be 
provided for by a general law, it was a matter purely within the 
legislative discretion to determine whether it might be provided 
for by a general law, hence the effort of the framers of the Con¬ 
stitution to strike down the evils of local legislation were rendered 
fruitless and abortive by that decision, and yet today, after a 
quarter of a century under which the evils of local legislation have 
grown to an alarming and dangerous extent in this commonwealth, 
we are asked practically to re-enact the same old provision in the 
Constitution of 1875, which every man on this floor admits to be 
absolutely nugatory. 



1954 


OFFICIAL PROCEEDINGS 


MR. PITTS (Dallas)—Does the old Constitution contain a 
single one of the thirty-five provisions that you are now putting 
in the Constitution? 

MR. O'NEAL—That question has been asked twenty-five 
times. In reply I would say of course it does not. We are here 
to remedy evils and not to perpetuate them. 

MR. PITTS—I desire to ask if you can enumerate a single 
thing out of the 35 put down there? 

MR. O'NEAL—Yes; I will name you from the Constitution of 
other States hundreds of subjects if it did not consume too much 
of the time of the Convention—regulating courts of justice, for the 
assessment of paving, for supporting common schools, for vacating 
streets and alleys, laying out, opening and working roads, game 
regulations, fish regulations, and hundreds of subject that are not 
in our report. 

MR. BOONE—I desire to ask the gentleman a question. 

THE PRESIDENT—Does the gentleman yield? 

MR. O’NEAL—Yes, I yield to one question. 

MR. BOONE—The gentleman stated some minutes ago with 
some vehemence that corporations could come here now to the 
Legislature and get an exclusive privilege from the Legislature? 

MR. O’NEAL—Yes. 

MR. BOONE—Did the gentleman overlook Section 23 in the 
Declaration of Rights adopted by this body? 

MR. O’NEAL—No sir, I did not. 

MR. BOONE—Declaring ‘that no ex post facto law, or any 
law, impairing the obligations of contracts, or making any irrevo¬ 
cable or exclusive grants of special privileges of immunities, shall 
be passed by the General Assembly; and every grant of a franchise, 
privilege or immunity, shall forever remain subject to revocation, 
alteration or amendment.” Now in the 9th section on Local Legis¬ 
lation it provides: “Exempting any person, corporation, county, 
township, municipality or association from the operation of anv 
general law.” 

MR. O’NEAL—I called the attention of the Convention to 
the difference between these two sections on yesterday, and it 
will occur to any lawyer who gives attention to the language of 
the section, to readily see the difference, and I call my friend’s 
attention to it from Mobile. The preamble says you shall not 
grant any exclusive privilege, but the preamble does not say that 
you shall not grant a special privilege. 



CONSTITUTIONAL CONVENTION. 1901 


1955 


MR. BOONE—We argued that on yesterday. 

MR. O’NEAL—I say under the preamble you can grant a 
special privilege provided it is not exclusive. The preamble does 
not use the word franchise, there is absolutely no such word as 
franchise in the preamble. If franchise and immunity mean the 
same thing it would not be necessary, but we do not think it does. 

MR. BOONE—I would ask the gentleman- 

THE PRESIDENT—Does the gentleman from Lauderdale 
yield to the gentleman from Mobile? 

Mr. O Neal declined to submit to any further interruption. 

MR. O’NEAL—The two provisions are entirely different, 
and an examination by any attorney will show that there is a dif¬ 
ference. One prohibits the granting of an exclusive or irrevoca¬ 
ble privilege, but it don’t prohibit the granting of a special privilege. 
Now Mr. President, we strike this out and what position are we 
in? The Legislature can grant a special privilege to any corpora¬ 
tion in Alabama, and that is what we have done in obedience to a 
sentiment which should not dominate the Convention. We are 
laying down laws for half a century, and we ought not to put in 
the Constitution any principle which we cannot sustain before the 
people of Alabama, in order to placate any particular interest in 
this State. Now I say to the gentleman from Henry, if you strike 
down this provision as to local laws, you will emasculate the entire 
provision. Section 26 says “No special, private or local law, ex¬ 
cept a law fixing the time of holding courts, shall be enacted in 
any case, which is provided for by a general law.” The argument 
was made on yesterday, that this provision might jeopardize vest¬ 
ed rights, that a person or corporation might secure a local law 
and that afterwards the Circuit Court would declare it unconsti¬ 
tutional on the ground that it was provided for by general law. If 
that be true no vested rights can be effected because if you secure 
a local law on any specified subject on which you make an outlay 
of money, and the court should hold that the local law was void, 
because provided by general law, how can you be hurt—the gen¬ 
eral law would protect you, absolutely so. Hence the argument 
on that ground is absolutely without an)" merit. Ah. no, the sole 
purpose of this is to strike out this provision for fear of some possi¬ 
bility or probability it might at some future time affect a dispensary, 
I beg you, before you pass on this section to pause and hesitate 
before you strike down this most important safeguard. 

MR. FITTS (Tuscaloosa)—The distinguished gentleman from 
Lauderdale has seen fit to say that whenever these exceptions are 
mentioned whenever an attempt is made to widen this proposition 
so that the State of Alabama may be advanced morally, that there 
is a certain element on this floor that become nervous and almost 



1956 


OFFICIAL PROCEEDINGS 


i r rlfxsirp to sav if anybody on this floor 

has nervous prostration. 1 desire iu *1 j . 

has shown signs of nervous prostration it has been the fury of the 

gentleman himself when he meets that d.spos.t.on on the par of 

this house, and the temper which he has d,sp ayed. 1 desire to 

say that the banner of moral reform is up in Alabama, and that a 

proposition to leave room for moral growth does stand here, and 

that the gentleman from Lauderdale, or the gentleman from the 

Local Legislative Committee, or any other committee will be 

met and he will be called upon every time he attempts to law down 

a hard and fast rule which threatens the onward march of the 

dispensary or prohibition. 

MR. O’NEAL—Will the gentleman permit an interruption f 
I said on behalf of the Committee I was willing, and the Committee 
was willing to accept a proposition that this section should not be 
applicable or control the sale of whiskey. 

MR. GILMORE—I rise to a point of order. 

THE PRESIDENT—The gentleman will state his point of 
order. 

MR. GILMORE—The gentleman from Lauderdale did not 
address the President. 


THE PRESIDENT—The point of order is well taken. 

MR. FITTS—It is the complaint every time we ask room for 
this reform that we ask for lea way, that the friends of the dis¬ 
pensary system rise up. I desire to say that we do rise up, I 
desire to say that with these other ample limitations set here, there 
is no rhyme or reason for putting anything in the Constitution 
that will make it questionable in the future as to the power of the 
people of Alabama to absolutely prohibit the sale of liquor even 
within a half square mile in the black belt, if they desire it, and 
there is no rhyme or reason for putting into this Constitution 
anything that will prevent the people in any locality from estab¬ 
lishing dispensaries whenever and wherever they please. We are 
taking this issue with the gentleman, and he desires to leave the 
impression here that advocates of the dispensary have formed some 
hidden combination with the advocates of some corporation that 
desires something improper at the hands of this Convention. I 
desire to say that I have never heard of such a combination, and 
that it exists only in the fertile brain and excited imagination of 
the chairman of this committee. I desire furthermore to say that 
whenever— 


A VOICE—Louder! 


MR. FITTS—That is all right about the louder part; I am 
going to say what I propose to say upon this subject of dispensary 
right here and now, and I don’t care whether gentlemen holler 



CONSTITUTIONAL CONVENTION, 1901 


1957 


“louder” or not, I mean for it to be heard. Because objection is 
made about these limitations it is complained that it comes from 
the dispensary element. If there is a probability that it might 
inhibit a dispensary that is reason enough for leaving it out, and 
furthermore the proposition that there is a great hidden mystery 
or some combination of which he speaks, exists only in his own 
imagination. He says that if the advocates of the Mobile school 
attack him—he makes some great threat of what he will do then. 
They can draw a ring and fight it out so far as I am concerned, 
but as one of the advocates of the dispensary, as one of those who 
does care about anything likely to the growth of this movement 
in this State, or the restraint of the liquor traffic in this country 
which will send the money into the general sources of revenue. I 
can say we should be watchful and guarded to see that nothing is 
put in here to threaten the life of these institutions, and the very 
disposition that the gentleman shows to fight with so much vigor, 
and to abuse with so much venom in this particular instance is a 
very good reason for being on the watchtower and upon guard. 

MR. O’NEAL—May I interrupt the gentleman for a moment? 

THE PRESIDENT—Does the gentleman from Tuscaloosa 
yield? 

MR. FITTS—Certainly. 

MR. O’NEAL—Didn’t I expressly disclaim any intention to 
impugn the motives of any gentleman or make any charge? 

MR. FITTS—And at the same time the very words you used, 
and your manner was a greater accusation in that regard. And I 
say that even if there is a municipal corporation in this State, 
where the proceeds of the liquor traffic goes to the upbuilding of 
schools—in Mobile or elsewhere, where the revenue derived from 
the liquor traffic goes towards education, that it is a step in the 
right direction, and that it ought to be left wide open, abundant 
leeway for local laws to be passed to allow that revenue to go to 
the education of the children of this State in other localities in 
the future. The very best dispensary argument is that the abund¬ 
ant profit which is taken by the saloon keeper and by the dram- 
seller is taken away from the individual and put into the revenues 
of the State and county, and a portion of it devoted to the edu¬ 
cation of the children of the county, therefore, whether in Eufaula 
or Mobile that is a good system which accomplishes this. This is 
a system which is a twin brother of the dispensary, and the same 
hand which would guard the dispensary from the attack of anv 
law that would bind it down and prevent its being built up in 
localities, ought to watch and guard the local laws which take a 
profit from this traffic and devote it to the education of the chil¬ 
dren. The time has come in Alabama when this is a live and vital 
question, when the people of Alabama have their eyes upon the 



1958 


OFFICIAL PROCEEDINGS 


dispensary project, when it is on trial in many counties of the 
State. It is a system that has never been abandoned in any coun¬ 
try of Europe, in any State in America or in any locality wherever 
tried. It is a plan that has met the approbation of the people of 
Alabama whenever tried, and there is no reason why there should 
not be abundant room for local laws to put it in force in every 
locality where it may turn out to be desirable, and there is no 
reason to abuse the friends of that reform, or the friends of any 
locality which adopts it. This committee can have no righteous 
or good reason for putting any limitation here that does not sub¬ 
serve the public interest, and I submit that such a limitation as 
will strike down these efforts for moral reform, or will strike down 
the vested rights of Mobile, Eufaula or any other locality that is 
devoting the income from the liquor traffic to the upbuilding of 
mankind would be a limitation that would be an impairment of 
the future growth and prosperity of the State. 

MR. SMITH (Mobile)—Mr. President, nothing that has oc¬ 
curred in this Convention has taken me more by surprise than 
the attack which has been made by the gentleman from Lauder¬ 
dale upon myself and upon my city. I had not spoken in regard 
to this particular section, nor had I taken any active part either in 
the defeat of it or in its reconsideration. I was opposed to it, not 
because I believe that the interests of Mobile’s school system were 
involved in this particular section, but because I thought it un¬ 
wise. Unlike the gentleman from Lauderdale, I did not believe at 
that time that there was some personal or malicious motive, in 
the attempt of gentlemen to put upon this Convention what I 
personally deemed to be an unwise provision in the Constitution 
of Alabama. The gentlemen, however, has seen fit to charge that 
there has been an holy alliance between the dispensary men and 
the advocates of the schools of Mobile, masking, as the gentle¬ 
man says, the desire to take from the public treasury money for 
the upbuilding of the interest of a private corporation; under that 
guise as he says, trying to strike down the safeguards of the liberty 
of the people that he, the great Chairman of this Committee, has 
inserted for their protection. Mr. Chairman. I desire to say that 
in the first place there is no masking in anv controversy that I 
may raise in this Convention or on any' issue that I may make with 
the gentleman upon this or any other question that may be pre¬ 
sented for discussion. In being opposed to certain provisions of 
the article I have objected, not behind any masked battery, but upon 
the ground frankly and openly stated that they did affect the schools 
of Mobile. I have given to this Convention a full and fair state¬ 
ment of the reason why I desired to protect the system, and I 
asked this Convention, upon the facts there stated, to protect that 
interest by making amendments to certain sections. Why it is that 
from my course the gentleman should judge that I was hiding or 
dodging or fixing any secret provision I am at loss to say. I do 



CONSTITUTIONAL CONVENTION, 1901 


1959 


not believe that the Committee on Local Legislation participated 
with the gentleman in the denunciation that he made of the school 
system of Mobile. I believe that the denunciations of the Chair¬ 
man are those of the individual and not of the Committee, and I 
therefore have no quarrel with the Committee or with its report 
on account of the charges that the gentleman has made. So far 
as the alliance is concerned, my friend from Barbour spoke to me 
in regard to clause 9. and called my attention to the fact that the 
interest of his county, and of my county were the same, conferred 
with me as to opposing that section, and I agreed with him that 
our interests were the same and that we should oppose it, and we 
did oppose it. And that, and that alone, is the holy alliance that 
the gentleman refers to, but the gentleman on the contrary, al¬ 
though he here declares that it is wrong in principle to take dis¬ 
pensary money and apply it to the common schools, gets up in 
this Convention and makes an open bid for an alliance with gen¬ 
tlemen in arraying the dispensary interest against the city of 
Mobile. He gets up and declares that if they will help him in his 
attack on my county and city that he will put almost anything 
in his article to protect the dispensary law. fudge, then, gentlemen 
of the Convention, between us as to who it is that is willing to 
trade away the safeguards of the people in order to accomplish 
his purpose—my purpose being the protection of my people, his 
purpose being the protection of personal pride as the author of 
an article that he offers to this Convention. Mr. President, that 
is all that I have to say upon the personal attack that the gentle¬ 
man has made, that is all that I have to say in regard to the school 
system of Mobile on this occasion. I expect the gentleman is 
personally piqued, not because it is in the interest of the people, 
nor because it is his duty to be so, but because I dared to vote 
against the provision, he threatens to make a determined fight 
against a great school system, and as the gentleman says, when 
that issue comes I have no doubt that he will attack it consistent¬ 
ly from a feeling of personal anger, and I, gentlemen, will be here 
to join him in the controversy and submit the issues to this Con¬ 
vention. Now. Mr. President, so far as the merits of this article 
are concerned I desire to say a few words. It was not my purpose 
to have anything to say on the subject, but being upon my feet, 
I am unwilling to take my seat and leave the impression that the 
question is only one of local interest. These gentleman have, as 
has been repeatedly said designated every subject matter of local 
legislation that their imagination could conjure up and then they 
forbid any legislation on all other local subjects and provide 
that the legislature shall pass no other local acts that is provided 
for by general law, or where a remedy can be given by the courts. 
Mr. President, you nor I, nor any man can foresee the necessities 
of the future. If we were able to prophesy what those necessities 
would be there would be no necessity for a legislative body meet- 



1960 


OFFICIAL PROCEEDINGS 


ing every two or four years. If we all had the foresight and wis¬ 
dom that the gentleman from Lauderdale arrogates to himself, we 
would look down the dim vista of the future and see what the de¬ 
mands would be for the next fifty years to come, and this body 
would here codify a set of laws to guide the people prosperously 
into a Utopian government, free from all troubles, embarrassments 
and difficulties. Unfortunately this Convention has not that 
prophetic power, and I do not believe that there is a man in the 
Convention who has it save the Chairman of the Committee on 
Local Legislation. It is for the purpose of meeting contingencies 
as they arise in government affairs from time to time that we 
have a legislature. It is because of the lack of this prophetic power 
that we have the legislature to meet. It is one of the co-ordinate 
branches of government, and its purpose is to enact laws from 
time to time to meet contingencies that this great Constitutional 
Convention cannot now foresee. If we say you shall not do this 
and that, and shall not do anything else, what have we done with 
the prerogatives of the Legislature ? We have declared the pro¬ 
visions for the formation of our government when first organized 
are mistakes; that it is not necessary to have any legislative body; 
that what is necessary is a Constitutional Convention and courts 
thereafter to hold the Legislature down and prevent them from 
exercising the prerogatives that have been vested in them. Mr. 
Chairman, I believe that it is unwise. I believe that the great safe¬ 
guard that my friend has erected is no safeguard, but is a folly, 
and I do not believe in accepting that folly simply because a gen¬ 
tleman is so sensitive to any objection that may be made to his 
views by another delegate in this Convention. Besides that Mr. 
President the provision is sure to be the cause of unlimited con¬ 
troversy between our people over their rights. When a man goes 
before the Legislature conceiving as he may that what he desires 
is not provided for by the general law, conceiving as he may (it 
may be under the advice of the very wise gentleman from Lauder¬ 
dale) that there is no remedy in the courts, and presents a ques¬ 
tion to the Legislature, the Legislature may say to him that his 
purpose is provided for by general legislation or that he can obtain 
it through the courts, he may reply that he has been otherwise 
advised. The Legislature may ask by whom are you advised and 
he may reply the gentleman from Lauderdale advised me; the Leg¬ 
islature may reply, well then, there can be no mistake about it, 
there is no general law. 

He has demonstrated in the Constitutional Convention that 
he not only knew all the law that existed at that time, but all the 
law there ever would be. The man has no remedy in court under 
a general law, he then asks for a special act of the Legislature to 
protect these rights and equities; he invests his money upon the 
faith of it, his rights become involved and his property, and litiga¬ 
tion arises, and it may be that he has staked his whole fortune, 



CONSTITUTIONAL CONVENTION, 1901 


1961 


and the courts come along and say the Legislature was mistaken, 
there was a general law, or there was remedy in the courts and 
the Legislature was mistaken; it may be that while there was no 
general law and yet the courts may hold that it knows, and would 
have decided this way or that way if he had applied to it; the 
court may even say that the learned advisor applied to was mis¬ 
taken. Then all the citizen has is sacrificed, the Legislature has 
acted and it is conposed of honest men and acting upon their own 
opinion they passed the law in good faith, local legislation has 
been had, and the only resort is a litigation over the right and 
destruction of property interests of the citizens. Gentlemen of the 
Convention, it seems to me that they have gone too far, it seems 
to me that you are putting too much confidence in the judgment 
and prophetic power of the Chairman of the committee. It seems to 
me that it is time for him to pause and think and become more 
conservative and restore to the Legislature some of the functions 
that this committee has undertaken to rob it of. 

MR. deGRAFFENREID—This discussion has been broader 
than I think the circumstances justify. I rise for the purpose of 
supporting the motion to reconsider, not as the friend of a dispen¬ 
sary because I know nothing about dispensaries, not as a friend 
of the liquor men because I know nothing about them, and not 
even as a friend of the school system of Mobile. I desire to say, 
however, that I have always believed that, so far as the liquor 
traffic is concerned, the only way that it can be successfully han¬ 
dled in Alabama is by letting each community by local laws, 
declare how it shall be handled, and that so far as the school sys¬ 
tem of Mobile is concerned, it was established by the people of 
Alabama before I was born and that it has done much good in 
this State. Whether that school system was rightfully or wrong¬ 
fully established, it now exists, and rude will be the hand that 
will undertake to strike it down. If the question is ever raised 
before this Convention, I shall be found with those who shall 
undertake to prevent any person placing an impediment in the 
path of any educational institution already established in this 
State. As has been said by the gentleman from Dallas in dis¬ 
cussing the proposition before us, it is a very grave question 
as to whether this Convention has not gone too far. We have pro¬ 
vided 37 or 38 articles, I don’t remember the number, upon which 
there has been placed an absolute prohibition on the Legislature 
and as to which there cannot be passed any local law. In addi¬ 
tion to that—in my judgment—the greatest safeguard on this sub¬ 
ject that has been placed in the Constitution we have provided 
that no local law shall be passed, unless there has been given 
before its passage thirty days’ notice of the substance of the pro¬ 
posed law, by advertisement in a newspaper, and that this fact 
shall affirmatively appear upon the Journal before it shall be given 
validity by the courts. When we did that, gentlemen, we went 



1962 


OFFICIAL PROCEEDINGS 


far enough. A government dependent upon the Legislative De¬ 
partment is the freest government in the world. When you tram¬ 
mel the Legislature you touch the liberties of the people. I am 
reminded that across the waters there exists a government, the 
oldest in the world, the freest save our own, and its parliament 
is untrammeled by any written constitution. It is a law unto it¬ 
self. Its Parliaments have not only seen fit at times to take unto 
itself the power to change the succession of the Kings, but it has 
even sat in judgment upon the monarch even to the taking of 
his life. That government today is the arbiter of the peace of the 
world, and its power and its dignity are due to the power and the 
dignity of its Parliament. It has been said, gentlemen, that this 
committee has examined every Constitution in the United States, 
and from them has gleaned the various subjects prohibited to lo¬ 
cal legislation, and has placed them in the report now being con¬ 
sidered. I shall ask the chairman if there was found in any Con¬ 
stitution in the United States or in any Constitution of an intelli¬ 
gent State, the provision that the courts and not the Legislature, 
shall determine whether or not a general law exists or the courts 
can furnish a remedy where a remedy is sought or a right es¬ 
tablished by a local law. I say that there is no such provision in 
any Constitution of any State of the Union or of any intelligent 
State anywhere. My objection to this Section as passed on yes¬ 
terday is not because it touches the liquor traffic in any way, not 
because it touches any school system anywhere, but that it pro¬ 
vides the most fruitful source of litigation that can possibly be 
provided by the Constitution of a State. The Supreme Court of 
Alabama decided wisely when it declared that under the Consti¬ 
tution of 1875 it was for the Legislature and not for the courts to 
determine, when a local bill was before it, whether a remedy had 
been provided by a general law or could be obtained through the 
court. That in my judgment was one of the wisest decisions that 
was ever handed down by the Supreme Court of Alabama. It 
shut a broad door to litigation, and when we leave here, Mr. 
President, we want to leave with a Constitution about which there 
shall be as little doubt as possible, so that the courts will not be 
called upon for fifteen or twenty years to tell the citizens of Ala¬ 
bama what their rights are under that Constitution. I have con¬ 
sistently, whenever I had any doubt upon any • subject voted 
against any change, and frequently, although the change’offered 
might be good—where I saw intelligent men in this Convention 
^ ^ erin f? upon the subject I have acted upon the proposition that 
wherever there is a doubt it is best to take the safe course and 
voted against. We are establishing a fundamental law that can 
not be changed like a legislative enactment and we should never 
lose sight of that fact. 

® NEAL I rise to a question of personal privilege In 
my opening remarks I expressly disclaimed any purpose to im- 



CONSTITUTIONAL CONVENTION. 1901 


1963 


pugn the motives of any delegate in this Convention. I expressly 
and emphatically stated that I did not doubt that every member of 
this body was actuated by the highest, most patriotic and most 
conscientious motives. Notwithstanding that statement, the dis¬ 
tinguished gentleman from Mobile has seen fit to make a personal 
assault upon myself, and to state to this Convention that I am es- 
saying the role of a prophet, and that I am seeking to dictate what 
action they shall take in this matter. I protest that there is noth- 
m g what I said which would warrant any such construction. 
I do not think this is a proper forum to band}' epithets with any 
gentleman, but if the gentleman from Mobile meant to intimate 
that my motives were not as conscientious and that my purposes 
were not as high as his own or any other delegate’s, he states 
what he knows is without foundation in fact and what was not 
warranted by anything in this discussion. He has attempted to 
make me the subject of ridicule, and to say that I am proposing 
to lay down the law to this Convention, and force them to adopt 
a provision against their judgment. I think that remark was un¬ 
warranted. I was simply undertaking to do my duty as my con¬ 
science dictated, and according to the lights before me. I was 
simply defending the report of my Committee, on grounds which 
I believed to be just and meritorious. I expressly disclaimed any 
intention to impugn the motives of any gentleman, but yet that 
declaration did not seem to satisfy the gentleman, and he has gone 
out of his way to make an assault upon me, which I think is ab¬ 
solutely as unwarranted as it is unjust, and I am surprised that a 
gentleman of his high character would do it under any circum¬ 
stances. I stated to him expressly that it was not the purpose of 
the Committee to attack any law that now exists by which the 
city of Mobile used its liquor licenses for the public schools, but 
that they had made a combination to strike out a certain section. 
That is true and every gentleman knows it to be true. I did not 
say that he was a party to the combination, but the vote of every 
member from that district, indicated that such a combination had 
been made. I saw some gentlemen going around rallying the 
forces from that section and warning them to vote against the 
subdivision and here was a solid vote against the provision. 

MR, SMITH (Mobile)—Permit me to ask the gentleman p. 
question. 

THE PRESIDENT—Does the gentleman from Lauderdale 
yield? 

MR. O’NEAL—Yes, sir. 

MR. SMITH (Mobile)—Did the gentleman not say in sub¬ 
stance that the gentleman from Mobile was masking behind—at 
any rate engaged in a pretense of morality for the purpose of get¬ 
ting money that belonged to the State, for the schools of Mobile? 



1964 


OFFICIAL PROCFFDINGS 


MR o’NF AL_No sir. I said certain gentlemen had im¬ 

pugned the motives of the Committee. That while we did not 
impugn the motives of any gentleman, that .1 we were inclined 
to follow their tactics, we might he justitttd m saying that behind 
the great moral reform some of them were attempting to grant 
corporations privileges that they ought not to enjoy. 1 said that 
we could, with as much force, say they were doing that, as tluv 
could say that we were concealing a masked battery which would 
operate against the dispensary. 


I have no disposition to dictate to this Convention, or to com¬ 
pel them to follow anv jndgtmnt ot mine. I am simply a dele¬ 
gate, representing the’ people of Alabama, doing my duty a> I 
understand it, and under the circumstances 1 do not think i should 
he the subject of such caustic remarks. 1 do not think this is a 
forum in which such remarks should be made, and 1 think it is 
beneath the dignitv of a body of thi- kind to indulge in such mi- 
parliamentarv conduct. I desire t«> >ny. it the gentleman from 
Mobile does question my motives being as high a> his own. or as 
conscientious, he has gone beyond the bounds of proper debate, 
and his imputations 1 do resent. In making siich imputation^ 1 di- 
sire to sav he must have known the\ could not be sustained bv 
the facts, but were absolutely and wholly without am loundation 
or basis. 

MR. WILLIAMS (Marengo)--1 rise to a question of per¬ 
sonal privilege. The gentleman from Latnh rdale has stated that 
the whole of the first district \oted solidly to strike out Section 14. 


MR. O’NEAL (Lauderdale) What was tnv information. 


MR. WILLIAMS (Marengo) — I do not want to go on record 
as voting against section 14. I voted for it and not against it; 
and I am from the first district. 


MR. CL X X INGHAM (Jeticrsnn) [ w ish to v but virv 
little upon the pending question. As I have perhaps been one of 
the humble instruments of stirring up this agitation. I feel that 
I owe it to myself and gentlemen who think as I do on the floor, 
to submit a few' scattering remark-. I shall not approach th< sub¬ 
ject as a lawyer, for I have no technical knowledge, nor as a 
jurist, for I know' nothing of the decisions of the Courts, but as 
an humble citizen, and one who understands plain United States. 
I disclaim at the beginning that \ have any purpose to interpret 
the motives of the Committee. I hat was not a question for which 
this Convention was responsible. The real thing at issue was 
what did the report contain, and what did it do. That was the 
question, regardless of the motive. 

Now I undertake to say, Mr. President, that the Committee 
has brought in a very able report. So far as local legislation is 



CONSTITUTIONAL CONVENTION, 1901 


1965 


concerned, it embraces the entire field. About thirty-five specific 
subjects they have shot at with a rifle, and rung: the bell every 
time. After they got through with that, they have shot at the 
balance with a shot gun, and then they have turned loose a blun¬ 
derbuss, and finally, with the fourth section, covered the whole 
thing down with a blanket. 

It reminds me of a friend of mine who had a horse that would 
not stay hitched. It took three saplings, a double halter, a plank, 
some nails, and a blanket to hold him. The manner in which he 
hitched him was this. He took one rein and tied it to a sapling 
on the right, and the other rein to a sapling on the left; he tied 
his tail to the sapling in the rear, and nailed his hoofs to the plank 
on the ground, and after he got through with that he covered him 
with a blanket and pinned that down to the ground, and that 
horse never got away. 

Now, there is no question with the adoption of the thirty-five 
subdivisions, and with section four of this article, that they have 
practically excluded all questions of local legislation with the pos¬ 
sible exception of game. Now. Mr. President, I hope that this 
motion to reconsider will prevail. I believe that if we knock out 
the section which is now proposed to be reconsidered, and section 
four of this article, we would have a most excellent Article upon 
the question of local legislation. One in which there is sufficient 
elasticity to cover all the grounds, and all the issues that may pos¬ 
sibly arise. In this connection, gentlemen, I desire to read to you 
a part of a section that has already been adopted in the bill of 
rights, and it is this: “That the judicial shall never exercise the 
legislative and executive powers, or either of them, to the end that 
it may be a government of laws, and not of men.” 

With the limited experience that I have had in the legislature, 
I know that the purpose of the Committee on the judiciary, is to 
pass upon the constitutionality of questions. Now, instead of 
this Committee passing upon this question, it is to be left to the 
courts in this particular section. Not in a general way, as applied 
to all of our statutes, but in a particular way as applied to local 
legislation, and it seems to me that we set at defiance the ordi¬ 
nance already adopted in the bill of rights. That being the case, 
I want the legislative and the judicial departments kept distinct, 
as we have already adopted in the bill of rights. I hope that the 
motion to reconsider will prevail, and then I hope the Convention 
will knock that entire section out. 

MR. WATTS—Mr. President, I think there is a total misap¬ 
prehension in this matter. There is no desire on the part of this 
Committee to throttle anybody; we are simply trying to perform 
our duty in the matter which was submitted to us. We were ap¬ 
pointed a committee to cure the evil of local legislation, and I must 



1966 


OFFICIAL PROCEEDING'S 


confess that we started out with a view of stopping up every pos¬ 
sible gap which the Legislature could get through on this ques¬ 
tion of local legislation. This report is not aimed at liquor or dis¬ 
pensaries any more than it is aimed at any other thing. It is aim¬ 
ed at local legislation; it is aimed at the Legislature taking up 
its time in passing on purely local matters. The committee has 
indicated that it is willing in order to satisfy these gentlemen who 
say so much about liquor, by incorporating an amendment in Sec¬ 
tion 4 which will say that as to liquor laws the Legislature may 
pass them by giving the notice which is mentioned in Section 2. 
That ought to satisfy any reasonable man. I have noticed, Mr. 
President and gentlemen of the Convention, that there are a great 
many sore toes in this Convention, and that no matter what the 
subject broached, one is always treading on somebody’s sore toe 
without ever knowing that you were within a mile of it. Now, as 
to the proposition advanced by my distinguished friend from Jef¬ 
ferson and my distinguished friend from Limestone, that this pro¬ 
vision would be in contravention of that provision of the Bill of 
Rights which said that the Executive and Legislative and Judicial 
Departments should be separated. I respectfully differ with them, 
and insist that it is but carrying out that provision. If we were 
to delegate to the Legislature to determine whether or not a mat¬ 
ter of local concern which was introduced before them had already 
been provided for by general law or delegated to them the right 
to determine whether or not it could be provided for by any court, 
that would be investing the Legislature with the functions of the 
Judiciary and violating the very provision which the gentleman 
refers to, and putting this provision in here that the courts and 
not the Legislature shall determine whether or not a matter is 
provided for by the general law. or has been or can be provided 
for by a court, you simply give to each department its peculiar 
function and do not infringe upon that of the Legislature. Now, 
Mr. President, this matter has taken a wide range; has been a 
great deal said here that has no n ference whatever to the matter 
under discussion. a great deal has been said about dispensaries 
and about liquor laws and the Mobile school law. This Conven¬ 
tion must bear in mind that this law' is not retroactive; it does 
not repeal any local law' now' in existence; it does not lay its hand 
on any local interests which have alreadv been protected by the 
Legislature, but it simply says that in future the Legislature shall 
not pass local law's except under the conditions of this Article; 
and it may repeal such as are now' in existence bv pursuing the 
same forms which would be necessary to pass a new' law' and I 
submit, Mr. President, that it is not improper for this Convention 
to say to the Legislature, in view of the past history of this State, 
that whenever a matter of local concern is proposed to you, you 
shall not judge whether or not that is provided for by general law 
or whether it can be provided for by any court, but the court 



CONSTITUTIONAL CONVENTION, 1901 


1967 


shall determine that question, and you shall not pass any law 
which is already provided for by the general law, and you shall 
not pass a law which can be provided for by the courts. As an 
illustration, I was informed that in a recent session of the Legis¬ 
lature, a bill was introduced to relieve a minor 20 years of age of 
the disabilities of non-age. Now there is a general statute upon 
the books that any minor over the age of 18 years can, by appli¬ 
cation to the Chancellor, with proof, be relieved. Why, then, was 
it necessary for the Legislature to take up the public time, and, 
at the public expense to grant to this minor the removal of his 
disabilities, when it could be done for $15 or $20 through the 
courts. If this provision had been in the Constitution at that 
time, no such provision could have been considered, and the ob¬ 
ject of this is because the Supreme Court had decided that the 
provision in the old Constitution, which we have copied here, must 
be construed as giving the Legislature the sole power or judging 
whether or not a law is provided by general law, or the relief 
sought can be granted by any court, and this provision is to put 
it in the courts instead of with the Legislature, and if we were to 
adopt the old provision of the Constitution, without this addenda 
to it, we would be held to have agreed to the opinion of the Su¬ 
preme Court, and agreed that hereafter the Legislatures might 
determine these things for themselves. I submit that when we 
put an amendment to Section 4, which is to come up for considera¬ 
tion, that the Legislature may pass local laws as to liquor by giv¬ 
ing the notice provided in Section 2, that that is all that any fair 
man can ask in reference to liquor, and I submit, Mr. President, 
that this discussion has gone far enough, and I move the previous 
question. 

MR. BULGER—I desire to ask the gentleman a question? 
What becomes of vested rights under the law passed by the Leg¬ 
islature before the court passed upon the question as to whether 
it can be provided for by general law? 

MR. WATTS—I answered yesterday; there are some law¬ 
yers in every Legislature who will know whether a particular 
measure is covered by a general law, or whether the relief sought 
can be granted by a court. The provision is not that the matter 
could be provided by a general law, but whether it is, and any 
lawyer can tell whether it is provided for, although nobody could 
tell whether it could be provided for. 

MR. WHITE—I wish to ask the gentleman a question. Do 
I understand from the committee that in the event this motion 
to reconsider is not carried, and this section is allowed to remain 
in force, that the committee will then offer an additional section 
or provision saying that this shall have no application to the en¬ 
actment of any local law for the regulation of the whiskey traffic? 



1968 


OFFICIAL PROCEEDINGS 


MR. O'NEAL—I desire to state that I will introduce a sec¬ 
tion of that kind, as I have repeatedly stated. 

MR. WATTS— I desire to answer the gentleman's question. 
We are willing to say that the passage of local laws in reference 
to liquor shall be passed in accordance with Section 2, but not 
that it shall be passed notwithstanding this article, because that 
would enable the Legislature to pass any liquor law regardless 
of whether the notice is given or not. and we want notice given 
for every liquor law that is passed. 

MR. HEFLIN (Chambers)—It it is the purpose of the com¬ 
mittee to introduce a new section to cover this, why not recon¬ 
sider this section and adopt an amendment like this which the gen¬ 
tleman from Henry has written: “provided that nothing in this 
section or article shall affect the right of the Legislature to enact 
local laws regulating the liquor traffic.” 

MR. WATTS—I have already answered that the objection 
is to the words “or article,” which would give the Legislature 
the right to pass a liquor law without giving notice. We are per¬ 
fectly willing that a local liejuor law may be passed providtd that 
the notice is given provided in Section 2. 

MR. LONG (Walker)—You stated that the lawyers in the 
General Assembly could advise the General Assembly as to what 
laws they should have the right to pass. Would not the effect of 
that be to turn over the Legislature to a few lawyers to advise 
and run the Legislature, instead of the representatives of the peo¬ 
ple. 

MR. WATTS—It would not. 

MR. LONG (Walker)—^ ou take it for granted that all law¬ 
yers know all the general law? Know all the law? 

MR. WATTS—No, it is not a fact that all lawyers know all 
the law. 

MR. LONG (Walker)—Just those that go to the Legislature? 

MR. W ATTb I think if you ask anv lawyer that pretends 
to be a lawyer, that he will tell vou that’he don’t know all the 
law. 

MR. LONG (Walker) That is what I thought, only those 
that go to the Legislature are competent to advise? 

MR. WATTS—No. I want to sav that there are lawyers in 
every Legislature, and those who are not lawyers ask the advice 
of those who are as to whether or not a matter was already pro¬ 
vided for by a general law, and they could turn to the code of 
Alabama and the acts passed since the code and see whether or 



CONSTITUTIONAL CONVENTION, 1901 


1969 


not that matter was provided for, and they could answer yes or 
no, and the question could be also asked, can this matter be pro¬ 
vided for in a court, and he could turn to the code again and as¬ 
certain. 

MR. LONG (Walker)—That would have the effect of let¬ 
ting a lot of lawyers run the Legislature? 

MR. WATTS—Not at all. 

MR. H EELIN (Chambers)—I will ask how will this amend¬ 
ment suit, if this is added to the end: provided that notice is given 
as required in Section 2 of this article? 

MR. WATTS—I think that would be satisfactory, and I am 
willing now to ask a suspension of the rules and pass that section. 

MR. HEFLIN (Chambers)—I call for the previous question 

The main question was ordered? 

MR. WATTS—In the reconsideration I call for the ayes and 
noes. 

A reading of the section being called for, it was read as fol¬ 
lows : 

No special, private or local law, except a law fixing the time 
of holding courts, shall be enacted in any case, which is provided 
for by a general law, or when the relief sought can be given by 
any court of this State, and the courts and not the General As¬ 
sembly shall judge as to whether the matter of said law is pro¬ 
vided for by a general law and as to whether the relief sought can 
be given by any court; nor shall the General Assembly indirectly 
enact any such special, private or local law by the partial repeal 
of a general law. 

MR. WATTS—I want to call the attention to the fact that 
the whoie of Section 1, of which that is a part, has been adopted 
by this Convention, and we cannot entertain a motion to reconsid¬ 
er the adoption of a part of the section without reconsidering the 
adoption of the whole of Section 1. 

THE PRESIDENT—In the opinion of the Chair this section 
was considered differently from other sections. It was consid¬ 
ered subdivision bv subdivision, and a separate vote was taken 
upon each, and therefore it seems to the Chair that the Conven¬ 
tion might reconsider its action in the adoption of one subdivision 
without reconsidering the whole. 

MR. WATTS—But the Chair forgets that there was a vote 
adopting the whole of Section 1. 



1970 


OFFICIAL PROCEEDINGS 


THE PRESIDENT—The Chair does not so recollect. The 
Secretary states the Journal does not bear out the recollection of 
the gentleman from Montgomery. 

Upon the call of the roll, the vote resulted as follows: 

AYES 


Ashcraft, 

Banks, 

Barefield, 

Bethime, 

Blackwell, 

Boone, 

Brooks, 

Bulger, 

Burns, 

Carmichael, of Colbert, 
Carmichael, of Coffee, 
Cobb, 

Cunningham, 

Dent, 

deGraffenreid, 

Duke, 

Eley, 

Eyster, 

Fitts, 

Foshee, 

Foster, 

Freeman, 

Gilmore, 

Graham, of Montgomery, 
Grant, 

Grayson, 

Greer, of Perry, 

Harrison, 


Heflin, of Chambers, 
Heflin, of Randolph, 
Henderson, 

Howell, 

Hodges, 

Inge, 
lacks oil, 

Jones, of Bibb, 

Jones, of Hale, 

Jones, of Wilcox, 

Kirk, 

Kirkland, 

Knight, 

Ledbetter, 

Long (Walker), 
Macdonald, 

M c M i 1 la n (Bald w i n), 
McMillan (Wilcox), 
Malone, 

Martin, 

Maxwell, 

Merrill, 

Miller (Wilcox), 
Murphree, 

NeSniith, 

Norwood, 

Oates, 

Opp, 


Messrs. President, 
Almon, 

Beddow, 

Burnett, 

Byars, 

Cardon, 

Carnathon, 

Case, 

Cofer, 

Coleman, of Walker, 
Davis, of DeKalb, 


NOES 

Davis, of Etowah, 
Espy, 

Ferguson, 

Fletcher, 

Glover, 

Graham, of Talladega, 
Greer, of Calhoun, 
Haley, 

Handley, 

Hinson, 

Hood, 


Parker (Cullman), 
Parker ( Elmore,) 
Pearce, 
i Vttus, 

Pi Hans, 

Pitts, 

Reese, 

Renfro, 

Robinson, 

Rogers ( Lowndes), 
Rogers (Sumter), 
Samford, 

Searcy, 

Sentell, 

Sloan, 

Smith (Mobile), 
Smith, Mac. A., 

Sni it h, M orga n M., 
Sorrell, 

Stewart, 

Tayloe, 

Thompson, 

Vaughan, 

Weatherly, 

Williams (Elmore), 
Wilson (Clarke), 
Winn, 

TOTAL—83 


Howze, 

Jones, of Montgomery, 
Kyle, 

Leigh, 

Long (Butler), 

Lowe (Lawrene), 
Miller (Marengo), 
Moody, 

Norman, 

O’Neal (Lauderdale), 
O’Neill (Jefferson), 



CONSTITUTIONAL CONVENTION, 1901 


1971 


Phillips, 

Porter, 

Proctor, 

Reynolds (Chilton), 
Sanders, 

Sanford. 


Selheimer, 

Spears, 

Spr agios, 
Waddell, 
Walker, 
Watts, 


Weakley, 

White, 

Whiteside, 

Williams (Barbour), 
Williams (Marengo), 
Wilson (Washington), 

TOTAL—51 


ABSENT OR NOT VOTING 


Altman, 

Beavers, 

Bartlett, 

Browne, 

Chapman, 

Coleman, of Greene, 
Cornwall, 


Craig, 

Jenkins, 

King, 

Loklin, 

Lomax, 

Lowe (Jefferson), 
Morrisette, 

M ulkey, 


O’Rear, 

Palmer, 

Reynolds (Henry), 
Sollie, 

Studdard, 

Willct, 


MR. SANDERS—I have an amendment offered by the com¬ 
mittee. The amendment was read as follows: Amend Subdivision 
26 by adding thereto the following words: “Provided that nothing 
in this section or article shall affect the right of the Legislature 
to enact local laws regulating or prohibiting the liquor traffic. 
Provided, that notice is given as required in Section 2 of this ar¬ 
ticle/' 


MR. WILSON (Clarke)—I desire to offer an amendment to 
the amendment. 

The amendment was read as follows: Add to the amendment 
by striking out the words “and the court and not the General As¬ 
sembly shall judge as to whether the matter of said law is pro¬ 
vided for by a general law and as to whether the relief sought 
can be given by any court ” 

MR. HARRISON—I sought recognition, Mr. Chairman, but 
the purpose for which I rose could not now be accomplished, as 
there is an amendment to the amendment. 

MR. ROBINSON — The amendment of the delegate from 
Clarke is the identical amendment which was laid on the table 
yesterday. 

MR. WILSON (Clarke)—I desire to say that it is not the 
same. With this amendment that I now offer is the amendment 
of the delegate from Limestone and the two are coupled together 
so that that makes a difference. 

MR. ROBINSON—There was a motion yesterday to strike 
out those identical words. 



OFFICIAL PROCEEDINGS 


1972 

MR. SANDERS—I move to lay on the table the amendment 
of the gentleman from Clarke. 

THE PRESIDENT—The gentleman from Lee has the floor. 

MR. HARRISON—I thought I had, but was not sure. 

MR. WADDELL—A parliamentary inquiry. 

THE PRESIDENT—The gentleman will state the question 
of inquiry. 

MR. WADDELL — Is not this whole matter out of order. 
Are we not just considering the matter of reconsidering the Sec¬ 
tion? 

THE PRESIDENT—It has already been reconsidered. 

MR. WADDELL—Can you go further until it comes up in 
regular order. 

THE PRESIDENT—That point seems to be well taken. Tin 
question before the House was the question of reconsideration 
and when that was acted upon that disposed of the matter as to 
the report of the Committee until it was reached in regular order 
and it seems to the Chair the next order of business will be the 
call of the standing committees. 

MR. ASHCRAFT—Has not the hour passed for that? 

THE PRESIDENT—For the call of the delegates to intro¬ 
duce resolutions, etc., but not the cal! of the Committees to re¬ 
port. 

MR. PETTUS—I rise to a point of order. Did I understand 
the Chair to hold that this matter is not up for consideration? 

THE PRESIDENT—Yes. 

MR. PETTUS—Then I would call the attention of the Chair 
to the fact that when a motion is made to reconsider at the morn¬ 
ing session, it shall be taken up and acted upon at once. 

THE PRESIDENT—And the motion to reconsider has been 
passed on. The motion prevailed but now the report is not up 
for consideration. 

MR. HARRISON—I desire to have it understood that I have 
the floor when the report does come up for consideration. 

THE PRESIDENT—The Chair will try to keep the gentle¬ 
man in mind, and if he is on his feet before others, the Chair will 
try to see him. 

MR. JONES (Hale)—I rise to move a reconsideration of the 
vote whereby Subdivision 22 of Section 1 of this article was adopt- 



CONSTITUTIONAL CONVENTION, 1901 


1973 


ed yesterday. It relates to the jurisdiction and fees of Justices of 
the Peace and constables. If the Convention reconsiders, I wish 
to substitute the word “increasing” in lieu of the word “regulat¬ 
ing” which would make it read “increasing the jurisdiction and 
fees of Justices of the Peace or the fees of constables.” 

THE PRESIDENT—Did the gentleman vote for that? 

.MR. JONES (Hale)— Yes, for the special purpose. 

MR. WATTS—Is it not too late to make a motion to recon¬ 
sider ? 

THE PRESIDENT—It seems to the Chair not. The gen¬ 
tleman moves to reconsider the vote by which Subdivision 23 was 
adopted. 

MR. OATES—As I understand the object as stated by the 
delegate for offering his amendment that is embraced in the sub¬ 
division the way it now stands. What is the change the gentle¬ 
man proposes to make? 

MR. JONES (Hale)—Insert the word “increasing” instead 
of the word “regulating.” 

MR. OATES—“Regulating” embraces everything. 

MR. JONES (Hale)—You don’t catch my idea. I want to 
leave the Black Belt counties free to decrease the fees but not 
to increase them. 

MR. OATES—Regulating would allow the decreasing as well 
as increasing. 

MR. JONES (Hale)—That is what I don’t want. I want the 
Justices of the Peace of a particular county confined to a pre¬ 
cinct, and to take away his criminal jurisdiction. This matter 
is a great burden and hardship on the planters of the Black Belt 
and also on the negroes. The way matters stand now no matter 
how obnoxious the system works in any particular county, we 
have to stand it, just because the white counties in the State have 
it I can see no reason why if the people want to decrease juris¬ 
diction or fees it should not be done. In cases where they have 
county courts to take charge of the matter I cannot see why it 
should be objected to that county regulating this matter as I sug¬ 
gest. And I think the matter ought to be settled here and you 
know that Justices of the Peace have friends here, and have still 
more in the Legislature, and if it is referred to the Commissioners 
Courts they will be of the same calibre and it is well known when¬ 
ever you tackle any office, you are up against it strictly. 

MR. O’NEAL—I desire to say we have no objection to the 
amendment of the gentleman from Hale. 



1974 


OFFICIAL PROCEEDINGS 


A vote being taken, the vote by which the Section was passed 
was reconsidered. 

MR. COBB—I made a motion yesterday to reconsider Sec¬ 
tion 33. I want now to direct the attention of the Convention to 
this amendment. It relates to boundary lines. 

THE PRESIDENT—Before that is taken up: The gentle¬ 
man from Chambers made a point of order against the amendment 
offered by the gentleman from Clarke. The Chair has been un¬ 
able to find a record of the vote to which the gentleman referred. 
The Chair will be obliged to the gentleman if he will look up the 
record. 

MR. ROBINSON — The gentleman from Limestone (Mr. 
Pettus) offered the same amendment as the gentleman from 
Clarke. 

THE PRESIDENT—The Chair will investigate the question 
and rule on the point of order when the question comes up again. 
The Chair will now recognize the delegate from Macon. 

MR. COBB—I will ask the Clerk to read the amendment of¬ 
fered by the delegate from Cullman (Mr. Parker), which was 
adopted to Subdivision 33. 

The amendment was read as follows: Amend Subdivision 33 
by adding to the same the words “and changing the lines of old 
counties/’ 

MR. COBB—My apprehension is that if that provision re¬ 
mains in the law the Legislature will be deprived of the power 
hereafter to change the boundary lines of old counties. 

MR. PARKER (Cullman)—If the gentleman will read just 
ahead of that he will see that there is an exception so that the 
right remains to change the boundary lines of counties. 

MR. COBB—I am afraid there would be some doubt on that 
point. If that amendment remains it seems to me it leaves the 
matter in doubt and it also seems to me that it is entirely unne¬ 
cessary and that it should be stricken out. It is entirely unneces¬ 
sary for the reason that when the report comes in from the Com¬ 
mittee on County Boundaries you will have this subject entirely 
covered. Provision will be made and I have no doubt but that 
the provision will meet the sanction of this Convention regulating 
the mode and manner in and by which county boundary lines 
may be changed. The main feature of this is that before any 
change of that sort shall be made it shall be submitted to a vote 
of the people whose interests are affected, and that I think is 
right. It may be that I am supersensitive on this subject. It may 
be that this amendment will not have the operation which I think, 
but still out of abundant caution and because it is unnecessary 



CONSTITUTIONAL CONVENTION, 1901 


1975 


in this place I move to reconsider the section in order to strike 
the amendment out. Can I move to reconsider just the amend¬ 
ment or will I have to move to reconsider the vote by which the 
entire subdivision was adopted? 

THE PRESIDENT—The gentleman will have to make the 
motion to reconsider the vote by which the subdivision was adopt¬ 
ed. 


MR. COBB—Then I will give notice of that motion and State 
that it is simply for the purpose of striking out the amendment of 
the delegate from Cullman which I think is wholly unnecessary. 


MR. deGRAFEENRHII)—What is the subdivision as pass¬ 
ed by the house (a good many of us don’t know what it is.) 

THE PRESIDENT—The clerk will read the subdivision as 
adopted. 

MR. O’NEAL—The gentleman from Macon is laboring un¬ 
der a total misapprehension. Section 33 was amended yesterday 
to meet the objection he is now making. Mr. Parker of Cullman 
offered an amendment which was adopted and the section now 
reads: “Providing for the conduct of elections or designating 
places of voting, or changing the boundaries of wards, precincts 
or districts, except on the organization of new counties or chang¬ 
ing the lines of old counties. That is the exception. They can¬ 
not pass anything as to that. That is the exception from the pro¬ 
vision. 


MR. COBB—I desire that nothing shall be passed by this 
Convention to prohibit the legislature from providing for a change 
in the boundary lines of counties. 

MR. O’NEAL—That is exactly what has been done. 


MR. COBB—Then I would be satisfied except for the point 
I make that it is wholly unnecessary here and will be provided for 
elsewhere, and I do not think it is wise to put the same provision 
in two places in the Constitution. 

MR. deGRAFFENREID — I called for a reading and the 
Chair directed that it should be done but it was not done. 


MR JONES (Montgomery)—I rise to a point of order. The 
time is reached when the call of the committees is to be made and 
without a suspension of the rules this matter cannot be considered. 

THE PRESIDENT—There is no fixed time for the call of 
the committees. The rule provides that half past ten the call of 
the roll of delegates for the introduction of ordinances, shall be 
suspended and the regular order of business will then be resumed 
exceot when it is interrupted by a motion to reconsider, which 
can be made immediately after the approval of the journal. 



1976 


OFFICIAL PROCEEDINGS 


The Secretary will read the subdivision for the reading of 
which the gentleman asked. 

The subdivision was read as follows: 33. Providing for the 
conduct of elections, or designating places of voting, or chang- 
ing the boundaries of wards, precincts or districts, except on the 
organization of new counties, and changing the lines of old coun¬ 
ties. 


MR. OATES I had charge of this part of the report when 
this amendment was adopted. I remember that when the amend¬ 
ment of the delegate from Cullman was offered I called the at¬ 
tention of the Convention to the fact that I had read the report 
made by the Committee on Counties and County Roundaries of 
which Committee, the delegate from Cullman is Chairman, in 
which I thought ample provision was made for this thing, but so 
far as I was concerned if he wishes it to be put in there we had 
no objection, but I called the attention of the Convention to the 
fact it had been substantially reported by his Committee although 
we had no objection to putting it in here. 

THE PRESIDENT-The question is on the motion to re¬ 
consider the vote whereby subdivision 33 was adopted. 

A vote being taken the motion to reconsider was lost. 

^ HR PRESIDENT. I he Clerk will call the roll of stand¬ 
ing committees. The Clerk called until he had called the Com¬ 
mittees on Rules. 

MR. SMITH (Mobile) — The Committee on Rules reports 
favorably resolution 237 offered by Mr. deGraffenreid. 

The resolution was read as follows: Resolved that after the 
present week this Convention shall dispense with all clerks of 
committees except the clerk of the Committee on Rules and the 
c * er k of the Committee on Order, Harmony and Consistency of 
the W hole Constitution. Resolved, further, that the clerks of the 
Committee on Rules and Order, Harmony and Consistency of the 
Whole Constitution shall serve the Chairmen of the other com¬ 
mittees when their .services are required. 

MR. PROC I OR—Mr. President, the gentleman— 

THE PRESIDENT — The gentleman from Mobile has the 
floor. 

MR. SMIIH I yield for the purpose of an amendment which 
the Committee had intended to make. 

MR. PROCTOR—I desire to offer an amendment. 



CONSTITUTIONAL CONVENTION, 1901 


1977 


The amendment was read as follows: Add after the words 
“consistency and harmony of the whole Constitution” the words 
“and the journal clerk.” 

M K. PROCTOR—That is done by permission of the mover 
ot the resolution and the Chairman of the Committee on Rules. 

'!H1\ PRESIDENT—The question will be upon the amend¬ 
ment ofiered by the gentleman from Jackson to the resolution 
as reported by the Committee on Rules. 

MR. HOWZlv—I would like to inquire whether those two 
secretaries cannot perform the work for all three of the Commit¬ 
tee^ It seems to me we should get rid of all expense possible. 

MR. PROCTOR—The character of work that is required 
for our Committee is different from that required for any other 
Committee. We have taken our clerk in hand and broken him 
in under our personal supervision and for that reason we would 
like to have him retained. 

MR. JONES (Montgomery)—I would like to inquire why the 
Committee needs the clerk now? It may be there is a need, but 
I would like to be shown what is the need. 

MR. SMITH (Mobile*)—Matters are being referred to the 
Committee on Rules that we have to report on. We have some 
resolutions now. 

MR. JONES (Montgomery)—How many are there now not 
acted on? 

MR. SMITH (Mobile)—I think three. 

MR. deGRAFFENREID—It is very probable that some of 
the Committee will need clerical work in the future. We cannot 
tell. It is a fact that the clerk to the Committee on Rules is a 
first class short hand writer and can do a great deal of work 
quicklv. Some Committee may need some clerical work and we 
can send to them a first class shorthand writer. For that reason 
we desire to retain him on the Rules Committee. Then the Corn- 
mot tee on Order, Harmony and Consistency will need a clerk. 

MR. JONES (Montgomery)—How about the Committee on 
Journal ? 

MR. deGRAFFENREID—Mr. Proctor says they have a clerk 
who has been broken in and understands the work. 

MR. JONES (Montgomery)—It is the duty of the Committee 
on Journal to look over the journal to see whether it is right 
and if they have a clerk to do it, we had as well dispense with the 
committee. 



1978 


OFFICIAL PROCEEDINGS 


MR. HOWELL—If it is in order, I would like to introduce a 
substitute for the resolution and the pending’ amendment. I think 
we have other employes who, with equal propriety, might be dis¬ 
pensed with. 

The substitute of the delegate from Cleburne was read as 
follows: Whereas, the session of the Convention is being pro¬ 
tracted much longer than was anticipated and the expense of the 
same is already beyond what was expected, be it therefore, Re¬ 
solved, That a special committee of five be appointed by the 
President to investigate and report at the earliest practicable day 
the advisability of reducing the number of employes of the Con¬ 
vention and cutting down the expenses of the same. 

MR. deGRAFFENREID—I move that the substitute be laid 
on the table. 

The motion to table was withdrawn. 

MR. HOWELL—In my judgment, we made a mistake in the 
beginning in having more employes than were needed. We have 
ten pages at $2 a day, and everybody knows five are amply suf¬ 
ficient. It occurs to me that the proper solution is to appoint a 
special committee to investigate and to see what employes can 
be dispensed with. If we are justified in squandering $5 of the 
State’s money, the same rule would apply to $500 or $5,000. I 
hope the Convention will not vote down this substitute. 

MR. deGRAFFENREID—Now I renew my motion to lay 
on the table. 

MR. HOWELL—On that I call for the ayes and noes. 

The call was sustained. 

MR. CUNNINGHAM—I rise to a point of order. The sub¬ 
stitute of the delegate from Cleburne is not germane to the 
amendment of the gentleman from Jackson, inasmuch as it raises 
the appointment of a committee for the consideration of the sub¬ 
ject, and, therefore, introduces entirely new matter, and is out 
of order. 

THE PRESIDENT—The Secretary will read the resolution 
as reported by the committee and the substitute and the amend¬ 
ment offered by the gentleman from Jackson. 

The resolution was read as follows: 

“Resolved, That after the present week, this Convention shall 
dispense with all clerks of committees, except the clerk of the 
Committee on Rules and the clerk of the Committee on Order, 
Harmony and Consistency of the Whole Constitution and Journal. 



CONSTITUTIONAL CONVENTION, 1901 


1979 


“Resolved, further, That the clerks of the Committee on 
Rules, and Order, Harmony and Consistency of the Whole Con¬ 
stitution and Journal, shall serve the chairman of the other com¬ 
mittees when their services are required.” 

The substitute of the delegate from Cleburne was read as 
follows: 

“Whereas, The session of the Convention is being protracted 
much longer than was anticipated, and the expense of the same is 
already beyond what was expected, be it therefore 

“Resolved, That a special committee of five be appointed by 
the President to investigate and report at the earliest practicable 
day the advisability of reducing the number of employes of the 
Convention and cutting down the expenses of the same.’’ 

MR. LOWE—May I ask for a reading of the amendment? 
THE PRESIDENT—It has just been read. 

MR. LOWE—I understood there was a resolution, an amend¬ 
ment to the resolution, and a substitute. 

THE PRESIDENT—The amendment was added to the reso¬ 
lution, inserting “clerk to the Committee on Journal.” The reso¬ 
lution reported by the Committee on Rules is to reduce the ex¬ 
penses of the Convention by dispensing with certain clerks to cer¬ 
tain standing committees. The provision of the substitute is to 
raise the committee to investigate and report as to the propriety 
of dispensing with these clerks and with others. It seems to the 
chair that the substitute is germane, and the point of order of 
the gentleman from Jefferson is overruled. 

MR. LOWE—The report of the Committee on Rules and 
resolution was what? 

THE PRESIDENT — To dispense with all but the three 
clerks. The question is on the substitute of the delegate from 
Cleburne, and the yeas and nays demanded and the call sustained. 

MR. deGRAFFENREID—The question is on the motion I 
made to table. 

THE PRESIDENT—The chair stands corrected. The ques¬ 
tion is on the motion to table the substitute of the delegate from 
Cleburne. 

The roll being called, resulted as follows: 

AYES 


Almon, 

Barefield, 

Bethune, 


Brooks, Carnathon, 

Carmichael, of Colbert, Cofer, 

Carmichael, of Coffee, Coleman, of Walker, 



OFFICIAL PROCEEDINGS 


1980 

Craig, 

Cunningham, 

deGraffenreid, 

Eyster, 

Glover, 

Inge, 

Jones, of Bibb, 
Kirk, 


Messrs. President, 
Ashcraft, 

Banks, 

Beddow, 

Blackwell, 

Boone, 

Burnett, 

Burns, 

Byars, 

Cardon, 

Case, 

Cobb, 

Davis, of Etowah, 

Dent, 

Duke, 

Eley, 

Espy, 

Ferguson, 

Fitts, 

Fletcher, 

Foshee, 

Foster, 

Freeman, 

Gilmore, 

Graham, of Montgomery 
Graham, of Talladega, 
Grant, 

Grayson, 

Greer, of Calhoun, 

Greer, of Perry, 

Haley, 


Altman, 

Bartlett, 

Beavers, 

Browne, 


Leigh, 

Long, of Butler, 

Lowe, of Jefferson, 
Lowe, of Lawrence, 
Macdonald, 

Parker (Cullman). 
Proctor, 

Reynolds (Chilton), 

NOES 

Handley, 

Harrison, 

Heflin, of Chambers. 
Heflin, of Randolph, 
Henderson, 

Hinson, 

Hodges, 

Hood, 

Howell, 

Hovvze, 

Jackson, 

Jones, of Hale, 

Jones, of Montgomery, 
Jones, of Wilcox. 
Kirkland, 

Kyle, 

Ledbetter, 

Long, of Walker, 
McMillan, of Baldwin, 
McMillan (Wilcox), 
Malone, 

Martin, 

Maxwell, 

Merrill, 

Miller (Marengo). 

Miller (Wilcox), 

Moody, 

Murphree, 

NeSmith, 

Norman, 

Norwood, 

ABSENT OR NOT VOTH 
Chapman, 

Coleman, of Greene, 
Cornwall, 

Davis, of DeKalb, 


Reynolds, of Henry, 
Smith (Mobile), 
Spragins, 

Tayloe, 

Weatherly. 

Williams (Barbour), 
Wil son (Washington), 

TOTAL—33 


Oates, 

O’Neal ( Lauderdale), 
O’Neill, of Jefferson, 
Opp. 

Parker (Elmore), 
Pearce. 

Pettus, 

Phillips. 

Lilians, 

Porter. 

Sanford, 

Sanders, 

Searcy, 

Selheimer, 

Sloan, 

Smith, Mac. A.. 
Smith, Morgan M., 
Sorrell, 

Spears, 

Thompson. 

Vaughan, 

Waddell. 

Walker, 

Weakley. 

Watts, 

Whiteside, 

White, 

Williams (Marengo), 
Wilson (Clarke). 
Winn, 

TOTAL—92 
G 

Jenkins, 

King, 

Knight, 

Locklin, 



CONSTITUTIONAL CONVENTION, 1901 


1981 


Lomax, 

Morrisette, 

Mulkey, 

O’Rear, 

Palmer, 

Pitts, 


Reese, 

Renfro, 

Robinson, 

Rogers (Lowndes), 
Rogers (Sumter). 
Samford, 


Sentell, 

Sollie, 

Stewart, 

Stoddard, 

Willet, 

Williams (Elmore). 


So the House refused to table the substitute. 

IHK PRESIDENT—The question is on the adoption of the 
substitute of the delegate from Cleburne. All in favor say aye. 

MR. COKRR—I desire to ask unanimous consent to introduce 
a resolution. 


A reading of the substitute was called for by Mr. Lowe and 
read. 

THE PRESIDENT—All those opposed say no. 

MR. LOWE—Before the Chairman announces the vote I de¬ 
sire to make the point of order that the statement should be made 
before the Convention for the ayes and noes both. 

MR. HOWELL—I make the point of order that the vote has 
been taken and substitute adopted. 

MR. LOWE—I should not like to call for a verification— 

THE PRESIDENT—The gentleman from Jefferson possibly 
failed to hear the Chair when he submitted the question for the 
ayes and the vote on the ayes had been taken. 

MR. LOWE—All I ask is for a verification of the vote. 

THE PRESIDENT—Will the gentleman suspend until the 
Chair makes a statement? The Chair submitted a vote on the 
ayes and 'the gentleman called for a resolution and as an act of 
courtesy to the gentleman from Jefferson, the Chair directed the 
Clerk to read the resolution. 

MR. LOWE—The gentleman from Jefferson considered it 
as a matter of right and he was demanding it before the question 
was put. 

MR. BURNS—I rise to a point of order. The vote has been 
taken on the ayes and on the noes and the result has not been 
announced. 

THE PRESIDENT—In the opinion of the Chair the ayes 
have it. The ayes have it and the substitute is adopted. 

MR. LONG (Walker)—I would like to offer a resolution and 
have it referred to the proper committee. I wanted to offer it 
as an amendment on this matter, but it being disposed of my 
resolution will have to go to a committee. 



1982 


OFFICIAL PROCEEDINGS 


THE PRESIDENT — The gentleman from Cullman asked 
unanimous consent to introduce a resolution but the Chair will 
first submit to the Convention is there objection. There is ob¬ 
jection. 

The gentleman from Walker asks unanimous leave to intro¬ 
duce a resolution. Is there object? There is objection. 

MR. deGRAFFENREID—I move that the rules be suspend¬ 
ed and the gentleman from Cullman and the gentleman from Walk¬ 
er be allowed to offer their resolutions. 

THE PRESIDENT—The question would be on the report 
of the committee as amended. By unanimous consent that might 
be dispensed with. 

MR. deGRAFFENREID — I understood the House had 
adopted the substitute and that the report of the Committee on 
Rules has been disposed of? 

THE PRESIDENT—It has not been and the question will 
now be on the resolution as amended. 

MR. O’NEAL—Is that open to amendment now? 

MR. HEFLIN—I move that the substitute and the amend¬ 
ment be referred to the Committee on Rules. That committee 
can make the same investigation that a special committee could. 

MR. GREER (Calhoun)—I make the point of order that the 
rules will have to be suspended before that can be done. 

The point of order was overruled and a vote being taken the 
motion to refer was lost by a vote of 38 ayes to 72 noes. 

A further vote being taken the resolution as amended was 
adopted. 

MR. deGRAFFENREID—I now move that the rules be sus¬ 
pended in order that the gentleman from Cullman and from 
Walker may offer their resolutions. 

MR. GREER (Calhoun)—I withdraw my objections. 

MR. SANDERS—I object. 

A vote being taken the motion to suspend was carried by 87 
to 13. 

The resolution No. 328 offered by Mr. Cofer was read as fol¬ 
lows : Be it resolved that from and after the present week the 
services of five pages of the Convention be dispensed with and 
that the President be directed to discharge five of the pages now 
in attendance upon the Convention in order to save unnecessary 
expenses. 



CONSTITUTIONAL CONVENTION, 1901 


1983 


MR. COFER—I move a suspension of the rules and that that 
resolution be put upon its passage. 

MR. LOWE—I second the motion. 

MR. PETTUS—As a substitute I move that that resolution 
be referred to the special committee to be appointed by the Presi¬ 
dent. 

MR. HEFLIN (Chambers)—Would a motion to table be in 
order ? 

THE PRESIDENT—A motion to table a motion to suspend 
the rules would not be in order. 

A vote being* taken the House refused to suspend the rules 
to immediately consider this resolution to the special committee to 
be appointed. 

The resolution of the delegate from Walker was read as fol¬ 
lows : 

Resolution No. 239, by Mr. Long of Walker: 

Whereas, there is too much expense attached to the running 
of the Convention, therefore, be it resolved, that a committee of 
five be raised to say who are orators and who are not orators, 
and to allot to the orators a time during which each day they and 
one-half of the stenographers may repair to the Senate Chamber 
and there let the orators deliver themselves of their eloquence, and 
that the Convention proceed to work during such time. 

THE PRESIDENT—That also will be referred to the Com¬ 
mittee of five on economics. 

MR. BKTHUNE — I have a petition of a large number of 
citizens which I ask unanimous consent to present and have read. 

THE PRESIDENT—The gentleman asks unanimous consent 
and the Chair hears no objection and the Clerk will read the pe¬ 
tition. 

The petition was read as follows: 

Petition No. 19, introduced by Mr. D. S. Bethune. 

To the Constitutional Convention: 

We, the undersigned, do most respectfully petition your hon¬ 
orable body to pass an ordinance requiring the election of Rail¬ 
road Commissioners by the people, and that they be given more 
power, and be paid by the State. 

A. E. Singleton, Mayor; N. B. Powell, B. P. Powell, F. B. 
Haines, H. Well, R. J. Lawrence, T. J. Dean, W. S. Memfer, H. 
Harris, P. Q. Callam, R. L. Hobbs, H. P. Chappell, M. S. Stuckey, 



1984 


OFFICIAL PK()CKKI)IN'CiS 


W. J. Renfroe, C. C. Clark, Pat. F. Martin, G. A. Hunter. B. K. 
Grider, J. W. Ralsom, J. Y. Freman, T. R. Martin, C. I’. West, 
H. M. Martin, J. E. Firt, R. \V. Wise, M. Cohn. Albion Hixon, 
C. H. Franklin, T. H. Coleman, W. G. Wilson, J. B. Batmum, R. 
T. McGirty, T. B. Miles, N. H. Frazer, J. S. Sellers, l’. T. High¬ 
tower, J. A. Hough, J. E. Griffith, J. G. Carmichael, F. B. Miles, 
T. C. Lester, H. L. Lee, A. M. Cope, J. H. Harrison, L. C. Ware, 
G. A. Hern. H. H. Hayes, W. H. Fuller, W. G. Lee. E. Troup 
Randle, Thos. H. Jones, J. T. Robertson, L. F. Tracies, W. T. 
Hough, O. C. Moore. W. M. Stakelv. H. C. Chappell, W. M. Cross¬ 
ly, F. J. Carlisle, W. C. Allison. W. W. Johnston, J. E. Foster, L. 
W. Redd, J. A. Lynch, W. Kosenstheil, H. J. Rosenstheil, 
J. F. Payne, P. B. Mitchell. W. A. Owen, J. A. Eidson, J. W. 
Pruett, R. A. Bishop, F. N. McMillan, W. W. Bates, E. F. McKin¬ 
non, J. D. Feagin, j. T. Flewellen, J. A. Fault, Henry Stierson, J. 
G. McAndrew, J. W. Crossly, Jr., R. E. L. Cope. Henry P. Blue 
& Co., J. H. Rainer, A. H. Keller. S. C. Go wan, R. J. Grady. (. H. 
Rainer, T. H. Gholston, A. D. Fielder, F. M. Mosely, C. E. Ghols- 
ton, W. L. Mosely, J. H. Branscomb, J. K. Franklin, C. A. High¬ 
tower, J. W. Dykes, S. P. Rainer. W. W. Rainer, W. B. Cope. E. 
C. Dawson, T. U. Baskin, W. H. Wilson, J. A. Wylv. Jr.. F. An¬ 
derson. 

MR. SANDERS—I call for the regular order of business. 

MR. MALONE—I have a short petition, which [ ask unani¬ 
mous consent to have read. 

There being no objection, the petition was read as follows: 

Dothan, Ala., July 5, 1901. 

To Hons. M. Sollie, George H. Malone, T. M. Espy and H T 
Reynolds: 

As our delegates, we respectfully petition the Constitutional 
Convention, through you, to provide in the new Constitution, for 
the election of the Alabama Railroad Commission bv the people 
direct, and for the payment of their salaries by the State, and that 
their powers to enforce their rulings and orders be increased. 

(Signed.) 

J. M. Byrd, Geo. Cotton, G. W. Pilcher, W. W. Barnard A 
Payne, C. B. Farmer, W. C. Penn, J. R. Young, A. B. Kelly C C 
Hughes, J. J. Snell, A. J. Berverett, W. Y. Tate, B. F. Reid,’ R. F. 
Millikens, and many others. 

Referred to Committee on Corporations. 

MR. REESE — I have about thirty-five petitions which I 
would like to have read. 



CONSTITUTIONAL CONVENTION, 1901 


1985 


I o which objection was unmistakably manifested. 

MR. SANDERS I call for the regular order of business. 

1HE PRESIDENT—The regular order will be the call of 
the roll of the standing committees. 

Upon the call of the roll the Committee on Impeachments 
submitted the following report: 

REPORT OF THE COMMITTEE ON IMPEACHMENTS 
Mr. President: 

The Committee on Impeachments instructs me to report the 
Ordinance hereto appended, to take place of Article VII of the 
present Constitution. 

The material changes are as follows: 

Section E The words “Lieutenant Governor, Commissioner 
of Agriculture and Industries” are inserted. “Habitual drunken¬ 
ness” is omitted, and the following inserted in lieu thereof, “or 
intemperance in the use of intoxicating liquors or narcotics to 
such an extent, in view of the dignity of the office and importance 
of its duties, as unfits the officer for the discharge of such duties.” 

Sec. 2. The word “sheriffs" is inserted. 

Sec. 3. The word “sheriffs” is omitted: County Superintend¬ 
ents of Education and County Solicitors inserted. The impeach¬ 
ment of all officers of incorporated cities and towns is provided 
for. 


Sec. 4. This is identical with Section 4 of the Article in the 
present Constitution. In this connection, the committee reports 
favorably Ordinance No. 404, offered by Mr. Coleman of Walker, 
providing for the amendment of that part of Section 25, Article 
V, adopted by this Convention, which is as follows: 

“And the Governor, when satisfied after hearing the Sheriff, 
that he should be impeached, may suspend him from office until 
the impeachment proceedings are decided.” 

But two other ordinances have been referred to this commit¬ 
tee, which have been duly considered, and the principles contain¬ 
ed in the same incorporated in the Article, hence they are here¬ 
with returned to the Convention. 


O. R. Hood, Chairman. 

AN ORDINANCE 

Be it ordained by the people of Alabama, in convention as¬ 
sembled, that Article VII of the Constitution be stricken out, and 
the following Article inserted in lieu thereof: 



1986 


OFFICIAL PROCEEDINGS 


ARTICLE -. 

Impeachments. 

Section 1. The Governor, Lieutenant Governor, Secretary of 
State, Auditor, Treasurer, Attorney General, Superintendent of 
Education, Commissioner of Agriculture and Industries and 
Judges of the Supreme Court, may be removed from office for 
willful neglect of duty, corruption in office, incompetency, or in¬ 
temperance in the use of intoxicating liquors or narcotics to such 
an extent, in view of the dignity of the office and importance of its 
duties, as unfits the officers for the discharge of such duties, or 
for any offense involving moral turpitude while in office, or com¬ 
mitted under color thereof, or connected therewith, by the Sen¬ 
ate sitting at a court for that purpose, under oath or affirmation 
on Articles or other charges preferred by the House of Repre¬ 
sentatives. 

Sec. 2. The Chancellors, judges of the Circuit Court, Judges 
of the Probate Court, Sheriffs, Solicitors of the Circuits and Judges 
of the Inferior courts, from which an appeal may be taken directly 
to the Supreme Court, may be removed from office for any of 
the causes specified in the preceding section, by the Supreme 
Court, under such regulations as may be prescribed by law. 

Sec. 3. The clerks of the Circuit, or courts of like jurisdic¬ 
tion, of Criminal Courts, Tax Collectors, Tax Assessors, County 
Treasurers, County Superintendents of Education, County Solici¬ 
tors, Coroners, Justices of the Peace, Notaries Public, Constables 
and all other count)' officers. Mayors, Intendants, and all other 
officers of incorporated cities and towns in this State, may he 
removed from office for any' of the causes specified in Section 1 
of this Article, by the Circuit or other courts of like jurisdiction, 
or criminal court of the county in which such officers hold their 
office, under such regulations as may be prescribed by law. Pro¬ 
vided, that the right of trial by jury and appeal in such cases be 
secured. 

Sec. 4. The penalties in cases arising under the three pre¬ 
ceding sections shall not extend beyond removal from office, and 
disqualifications from holding office, under the authority of this 
State, for the term for which he was elected or appointed; hut 
the accused shall be liable to indictment and punishment as pre¬ 
scribed by law. 

MINORITY REPORT. 


Mr. President: 

The undersigned, members of the Committee on Impeach¬ 
ments, do not concur in the report of the majority as to Sections 
1, 2 and 3, and in lieu thereof, we recommend the following: 



CONSTITUTIONAL CONVENTION, 1901 


1987 


Section 1. The Governor, Lieutenant Governor, Secretary of 
State, Treasurer, Auditor, Attorney General. Superintendent of 
Education, Commissioners of Agriculture and Industries, and 
Judges of the Supreme Court, may be removed from office for 
wilful neglect of duty, corruption in office, habitual drunkenness, 
incompetency, or anv offense involving moral turpitude while in 
office, or committed under color thereof, or connected therewith, 
by the Senate, sitting as a court for that purpose, under oath or 
affirmation, on Articles or charges preferred by the House of Rep¬ 
resentatives. 

Sec. 2. The Chancellors, Judges of the Circuit Courts, So¬ 
licitors, and Judges of the Inferior Courts, from which an appeal 
may be taken directly to the Supreme Court, may be removed 
from office for any of the causes specified in the preceding section, 
by the Supreme Court, under such regulations as may be pre¬ 
scribed by law. 

Sec. 3. The Sheriffs, Clerks of the Circuit or other courts of 
like jurisdiction, of criminal courts, Tax Collectors, Tax Assessors, 
County Treasurers, County Superintendents of Education, County 
Solicitors, Coroners, Justices of the Peace, Notaries Public, Con¬ 
stables and all other county officers. Mayors. Intendents of in¬ 
corporated cities and towns in this State, may be removed from 
office for any of the causes specified in Section 1 of this Article, by 
the Circuit or other Courts of like jurisdiction, or Criminal Courts 
of the county in which said officers hold their office, under such 
regulations as may be prescribed by law ; provided, that the right 
of trial by jury and appeal in such cases be secured. 

We are aware that the change as made by the majority in 
Section 1 was done to try to remedy the defect as shown by the 
opinion of the Supreme Court in the Robinson cases. We are 
unable to see how the change remedies the difficulty, and, there¬ 
fore, recommend the adoption of the section as found in the Con¬ 
stitution of 1875, with the addition of Lieutenant Governor and 
Commissioner of Agriculture and Industries. 

As to Sections 2 and 3, the minority dissent from the action of 
the majority in transposing the word “Sheriffs” from Section 3 to 
Section 2, and the Section as recommended by the minority is the 
same as in your Constitution. 

The effect of the adoption of the majority report will be to 
take the impeachment of the Sheriffs out of the hands of the local 
community which elected them, and place it in the Supreme Court, 
and it will be observed, that this is not limited to cases arising 
from negligence in allowing a prisoner to be lynched, but for any 
cause whatever, which we insist is not demanded by any condition 
that has ever existed in our State, or which is at all likely to ever 
occur, and therefore, we submit that the provisions of the Consti¬ 
tution of 1875 should not be changed. 



1988 


OFFICIAL PROCEEDINGS 


J. F. Thompson, 

J. J. Robinson. 

MR. HOOD—I ask for the reading of the ordinance No. 404 
accompanying the report. 

The ordinance was read as follows: 

Ordinance No. 404. hv Mr. Coleman (Walker) : 

Whereas, ample provision is made by law for the impeach¬ 
ment of officers, and whereas, it is contrary to the polic\ of this 
government that anv part of the powers of our department should 
be exercised by an* officer of another department, and whereas, 
it is contrary to the spirit of our institutions that any person should 
be punished before trial. 

Now, therefore, be it ordained bv the people of Alabama in 
Convention assembled, That the following part of Section 28 of 
Article V, adopted by this Convention, be and the same is hereby 
annulled to wit: “And the Governor, when satisfied after hearing 
the Sheriff, that he should be impeached, may suspend him from 
office until the impeachment proceedings are decided/’ 

MR. HOOD—[ now move that the ordinance and report of 
the Committee be printed and lie upon the table and be considered 
in the order of its being reported. 

The motion was carried. 

THE PRESIDENT—The regular order will be the consid¬ 
eration of the report of the Committee on Local Legislation. 

MR. DENT—I have an amendment to Section 4, which was 
under discussion when we adjourned, and I send it up. 

MR. O’NEAL—I rise to make an inquiry. Do we take up 
where we stopped on yesterday, or do we take up the first motion 
to reconsider. 

THE PRESIDENT—It seems to the Chair that when the 
Convention reconsiders the part that has been acttd upon, we will 
properly go back. A part of subdivision twenty-six was transposed 
to the end of the section. That was withdrawn bv the Committee, 
and added at the end of the Section, to which there were one or 
two amendments offered. 

MR. WATTS The Chair is a little in error. Mr. Jones of 
Hale, moved to reconsider subdivision 23, which was granted by 
the Convention, and it seems to me that we ought to dispose of 
his subdivision 23, before we go to 26. 

THE PRESIDENT The Chair did not intend to take it up 
in an} other order, but the Chair was trying to correct a misap- 



CONSTITUTIONAL CONVENTION, 1901 


1989 


prehension in reference to subdivision 26. The Chair understands 
that that part of subdivision 26 was withdrawn, and added at the 
end of section 1. Is the Chair correct about that? 

MR. O’NEAL—The Chair is correct. 

THE PRESIDENT—The question will be on the adoption 
of amendment of subdivision 23. 

MR. JONES (Hale)—I have a substitute, which has been 
accepted by the committee. 

The substitute was read as follows: “Increasing' the juris¬ 
diction and fees of justices of the peace or the fees of constables. 

MR. JONES (Hale)—I move the adoption of the amendment. 

MR. WATTS—As an amendment to that. I move that Sub¬ 
division 23 be amended simply by striking out the words “juris¬ 
diction or.” 

THE PRESIDENT—The gentleman will have to put his 
amendment in writing. 

MR. O’NEAL—That will destroy the meaning of it. 

MR. SANDERS—I call for the previous question on the sub¬ 
stitute offered by the gentleman from Hale. 

The main question was ordered, upon the substitute and the 
subdivision, and upon a further vote being taken, the substitute 
was adopted. Upon a further vote the subdivision as amended 
was adopted. 

THE PRESIDENT—The question is on Subdivision 33. 

MR. WATTS—The question now up is what the Convention 
persists in calling Section 26. It is the last part of Section 1, 

MR. DENT—Is the section that was reconsidered now under 
consideration ? 

MR. O’NEAL—It commences after Subdivision 26 in the re¬ 
port— 

MR. DENT—Beginning “no special law?" 

THE PRESIDENT—To what purpose does the gentleman 
from Barbour rise? 

MR. DENT—I rise for the purpose of making a motion. I 
want to preface it with some remarks, if this matter is up for 
consideration. 

THE PRESIDENT—To what does the motion relate? 



1990 


OFFICIAL PROCEEDINGS 


MR. DENT—It relates to this part of Section 33, I believe 
you call it. 

THE PRESIDENT—The Convention did not reconsider Sec¬ 
tion 33. 

MR. DENT—That part of Section 26 which was reconsidered 
beginning with the words “No special law.” and ending with the 
word “general law.” 

THE PRESIDENT—There are some pending questions in 
reference to that, and the Chair will have to >tate them to the 
Convention. The gentleman from Limestone moved to amend 
the last paragraph. The Secretary will read the paragraph and 
pending amendments. 

The subdivision was read. 

THE PRESIDENT—There is a point of order made bv the 
gentleman from Chambers, which will have to be ruled on. 

MR. HARRISON—I rise to a parliamentarv inquire. 

THE PRESIDENT—The gentleman will state the question 
of inquiry. 

MR. HARRISON—The amendment was offered, immediate¬ 
ly after the motion to reconsider. Soon after I took the floor and 
the question was raised that it was all out of order, and I had 
to yield the floor under that ruling and I submit that if it was all 
out of order these amendments are not properlv before the Con¬ 
vention. 


MR. WILSON (Clarke)- 
received the amendments. 


A point of order. The Convention 


THE PRESIDENT—It seems to the Chair that the point of 
order is well taken, that the amendments were not in order at the 
time. 


MR. SANDERS I now offer the amendment I offered. 

(Clarke) 1 offer the amendment to the 
amendment offered by the gentleman from Limestone. 

MR. HARRISON—I rise to a point of order. The delegate 
from Barbour had the floor, and was in realitv not out of order 
on the proposition on which the Chair now changes its ruling 

^ offcrin, ,£ 

^ floor I would like to hold it if I 

am entitled to it. Will the Chair bear with me a moment I took 
my seat in order that the Chair might decide the point of order 
raised as I believed by the gentleman from Chambers, and for [hat 



CONSTITUTIONAL CONVENTION, 1901 


1991 


purpose only, as I understood it, and I have not heard any ruling 
from the Chair upon the point of order. 

THE PRESIDENT—The point of order related to these 
amendments, against which a point of order was made that they 
were not offered at the proper time. 

MR. DENT—Then they are not before the Convention. 

THE PRESIDENT—They were not properly before the Con¬ 
vention, but after the Chair ruled on that point of order, there was 
no gentleman who had the floor, thereupon the gentleman from 
Limestone rose, and he was recognized for the purpose of offering 
his amendment, and thereupon the gentleman from Clarke arose, 
and gained recognition for the purpose of offering his amendment 
to the amendment. The Chair will recognize the gentleman from 
Barbour to present any motion which he thinks will facilitate the 
Convention. 

MR. DENT—I move to table the whole matter, the pending 
subdivision and all the amendments. 

MR. ESPY—Wasn't that same proposition voted on by this 
Convention on yesterday, and voted down? 

THE PRESIDENT—No, the proposition in its present shape 
was not voted down, because the amendment offered by the gen¬ 
tleman from Limestone was not then considered in its present con¬ 
nection. 

MR. O'NEAL—I will ask for a division of the question. 

THE PRESIDENT—The Chair will state that the point of 
order made now by the gentleman from Henry involves to some 
extent the same point of order made by the gentleman from 
Chambers, although the question is in a little different shape. One 
authority says “an amendment may be in any of the following 
forms, to add or insert certain words or paragraphs, to strike out 
certain words or paragraphs, and if this fails, it does not preclude 
any other amendments, than the identical one rejected. To strike 
out certain words and insert others, which motion is indivisible, 
if lost, does not preclude another motion to strike out the same 
words and insert different ones, or to substitute another resolution 
or paragraph on the same subject for the one pending." 

Another authority says “where two propositions have been 
voted upon separately, an amendment embodying the two presents 
a different question." The two propositions were considered sep¬ 
arately and the two propositions are both combined in the present 
and it is a different question and therefore the Chair will overrule 
the point of order. 

MR. O’NEAL—I call for a division of the question, and I 
call for an aye and no vote upon the question. 



1992 


OFFICIAL P R (> C K K l) IN (»S 


The call for the ayes and noes was not sustained. 

MR. SANDERS—I move that this Convention remain in ses¬ 
sion for five minutes, until this pending question is disposed of. 

Upon a vote being taken the Con\cntion refused to suspend 
the rules. 

The chairman of the Democratic caucus made a statement to 
the Convention, and the Convention adjourned. 


AFTERNOON' SESSION 

The Convention was called to order by the President, and 
upon a roll call it showed that there were lid delegates present. 

Indefinite leave of absence was granted to Mr. Spear of St. 
Clair, on account of sickness. 

THE PRES!DKXT—When the Convention adj<mrned. we 
had under consideration the report ot the Committee on Local 
Legislation. 

MR. REESE—In the proceedings of this Convention of dav 
before yesterday, there was an omission in part of the proceedings. 
The gentleman from Macon, in addressing an interrogatory to tin* 
Chairman of the Committee at the conclusion of it said, “Now, 
bold Saxon, hold thine own." It does not appear in the proceed¬ 
ings. 

MR. COBH—I deny the soft impeachment. 

MR. HEFLIN (Randolph) — \ desire to ask unanimous con¬ 
sent to make a report from the Committee on Schedule. Printing 
and Incidental Expenses. 

Objection was made. 

THE PRESIDENT—The question is on the consideration of 
the report of the Committee on Local Legislation. The Conven¬ 
tion had under consideration the last paragraph of that report. 
There was pending an amendment to amend a motion bv the gen¬ 
tleman from Barbour to lay on the table. 

MR. DENT—I desire to withdraw the motion to table. 

There being no objection, the motion was withdrawn. 

MR. WATTS I move to table the amendment of the gentle¬ 
man from Clarke. 

MR. PRESIDENT The Chair recognized the gentleman from 
Montgomery (Mr. Jones.) 

MR. O’NEAL—We withdraw that motion. 



CONSTITUTIONAL CONVENTION, 1901 


1993 


MR. WATTS—I beg pardon, I understood the Chair to recog¬ 
nize me. 

MR. JONES—If it were not that this matter is fraught with 
so much vital import to the whole work of the Convention con¬ 
cerning local legislation, I should be content to simply vote. I 
beg the gentlemen who are opposing this provision to remember 
that under the old law, the uncertainty, which was spoken of, grew 
out of the language in the Constitution when it said there should 
not be any local law in a case which can be provided for by a gen¬ 
eral law. 

MR. PET I US—Was not the pending question when the 
House adjourned the motion of the gentleman from Barbour to 
table the entire Section? 

THE PRESIDENT—That has been withdrawn. 

JONES Mr. President, I was proceeding to say that the 
language of the present amendment takes away, in a large measure, 
the uncertainty and deplorable circumstances to which the gentle¬ 
men refer arising under a ruling that the courts could judge under 
the present Section of the Constitution. It might take a very wise 
man in fact to say, under the present Constitution, what can be 
provided for by general legislation. Most anything could be pro¬ 
vided for by general legislation if skilled ingenuity were employed. 
It might require numerous statutes and they might be very volumi¬ 
nous in detail, but still you could not sav a thing could not be 
provided for by general legislation. Now the Committee has pro¬ 
vided that it is not the things that can be provided for by general 
legislation, but things that are. So that all a man has to do is to 
look at the statute and he can determine with reasonable certain¬ 
ty, because nothing is absolutely certain in a law when it is a 
question of construction. 

Another objection has been urged that this is something new, 
that it is putting the courts to invade the legislative province. I 
want to ask my friends here who have made that objection if 
there is really anything in it? Isn't the Legislature bound in any 
c\ ent when the matter comes before it, to determine whether it 
is constitutional or not? Certainly it is. It is one of the greatest 
co-ordinate departments of the Government and the courts attach 
so much importance to its judgment in a matter of that sort that 
they say when the Legislature has acted and thcrebv determined 
that it has a power or that a certain act is constitutional, that the 
courts will not interfere unless clearly convinced that the Legis¬ 
lature is in error. There is nothing new then in saying that the 
courts and not the Legislature shall be the final judge in this 
matter. It is no invasion of the province of the Legislature. It 
is simply our old ancient way of doing, and one of the glories of 
a written Constitution, is that there is always some tribunal that 



1994 


OF FI Cl A L P H O C l\ E D 1\ (; S 


has the power to determine in a case of last resort, whether a 
Constitution has been violated or not. You make an exception to 
the spirit of our institution when you say that it is an invasion of 
the province of the Legislature to say that the courts shall be 
the final arbiters to determine whether the Constitution lum been 
violated or not. 

MR. CUNNINGHAM—Will the gentleman permit a ques¬ 
tion ? 


MR. JONES—Yes, sir. 

MR. CUNNINGHAM—Are not the eourt> the final arbiters 
without this provision of the Constitution? 

MR. JONES--No sir; because our Supreun Court has said 
that the language put down there may he purelv a matter of legis¬ 
lative discretion with which the courts will not interfere, jlist for 
instance, the Constitution says, a hill shall !n read at length three 
several days. The courts cannot inquire into that. They cannot 
.supervise it if the Legislature says in its journal that it has been 
read three several days. That is the language of it. 

MR. C L NX 1X ( i If AM—The question whether an act is local 
or general in its nature would not he passed upon by tin* courts 
unless there is a special provision requiring them to do so. 

MR. JONHS—Under the decision of lack et als. vs. DeVinnev, 
and several other cases. I think not and this is the reason we make 
this appeal to our friends who do not seem to reallv take in the 
lull scope of this section. The gentleman from Greene. who was a 
Judge °t the Supreme Court, thinks it would. [ for one do not 
l>ut there are some other able lawyers on this floor, and the <wn- 
t eman from Greene is one of them, who are of the opinion that 
t those things are stricken out. especially in view of a decision of 

me e nnT e T ST* n" 3 l ? C provision of the Constitution, it may 

vou I dond^ tb 6 ] t0 thC VV10lC SCCtIOn ' Tt mav l,e - but. mind 
>ou, I don t say that is my opinion. In cause it is not but there are 

the !e ; e S!i s n o? t°h? tr; r -r to - think that * — 

the death knell of this whole Article on Local Legislation if we 
put m here language which the Supreme Court says means that 
he Legislature alone should not have any voice in it It seems 
to me that we ought to proceed with great caution. 

MR. SMITH (Mobile)—f want to ask the gentleman from 

ST' 0 ar8Ument “ n “ kin£ is ™ -cord wj,h h™ 

MR. JONES—The gentleman did not hear me I said dav 
before yesterday, and I said a moment aeo that w, A “ d * 
sonal opinion R ’ ttlat W3i> not m >' P er * 


MR. SMITH—I did not hear you say that. 



CONSTITUTIONAL CONVENTION. 1901 


1995 


MR. JONKS—But take the gentleman from Greene, who has 
long been an honored Judge on the bench; he thinks differently, 
and we may be in the attitude of the eminent Francis S. Lyon, 
a man of eminent intellect and fine, broad, common sense, and in 
the Convention of 1875. they thought they had provided against 
the evils with which we had struggled for a quarter of a century 
in that Constitution and they congratulated the people of Alabama 
that they had delivered them from these evils; but it was not five 
years before a case came up that knocked down the whole provision 
and made it as so much waste paper. 

MR. MACDONALD—May I ask the gentleman a question? 
Suppose a local law should provide a certain method by which 
rights might be obtained and a person should follow such methods 
and obtain rights; suppose the courts should afterwards decide that 
a general law existed under which such rights might have been 
obtained by different methods, what position would such person 
be in? 


MR. JONKS—He would be in the fix of any other man who 
acted on an unconstitutional law. 

MR. MACDONALD—Suppose the law was apparently con¬ 
stitutional ? 

MR. JONES—Every law is apparently constitutional. 

MR. MACDONALD—Would a man be helped by the gen¬ 
eral law? 

MR. JONES—I don’t think he would, because he would be 
getting his rights under a void statute in violation of the Con¬ 
stitution. 

MR. MACDONALD—Void, not voidable. 

MR. JONES—No, sir; any law declared void is as though it 
had never been enacted. That is the language of the decision. 

Now, there is another thing which I hope our friend will bear 
in mind, there cannot be very much of this legislation. It is not 
one time in a thousand that any title would depend upon some 
local act that is passed. There are always hard cases in which 
an innocent man is hurt by law, but if we once get our people 
out of the rut of favoritism in local legislative matters, that can 
be attended to by general legislation, the good that will result will 
more than compensate for the hardship in any particular case. 
There is not a case where a legislator is compelled to draw a law 
that he does not stop to think and have to consider, does this thing 
violate the Bill of Rights? Sometimes questions come up whether 
the statute infringes upon the right of life, or liberty in the pursuit 
of happiness. You have not to take the risk. If you go into a 
battle, you may be shot. You must do the best you can. There is 



1996 


OFFICIAL PROCEEDINGS 


no provision in our government by which you can get in advance 
a decision of the Supreme Court as to whether a law is constitu¬ 
tional or unconstitutional until some like case has come into court 
and been declared constitutional or unconstitutional. 

MR. WALKER—This matter has been discussed before the 
Convention a good deal, and by reason of some interests being 
developed on the one side or the other, it seems to me that the 
Convention has to a great extent lost sight of the meaning of a 
very simple provision that is before it and have interpreUd it as 
going out further than the provision can possibly be interpreted 
when you examine the language. Now, what is the proposed pro¬ 
vision about which all this discussion is taking place? It is sim¬ 
ply this: That no special, private or local law except a law fixing 
the time for holding courts shall be enacted in any case which is 
provided for bv a general law. or when the relief sought can he 
given by any court of this State. Now. gentlemen of the Conven¬ 
tion, don’t you all agree that if a man already has under the general 
law a thing which he wants or if under a general law already 
existing, he can get the relief he desires by going to the court, 
don’t you think under those circumstances he ought not to be al¬ 
lowed to go to the Legislature? And. as a special privilege, or 
benefit to him get something that is not open to the remainder of 
the people? Is there any hardship in that It a general law al¬ 
ready gives the right, why in the world should the Legislature be 
bothered with giving that right over again? If. under the general 
law already existing, the relief that is desired can be obtained in 
the courts which are open to all men, ought one man as a favor 
to be conferred upon him by the member from his countv to get 
that relief when everybody else who cannot get these favors must 
go before the courts and get it in the way the general law pre¬ 
scribes? Now. gentlemen, don't all the members of this Conven- 
tion concede that the applications to the Legislature for things of 
that kind that have already been provided for fullv and completely 
under laws already in existence should not consume uselessly the 
time of the Legislature. If the thing is already provided for bv a 
general law, or if the relief desired can readily be obtained by 
going into the courts of the country, what necessity can any one 
say exists for the passage of a special or local law under those cir¬ 
cumstances? I conceive none in the world. Now. what has been 
the practice? The practice has been that with reference to mat¬ 
ters as to which we have ample and complete general laws appli¬ 
cation has been made to the Legislature time and time again to 
get relief as a matter of special favor simply to relieve persons in 
that situation from going into the courts and proceeding to secure 
the remedies they desire in the mode that other people have to 
pursue in order to secure that kind of relief. It is a kind of special 
favoritism that I do not believe any gentleman in this Convention 
when he stops to consider the matter, is in favor of continuing or 



CONSTITUTIONAL CONVENTION, 1901 


1997 


perpetuating. Well, now, the Constitution of 1875 passed a pro¬ 
vision and congratulated itself upon the fact that it had put in the 
fundamental law a provision of this kind of favoritism. Read the 
address that was made by some of the able men in that Conven¬ 
tion in which they congratulated the people of Alabama that by 
this provision on that subject they had stopped that kind of fa¬ 
voritism by special acts of the Legislature and had put the citizens 
of the State generally upon the same footing. But how were their 
expectations disappoint and defeated? By the circumstance that 
under the provision which that Convention made and congratu¬ 
lated itself upon, it turned out that the provision was faulty be¬ 
cause the determination of the question as to whether or not the 
relief could be obtained under the law as it existed or under general 
legislation was left entirely with the Legislature and that the courts 
could not determine it. Now is there any hardship saying to any 
man. any individual, corporation or association that if the laws of 
the State have already provided for your case and you can get 
everything you could possibly get by appealing to the legislature, 
you ought not to consume the public time in trying to get the 
legislature to do what has already been done for you. That is 
all this provision means. 

MR. BET HUNK—Suppose the legislature, after this Consti¬ 
tution has been made and adopted by the people, suppose the 
legislature meets and passes a general law forbidding the organiz¬ 
ing or establishing of any more dispensaries in this State and a 
town or city desires one, how would the town or city obtain one 
if that section is adopted? 

MR. WALKER—I really don’t understand the purport of the 
question. 

MR. BKTHUNR—Suppose the legislature, after this Consti¬ 
tutional Convention adjourns and the Constitution is submitted 
to the people and adopted, meets and passes a general law for¬ 
bidding the organizing or establishing of any more dispensaries 
in this State, and suppose a town or a city desires to establish one, 
how would such city or town obtain one if this section were 
adopted. 

MR. WALKER—That would be just the reverse of the situa¬ 
tion. In that case there would be no general law under which the 
relief could be obtained and this is not a prohibition upon a town 
or city in that kind of a case. It prohibits local or special laws 
only in the classes of cases in which the relief desired could not be 
obtained. That is the kind of cases. 

MR. ROBINSON—I ask the gentleman suppose the legisla¬ 
ture were to pass a general law allowing a county to issue bonds 
for the purpose of building a court house and prescribe the rate 
of interest at 6 per cent and the county could not float its bonds 



1998 


OFFICIAL PROCEEDINGS 


at 6 per cent but could only float them at 1 per cent and the legis¬ 
lature were to pass a special law allowing them to issue bonds just 
as in a general law and provide a rate of 7 per cent, how would 
the courts decide that question? 

MR. WALKER—I am not able to say, but that would not be 
governed by the provisions contained in this section. This section 
prohibits a special law only in cases already provided for by a 
general law. 

MR. ROBINSON—Suppose there is a general law providing 
for the issuance of bonds to build a court house and providing the 
rate of interest of 6 per cent and this county cannot float the bonds 
at 6 percent, could they pass a special law for the issuance of bonds 
at 7 per cent, would that be held to be in conflict with the general 
law? 


MR. WALKER—I am not able to answer your question. 

MR. ROBINSON—Wouldn’t it be better to leave that matter 
of whether that could be provided for by a general law to the 
legislature and not for the court because one is acting at the time 
they pass the law and the other is called on to act afterwards when 
substantial rights of individuals are affected by it? 

MR. W ALKER I think not. The only question is, all these 
cases imply that one body or another should be required to answer 
this question, either the legislature or the court. You cannot in 
fairness say after the experience we have already had that leaving 
the provision as it is under the Constitution of 1875, the legislature 
will really ask itself the question. Nobodv will pretend to say 
that in reference to these matters of local and special legislation 
that have been adopted in Alabama that the legislature has ever 
paused for a moment to inquire whether those cases are such as 
could be provided for by general law. 


MR. MALONE—Section 3 which has alreadv been adopted 
makes provision for the repeal of anv local law. Now, if some 
adverse legislature were to repeal for instance the laws on the 
dispensary question, which were passed for the purpose of meeting 

unde'r a generii a iaTs , ? a ' n l0Ca '' tV ' ,h ' y eVer Ket h back '*«P‘ 


MR- WALKER—It could readily be provided for under gen- 
that regard*' a COmnnmit - v ^t their own desires in 


more? R ' MALONE—When >' ou ar e out you can’t get back any 

MR. WALKER—Not under the local law. The fears of the 
gentlemen who have the dispensaries in their minds throughout 
the discussion of the matter have made the gentleman lose sight of 



CONSTITUTIONAL CONVENTION, 1901 


1999 


the purport of the provision. I think it is obviated by the pro¬ 
vision that that matter should be excluded and that it should be 
left the subject of local and special legislation. I thought every¬ 
body was satisfied that it was disposed of in that way. 

MR, WATTS—I move to table the amendment offered by 
the delegate from Clarke. 

1 he motion was withdrawn at the request of the delegate from 

Lee. 

MR. HARRISON—I dislike to discuss any question that has 
been already discussed so extensively. I was perfectly willing 
when the motion was made to lay on the table, but that motion 
was withdrawn and argument in favor of this subdivision has been 
gone into quite extensively. I have listened attentively and have 
tried to ascertain the views of the Convention and after listening 
to those views I see no use whatever for this subdivision as re¬ 
ported by the Committee. I agree with the distinguished gentle¬ 
man from Madison that so far as the part of the section read by 
him there can be no opportunity for harm in it; but I cannot see 
any use of it. To the other part which the motion of the delegate 
from Clarke seeks to strike out. I do see great objection. I appre¬ 
ciate all that has been said about the effect of the ruling of the 
Supreme Court on that subdivision as it practically stood in the 
old Constitution, but when these two Committees with great dili¬ 
gence have not only included everything they could think of, but 
have examined every Constitution in the land and have given us 
positive inhibitions against thirty-five classes of special and local 
legislation, I cannot see any need for this blanket clause. 

MR. WALKER—If the gentleman will permit me a question, 
I am satisfied you and I are after the same object. We want to 
stop local and special legislation. 

MR. HARRISON—I do. 

MR. WALKER—In reference to matters already provided for 
by general law or in reference to relief that can already be obtained 
from a court. Now that is the object sought for here and if you 
can advise a method to secure it, I shall be glad to support the 
proposition. 

MR. HARRISON—I think these two committees have de¬ 
vised the best plan known to anybody and that is to make a fair 
positive, clear provision and name the subjects upon which they 
cannot pass local and special legislation. 

MR. O’NEAL—Will the gentleman allow me to interrupt 
him ? 

MR. HARRISON—I will, but my time is very limited. 



2000 


OFFICIAL PROCEEDINGS 


MR. O’NEAL—I will move to extend your time. 

MR. HARRISON—It may not be granted. 

THE PRESIDENT—The chair is not looking favorably this 
afternoon on motions to extend time. 

MR. O’NEAL—The General Assembly shall pass general laws 
for the cases enumerated in this subdivision. Do you want to 
strike that out? 

MR. HARRISON—No, I would leave that there. I think 
the English would be better to leave that and strike out the other, 
but I don’t see how that applies to the question we are discussing. 

MR. O’NEAL—Well, let me call your attention to this pro¬ 
vision, “Nor shall the General Assembly enact any such special, 
private or local law by the partial repeal of a general law.” What 
objection have you to that? 

MR. HARRISON—I have no objection to that, but you have 
crowded so much in there that I object to that I would be willing 
to lose the good things in it to get rid of all the rest, and I don’t 
see how that last mandate can be carried out. 

As I understand it, this is largely a copy of the present Con¬ 
stitution, only that the one we are living under now leaves it to 
the courts and not the Legislature to determine as to this matter, 
and with that out, I do not see that any harm would be done, but 
I see no good in this section when the whole field have been cov¬ 
ered by special prohibitions eliminating from legislative action the 
subjects named, and my distinguished friend from Montgomery, 
although he quoted the delegate from Greene as expressing a 
doubt, I doubt whether the delegate from Greene can entertain 
that doubt after carefully reading this, and I was pleased that the 
delegate from Montgomery himself had no doubt about it, for he 
answered the delegate from Mobile that he did not so contrue it. 
Now, there is no lawyer on this floor who will contend that this 
subdivision will have any effect whatever with these thirty-five 
subdivisions in there. 

MR. ROBINSON—May I ask the gentleman a question? Is 
there anything in these thirty-five subdivisions to prevent holding 
all-day singing? 

MR. HARRISON—No, sir; nor prayer meetings, either. 

MR. ROBINSON—Is there anything to prevent foot log 
crossings? 

MR. HARRISON—No, sir. 

MR. ROBINSON—Is there anything to prevent throwing 
rocks out of the road? 



CONSTITUTIONAL CONVENTION, 1901 


2001 


MR. HARRISON—No, sir. 

MR. ROBINSON—There have been special laws passed on 
all those subjects by the Legislature. 

MR. HARRISON—Then I suppose the things that brought 
about the passage of such laws were happening in Chambers and 
not in Lee. 

Now, I call the attention of the Convention to the fact that 
the gentleman from Madison could not answer the question pro¬ 
pounded by the gentleman form Chambers, and that is a sufficient 
reason for stating that it could not be answered and that is reason, 
if nothing else, why this clause should be stricken out. 

MR. ROBINSON—1 would ask, then, that it be left to the 
Legislature to decide it. 

MR. HARRISON—I don’t think we should adopt this. I have 
entertained a view that seem to have actuated the committees. I 
have always favored carrying into effect the provisions of the old 
Constitution, and if there was no other way, I perhaps would vote 
for this one, but I doubt the propriety of allowing this matter to 
go into the hands of the court, because I really believe if this 
provision is adopted it will tend to produce more litigation than 
any matter that has been before this Convention. The effect of 
this would be that one-half of the local laws passed on any subject 
would go into the hands of the court. It would be a fine harvest 
for my profession, but as a member of this Convention, and as a 
legislator, I would feel that I was neglecting my duty if I did not 
raise mv voice against this. It will be a question on one side or 
the other of every measure as to whether it has been provided for 
by general legislation, and I think it would be better to risk the 
Legislature to determine the matter under the positive mandates 
here than to be inter-weaving the different duties that the several 
departments of our government should perform. This will not 
only create confusion, but will cover the State with litigation. I 
would be loath to support this matter anyhow, but when the com¬ 
mittees have, after examining all the constitutions, and when we 
have, as one of the committees informed me last night, one more 
of these sections than any State in the Union, positively prohibiting 
the Legislature, who do you want to go further? Therefore, con¬ 
formable to the request of the gentleman, I renew his motion to 
table the substitute, and to table the whole thing. 

MR. O’NEAL—I ask for a division of that. 

MR. HEFLIN (Randolph)—The other day, when I was mak¬ 
ing the first speech I have made during the Convention, and my 
time expired, some gentleman was kind enough to move that my 
time be extended, and the gentleman from Lee suggested that I 
have leave to print. Being loath to believe that the gentleman 



2002 


OFFICIAL PROCEEDINGS 


intended any unkind cut, and, being desirous to some extent of 
showing the milk of human kindness, and out of great respect for 
the age and ability of the distinguished gentleman from Lee, I 
move that his time be extended. 

MR. HARRISON—I thank my friend from Randolph and the 
Convention, but I have been in favor of short speeches and the 
saving of the public time, and I beg respectfully to decline fur¬ 
ther time; but I also wish to say to my friend that I am sorry if 
he took any offense at my remarks, which were not intended in 
any such light, but he did have such a pretty speech, and 1 thought 
thoroughly prepared, that I wanted to read it in writing. 

MR. WATTS—I call for the ayes and noes. 

MR. REESL Has a Convention a right, when a motion is 
made to table a section and all amendments with a view of get¬ 
ting rid of the entire subject, to call for a division on the various 
amendments? 


THE, PRESIDEN 1 In answer to the inquiry, the chair will 
state that it is perfectly competent for the Convention to table a 
section and all amendments, but as a matter of right, delegates 
can demand a division. The rule laid down by Cushing is that 
the motion to table will apply to the propositions in their regular 
order. A division under our rules is a matter of right, and when 
a delegate demands a division of a motion to table a section and 
pending amendments, the motion will be taken on each proposi¬ 
tion successively. The question is on the motion of the delegate 
rom Clarke, and the ayes and noes have been demanded by the 
delegate from Montgomery (Mr. Watts). Is the call sustained? 

The call was not sustained. 

A vote being taken, the amendment of the delegate from 
Clarke was tabled. s 

s rx s « :t n m s e m e”«r. refused ,o ,abie the 

table T the E Sec R ttan IDENT_The ' , “ eS ' , ° n is "" on the n,oti °" to 

MR. WATTS Don t we pass on this amendment before we 
pass on any further. The Convention has refused to table this 
amendment. Now don’t we take up this amendment and dispose 

THE PRESIDENT-The motion to table has been made and 
It is the duty of the Chair to submit the motions to table in suc¬ 
cessive order. * t,uc 

. Ki Notwithstanding we have refused to 

tab e this amendment are we still called upon to say whether we 
will table the original proposition without the amendment? 



2003 


CONSTITUTIONAL CONVENTION, 1901 
ti V n ; 1>K EvSIDENT—That is the proposition. The Conven- 

T .; his,>roposi,ion That fc fM - - 

proposition^tabled *~7 < “ )ne . more question. Suppose the original 
we have refused to table? d ° We d ° W ’ th th ’ S amendment whi <* 

THI- PRESIDENT—That is for the Convention to say. 

the Convention refuses to table the orig- 
menC th< ’ quest,on recurs 011 the adoption of the amend- 

I HE PRESIDENT—Certainly. The Chair will state that 
the peculiar condition that will he produced as suggested by the 
gentleman from Lauderdale might be a reason why the Conven- 
!'? shoul(I decline to table this proposition, but it is not a reason 
why they have not the right to amendment. In many cases 
amendments are tacked on to a proposition to kill it but the Con¬ 
vention, if it desires, can fasten on to a proposition any amend- 
ment. 


A vote being taken on a division, by 50 ayes and 75 noes the 
House refused to table the Section. 


, ,° NEAL—I now move the adoption of the amendment 

of the delegate from Limestone and on that I move the previous 
question and also move the previous question on the Section, but 
if the gentleman desires to offer an amendment. I will withdraw 
It. 


MR. ROBINSON—I have an amendment I would like to of¬ 
fer. 


MR. () NhAL Then I withdraw the motion for the pre¬ 
vious question as to the Section. 

A vote being taken the main question was ordered on the 
amendment of the delegate from Limestone, and a further vote 
being taken the amendment was adopted. 

MR. ROBINSON—I offer an amendment. 

The amendment of the delegate from Chambers was read as 
follows: 

Amend by striking out after the word State in the thirty- 
fifth line down to and including the word “court” in the thirty- 
seventh line, and insert, “Unless every such special, private or 
local law' shall contain a recital that notice has been given as pro¬ 
vided by Section 2 of this Article and that the matter of such 
special, private or local law cannot be provided for by general 
law, and that the relief sought therein cannot be given by any 
court.” 



2004 


OFFICIAL PROCEEDINGS 


MR. O’NEAL—I rise to a point of order. The Convention 
has already refused to strike out that very part. 

MR. ROBINSON—This is not a motion to strike out simply, 
it is a motion to strike out and insert. 

MR. O’NEAL—The gentleman from Clarke moved to strike 
out this same language. 

MR. ROBINSON—But I move to strike out and insert. 

MR. O’NEAL—If a gentleman moved to strike out a certain 
part of a Section and the Convention votes it down, can some 
other gentleman then move to strike out that same part and in¬ 
sert something else? If he can, it seems to me there would he no 
end. 

THE PRESIDENT—It seems to the Chair that the present 
amendment is in order. The proposition is somewhat changed. 

MR. ROBINSON — I shall detain the Convention only a 
minute to explain that provision. It is simply to strike out the 
power of the court to pass on this question, which, under this Sec¬ 
tion as it stands, may be done next week or two years or twenty 
years, and allow the Legislature to put in the recitals of the bill 
and determine then and there which must be carried into the act 
itself, and also that the act must contain the statement that the 
notice has been given and that the matter is not provided tor by 
general law and that the relief sought cannot be obtained from 
any court. That is a simple matter. It allows the same tribunal' 
that is enacting the law to determine the question whether the 
notice is given and whether the relief sought can he obtained un¬ 
der any general law or through any court. 'Phis amendment 
provides that the General Assembly when it passes any law must 
put into that law itself and thereby determine the question that 
notice has been given, that the relief cannot be obtained under a 
general law, or through any court. That is all there is in my 
amendment. This matter ought to be determined by some tribunal 
at the time the bill is passed, and not let it go on for years until 
valuable rights have been acquired under it before the matter is 
determined. I cited an instance to the distinguished gentleman 
from Madison where the court would hold that the law I mention¬ 
ed to him was provided by general law because there would be no 
evidence to show why 7 per cent, interest was carried into it in¬ 
stead of 6 per cent, already provided by the general law. Peo¬ 
ple ought to be protected in that. Suppose a Court House were 
burned and under a general law they could not float bonds at 6 
per cent, and a special law is passed and the bonds sold and the 
Court House built and then a year or two afterwards some tax 
payer comes up before the court and says this law is unconstitu¬ 
tional. We have the Court House and we won’t pay the bonds. 



CONSTITUTIONAL CONVENTION, 1901 


2005 


There have been a number of instances of that kind and it does 
seem to me that right in the legislative act is the place for this 
question to be determined, and when they carry it into the law 
they are bound by it and there can be no chance for them to say, 
we did not understand this question. 

MR. JONES (Montgomery) — My distinguished friend from 
Chambers has brought the same man back here only in a different 
uniform, and 1 move the previous question on the Section and the 
amendment. 

MR. REESE—1 will ask the gentleman to let me offer an 
amendment which does not relate to this amendment. 

'fhe motion for the previous question was withdrawn tem¬ 
porarily, and the amendment by the gentleman from Dallas was 
read as follows: 

Amend last paragraph of Section 1 by striking out the word 
"fixing'’ in line 33 and insert in lieu thereof the words “regulating 
the creation, practice, or.” 

MR. JONES — I now move the previous question on the 
amendment. 

On a vote the main question was ordered. 

MR. WILSON (Clarke) — Is that an amendment to the 
amendment proposed by the gentleman from Chambers? 

THE PRESIDENT—It is. The gentleman from Chambers 
offers an amendment to the paragraph as reported by the com¬ 
mittee and the gentleman from Dallas offers an amendment to 
that amendment. 

MR. PROCTOR—It seems to me the amendment offered by 
the gentleman from Dallas is to insert in the original section and 
the gentleman from Chambers desires to strike out the very part 
the gentleman from Dallas desires to amend. 

MR. ROBINSON—The amendment of the delegate from Dal¬ 
las is not in the words I strike out. 

MR. REESE — I ask unanimous consent to withdraw my 
amendment and ask leave to put it in afterwards. 

The consent was given. 

Mr Long of Walker called for the yeas and nays on the 
amendment of the delegate from Chambers and the call was not 
sustained and a vote being taken the amendment of the delegate 
from Chambers was lost. 

MR. LONG (Walker)—I would like to be recorded in favor 
of the delegate from Chambers. 



2006 


OFFICIAL PROCEEDINGS 


THE PRESIDENT — The official stenographer will be in¬ 
structed to report the gentleman's attitude. 

MR. REESE—I now offer my amendment. 

The amendment was read as follows: Amend last paragraph 
of Section 1 by striking out the word “fixing” in line 33 and in¬ 
sert in lieu thereof the words ‘‘regulating the creation, practice 
or." 

MR. ROBINSON—Has not the previous question been or¬ 
dered? 

THE PRESIDENT—The previous question was ordered on 
the amendment only. 

MR. SAMFORD—Then I move the previous question upon 
the paragraph and all amendments. 

A vote being taken the main question was ordered, and a fur¬ 
ther vote being taken the amendment of the delegate from Dallas 
was adopted, and a further vote being taken the paragraph as 
amended was adopted by a vote of 73 ayes and 27 noes on division. 

MR. O'NEAL—Now I move the adoption of the entire sec¬ 
tion as amended and upon that I call for the previous question. 

A vote being taken the main question was ordered and a fur¬ 
ther vote being taken the section was adopted. 

MR. deGRAFFENRElD—I rise for the purpose of saying 
that I voted for that section with a view and for the purpose of 
tomorrow morning moving a reconsideration and I give notice 
that I will make that motion to reconsider tomorrow. 

MR. WATTS—I make the point of order that the gentle¬ 
man did not vote for the adoption of the section in which it was 
included. 

MR. deGRAFFENRElD — I voted for both and for that 
special privilege. 

MR. JENKINS—I rise to a question of inquiry. Rule 49 says 
“on the final adoption of a section the vote shall be taken by vcas 
and nays." 

THE PRESIDENT — The same question was raised some 
time since and the ruling of the Chair was that the word “section” 
following “article” in that rule meant the same thing as article. 
It was taken from some rule where the Constitution was divided 
in sections instead of articles. It was not intended that there 
should be a yea and nay vote on the adoption of every paragraph 
of every article. 

THE PRESIDENT—The question is now on Section 4. 



CONSTITUTIONAL CONVENTION, 1901 


2007 


MR. PROCTOR—I have an amendment to offer. 

MR. DENT—I also. 

THE PRESIDENT—The Secretary will read the section and 
the pending amendment. 

Section 4 was read as follows: 

Sec. 4. The operation of no general law shall be suspended 
for the benefit of any individual, corporation, association, town, 
city, county or township, nor shall any individual, corporation, 
association, town, city, county or township be exempted from the 
operation of any general law. 

The amendment of the delegate from Limestone (Mr. San¬ 
ders) was read as follows: Amend Section 4 by adding thereto, 
“Providing that nothing in this section or article shall affect the 
right of the Legislature to enact local laws regulating or prohibit¬ 
ing the liquor traffic. 

MR. O’NEAL—That has been adopted. 

MR. SANDERS—I ask unanimous consent to withdraw that 
amendment as the identical amendment has been adopted in the 
previous section. 

Objection was made. 

The amendment offered by Mr. Dent was read as follows: 
Amend Section 4 of the article on Local Legislation as follows: 
Strike out the following words “town, city, county or township’’ 
as those words appear in lines 2 and 3 and also add the word “pro¬ 
vided” before the word “corporation” in the same line and also to 
further add the word “or” before the word association in the same 
line. 

MR. WATTS—I offer a substitute for Section 4. 

MR. DENT—I had the floor and I want to say a word or two 
on my amendment. 

THE PRESIDENT—The gentleman’s amendments does not 
seem to be germane to the amendment of the delegate from Lime¬ 
stone and it might be better to withdraw the amendment until 
the Convention votes on the other amendment. 

MR. DENT—With the understanding that I shall then have 
the privilege of renewing it, I have no objection. 

The Convention assented and the amendment was withdrawn. 

MR. O’NEAL—I would like to amend by adding “except as 
otherwise provided.” 



2008 


OFFICIAL PROCEEDINGS 


THE PRESIDENT—The gentleman will send up his amend- 
ment. 

MR. ASHCRAFT—I have that same amendment already re- 
dued in writing. 

The amendment was read as follows: ‘‘Amend by adding ‘ex¬ 
cept as in this article otherwise provided’.” 

A vote being taken the amendment was adopted. 

THE PRESIDENT—The question is now on the amendment 
offered by the delegate from Limestone. 

MR. WATTS — We have already adopted this identical 
amendment and I move to lay it on the table. 

A vote being taken the Convention by 45 ayes to 51 noes re¬ 
fused to table the amendment and a further vote being taken the 
amendment of the delegate from Limestone as amended by the 
amendment of the gentleman from Lauderdale was adopted. 

MR. WATTS—I move that each one of the subdivisions have 
that provision tacked on to it. 

MR. ASHCRAFT—I am sure if the delegate from Montgom¬ 
ery understood this amendment he could not possibly object to it. 

MR. DENT—I now desire to re-offer my amendment to the 
section as it now stands. 

The amendment which has shortly before been withdrawn by 
the delegate was again read. 

MR. DENT—I just desire to say a word or two to the Con¬ 
vention. This same question was passed upon by the Convention 
when we adopted subdivision 9 of Section 1 of this Article and to 
add the amendment offered by myself would make it harmonious 
with this section and besides leave it just the same as the provi¬ 
sion in the Constitution of 1875 in reference to not granting special 
favors to individuals, corporations or associations. I hope the 
amendment will be adopted. 

MR. WADDELL—I move to lay the amendment of the dele¬ 
gate from Barbour on the table. 

A vote being taken the motion to table was lost. 

A viva voce vote was then taken on the amendment and a 
call for division made by the delegate from Walker, Mr. Long. 

MR. HEFLIN—I will withdraw the call for the division. 

THE PRESIDENT—Is the gentleman from Chambers rep¬ 
resenting the delegate from Walker? (Laughter.) 



CONSTITUTIONAL CONVENTION. 1901 2009 

VO j e 9° division was taken and resulted 59 ayes and 
3- noes, and the amendment was adopted. 

MR. LONG (Walker)—I have an amendment. 

MR. FITTS This section with the amendments amount to 
nothing and I move to lay the section and all amendments on the 
table. 

THE PRESIDENT—The Chair had recognized the gentle¬ 
man from Wilcox. 

MR. JENKINS—I ask the clerk to read my amendment. 

Ihe amendment was read as follows: Amend Section 4 by 
striking out all of said section after “corporation” in the third line 
and inserting the word “or” before the word “corporation” in the 

third line. 

The amendment was read as follows: Amend Section 4 by 
providing that the legislature shall never have the power to issue 
a call for another Constitutional Convention. 

MR. JENKINS—I decline to accept that amendment. 

Under this provision I maintain it is impossible to amend the 
general law as it goes through the legislature so as to exclude 
any county from its operation and I believe if the people of any 
county are overwhelmingly opposed to that law they ought to 
have the power to exclude that county from its operation. 

MR. DENT — I think the amendment which was adopted 
struck out the word county and it does not apply to counties now. 

MR. JENKINS— : Not only counties but strike out towns and 
cities too. 

MR. DENT—That has already been stricken. 

MR. JENKINS—Then I am in favor of the section and will 
withdraw my amendment. 

MR. SANDERS—I have a substitute which I believe will 
be acceptible to all and which I believe will clear up this muddle. 

THE PRESIDENT—The clerk will read the amendment of 
the delegate from Limestone. 

The amendment was read as follows: No bill introduced as 
a general law into either house of the General Assembly shall be 
so amended as to except from its provision any individual asso¬ 
ciation. corporation, municipality, county or township. 

MR. deGRAFFENRElD—I move to lay that on the table. 

A vote being taken the amendment was tabled. 



2010 


OFFICIAL PLOCFKDlX(S 


MR. CARMICHAEL — I move to lay the section and all 
amendments on the table. 

MR. O’NEAL—I hope the gentleman will allow me to call 
attention to one provision of law before that is done. 

THE PRESIDENT—Does the gentleman withdraw the mo¬ 
tion to table. 

MR. CARMICHAEL—Yes. 

MR. O’NEAL—The provision as amended is the same pro¬ 
vision found in the present code. That has a wise purpose. I call 
attention to a veto by Governor Samford of a bill during the last 
legislature when a bill was passed to the effect that all liquor con¬ 
sumed by the members of a club should not be regarded as sold. 
It was held that that would be regarded as a violation of this 
section. There was also a veto by our distinguished friend from 
Montgomery when he was Governor, where a bill was passed pro¬ 
viding that card-plaving in a certain club should not be considered 
as card-playing in a public place. The veto was on the ground 
that that was a violation of this section. So this section has a 
broad purpose. 

MR. BOONE—I ask the gentleman to read Section 23 as it 
now is in the Constitution. 

MR. O’NEAL—I haven't it before me. Will the gentleman 
please read it? 

Section 23 was read as follows: 

23. No special or local law shall be enacted for the benefit 
of individuals or corporations in cases which are or can be pro¬ 
vided for by a general law, or where the relief sought can be given 
by any court of this State; nor shall the operation of any general 
law be suspended by the General Assembly for the benefit of any 
individual, corporation or association. 

MR. O’NEAL—Certainly, and on that very question the Su¬ 
preme Court says in the case of ex parte City Council of Mont¬ 
gomery in re Knox: 

The cities of Mobile, Montgomery and Selma are excepted 
from the operation of the section of the code which forbids cities, 
towns or counties, to tax business occupations, etc. Code of 
1876, Sec. 499. The exception is not violative of the last clause 
of the 23id section of the fourth article of the Constitution, which 
inhibits the General Assembly from suspending any general law, 
“for the benefit of any individual, corporation or association.” We 
do not incline to the opinion, that any other than private corpora¬ 
tions are within the operation of this provision. But, without ex¬ 
pressing any opinion upon that point, we cannot suppose that it 



CONSTITUTIONAL CONVENTION, 1901 2011 

Weis intended to limit the nower nf r* i \ t i i 
enacting general law, to Lent l the t , General Assembly, when 

things which would be otherwise ,™"u<1ed ,r PerS °"- ° r 

•n the statute of limitations n t f S °’ he e * ce P tlons 

ur of married i^’, ln . ,r . t ' le tnsane, or of infants, 

the suspension the ’ " ou ( )e v, °lative of the Constitution. It is 
benefit of individn-1 . n ‘ I)0rary stl, PP<ng of existing law's, for the 

and no, the,»»!? of Z Cel^lT' 'u 

enl l-i,,v tn I,, • , , eneici * Assembly when enacting gen- 

« Se TT WhC , Uier they may be - or nia >' not he, per- 
muis or objects which ought to be excepted from their operation. 

Now certainly no delegate in this Convention wishes to re- 
peal such a provision as this. 

Nobody wishes the Legislature to suspend the operation of a 
law that is in existence for the benefit of a corporation, and unless 
}ou * lls proMSion, you allow the General Assembly to 

suspend the statutes on the books for the benefit of individuals 
and corporations in this State, and hence I hope the Convention 
will vote down the motion to strike this section from the Article. 

MR. PARKER (Cullman)—I move the previous question. 

THE PRESIDENT—The question recurs upon the adoption 
of the section as amended. 


MR. REESE—I call for the reading of the section. 

MR. HEFLIN (Chambers)—I move to lav the section on the 
table. 


MR. () NEAL—And on that I demand the ayes and noes. 

The call for the ayes and noes was then withdrawn. 

MR. DENT—It seems to me that we have already adopted 
this section as amended. While we were in the act of taking a 
vote, the gentleman from Colbert moved to table it, which was 
not heard by the chair. 

MR. O’NEAL—He withdrew it at my request, to allow me 
to make some remarks on the subject. 

MR. WATTS—I would like to have it read, because I think 
it is so absolutely foolish with those amendments in it, that I want 
the Convention to hear it. 

The clerk read as follows: “The operation of no general law 
shall be suspended for the benefit of any individual, corporation, 
association, nor shall any individual, private corporation, asso¬ 
ciation, town, city, county or— 

MR. REESE — I would like to be informed what are the 
words in the section before the house. 



2012 


OFFICIAL PROCEEDINGS 


THE PRESIDENT—Two secretaries are endeavoring to ac¬ 
commodate the gentleman, if he will be patient. 

The clerk continued to read: “The operation of no general 
law shall be suspended for the benefit of any individual, private 
corporation, or association, be exempted from the operation of anv 
general law— 

MR. O'NEAL—That is not right. There is no sense in that. 

MR. WATTS—That is what I told you. 

MR. DENT—That is not the amendment. 

THE PRESIDENT—Will the gentleman from Barbour step 
forward and read it to the Convention? 


MR. DENT—I will read it from where I stand: “The opera¬ 
tion of no general law shall be suspended for the benefit of any in¬ 
dividual, private corporation or association, nor shall any individ¬ 
ual, private corporation be exempted from the operation of anv 
general law.” 

The clerk continued reading: “Provided that nothing in this 
section or Article shall affect the right of the Legislature to en¬ 
act local laws regulating or prohibiting the liquor traffic.” Amend 
by adding, “except as in this Article otherwise provided.” 

MR. DENT—That was stricken out. 

THE PRESIDENT—The chair understands it was insisted 
upon. ' ‘ 


MR. ONLAL—\ es sir; as an amendment. 

MR. ASHCRAFT—The substitute was adopted in lieu of the 
amendment ot the gentleman from Limestone. I tried to explain 
>t to the chair at the tune, but the chair declined to recognize me 
for the purpose. I knew that the gentleman from Montgomery 
did not understand it at the time. * 

MR. O NEAL—-You offered it as a substitute. 

MR. ASHCRAFT—Yes, sir. 

MR. REESE—I move that the section be recommitted. 

To which there were expressions of dissent. 

uvon T ih^Srr ES 1 ° ENT T T . he P rcvioi,s Question has been ordered 
upon the section as amended. 

gentlerrmn^frorn^ ^ aS ,^i to * )C read as re ally adopted. The 
ment of th, L auderda] e moved a substitute for the amend- 

adooted and ^ ent eman from L'mestone, and this substitute was 
adopted, and no one can question that fact. Then it reads with- 



CONSTITUTIONAL CONVKNTION, 1901 


2013 


out all that liquor business being repeated time and again. We 
don t want to show we are wild on one subject. To put it in once 
is sufficient. 

1 Hb CHAIR—The gentleman from Limestone, Mr. Sanders, 
offered the following amendment to Section 4: “Provided, that 
nothing in this section or Article shall affect the right of the Leg¬ 
islature to enact local laws regulating or prohibiting the liquor 
traffic. I hereupon the gentleman from Lauderdale moved to 
amend. It is not offered as a substitute, but as- 

MR. ASHCRAFT (Lauderdale)—I beg the chair’s pardon, 
hut 1 offered it as a substitute. 

THK PRLSIDKXT— The paper speaks for itself; it says 
“amend by adding except as in this Article otherwise provided.” 
This applies directly to the amendment of the gentleman from 
Limestone, which the Convention refused unanimous consent to 
withdraw. 

MR. ASHCRAFT—But, Mr. President, if I offered it by inad- 
vertance to amend, and so wrote it there, yet it was offered as a 
substitute, and so understood by the Convention, and adopted as 
a substitute. 

A VOICE—I understood it was an amendment to the amend¬ 
ment. 

THK PRESIDENT-—It was so understood by the chair and 
so it reads. 

MR. O'XKAL—There was a misunderstanding on the sub¬ 
ject, and the only way to reach it is to vote over. 

To which there were expressions of dissent. 

MR. O'XKAL—I move that unanimous consent be given to 
withdraw both, and then put it in shape. 

MR. HKFLIX (Chambers)—I will ask the gentleman a ques¬ 
tion. Is that the amendment that 1 offered that the committee 
accepted. 

MR. O'XKAL—That has already been incorporated in the 
other section. 

MR. HEFLIN—That is the same section. 

MR. O’NEAL—That was incorporated in Section 1. The 
amendment you offered applies to the whole Article, and then the 
two amendments apply to the whole Article m the same lan¬ 
guage. That makes us ridiculous. I do not think that the Con¬ 
vention wants to make this section ridiculous. 



2014 


OFFICIAL PROCKKDINOS 


MR. SAMFORD—I move that the rules be suspended for the 
purpose of reconsidering the amendment and the substitute. 

THE PRESIDENT—The gentleman from Pike moves a re¬ 
consideration of the vote whereby the previous question was or¬ 
dered and the several amendments adopted. 

MR. REESE—I make the point of order that the previous 
question has been ordered, and that the rules of this Convention 
require amendments shall be in writing, and that they show for 
themselves; that it is within the province of the chair to inform 
this Convention of what amendments they have adopted, and the 
motion to reconsider at this time, or a motion to suspend the rules 
will not be in order, and even a motion to adjourn is not in order. 

MR. SAMFORD (Pike)—My understanding of the same rule 
is that a motion to suspend the rules of this Convention is always 
in order. 

A DELEGATE—No, sir. 

MR. SAMFORD—And especially at this time. 

THE PRESIDENT—The chair will examine the question and 
rule on it. 

MR. HEFLIN (Chambers)—I want to make the point of or¬ 
der that the amendment I offered this morning, the committee 
came to me and wanted me to offer it, and it is the same, it is the 
identical amendment that we passed on this morning that they 
now ask to withdraw. In the very same words. 

MR. O’NEAL—We adopted it this morning. 

MR. HEFLIN (Chambers)—But you ask unanimous consent 
to take it out. 

MR. O’NEAL—That is why I ask the unanimous consent to 
withdraw it. 

THE PRESIDENT—In the opinion of the Chair the Conven¬ 
tion can suspend the rules, and that a suspension of the rules will 
be necessary to reconsider the vote whereby the previous question 
was ordered. The gentleman from Pike moves that the rules be 
suspended. 

MR. SAMFORD (Pike)—I now move a reconsideration of 
the vote whereby the amendment of the gentleman from Lime¬ 
stone, Mr. Sanders, was adopted. 

THE PRESIDENT—It will be necessary, the Chair would 
suggest, that the House reconsider the vote whereby the previous 
question was ordered. 

MR. SAMFORD (Pike)—I move to reconsider the vote by 
which the previous question was ordered. 



CONSTITUTIONAL CONVENTION, 1901 


2015 


And upon a vote being- taken the motion was carried. 

MR. SAMFORD—Now I move a reconsideration of the vote 
by which the amendment of the gentleman from Limestone, Mr. 
Sanders, as amended by the gentleman from Lauderdale, Mr. Ash¬ 
craft, was passed. 

THE PRESIDENT—In the opinion of the Chair the Con¬ 
vention would have first to reconsider the vote whereby the 
amendment of the gentleman from Lauderdale was passed upon 
the amendment of the gentleman from Limestone. 

MR. SAMFORD—I make that motion, then, Mr. President. 

And upon a vote being taken the motion was carried. 

MR. SAMFORD (Pike) — I move a reconsideration of the 
vote whereby the amendment of the gentleman from Limestone 
was passed. 

And upon a vote being taken the motion was carried. 

MR. SAMFORD (Pike)—Now, Mr. President, I move to lay 
the amendment of the gentleman from Limestone upon the table. 

THE PRESIDENT—There is pending the amendment offer¬ 
ed by the gentleman from Lauderdale to that amendment. 

MR. SAMFORD (Pike)—As I understand it is competent 
for any member to make a motion under the rules of this Conven¬ 
tion, to lay an amendment or substitute, or both, as he chooses, 
on the table, and leave the other before the House. 

THE PRESIDENT—The pending question will be upon the 
amendment of the gentleman from Lauderdale to the amendment 
of the gentleman from Limestone, and you cannot get over the 
amendment by him unless it is withdrawn or disposed of. 

MR. SAMFORD (Pike)—I will ask him to withdraw that 
temporarily by unanimous consent. 

MR. ASHCRAFT—I consent to its withdrawal. 

To which objection was made. 

MR. SAMFORD—I move that the gentleman be permitted to 
withdraw his amendment. 

The motion was carried. 

MR. SAMFORD (Pike)—I now move to lay the amendment 
offered by the gentleman from Limestone, Mr. Sanders, on the 
table. 

Upon a vote being taken the motion to table prevailed. 



2016 


OFFICIAL PROCEEDINGS 


MR. SAMFORD—Now I re-offer the amendment of the gen¬ 
tleman from Lauderdale, Mr. Ashcraft, and I move the previous 
question upon the section and the amendment. 

A reading was called for, and it was read as follows: Amend 
by adding “except as in this Article otherwise provided.” 

Upon a vote being taken the main question was ordered, upon 
a further vote the amendment being adopted, and a vote was taken 
and the section as amended was adopted. 

The Clerk read Section 5 as follows: 

“The General Assembly may by general law confer upon 
courts of County Commissioners, Boards of Revenue or other 
courts, such power of local legislation and administration, touch¬ 
ing all matters and things not provided for by general law, and 
not inconsistent with the provisions of this Constitution as the 
General Assembly may from time to time deem expedient.° 

MR. VAUGHN—I have an amendment. 

THE PRESIDENT—The Convention is considering the re¬ 
port of the Committee on Local Legislation and in that connec¬ 
tion is considering such parts of the report of the Legislative De¬ 
partment as bear on the same question. 

MR. OATES—The latter part of the report of the Commit¬ 
tee on Legislative Department as will be seen, states it will move 
the substitute— 

THE PRESIDENT—The Secretary will read the proposed 
substitute. 

It was read as follows: Your committee do not concur in 
Section 5 of said article as reported by the Committee on Local 
Legislation, and reports as a substitute therefor Section 25 of 
Article IV of the present Constitution. 

THE PRESIDENT—Does the gentleman from Dallas offer 
his amendment. 

MR. VAUGHN—I desire to offer a substitute to the report 
of the Committee on Legislative Department. 

MR. O’NEAL—If the gentleman will yield to me, to make a 
statement, I desire to say that the Committee on Local Legisla¬ 
tion have reported Section 7, which is the section in the Consti¬ 
tution to which the gentleman from Montgomery refers. We re¬ 
ported it as Section 7, but it is not printed. We had unanimous 
leave to take it up when this article was under consideration. 

MR. OATES—I have not seen that. 



CONSTITUTIONAL CONVENTION, 1901 


2017 


THE PRESIDENT—It is out of order to discuss the substi¬ 
tute offered by the gentleman from Montgomery until the substi¬ 
tute offered by the gentleman from Dallas is read. That is the 
pending question. 

The substitute was read as follows: 

Amend by striking out Section 5, adding in lieu thereof the 
following: The General Assembly shall pass general laws under 
which local and private interests shall be provided for, and pro¬ 
tected, and under which cities and towns may be chartered and 
their charters amended, and under which corporations may be 
created, organized and their acts of incorporation altered and all 
such laws shall be subject to repeal or amendment. 

MR. VAUGHN—That substitute is a copy of a section of the 
Constitution of Mississippi, which just precedes the exclusion from 
the legislature of subjects about the same as in the present article, 
and under that section of the Constitution of Mississippi, the legis¬ 
lature can pass laws whereby towns may enact their local laws. 
They have operated under it for a number of years and from the 
statement of the gentleman from Clarke, they have done it suc¬ 
cessfully, and I offer that as a substitute. 

MR. PETTUS—I want to say that this time I am heartily in 
accord with the section reported by the Committee. I think it is 
an admirable section, and it is taken from the Constitution of the 
State of New York. In the Constitution of New York, Article 
3, Section 27, occurs this provision: “The legislature shall, by 
general law, confer upon the Boards of Supervisors of the several 
counties of the States such further powers of local legislation and 
administration as the legislature may, from time to time deem 
expedient/' Under this, there are some decisions cited. One was 
that an act to vest in the Board of Supervisors certain legislative 
powers for the protection of shell fish is constitutional. Another 
case cited, is that a law providing for the compensation of certain 
county treasurers shall be fixed by the supervisors, is valid. Now, 
the substitute that is offered by the gentleman from Dallas makes 
it the duty of the legislature to provide by general laws for local 
interests, but in what manner, and what kind of a general law 
can the legislature provide for local interests of this character un¬ 
less it can delegate its power of legislation to some body. 

MR. FOSTER—Did you notice the difference between the 
New York provision and this? 

MR. PETTUS—There is no material difference. 

MR. FOSTER—This provides the legislature shall confer 
upon such courts power of local legislation touching all matters 
and things not provided for by general law. It seems to me to be 



2018 


OFFICIAL PROCEEDINGS 


much broader power than is conferred by the New York Consti¬ 
tution. 

MR. PETTUS—It is a question, Mr. President, that is left 
in the discretion of the General Assembly of this State, and when¬ 
ever the General Assembly passes a general law, under this sec¬ 
tion, it denudes itself of that much power and authority. It is not 
that the General Assembly shall pass these laws, but thev maw 
in their discretion, pass such laws, and I take it that the General 
Assembly is not going to divest itself of any power of local legis¬ 
lation, or any other power, by its own act, except where the best 
interests of the people demand it. Now another section exists in 
the Constitution of New York. They have provided for game 
law's. They have authorized and delegated by wav of local legisla¬ 
tion to the Boards of Supervisors in the respective counties, this 
matter of game laws. That was something specifically left out 
of the prohibition as to which local legislation was cut off, because 
they did not believe that that power could be delegated to the 
boards of commissioners in the different counties. 

MR. VAUGHN—Under the substitute offered by myself, the 
legislature would not have the authority to delegate that court, or 
any other body in the county, the authority to enact the>e local 
laws. 

MR. PETTUS—I think it is a doubtful proposition. I do not 
think it is near so plain as it is in the section as reported originally 
by the Committee. Now the proposition which we are confronted 
with is that we have adopted in the report of the Committee on 
Local Legislation, and put an absolute inhibition upon the Gen¬ 
eral Assembly of this State, so far as some thirty-five or seven 
matters of legislation are concerned. We have by' constitutional 
prohibition absolutely cut off the power of the General Assembly 
to pass local acts upon these different subjects. Now after vou 
have done that, there has got to be some source of relief. There 
has got to be provided some forum to which the people can turn 
for relief and legislation on these subjects, and if you cut it off 
entirely and do not authorize the legislature to delegate this power 
to some other body in the different counties, or somewhere else, 
you have left the thing up in the air. The General Assembly is the 
forum of the people, and if it is wise to cut off this legislation 
from the General Assembly, then it is the duty of the Constitu¬ 
tional Convention to provide some other body, and some other 
forum, where relief can be obtained; where legislation can be had 
upon stock laws, school districts, and things of that character, a 
place to my mind most convenient, and nearest to the people. 
A forum that is open nearly all of the time is the commissioners 
court. It is the one body in this State which is most nearly anal- 
agous to the Boards of Supervisors in the State of New York. It 
is a body, to which the humblest citizen of any county may go and 



CONSTITUTIONAL CONVENTION, 1901 


2019 


petition. Any poor person may go before it with his petition or 
his grievance. The humblest citizen in Limestone county can 
get on his mule or horse, and ride over to the county seat, and 
present his petition, and have his side of the case heard. As it is 
down here in the legislature, it is only the people who have the 
means to come before the Genera] Assembly to petition in local 
matters, and bring their influence to bear in a lobby, upon the leg¬ 
islature, to secure the passage of bills of this character. I think, 
Mr. President, that the Convention, upon consideration and in¬ 
vestigation will realize the fact that after they have prohibited the 
legislature from legislating upon these questions, they must turn 
to some forum, and provide some channel through which it can 
be obtained, and I think that the experience of the State of New 
York, and the conditions in the State of Alabama, make the com¬ 
missioners courts and the boards of revenue in the different coun¬ 
ties, the proper and the best and the most suitable forum to au¬ 
thorize such legislation. Delegate this power to the courts of 
county commissioners and I am heartily in favor of this provision. 

MR. PILLANS—I desire to ask the gentleman a question for 
information. How long has that been in operation in the State of 
New York? 

MR. PETTUS—It is in the printed Constitution that I have 
in my hands. It was in the Constitution, and amended by the Con¬ 
stitutional Convention of 1894. I do not know just what time 
this provision was put into the Constitution of New York. In this 
section it says this was former section 23 of this Article, and was 
changed to section 27 by the Convention of 1894 and ratified No¬ 
vember 6, 1894. It was added by the people November 3rd, 1874, 
and was in force on January 1st, 1875. It has been in operation 
for nearly a quarter of a century. 

MR. PILLANS—It came in in 75? 

MR. PETTUS—Yes. sir. 

MR. PILLANS—I would ask the gentleman also whether 
there is any similarity between the conditions of the County Courts 
of the great Empire State of the Union, and those of Alabama, in 
the diffusion of learning or anything of that sort? 

MR. PETTUS—Yes, sir, there is a marked similarity. I am 
not familiar with the diffusion of learning in New York, but I am 
familiar with the similarity in this respect, that local legislation 
is necessary in the counties of New York to meet the conditions 
there and that local legislation is necessary in the counties of Ala¬ 
bama to meet local conditions existing there, and I take it that 
the people of Alabama are as competent to govern themselves in 
their different counties and localities as the people of New York, 
or of an^ other State. 



2020 


OFFICIAL PROCEEDINGS 


MR OATES— There is a vast difference in the condition of 
the people~of this State and those of New York. In Nevv York it 
may be a very good thing, and quite satisfactory, to delegate to 
Ihe Countv Commissioners powers of legislation, but m Ala¬ 
bama I think that it is a very dangerous experiment and one that 
would not be satisfactory to the people. Now what is the main 
question here? The delegate from Limestone has shown that the 
provision reported by the committee is substantia ly the New Y ork 
provision. The delegate from Dallas dissents and makes a minori¬ 
ty report, and his proposition enumerates se\eral cases, and un¬ 
dertakes to point out the manner by which the General Assembly 
shall pass general laws. 


The Chair will suggest to the distinguished gentleman from 
Montgomery that the proposition of the gentleman from Dallas is 
not offered as a minority report. It is offered as a substitute, and 
the gentleman from Dallas is not a member of the committee mak¬ 
ing the report. 


MR. OATES—I was not aware of it, and I thank the Chair 
for making the correction. But I will speak to the proposition, 
and on the principle that inclusion of certain things is an exclusion 
of others, it makes it very dangerous. There are some gentlemen 
who have said, and many delegates have claimed, that there are 
are about thirty-five or thirty-six prohibitions which have been 
adopted. They are mistaken about that. There are thirty, or 
thirty-one is the last one to be considered as such. The last was, 
however, more of a regulation of the manner in which legislation 
should be effected, but considering and counting it as one, there 
are but thirty-one, because several have been voted down. My 
count of it leaves thirty-one. But the amendment offered by the 
delegate from Dallas does not apply nor provide for the cases 
presented by these. Not at all. Then construing it as statutes 
are frequently construed, it may be found to be defective, and 
too restricted in its provisions. Now, sir. the Section found in 
the present Constitution has an application to this case, which I 
think if the gentleman will look at the amendment he will find 
that it fits exactly, and is just what ought to be provided in the 
Constitution. The language is the “Legislature shall pass gen¬ 
eral laws under which local and private interests shall be provided 
for and protected.” Does not that give the Legislature as much 
power as anything that could be said, and it does not undertake 
to point out, except the general direction, and authorization, and 
it is an injunction upon the Legislature that they shall pass laws 
which shall provide for these private interests and under which 
they shall be protected. 


MR. PETTUS—I would like to ask the gentleman a ques¬ 
tion. If his remark a while ago about the different conditions in 
this State, had reference to the ability of the different commis- 



CONSTITUTIONAL CONVENTION, 1901 


2021 


sioners' Courts, does not he think that the additional responsibili¬ 
ty would raise the standard of the men in those Commissioners' 
Courts ? 

MR. OATES—That is an untried experiment. 

MR. PETTUS—Another question. Under Section 25 of Ar¬ 
ticle IV, in the old Constitution, the Legislature could pass a 
general law to give the people of Swamcut Beat in Limestone 
County, an anti-stock law? 

MR. OATES—Now any legislator who will address himself 
to the work and who is at all learned in the law, will find not 
much difficulty in framing general laws under which nearly ev¬ 
ery one of these things, and in fact all of them, can be readily 
performed, and to commit it to the County Commissioners, why 
sir, while we have in a good many counties very able men on the 
Boards of Revenue and County Commissioners, we have in other 
places and at other times, some men who are not very capable. 
I know' in a county not a great ways from Montgomery where a 
man served as County Commissioner for many years, and could 
not write his name. While he was a man of good judgment on 
matters which were presented to him, and could pass fair judg¬ 
ment on them, but illiterate men, in a sparsely settled country, 
are not very capable of handling these various questions. My 
opinion is that if you commit it to them, you w r ill have more liti¬ 
gation and trouble, as there will be a greater contrariety of opinion 
and greater differences, under what is supposed to be the general 
law in the different counties. Why it will be w r orse than local 
legislation now. Why, sir, a safer and better plan is to authorize 
the Legislature, as the amendment which I offered does, in a 
simple way, and make it the duty of the Legislature to pass these 
law r s. Now' the amendment offered by the delegate from Dallas, 
my recollection is, from the reading of it, the General Assembly 
may do it. I think it is better to employ the word “shall” though 
in a statute where the public are interested, the w r ord “may” is 
considered as meaning “shall.” But it is better to use the word, 
w'hich is intended to be employed, the Legislature shall pass gen¬ 
eral laws, under w'hich local and private interests shall be provid¬ 
ed for and abrogated. That language is simple and plain, and it 
occurred to me that it was decidedly the best. It w T as better than 
any speculative language. It cannot be misconstrued, but it gives 
all the authority to the Legislature that you can give under any¬ 
thing, and it is better a long ways than when you undertake to 
give a supposedly larger jurisdiction by a specification of what 
they may do. It is stated in so man)' words here, and it is to be 
presumed that the Legislature, and especially the Judiciary Com¬ 
mittee of the two houses, which would have this work to do, put¬ 
ting it in that plain and unmistakable language, would carry out 
the provision, and if you risk the Legislature, as I think you cer¬ 
tainly can, you cannot employ more proper and plainer language. 



2022 


OFFICIAL P R O C F K DIN tS 


MR. O’NEAL—1 ask the Clerk to read the amendment of¬ 
fered by the gentleman from Dallas. 

MR. VAUGHN—I desire to withdraw the amendment. I did 
not know at the time that there was a minority report, and that 
Section 25 and Article IV’. of the present Constitution is practical¬ 
ly the same as mv amendment, and I will withdraw my substi¬ 
tute. 


THE PRESIDENT—The (.'hair does not understand that 
there is a minority report. The Chair will explain that the propo¬ 
sition offered is by the Legislative Committee, which is being con¬ 
sidered in connection with the report of the Committee on Local 
Legislation, and while it is not a minority report, it subserves the 
same purpose. It is offered as a substitute. 

MR. VAUGHN—That being the case. I ask consent to with¬ 
draw my substitute. 


There being no objection, the substitute was withdrawn. 

MR. O’NEAL—The reasons that actuated the committee 
in suggesting this section, was a doubt as to whether the Legisla¬ 
ture, in the absence of a constitutional provision, could vest legis¬ 
lative powers in the Commissioners Courts, or anv other court 
of like jurisdiction. Now, the gentleman from Montgomery says 
that Section 25 of the present Constitution covers the same pur¬ 
pose. We have offered as an amendment to our report Section 
—5 of the Constitution of 18/5 as Section 7. I his section provides 
that the General Assembly shall pass general laws under which 
local and private interests shall be provided for and protected, 
that does not confer upon any other tribunal legislative power 
Now, it is the general principle of the law. which the delegates 
m this Convention will recognize, that the Legislature cannot vest 
m any other tribunal its legislative powers. It cannot delegate its 
legislative powers. On this subject. Mr. Coolev. in his work on 
tU J; ion M Limitations, says: "One of the Settled maxims in 

S lf° na a 'Vf th f t , po ' ver conferred upon the Legislature to 
make laws cannot be delegated by that department to anv other 

located th 11 ^ 0 ^?' .." h ® re the sov ereign power of the State has 
located the authority, there it remains, and bv constitutional 

S C k a c 0 haU a d S T. St hC nia(U ‘ tG remai " until the Constitution 
oatriotism th F 16 P °". er vv h°se judgment, wisdom and 

ftsell nf^F gH P, re 1 ro ^ a l tlve been entrusted, cannot relieve 

power shalf h^devnl’ 1 '} y xf choos,n K agencies upon which the 
power shall be devolved. Nor can it substitute the judgment 

wisdom and patnotism of any other body for those to which alone' 

the people have seen fit to confide this sovereign trust.” 

other N co"i,rT AM '° ‘ he Co”™'«fioner s ' Court, or any 

other court. All that we des.re ts to confer upon the Legislature 



CONSTITUTIONAL CONVENTION, 1901 


2023 


power to delegate certain legislative authority to another tribunal, 
that in their wisdom may be necessary to be created in that coun¬ 
ty. 

MR. OATES—I would like to ask, as I suppose if the Con¬ 
vention authorizes this delegation of powers, it would stand, but 
it is a dangerous thing, and I am doubtful whether they can do 
it or not. I will ask the delegate from Lauderdale if he and a 
dozen more able lawyers, could take up this Constitution and 
frame general laws by which all of these things could be provided 
for before the Courts of County Commissioners alone? Some 
things are proper to be referred to them. Some other things to 
be provided for might be done by other courts. Could you not 
frame general laws under which everything could be accomplish¬ 
ed? 


MR. O'NEAL—I agree with the gentleman from Montgom¬ 
ery that the Legislature could frame laws under which almost ev¬ 
erything can be provided for. Now, the section which has already 
been adopted, expressly requires the Legislature to provide gen¬ 
eral laws to embrace all the subjects as to which they are prohib¬ 
ited from enacting special laws. They are required by the man¬ 
date of this article, which has been adopted, to pass general laws 
on all these enumerated subjects, and they are required to pass 
general laws on all other subjects, but we can see no impropriety 
for the Legislature to vest in the Commissioners' Courts power 
to change a man's name, power to change the names of a corpora¬ 
tion; powers, if necessary, to relieve the disabilities of non-age. or 
the power to locate stock districts. 

MR. OATES—I want to ask the delegate if the law does not 
now vest the Probate Judge, for instance, with the power of do¬ 
ing several of those things? 

MR. O'NEAL—We do not say the Commissioners' Court in 
the section, but Commissioners’ Courts, Boards of Revenue, or 
other courts. They could vest it, then, under this, in the Probate 
Court, in the Circuit Court or in any other court. We simply 
wanted to put a provision in here that in all these small matters 
of detail in the county, if it was ascertained that a general law 
could not sufficiently provide for it, then the Legislature should 
give this power to some court in the county, to exercise legisla¬ 
tive jurisdiction. 

The hour of 6 o’clock having arrived, the Convention ad¬ 
journed. 



2024 


OFFICIAL PR<K'FFDINOS 

FORTY-THIRD DAY 

m<>nt<;< >mkrv, ala., 

ITiday, July 12, 1 ( K)1. 

The Convention met pursuant to adjournment, was called to 
order by the President, and the proceedings opened with prayer 
by the Rev. Mr. Dix, as follows: 

()ur Heavenlv leather, >ti 11 the recipient- ut I hy meres , w e 
come before Thee with thanksgiving. Still conscious that we 
have not loved Thee, our Lord and Cod, with all our hearts, and 
with all our souls, and with all our minds, and all our strength, 
and that we have not loved our neighbor as ourself, we come be¬ 
fore Thee with confession. Seeking forgiveness and still conscious 
of our weakness, and of our need of help, we come to Thee with 
supplication and petition. We pray that Thy blessing’ mav to¬ 
day rest upon this Convention. We pray that they mav be en¬ 
abled to comprehend the deep significance of their work, and may 
they have that wide view of their relations to that work which 
becomes not only those who act for a sovereign State*, but those 
who act for a State standing in relation to sister States, under the 
administration of a government of their own establishment. We 
pray that all these relations may enter into account, and that this 
body of men may be enabled to frame an instrument which shall 
embody the principles of civil and religious liberty, of government 
administered by States. W'e pray, our bather, in behalf of the per¬ 
sonal interests of these men. May they and their families be bless¬ 
ed of Thee. May' they be enabled to discharge their duties to their 
fellow' men, under an approving conscience, and with wisdom of 
Thine own dictation, but may they also understand that whatever 
may' be the blessings of I hv providence bestowed upon a common 
country, and upon a beloved State, and upon communities and 
persons, the crowning excellence of divine blessing is eternal life 
through Jesus Christ, our Lord. Confer this blessing, w'e prav 
I het upon us, I hy servants, and hie:" them according to the 
measure of Thy love, we ask through Jesus Christ, our Redeemer. 
Amen. 

Upon the call of the loll 120 delegates responded to their 
names. 

Mr. Kyster here took the chair. 

Leaves of absence were granted as follows: Mr Tavloe for 
today; Mr. Kirkland for today and Saturdav; Mr. Reynolds of 
Henry for today and tomorrow; Mr. Bethunefor todav; Mr. Kyle 
for Friday, Saturday, Monday and Tuesday; Mr, Burnett for to- 
day tomorrow; Mr. Foshee for today and tomorrow; Mr Searcy 
of Tuscaloosa for today and tomorrow; Assistant Door-keeper 
bain for tomorrow'; Mr. Sollie for tomorrow; Mr Williams (FI- 



CONSTITUTIONAL CONVENTION, 1901 


2025 


more) for tomorrow; Mr. Craig for Monday; indefinite leave for 
Mr. Duke (Chambers) and Mr. Wilson (Clarke) on account of 
sickness. 

MR. MALONE — On yesterday I introduced a petition and 
had it referred. While it was a short one, it had quite a number 
of signatures to it. Mr. McCauley hunted me up in the evening 
and said he had looked for me in the morning to ask leave to print 
that petition with only one name, and as he could not find me he 
had already taken the liberty to do so. I insisted upon him put¬ 
ting several more names to it. I find now that the petition is not 
confined to my particular place, and that quite a number of names 
from adjoining localities will be left out, and I now ask that inas¬ 
much as the names were left out for the convenience of Mr. Mc¬ 
Cauley, on account of the printing to be done, that he print the 
petition today as a whole. 

There being no objection, the petition in full is as follows: 

Dothan, Ala., July 5, 1901. 

To Hons. M. Sollie, George H. Malone. T. M. Espy and R. J. 
Reynolds : 

As our delegates we respectfully petition the Constitutional 
Convention, through you, to provide in the new Constitution for 
the election of the Alabama Railroad Commission by the people, 
and for the payment of their salaries by the State, and that their 
powers to enforce their rulings and orders be increased : 

J. M. Byrd, Dothan Cge. Co., W. W. Barnard, C’. B. Farmer, 

B. F. Reed, Malone Sons, H. L. Solomon, J. W. Burkett,, O. P. 
Green, H. M. Young, A. B. Kelly, P. O. Singleton, W. W. Reenes, 
A. J. Beverett, T. W. Sheehan, I. Boxhorn, Dothan Jewelry Co., 
Joe Lurie, W. (). Griffith, P. R. Stokes, E. M. Teague, C. S. Lee, 
E. E. Hammond, J. Harnow, W. H. McNeal, John R. M. Lindon, 
R. L. Pitcher, S. S. Forrester, J. Buck. R. J. Carlisle, R. W. Clay¬ 
ton, First National Bank, C. Z. Saunders, 19. V. Paul, Dothan Ice 
Factory, J. W. Chambers, O. T. Howell, D. T. Thomas, C. C. 
Bush, Geo. Connon, J. J. Snell, W. F. Henns, M. F. Domon, R. H. 
Walker, W. C. Feine, L. M. Frey, C. S. Burns, W. H. Grant, A. E. 
Pace, B. Faulk, J. L. Acree, J. R. G. Howell, W. L. Brown, J. G. 
Sanders, W. R. McKenzie, Sol. Lune, \V. L. Lee, Dothan Hdw. 
Co., D. W. Ingram, C. C. Hughes, D. W. Baku, A. W. Hauke. A. 

C. Coe, B. R. Pitcher, L. Granburg, W. F. Gregory, W. Z. Batson, 
L. D. Welch, E. J. Bent in, Malone Fur. Co., W. D. Hutchinson, E. 
R. Porter, W. Harvey, Adam Grant, R. W. Holmes, H. G. For¬ 
rester, Abe Adams, M. Scott, C. C. Hughes, A. E. Cunnibil, J. R. 
Crawford, J. M. Meyrovitz, A. Pavne, R. IE A. Millikin, J. Silvers, 
J. R. Young, J. F. Dawsey, O. R. Morson, G. W. Pitcher, W. B. 
Tate, C. W. Lewis, J. E. Wise (rate on ice to Abbeville from Do- 



2026 


OFFlCIAf, I’UOCKKDINV.S 


than exceeds rate from Montgomery to Abbeville) ; S. P. Kirk¬ 
land, J. D. Howell. W. H. King, IP Plumberg, |. X. Cureton, Wni 
Passmore. H. K. Petham. W. A. Jelless. 11. S. Cilmore, F. K 
Sanders, IP K. Vance. C. A. Rullmc. |. T. Key ton, Louis Peaum 
(i. A llnmninm) (l‘ ( V i\\ I. 1 IvVii.rr! ln»\r! I \1 f > • i \ I 


(». A. 1 iamniond, 0 . IV Crawhinl. Kwi-crt Hum. 

X’. Singletary X Co.. I. \\ . Camp! oil. I. P I'um... 

D. D. Holmes, A. K. Peacock. I'.. A. le-ter. (•'rank fordon. |. 

:. i \ \' .v i ... \ 4 • \ i ii. i f .. 


M. 

\\ . 


Pay tier. ! 
Xewtoii 


j-v. riuiines, .y. tv. i eacocK, . \. ic-ier. rraiiK (ortlon. |. | 
Rogers, A. T. Williams. J. UP Sanders'. W. M. Hunter. I. 1,. Car- 
roll, D. I). Strickland. Sam Chen \ . P. A. Pearce. I. W. |.»ne>, Toni 
Kelly, T. J. Walden, K. C. William-. IP IP Pate. Sr.. \\ . C. Pilcher. 


Shai 


• Xu. I-dge. I. 1-' 

I Hall. V . IP | lav. 

I he Sitting-. |. R 

IP \\ dham-. S;i\i >11 
I I el ill i i oliie 1 1 'in■- 

ell. C. P. Pitman. 
U • X . I tur-. IP ( ) 


Kelly, T. f. Walden. K. C. Wilkan 
James (.'lark. A. IP Cr-nen i. i ! 

Hand, S. W. Robbins. ( >. IP Williams. 

Z. T. Pridgen. W. IT Watson. W T 
Turner. Dothan Drug Co.. 11. Watford. W 
& Heard. |. R. McCartv. R. 1, .\la\e-. j. ’j 
nal. J. IP McCain-, Wm. \\ In .P, 

M. Cherry. Batchelor Pro-.. |. ,\P t'Clim ax 

Trawick, 1. A White. Will PriPii, C. IP Roland. 1). IP You,,,' 
C. J. -Moms. A. Mathis. Logan X Co.. I. W. Payne. P. \\ Clendm 
& Co.. Strickland Pros.. C. \\ . Kallm-. |. \. Mar, C R 

J° ht ? A V; ar -'P j - L - Cr:l ' vfon! - J- Key Ion. Arthur \ c-c W ' lV 

CjP'V ■ V 1 -- K "!. X P V Sh - 11 1 inm 

L?< T jIwSr Jr!"* >■ X A K " k - 

|ejj e MK SJ!I ' J F OIdIiiIO- -I rise a ijm-linn of |,nr. 1 privi 

• SUSSSlgt ..- — 

Gyving to the locattn o7mv Vaat 

L^ng^aicf^r^onclmied 6 tuAva ,t''1, f ! VV hearin - "’hat w as 

official report of the debate - her '° U V Ur ’ lintl ^ conltl see the 
and also his remarks upon the t , ,V V" tlu ' gentleman and myself, 
have this morning gonTove the ec- f r T -° f J ,CrsSonal »rivilege. I 
t<> say that the W V ( ! V V ’ and 1 *** 

appears in the record is not substantialD "-1" 1 }" au,,t ' r<la!t “' as n 
to say upon the floor of rhf* rv, * a ' vv lat I understood him 

further toWay that i? I had unJerT P.u 0,1 >' K,< -' rda >-- I desire 
man to contain only the substance of wha? PPPP 'f * he Kentlc - 
tains, there is much that was said hv m t f f V? lc l al report con- 
been glad to omit. I thought' hoyvever 7 ^ ^ r shotdd have 
marhs, tha, prohah.y the ,L, S 




CONSTITUTIONAL CONVENTION, 1901 


2027 


the suddenness and passion of the debate, and was not inclined to 
call any attention to the errors in the record, until reading” the 
gentleman's remarks under personal privilege, I find that they 
were all based upon the proposition that there was nothing in the 
debate said by myself calling for the criticism. As the gentle¬ 
man placed his statement of personal privilege upon that basis, I 
regret exceedingly that the stenographers should have left out 
the substance of the matters criticised by myself, and I feel that 
the omission of those remarks, followed by the remarks of the 
gentleman upon personal privilege, do me a great injustice. I 
think a true report of the gentleman should have been made to 
the Convention. 

MR. O'NEAL (Lauderdale)—1 rise to a question of personal 
privilege. The report of the stenographer contains the substance, 
word tor word, what I said, but there were some remarks made 
yesterday by the gentleman from Mobile which I did not catch at 
the time, and which I am unwilling to let pass unchallenged. 

MR. SMITH—May 1 ask the gentleman if he did not materi¬ 
ally change in the revision much of his remarks? 

MR. O’NEAL—I did not make a single change. I desire to 
say this, and regret to intrude upon this Convention, or to un¬ 
dertake to renew the unpleasant episode of yesterday, but I find 
in the gentleman's remarks the following language : 

“But the gentleman on the contrary, although he here de¬ 
clares that it is wrong in principle to take dispensary money and 
apply it to the common schools, gets up in this Convention and 
makes an open bid for an alliance with gentlemen in arraying the 
dispensary interest against the city of Mobile. He gets up and de¬ 
clares that if they will help him in his attack on my county and 
city that he will put almost anything in his article to protect the 
dispensary law. Judge, then, gentlemen of the Convention, be¬ 
tween us as to who it is that is willing to trade away the safe¬ 
guards of the people in order to accomplish his purpose—my pur¬ 
pose being the protection of my people, his purpose being the 
protection of personal pride as the author of an article that he of¬ 
fers to this Constitution." 

I think it proper that 1 should state, Mr. President, that I an¬ 
nounced to the Convention on yesterday that it had been, from 
the outset, the purpose of the Committee, which I had the honor 
to represent, to insert no provision in the article in reference to 
Local Legislation which would abridge the power of the General 
Assembly to enact such laws in reference to the sale of intoxicating 
liquors as they might deem proper. I made that statement re-*' 
peatedly during my argument, and announced that I was willing 
to incorporate a section in my article to that effect. Now the gen¬ 
tleman says that I made that proposition, in order to secure an 



2028 


OFFICIAL FR( )C KF DI X('*S 


alliance with the dispensary element to strike down the interests 
of the city of Mobile. I suppose that statement of mine in ref¬ 
erence to my willingness to incorporate such a provision in refer¬ 
ence to the sale of liquor was the basis of that statement. I desire 
to say the charge the gentleman makes does me gross injustice, 
and is unwarranted, and I do believe that the gentleman would 
have made it except in temper. 


I desire to say, furthermore, Mr. President, that the gentle¬ 
man undertook to refer yesterday, with contempt, to mv intellec¬ 
tual powers, and to characterize me as the great chairman of the 
Committee who arrogated to himself all the wisdom of this Con¬ 
vention. I desire to say whatever intellectual powers 1 mav pos¬ 
sess are from my Creator, and l am only responsible for their use. 
I have never used them for any oilier purpose, except to promote 
the interests of the people of my State. 1 do not expect, nor do 
I suppose any other delegate in. tins Conxentiun ever expects to 
reach the high and lofty pinnacle of greatness upon which the dis¬ 
tinguished delegate from Mobile sits, enthroned in solitarv and 
cold grandeur. W e common mortals, like myself, can oniv gaze 
from alar, in fear and trembling, as one who looks upon some 
mighty volcano, belching forth fire and smoke. 


Now, sir, in reference to anv threat on mv part to attack the 
vested interests of the city of Mobile, I desire to sav that this con¬ 
troversy is not of my seeking. 1 desire to sav in justice to the 
other delegates from the city of Mobile, who are my personal 
friends, and from whom I have only received courtesy and kindly 
treatment, that I did not come to this Convention with any feel¬ 
ing of hostility to the interests of the great city of Mobile, but 
with only a earnest desire to promote her prosperity and to ad- 
vance the interest of every other communitv in our great Common¬ 
wealth. I desire to say that if at any time, the question as to the 
justice of the city of Mobile retaining part of the general funds of 
the Mate, and appropriating it to her own purposes, should be 
raised in this Convention, I shall then undertake to decide the 
controversy as becomes a delegate upon this floor, according to 
my conscience and my judgment, unterrified and uninfluenced by 

from t^Gulfaty ' nt ' Ct ' V ' am ' ri<liCl ' le ° f the n ’« ht y Ajai 


tended S , (M ° bl e) 7~ 1 he gentleman’s last remarks, in¬ 
tended as an oratorical display, have no part in the controversy 
between the gentleman and myself. As stated a few moments 
ago, either the record of the gentleman’s remarks is in error or I 
certainly very much misunderstood his debate. If he said nothing- 
more than is contained in that record, as I said in the commence 
ment I am sorry to have criticised him to the extent that I did 

oof on Sa ? r ha ; 1 m ? erst0 °i him to say, I would today, with¬ 
out one part.de of pass,on, without one feeling of unfriendliness 



2029 


CONSTITUTIONAL CONVENTION. 1901 


t°. U " *\ n , t f nian re P e at each and every word that I said in that de- 
V- an< t-'almly. without anger, without personality, 

1 . ‘i s tl( .“ production of a stranger, as applied to the argu¬ 
ment that I understood the gentleman to make, I believe it to be 
]. l * S - ail< nieri t( J> evcr y word and every syllable. There can, now, 
be but one method of determining whether I was right, or went 
too far in criticising the gentleman, and that is for me to get from 
the stenographer a copy of the gentleman’s speech as he under¬ 
stood it and took it down. That I propose to do. If, as I said 
ic ore the gentleman did not say more than is reported in the 
official report then I shall say to the gentleman, gladly, that I 
am sorry that I criticised him as I did; but. if the gentleman’s re- 
marks were as I understood and wrote them down on a piece of 
paper at the time that they were uttered, and have the paper in 
my room, then neither anger nor passion can make that which 
was justly said improperly spoken. 

.i \Y'ill the gentleman please state what it was 

that 1 said that is not in the report. 


say 


MR. SMITH—I cannot by heart, Mr. O’Neal, I am bound to 


MR. O’NEAL—In substance then. 

MR. BL RS (Dallas)—I move that this Convention proceed 
with its business. 


MR. SMITH—I understood the gentleman, in one of his sen¬ 
tences, to say that I was making under a pretense of morality to 
take funds from the State treasury for the benefit of the corpora¬ 
tion of the city of Mobile. 

MR. O NEAL I did not make that statement. Will the gen¬ 
tleman permit me to say what I did say. 

MR. CUNNINGHAM (Jefferson)—I rise to a point of order 
that the matter of colloquy between the gentlemen is not a matter 
of privilege, and I think it is out of order. 

MR. O’NEAL—I simply desire to state what I did say, what 
I know I said— 

MR. HOWZE—I call for the regular order, Mr. President: 

MR. SMITH—I desire to say one thing further. I did not 
say anything yesterday in passion. Not at all. The gentleman I 
have every reason to feel friendliness for from what I know of 
him, and I certainly have no feeling of prejudice against the gen¬ 
tleman. There was nothing between us, until the speech he made, 
and if I misunderstood him, I am sorry that I criticised him. 

THE PRESIDENT PRO TEM—The chair will state he can¬ 
not help but believe that the difference of opinion between the 
gentlemen results from a misunderstanding of the facts. 



2030 


OFFICIAL PROCEEDINGS 


MR. DENT—I want to find out whether the record of the 
stenographic report of yesterday’s proceedings are identical with 
the Journal. If so, some correction should be made in the Journal. 

THE PRESIDENT PRO TEM—The gentleman will suggest 
the point. 

MR. DENT—I find that the section which was amended in 
the stenographic report purports to read as follows: The opera¬ 
tion of no general law shall be suspended for the benefit of any 
individual, private corporation or association, nor shall any indi¬ 
vidual, private corporation or association." I would like to know 
how it is in the record. 

THE PRESIDENT PRO TEM—The clerk informs the chair 
that the Journal is correct, according to the gentleman’s recollec¬ 
tion. 


MR. LONG (Walker)—Yesterday s report of the proceed¬ 
ings of the Convention, under the head of the minority report of 
the Committee on Impeachments, as it is reported, says it was 
signed by Mr. Thompson and Mr. Robinson. There were five of 
us that signed the minority report, and I desire that the correction 
be made. Mr. Haley, Mr. MacA. Smith and myself were the names 
left off, and I desire that the correction be made in the minority 
report. 

THE PRESIDENT PRO TEM—The Journal is correct. That 
was a typographical error of the stenographic report, which will 
be corrected. 

r e P or t of the Committee on the Journal was read, stating 
that the Journal for the forty-second day of the Convention had 
been examined and found to be correct, and the same was adopted. 

Upon the call of the roll of delegates for the introduction of 
resolutions, ordinances, etc.— 

Ordinance No. 418, by Mr. Carmichael (Coffee) : 

Ordinance relating to tax rate of the State: 

ordained b >’ the people of Alabama, in Convention as- 


That Section 4 of Article XI 
follows : 


he amended so as to read as 


Sec. 4.—The General Assembly shall not have the power to 
levy m any one year, a greater rate of taxation than fifty-five one- 
hundredths of 1 per centum on the value of the taxable property 

*“ St " e ; pr °Y lded ’ that for the support of the public 
schools of the State and for the purpose of providing pensions for 
ex-Confederate soldiers and sailors, their widows and orphans, or 



2031 


CONSTITUTIONAL CONVENTION, 1901 

for either of these purposes, an additional rate not exceeding twen¬ 
ty one-hundredths of 1 per centum may be levied. 

Referred to the Committee on Taxation. 

MR. GRAYSON I have a petition signed by a large number 
ol persons which I move to be read. 

T he petition was read as follows: 

We the undersigned business men and citizens of the city of 
Huntsville, Madison county, most respectfully petition our dele¬ 
gation to the Constitutional Convention, Hons. R. K. Spragins, 
k. H. \\ alker, A. S. Hetcher and J. W. Grayson, and the members 
of the Constitutional Convention not to enact any law in our Con¬ 
stitution for the collection of a privilege tax, we believing that such 
a tax is unjust. 

The President here resumed the chair. 

Ordinance No. 419, by Mr. Jones of Walker: 

An ordinance to provide for the issuance of bonds, in the event 
of the annexation of any foreign territory to this State by purchase. 

Be it ordained by the people of Alabama, in Convention as¬ 
sembled, that in the event of the annexation of any foreign terri¬ 
tory to this State by purchase, that the General Assembly with 
the approval of the Governor shall be authorized to provide for the 
issuance of State bonds to pay for the purchase of such foreign 
territory, anything in this Constitution to the contrary notwith¬ 
standing. 

Referred to the Committee on Legislative Department. 

MR. JONES (Wilcox)—There is a remote possibility that 
the State, before the adoption of another Constitution, may acquire 
foreign territory by purchase. There is no provision made in the 
report of the Committee on Legislative Department authorizing 
the issuance by the State of the necessary bonds to pay the pur¬ 
chase money for such territory. Section 49 of the report reads as 
follows: “In the event of the annexation of any foreign territory 
to this State, the Legislature shall enact laws extending to the in¬ 
habitants of the acquired territory, all the rights and privileges 
which may be required by the terms of the acquisition, anything in 
this constitution to the contrary notwithstanding. 

The section is a copy of section 51 of the Article on Local 
Legislation in the Constitution of 1875. In fact it is in the Consti¬ 
tutions of 1819, 1861, 1868 and 1875, but in neither of these con¬ 
stitutions is there any provision made to pay for the purchase of 
such foreign territory. The ordinance offered by me, is for the 
purpose of calling the attention of the Committee on Legislative 



20 32 


OFFICIAL PROCEEDINGS 


Department to the omission of such provision in their report. It 
may be that it should be added to their report as a separate section. 
In my opinion, however, it could be added to Section 49. as an 
amendment, but I leave that to the better wisdom of the Com¬ 
mittee. 

MR. VAUGHN—I rise to a question of privilege. 

THE PRESIDENT—The gentleman will state the question 
of privilege. 

MR. VAUGHN—On yesterday I offered a substitute to Sec¬ 
tion 5 of the report of the Committee on Local Legislation, and 
the report has me as saying that under the Constitution of Missis¬ 
sippi, the Legislature can pass laws whereby towns may enact their 
local laws. I said whereby counties could do so. 

Just beneath that, it has me as saying that under the substitute 
offered by myself, the legislature would not have the authority to 
delegate that court, or any other body in the county, the authority 
to enact these local laws. I asked Mr. Pettus the question, and 
that question was this, under the substitute as offered by myself, 
would not the Legislature have authority to delegate to the Com¬ 
missioners Court, or any other body, in the county, the authority 
to enact these local laws. I would like for the reporters to make 
the correction. 

THE PRESIDENT—The stenographers will be requested to 
note the correction. 

MR. SANDERS—I ask leave to introduce a very short reso¬ 
lution. 

The consent was given. 

Resolution No. 240 by Mr. Sanders: 

ResoKed, That the Sergeant-at-Anns be instructed to place 
at least four more fans in this hall. 

MR. SANDERS For the purpose of putting that resolution 
upon its immediate passage, I move the suspension of the rules. 

Upon a vote being taken, the rules were suspended. 

Upon a further vote the resolution was adopted. 

On the call for reports of Committees the clerk read the fol¬ 
lowing report, submitted by Mr. Foster: 

^ our Committee on amending the Constitution respectfully 
report back Ordinance 412 by Mr. Merrill of Barbour, with the 
recommendation that it be adopted by this Convention. 

Respectfully submitted. 



2033 


CONSTITUTIONAL CONVENTION, 1901 
Ordinance No. 412, by Mr. Merrill: 

An ordinance relating to the bonded indebtedness of the 
State— 

Be it ordained by the people of the State of Alabama in Con¬ 
vention assembled. 

1 hat an act of the General Assembly of Alabama, entitled 
An act to consolidate and adjust the bonded debt of the State of 
Alabama, approved February 18, 1895, and an act amendatory 
thereto, entitled an act to amend Section 6 of an act to consolidate 
and adjust the bonded debt of the State of Alabama,” approved 
February 16 , 1895. which said last named act was approved Feb¬ 
ruary 16 , 1899 . Be and the same are hereby made valid. The 
Governor is authorized and empowered to act under the same and 
carry out all the provisions thereof. 

Upon the call of the standing committees, the Committee on 
Education submitted the following report: 

Report of the Committee on Education. 

MR. President: 

The Committee on Education directs me to submit an ordi¬ 
nance to be incorporated in the new Constitution as Article - 

Education. 

A few brief explanations and introductory remarks are neces¬ 
sary to the proper understanding of the work and purposes of the 
Committee. 

Section 1. This section has been changed by striking out the 
word “equal” as a basis of apportionment and substituting in sub¬ 
stance and fact the provision for a free school term of equal length 
as the basis of division of the school fund in the respective town¬ 
ships and districts; but leaves the apportionment to the several 
counties according to the number of school children therein. The 
latter plan is not a change. 

Sections 2 and 3 remain unchanged. 

Section 4 presents a change in detail, but not in effect. It 
provides that all poll taxes shall be applied to the public schools 
in the counties where levied and collected, but leaves the regula¬ 
tion thereof as to amount and those subject to such tax to the Ar¬ 
ticle on Taxation and Suffrage. 

Section 5 presents apparently the greatest change, yet in fact 
is largely a change in method only. 

The object of the Committee was and is merely to guarantee 
as nearly as possible the present State school fund as the minimum 
constitutional fund. 



2034 


OFFICIAL PROCEEDINGS 


The Sixteenth Section interest, and the surplus revenue funds 
are trust funds and must remain unchanged; hence the first part 
of the old Section 5 remains unchanged. 

The present State appropriation proper is $550,000 and to this 
is added the special 1 mill tax, which for the year 1900 has yielded 
to this date $256,117.50 as shown hy the Auditor’s hooks; and a 
reliable estimate from this office shows that, notwithstanding the 
total assessment of $266,893,288 for the war l‘XX), the 1 miil tax 
will not exceed $257,000. This being true, the total fund available 
for the scholastic year ending next September, exclusive of poll tax 
and trust fund interest will be $550,000 plus 1 mill tax. $257,0<X) or 
$807,000. 

In lieu of this annual appropriation and 1 mill tax, the Com¬ 
mittee has substituted an annual 3 mill tax, or 30 cents on each 
hundred dollars. A 3 mill tax on the assessed valuation of last 
year would yield $771,000 as an annual fund, which would he $36.- 
000 less than the fund for the present year. If the State should 
prosper and the assessment for 1901 should reach $280.000.tXX), a 
3 mill tax would yield $806,400 as a -chool fund, because otdv about 
96 per cent of the total is collected. It will therefore, he readily 
observed that, the 3 mill plan would approximately furnish the 
same revenue year in and year out. that we now have from the 
general appropriation, and the 1 mill tax. The superior merit of 
this plan is that it fixes the school fund permanently, and does not 
leave it to the general assembly as a matter of contention at everv 
session. It is a sliding scale. If the State prospers and assess¬ 
ments increase, the schools get a larger fund. If values decrease, 
then the schools share as they should, the adverse conditions. 

The present system of general biennial appropriations, supple¬ 
mented by the 1 mill special tax, gives rise to endless trouble in 
bookkeeping and estimates of the fund, and to efforts and alarm 
upon the part of true friends of education less the appropriation 
may be decreased and the school term shortened. 

The Auditor in his report for 1899 recommends that the plan 
of this Committee be adopted, though at a different rate. 

Section 6 remains unchanged. 

Section 7 remains unchanged except that the term of office 
and mode of election are left out for the reason that the Executive 
Article has already provided for these things. 

Section 8 and 9 remain unchanged. 

Section 10 remain unchanged except that the Institutions for 
the Deaf and Blind at Talladega and the Alabama Girls’ Indus¬ 
trial School at Montevallo are State Educational Institutions that 
should properly be included therein, and it is so done. 




CONSTITUTIONAL CONVENTION. 1901 


2035 


Section II is a new section which provides for taking a school 
census not oftener than once in two years, and throwing proper 
.safe guards around the same. This it seems would readily com¬ 
mand the appreciation and approval of the Convention. 

Section 12. This is a new section which is a modification of 
an amendment offered to the Article on Taxation by the Chairman 
of the Committee. It provides for a 1 mill local tax, with the coun¬ 
ty as a unit, to be voted in the respective counties by 60 per cent 
of the qualified electors voting at such election. This provision 
has been favorably reported because of its merits and in view of 
the reduction of the State limit of taxation to 65 cents. Under it, 
the State and county rate combined can never exceed $1.25 per 
hundred, and it is local self-government in behalf of better schools. 

Section 13 is Section 11 of the present Constitution and is in¬ 
corporated herein without change. 

There are some minority views which will either he attached 
to this report, or expressed upon the floor of the Convention at the 
proper time, the gentlemen in the minority having reserved this 
privilege. 

All ordinances and resolutions are herewith returned, the same 
having had careful consideration by the Committee. They are of 
the opinion that any further matters than those reported in this 
Article should be left to the General Assembly. 

Joseph B. Graham, Chairman. 

ARTICLE-. 

Education. 

Section 1. The General Assembly shall establish, organize 
and maintain a liberal system of public schools throughout the 
State for the benefit of the children thereof between the ages of 
7 and 21 years. The public school fund shall be apportioned to 
the several counties in proportion to the number of school children 
of school age therein, and shall be so apportioned to the schools in 
the districts or townships in the county as to provide, as nearly as 
practicable, school terms of equal duration in such school districts 
or townships. Separate schools shall be provided for white and 
colored children, and no child of either race shall be permitted to 
attend a school of the other race. 

Sec. 2. The principal of all funds arising from the sale or 
other disposition of lands or other property, which has been or 
may hereafter be granted or entrusted to this State or given by 
the United States for educational purposes, shall be preserved in¬ 
violate and undiminished; and the income arising therefrom shall 
be faithfully applied to the specific object of the original grants 
or appropriations. 



2036 


OFFICIAI, PROCKKi)IN(S 


Sec. 3. All lands or other property given by individuals, or 
appropriated by the State for educational purposes, and all estates 
of deceased persons, who die without leaving a will or heir, shall 
be faithfully applied to the maintenance of the public schools. 

Sec. 4. All poll taxes levied and collected in this State shall 
be applied to the support of the public schools in the respective 
counties where levied and collected. 

Sec. 5. The income arising from the Sixteenth Section Trust 
Fund, the Surplus Revenue Fund, until it is called for by the United 
States Government, and the funds enumerated in Sections 3 and 4 
of this Article, together with the special annual tax of 30 cents oij 
each one hundred dollars of taxable property in this State, shall be 
applied to the support and maintenance of the public schools, and it 
shall be the duty of the General Assembly to increase, from time to 
time, tlie public school fund as the necessity therefor and the con¬ 
dition of the treasury and the resources of the State may jitstifv. 
Provided, that nothing herein contained shall be so construed as to 
authorize the General Assembly to levy in any one year a greater 
rate of taxation than 65 cents on each one hundred dollars' worth 
of taxable property. 

Sec. 6. Not more than 4 per cent of all moneys raised, or 
which may hereafter be appropriated for the support of public 
schools, shall be used or expended otherwise than for the payment 
of teachers employed in such schools; provided, that the General 
Assembly may, by a vote of two-thirds of each House, suspend the 
operation of this section. 

Sec. 7. The supervision of the public schools shall be vested 
in a Superintendent of Education, whose powers, duties and com- 
pensation shall be fixed by law. 

Sec. 8. No money raised for the support of the public schools 
of the State shall be appropriated to or used for the support of 
any sectarian or denominational schools. 

Sec. 9. The State University and the Agricultural and Me¬ 
chanical College (now called the Alabama Polytechnic Institute), 
shall each be under the management and control of a Board of 
Trustees. The Board for the University shall consist of two mem¬ 
bers from the Congressional district in which the University is 
located, and one from each of the other Congressional districts 
in the State. The Board for the Agricultural and Mechanical Col¬ 
lege shall consist of two members from the Congressional district 
in which the college is located and one from each of the other Con¬ 
gressional districts in the State; said trustees shall he appointed 
by the Governor by and with the advice and consent of the Sen¬ 
ate, and shall hold office for a term of six years and until their 



CONSTITUTIONAL CONVENTION, 1901 


2037 


successors shall be appointed and qualified. After the first ap¬ 
pointment each Board shall be divided into three classes, as nearly 
equal as may be. The seats of the first class shall be vacated at 
the expiration of two years, and those of the second class in four 
years, and those of the third class at the end of six years from the 
date.of appointment, so that one-third many be chosen biennially. 
No trustee shall receive any pay or emolument other than his ac¬ 
tual expenses incurred in the discharge of his duties as such. The 
Governor shall be ex officio President, and the Superintendent of 
Education ex oflicio a member of each of said Boards of Trustees. 

Sec. 10. The General Assembly shall have no power to change 
the location of the State University or the Agricultural and Me¬ 
chanical College, or the Institutions for Deaf and Blind, or the 
Alabama Girls’ Industrial School, as now established by law, ex¬ 
cept upon a vote of two-thirds of the General Assembly, taken by 
yeas and nays and entered upon the journals. 

Sec. 11. I he General Assembly shall pro\ ide for taking a 
school census by townships and districts throughout the State not 
oftener than once in two years, and shall provide for the punish- 
ment of all persons or officers making false and fraudulent enum¬ 
erations and returns; provided, the State Superintendent may or¬ 
der and supervise the making of a new census in any township, 
district or county, whenever he may have reasonable cause to be¬ 
lieve that false or fraudulent returns have been made. 

Sec. 12. The several counties in this State shall have power 
to levy and collect a special tax, not exceeding 10 cents on each 
hundred of taxable property in such counties, for the support of 
public schools; provided, that the rate of such tax, the time it is 
to continue, and the purpose thereof, shall have been first submit¬ 
ted to a vote of the qualified electors of the county and voted for 
by three-fifths of those voting at such elections ; but the rate of 
such special tax shall not increase the rate of taxation, State and 
county combined, in any year, more than $1.25 on each hundred 
dollars of taxable property; excluding, however, all special coun¬ 
ty taxes for public buildings, roads, bridges and payment of debts 
existing at the ratification of the Constitution of 1875; provided, 
that such funds so raised shall be so apportioned and paid through 
the proper school officials to the several schools in the townships 
and districts in said county, that the school terms of the respective 
school shall be extended by such supplement as nearly the same 
length of time as practicable. 

The General Assembly shall provide for carrying the pro¬ 
visions of this section into effect. 

Sec. 13. The provisions of this Article and of any act of the 
General Assembly passed in pursuance thereof to establish, or¬ 
ganize and maintain a system of public schools throughout the 



2038 


OFFICIAL PROCEEDINGS 


State, shall apply to Mobile County only so far as to authorize 
and require the authorities designated by law to draw the por¬ 
tions of the funds to which said county shall be entitled for school 
purposes, and to make reports to the Superintendent of Education 
as may be prescribed by law. And all special incomes and powers 
of taxation, as now authorized by law for the benefit of public 
schools in said count}' shall remain undisturbed until otherwise 
provided by the General Assembly; provided, that separate schools 
for each race shall always be maintained by said school authorities. 


Minority report of the Committee on Education: 

Mr. President, the undersigned minority of your Committee 
on Education, does not concur in that part of the report embraced 
in Section 9 in reference to the University of Alabama. 

While this institution has done great service for the State 
under existing conditions, it is the opinion of the minority that 
the usefulness of the University will be enhanced bv providing that 

?,°? r r r Sh , al ! not , h * a member of the Board of Trustees, 
and that the said board be authorized to elect its own presiding 
omcer. It seems in line with a true and broad policy that the an 

P? in , tin ^ P 0 jer should not be a member, nor ex officio president 
of the board appointed. 1 ’ 

_ No recommendation is made by this minority in regard to 
other State institutions for the reason that they have exoresslv 
petitioned that no change be made in their management * 

Your minority does not think that the fact that other instit.,- 
tions are satisfied with the existing conditions should deter the 
University from taking a progressive step. The State University 
is nx a class by itself, and the fact that the Governor is ex officio 
a member of the Board of Trustees of the Alabama Polytechnic 
Institute or of the Board of Trustees of certain agricultural <co 

fcrSst sho " M be a raen,b " ° f t,K 

Therefore, the undersigned minority of vour Committee on Fd 

the words “each of said hoards of trus- 

f £ rf/h hen f t *h h ereof P , 0 h‘ % Krall 

Trustees of the Alabama Polytechnic Institute vv, c a [ d 
en, of Education shall be J offiSo 

Pres S id e e'„ S t° Ln ' VerS " y; ‘he said Board shall elect its own 
A p < ' Sl§rne< Tv o r D P f ttus ’ j° hn T - Ashcraft,, P. W. Hodges Tohn 

o A , ,h: g Co S m° i,te B :' h Ed e „c J S„ N ' »“■> Opp.M 



CONSTITUTIONAL CONVENTION. 1901 2039 

Minority report: 

Mr. 1 resident, the undersigned, members of the Committee 
on Education, regret that they are unable to agree with the ma¬ 
jority on the provisions of Section 12 of the article on Education, 
and beg lea\e to submit a minority report proposing a substitute 
for said Section 12. 

I his section as reported by the majority of the committee pro¬ 
vides for the levy by the county of a one mill tax for schools. The 
majority claim this is local self-government in behalf of better 
schools. I he leading educators of this state agree that the cause 
of education would be greatly accentuated by a wise plan of local 
assessments for schools because of the local initiative and pride 
produced by a direct contribution by a community to its schools. 
Local assessments contribute to the interest in the schools as well 
as to its funds, hducators recognize the former as the more valu¬ 
able contribution. The plan proposed by the committee has none 
of the advantages of local assessments. 

The minority believe that both local and race initiative should 
he encouraged. The plan proposed by them has these two ends 
in view. They are aware that some persons have urged consti¬ 
tutional objections against the right of each race to contribute 
something to its own schools independently of the other race, but 
they do not believe these objections are well taken. In the Cum¬ 
mings law (175 U. S. p 528), the Supreme Court said “while all 
admit that the benefits and burdens of public taxation must be 
shared by citizens without discrimination against any. class on ac¬ 
count of race, the education of the people maintained by State 
taxation is a matter belonging to the respective States, and any 
interference on the part of Federal authority with the management 
of such schools can not be justified except in the case of a clear and 
unmistakable disregard of the rights secured by the supreme law 
of the land.” 

The court was considering an application for “an injunction 
that would only impair the efficiency of the High school, provided 
for the white children, or compel the board to close it.” The court 
said : “If that were done, the result would only be to take from 
white children educational privileges enjoyed by them without 
giving to colored children additional opportunities for the educa¬ 
tion furnished in High schools.” The colored school children of 
the county would not be advanced in the matter of their educa¬ 
tion by a decree compelling the defendant board to cease giving 
support to a High school for white children,” and the injunction 
was denied. 

In the Owensboro case (1 Federal Reporter, 297), the CQurt 
held that the city of Owensboro did not have the right to impose 
taxes upon all the citizens of the city of Owensboro “without re- 



2040 


OFFICIAL PROCEEDINGS 


ward to their willingness or unwillingness to be taxed, and then 
distribute the proceeds between the races on an unfair and unequal 
classification or basis.” Here the governmental agency was ex¬ 
ercising its power to tax all persons alike and its power to dis¬ 
tribute one wav for the white people and another way for the col¬ 
ored people the court held that this did not give to all persons 
within the jurisdiction of the city of Owensboro the equal protec¬ 
tion of the laws and was violative of the Fourteenth amendment. 

In the Puitt case (94 N. C. 709), the court held that the Sta¬ 
tutes of the State of North Carolina, which provided that white 
voters in a township might vote to levy a special assessment upon 
property belonging to white persons for school purposes was vio¬ 
lative of two provisions of the Constitution of that State. One pro¬ 
viding that all tax should be uniform and the other providing 
that there should be no discrimination in favor of or to the preju¬ 
dice of either race. The court refused to inquire into the consist¬ 
ency of the statute with the recent amendments to the Constitu¬ 
tion of the United States, but the court added: “It is not every 
distinction dependent upon race, or color, that comes in conflict 
with the Federal Constitution, but only when it produces inequali¬ 
ty of rights or interests ; and when this is the result the State leg¬ 
islation from which it flows is rendered inoperative. When the 
case essential privileges are secured to all, such legislation is 
valid and rests in the"sound discretion and views of public policy 
of those who make the laws.” One of the justices declined to ad¬ 
mit that the plan of local assessment referred to was violative, 
even of the strong provisions of the State constitution. He says: 
“I am of opinion, that the statute authorizes in effect a local as¬ 
sessment and does not prescribe a public tax, in the sense of the 
Constitution, and that local assessments are not necessarily con¬ 
fined to particular real property to be affected by them favorably 
in contemplation of law. 

It is universally conceded that the State may by its Consti¬ 
tution provide for separate schools for white and colored children 
without violating the Federal Constitution. If separate schools 
may be maintained certainly separate districts may be organized 
for the patronage of such schools. 

The section proposed by the minority proposes that white 
school districts may be laid out to the greatest advantage of the 
white people and that colored school districts may be laid out to 
the greatest advantage of the colored people. 

It is provided by Section 1 of the article that the general 
school funds shall be so apportioned as to maintain equal school 
terms in these districts. So far it will be admitted that all receive 
the equal protection of the laws. The substitute further proposes 
to permit each school district to impose upon itself a local assess¬ 
ment the better to carry out the purpose for which the district 



CONSTITUTIONAL CONVENTION, 1901 


2041 


was organized. In this right the colored districts and the white 
districts are equally protected. Each district is guaranteed from 
the general school funds reasonable school terms. If the mem¬ 
bers of one district see fit to impose on themselves a special as¬ 
sessment how can it be said that the other, which has the same 
right, is denied the equal protection of the laws. It is said that 
one district owns more property than another, the same may be 
said about the different counties under the plan proposed by the 
majority. The white race being given an opportunity to do some¬ 
thing for itself as a race will no longer be irritated by the dispro¬ 
portionate share which they contribute to and receive from the 
general fund. The negro being given the opportunity to do some¬ 
thing as a race will no longer be in the position of an absolute 
mendicant, and will have the opportunity of showing himself 
worthy of the large share he receives from the general fund. He 
will have the opportunity of cultivating self-respect and self-re¬ 
liance. Race pride and race fraternity will take the place of that 
suspicious envy which now manifests itself in the commission of 
those crimes which shock humanity. 

The primarv purpose of this Convention was to establish a 
more just relation between the two races and the State, and so to 
insure domestic tranquility and prosperity. 

The divorcement of the white and colored school systems 
stand side by side in importance with the proper suffrage regula¬ 
tion. 

John T. Ashcraft, 

Erie Pettus, 


P. W. Hodges, 

Henry Opp. 

Substitute proposed by minority for Section 12 of majority 
report of the Committee on Education. 

1? It shall be the duty of the County Superintendent of Ed¬ 
ucation or other school officer in each county by and with the 
advice and consent of the Court of County Commissioners, or 
body of like jurisdiction, to organize the white people: of the coun¬ 
ty into white school districts, according to then respective neeas 
and advantages without reference to each other as to teirito a 
bol^Hes Provided no incorporated town or• c.|y —« 
a svstem of public schools as provided by law, shall be separated 
Lo di"tnctswithout the consent of the Mayor and Board of Al- 
dermen of such town or city. 

For the purpose of 

& federal, Sfate, county, 



2042 


OFFICIAL PROCEEDINGS 


municipal and other sources, the Court of County Commissioners, 
or body of like jurisdiction shall, as hereafter provided, levy a 
special assessment of not more than one-fourth of one per centum 
in any one year upon the property of the white persons situated 
in a white district, or, upon the property of colored persons sit¬ 
uated in a colored district; provided, no such levy shall be made 
except upon the request of three-fifths of the voters voting- at an 
election held for that purpose and residing in the district. At such 
election in a white school district only qualified white electors 
shall be permitted to vote, and in colored districts only qualified 
colored electors shall be permitted to vote. It shall be the duty of 
the Probate Judge to order such election in any district upon the 
petition of not less than one-fourth of the voters who will be en¬ 
titled to vote at such election. The order for such election shall 
state the purpose for which it is proposed to make the assessment, 
the rate of the proposed assessment and the number of years dur¬ 
ing which such assessment is proposed to be made. Notice of 
such election shall be given and the election held in such manner 
as may be provided by law for such special elections. No propo¬ 
sition shall be made at any such election to levy such special es- 
sessment during a period of more than four years. 


When any property belonging to a corporation is situated in 
ci white school district where a special assessment is to he made 
as herein provided such assessment shall be levied upon such pro- 
portion of the value of such property as the number of white 

p-11 of f sc t°° a ? e in the c o«nty bears to the whole number of 
children of school age in the county. When such property is sit- 
uated m a colored school district where such assessment is made, 
-t shall be levied upon such proportion of the value thereof as the 
number of colored children of school age in the county bears to 
the whole number of children of school age in the county 


John T. Ashcraft, 
Erie Pettus, 

B. W. Hodges, 
Henry Opp. 


PRESIDENT PRO TEM (Rogers)-The 
mittee on Education will be printed and taken 
unless otherwise directed by the Convention. 


report of the Com- 
up in regular order 


ed w'l GRAHA ^ (Talladega)—I move that the report be print¬ 
ed and lay upon the table and be taken up in the order in which it 
has been reported and be considered by the Convention 

THE PRESIDENT PRO TEM-Such will be the order. 

in SHCRAFT—In reading the article the word “dollars” 

in the I2 th Section of the Article was omitted, if it is not in there 
it ought to be corrected. 



CONSTITUTIONAL CONVENTION, 1901 


2043 


The clerk read the 
appear. 


section again and the word dollars did not 


A ^HCRAFT—I ask unani nious consent to have it cor¬ 
rected by inserting the word “dollars.” 


Unanimous consent was accorded and the correction made. 

MR. JACKSON (Lee)—I rise to a question of personal in¬ 
quiry. 1 would like to know if the minority are offering their 
amendments now? 


J KESI DRN J PRO TRM—The minority is offering a 
substitute for Section 12 of the report which has just been read. 

MK. JACKSON I would like to know if they have a right 
to do that now on the first reading. 

IHL PRESIDRN 1 PRO TRM—The minority report is con¬ 
nected \\ ith the majority report as is always the case. 

PKhSIDLN f PRO 1 LM—The report will take its regular 
course unless the Convention orders otherwise. 

I he Convention then proceeded with the regular order of busi¬ 
ness, and after the conclusion of the call of Committees: 


PRESIDENT PRO TRM—The next order is unfinished busi¬ 
ness. The question is on the amendment to Section 5 of the report 
of the Committee on Local Legislation. 

MR. HINSON—I wish to offer an amendment. 


THE CHAIR—There is an amendment pending. 

MR. HINSON—I offer my amendment to that amendment. 

MR. FOSTER—The amendment, I think was withdrawn. 

MR. HINSON—There was an amendment by the Chairman 
of the Committee on Legislation, and there was an amendment to 
that amendment by the gentleman from Dallas, and the gentleman 
from Dallas by unanimous consent withdrew his amendment. 

MR. O'NEAL—I have a substitute for the entire section. 


MR. OATES'—The gentleman is quite correct. I had, for the 
Committee on Legislative Department, submitted the Section found 
in the present Constitution and on yesterday afternoon explained 
it, and the gentleman from Lauderdale had the floor speaking 
against it, and at the time of adjournment I had been recognized 
for the purpose of propounding a question to him, but the clock 
struck the hour of adjournment and we quit at just that point. I 
did not get the opportunity to propound the question. 

THE PRESIDENT—The Chair so understands. 



2044 


OFFICIAL PROCEEDINGS 


MR. HINSON—My amendment has already been sent up. 1 
have been recognized by the Chair, and the substitute offered by 
the gentleman from Lauderdale is out of order. 

PRESIDENT PRO TEM—I will state to the gentleman that 
the substitute has not been accepted, it lias not been read or an¬ 
nounced. 

MR. HINSON—I had the floor for the purpose of introducing 
my amendment, and claim it is in order to read by amendment. 

PRESIDENT PRO TEM—The point of order is not well 
taken. 

MR. O'NEAL—I had the floor at the time of adjournment. 

PRESIDENT PRO TEM—The Chair will state that he had 
recognized the gentleman from Lauderdale, that is why he decided 
the gentleman from Lowndes was out of order. 

MR. O'NEAL—I desire to have the substitute read for Sec¬ 
tion 5 and pending amendments. 

The Secretary read the substitute as follows: “The General 
Assembly may by general law confer upon courts of County Com¬ 
missioners, Hoards of Revenue or other courts, or upon such other 
tribunals in each county, as may be created by the General Assem¬ 
bly, such powers of local legislation and administration touching 
such matters and things which are not provided by general law. 
and are not inconsistent with the provisions of this Constitution, 
as the General Assembly may from time to time deem expedient." 

MR. O'NEAL—Mr. President, the purpose of that amend¬ 
ment, or substitute, was not to confine the legislature to vesting 
legislative powers entirely in Courts of County Commissioners. 
Boards of Revenue or other courts of like jurisdiction. It author¬ 
izes the legislature to create in any county in the State such a 
tribunal as the necessities in that county may require, upon which 
can be vested such legislative powers as may be expedient. Now 
there may be counties in this State that are unwilling to confer 
upon the Commissioner's Court any such legislative powers. The 
purpose of that substitute is to authorize— 

MR. FOSTER—I would like to hear that substitute read. 

The Clerk again read the substitute. 

MR. O'NEAL—I desire to state that the only change made 
in the original section is by adding the words “or such other 
tribunals in each county as the General Assembly may create," 
and changing the other words in the Section which say : “Touching 
all such matters and things not provided by general laAv." The 
idea being not to require the legislature to confer upon such tribu¬ 
nal legislative power as to all matters not provided for by general 



CONSTITUTIONAL CONVENTION, 1901 2045 

law, but such matters not provided by general law as they might 
deem proper, 

MR. C()RR-~ Is it necessary to ])Ut that in the Constitution 
in order to give the legislature that power Haven’t they that power 
without this in the Constitution? 

MR O’NLAL—I do not think so under the authorities which 
I read yesterday evening Cooley on Constitutional Limitation, and 
other decisions, that the* legislature could confer power upon any 
other tribunal, without a provision in the fundamental law to that 
eiteet. The doctrine Laid down in Cooley on Constitutional Limi¬ 
tation:*. was that the legislature could not vest its legislative power 
in any other tribunal, and the legislature of New York, realizing 
that dillicultv did provide in their Constitution a provision similar 
to this. Now we are not wedded especially to the idea of con¬ 
ferring thL power upon the courts of County Commissioners. 
'There is force in the argument that in some counties it might be 
dangerous on account of the character of the courts, hence we 
provide that the legislature can, whenever necessity arises, create 
in any county in the State, a special tribunal in which they might 
vest any matters of local legislation—that they think expedient. 
'This don’t require the legislature to do it, but simply gives them a 
power if in the future a contingency of that sort should arise. In 
my judgment a (ieneral Assembly can provide by general law for 
most of these matters, still we cannot foresee what the future may 
bring forth, what we want to do is to provide for a contingency 
that may arbe. 

MR. WKATUKRLY (Jefferson) — I desire to ask if the sub¬ 
stitute uses the words “or other courts.''” 

MR. ( )’XKAL -ft docs. 

MR. WKATHKRLY—I think it might read better, since you 
have put in the word “tribunal” to strike out those words “or other 
courts” and let the word “tribunal” stand. 

MR. O’XKAL -The reason that was left there was it might 
he expedient to give it to the Probate judges in some counties. 

MR. \YKATHKRLY—Rut really the Hoards of Revenue and 
Countv Commissioners are only quasi courts, it is a legislative 
tribunal. 

MR. ( TNKAL—I believe the suggestion of the gentleman from 
Jefferson is wise, and I ask unanimous consent to strike out the 
words “or other courts” in the substitute. 

There being no objection the words were stricken from the sub¬ 
stitute. 



2046 


OFFICIAL PROCEEDINGS 


MR. SMITH (Mobile)—I have been requested by Judge Cole¬ 
man of Greene, who is now absent, to offer an amendment to the 
amendment to the Section. 

MR. PETTUS—I rise to a point of order. There are two 
amendments and a substitute pending and the amendment offered 
by the gentleman from Mobile is not in order at this time. 

PRESIDENT PRO TEM—The understanding of the Chair 
is that the amendment is in order, or the amendment to the sub¬ 
stitute. This is the substitute offered by the Committee to its re¬ 
port and there being but one substitute the amendment of the gen¬ 
tleman from Mobile is in order. 

MR. PETTUS—There is a misapprehension about the number 
of amendments pending if the Chair has stated the number of 
amendments correctly. 

THE PRESIDENT PRO TEM—The Chair is informed by 
the Clerk that there are two amendments, therefore the amend¬ 
ment offered by the gentleman from Mobile is not in order. 

MR. SENTELL—I believe the question before the Conven¬ 
tion is the amendment offered by the gentleman from Lauderdale, 
is it not? 

THE PRESIDENT PRO TEM—That is the question before 
the House, the substitute for the amendment of the gentleman from 
Lauderdale. 

MR. SENTELL—I rise to discuss the question. It seems to 
me that the question of local legislation as viewed in the report of 
the Committee is not exactly the proper thing. I think it would 
be very unwise. If it is the purpose to confer upon Commissioner’s 
Courts or other courts of like jurisdiction the power to legislate, 
I think it would be unwise. It seems to me that the amendment 
offered by the gentleman from Montgomery, that is substantially 
the same as in the present Constitution, covers the question, and is 
all that we need on this line. Now then, if the purpose of that is 
simply to permit Commissioners’ Courts and other courts of like 
jurisdiction to put into effect general laws already passed on the 
subject, why then it might be all right. Now we know that under 
the law as it is at present in this State, any town may incorporate 
itself under a general law by making application to the Probate 
Court, and in many counties any district or section may provide 
for a stock law district by making proper application to the Com¬ 
missioners’ Court, and it seems to me, Mr. President, that all that 
we want is to have a general law that provides for the proper courts 
to put into effect, this general law whenever it is desirable, and it 
seems to me that a general law might be passed that would cover 
every Section of local legislation that is presented by this Article. 
For instance, if it is desired to provide a separate school district a 



CONSTITUTIONAL CONVENTION, 1901 


2047 


general law may provide that the Commissioners’ Court may lay 
off separate school districts under limitations and restrictions that 
would be perfectly satisfactory, and the same would be true of 
every other section or a kind of local legislation that is prohibited 
by Legislature, but I think it would be very unwise and very un¬ 
safe if the purpose of this Section is to give to Commissioners’ 
Courts power to legislate, because I do not think they ought to 
have that power. Now I think the amendment of the gentleman 
from Montgomery on yesterday evening covers the subject entire¬ 
ly, and is sufficient to give to the courts all the power that is neces¬ 
sary, and I shall oppose the report offered and the substitute of¬ 
fered by the Committee, using the words “the power to legislate” 
because I think that is a dangerous power to give to these minor 
tribunals. Now we know as a matter of fact that many Commis¬ 
sioner’s Courts are very wise, and are good, conservative men, 
but it often happens that they are the contrary and do not know 
anything about legislation, and it would create a good deal of dis¬ 
turbance in the county and be the cause of a good deal of dissatis¬ 
faction if such a thing were adopted. 

MR. PKTTUS—I desire to ask the gentleman a question: 
He says he does not believe the Commissioners’ Courts ought to 
legislate. Does he not know that it has been held by the Supreme 
Court that the Commissioners' Courts are quasi legislative bodies, 
and don’t they legislate in levying taxes, appropriating money, 
opening roads and other local questions? 

MR. SENTELL—I do not think that is legislation. They 
only do these things under the provisions of a general law that 
restricts and limits them, as I think is proper. 

MR. PETTUS—I would like to ask the gentleman further 
in respect if the legislature delegates powers of local legislation 
as proposed under this substitute would not they come then under 
the general law to restrict and keep them in proper limits? 

MR. SENTELL—If such were the case it would be all right, 
but I think it very unwise to put the word in there to delegate to 
them the power to legislate. 

PRESIDENT PRO TEM—The question is upon the substi¬ 
tute offered by the gentleman from Lauderdale, is the Convention 
ready for the question? 

MR. deGRAFFENREID—I would like to hear the reading 
of the substitute. 

MR. O’NEAL—I ask unanimous consent to add a proviso to 
the substitute to be considered as a part of the substitute. 

MR. BULGER—We would like to hear the proviso before we 
give the consent. 



2048 


OFFICIAL PKOCKKDINOS 


The Clerk read the proviso as follows : “Provided, such courts 
or tribunals shall not be authorized to exercise such powers of local 
legislation except during a term thereof held exclusively for that 
purpose, and that such term shall not be extended beyond thirty 
days, and shall not be held more than once in two years, but 
special terms of such court for such purpose of not more than 
three days duration may be authorized to be called at any time 
by the fudge of Probate when necessary to consider one or more 
special subjects of local legislation; and provided further, that the 
General Assemble may abolish such courts or other tribunals, and 
establish other courts or bodies with like and other powers in lieu 
thereof, when in the discretion of the General Assemble it mav be 
deemed to be for the best interest of any county. 

MR. deORA K EENEEI1) 1 ask that the .substitute itself be 

read. 

The Clerk again read the substitute. 

PRESIDENT PRO TEM — Unanimous consent is asked to 
add this proviso to the substitute of the gentleman from Lauder¬ 
dale. The Chair hears no objection and the proviso will be added. 

AIR. OATES—I desire to consume a few minutes in opposition 
to the proposed substitute. It is in brief, this: Not only to confer 
upon the legislature power to provide for the doing— 

THE PRKSIDKNT PRO TEM—The house will please be in 
order. 

MR. OATES—In conferring or attempting to confer by this 
substitute power upon Boards of Count)' Commissioners and others, 
powers of legislation, it proceeds to direct them how they can 
exercise these powers, and then the proviso is that if the scheme 
which it adopts does not work well that the legislature may change 
it and try another way. Now gentlemen of this Convention, there 
is no use of launching out into that kind of speculation and it has 
no proper place in the Constitution of the State. It is untried, it 
is entirely speculative, and there is no necessity for it. Then isn’t 
it safer and wiser to follow the beaten path in which we have 
moved and our legislature acted in the past than to launch out 
upon a new scheme of this kind. Why, sir, it may be said, and 
doubtless will be thought by some of the delegates, that the legis¬ 
lature under this amendment which I offer and which is found in 
the present Constitution have not enacted general laws for the 
doing of all these things which by the 30 or 31 provisions they 
cannot do after this Constitution is adopted, for the reason, not 
of the incapacity of the legislature to provide, but because these 
inhibitions have not existed hitherto, if they had, who has any 
doubt that our legislative bodies would have been equal to the 
task. Every delegate here knows that bills of this character would 
go to the Committee on Judiciary of the two Houses, composed 



CONSTITUTIONAL CONVENTION. 1901 


2049 


in the main of lawyers, as able as the lawyers who largely compose 
this body. Shall we assume that they are incapable? What right 
have we to do so? They are such men as have been sent here by 
the people, and I presume that they are capable of enacting general 
laws. So far, sir, if we examine into the code and subsequent acts, 
we find that they have already provided several general laws for 
the doing of these things, which the legislature under the present 
Constitution had abstained from enacting in special statutes. '1 he 
probate judge or probate court has jurisdiction of many, the court 
of chancery has jurisdiction, the circuit court has jurisdiction in 
some cases. Will you undertake to say by your action that the 
Committee on Judiciary of the House of Representatives and the 
Senate are incapable of extending those laws and providing ably 
and wisely for all these things which cannot be accomplished by 
direct local legislation to be done. Why, it is not wise to confer 
such extensive powers upon the Commissioners’ Court, composed 
in the main of good men, but men as a rule not experienced at all 
in the matters of that kind, and we get up more confusion, more 
trouble, infinitely more than results now from local legislation. 
Now, sir, the legislature or General Assembly, whichever it may 
be called, I prefer to call it legislature because it is one word, and 
everybody nearly uses it, it is common sense—the legislature is 
capable of dealing with the question. They can provide general 
laws under which all these things can be done and should they 
fail to do so—they may not act the first session; some things may 
be overlooked; they may fail to agree on some, but the other pro¬ 
visions which have been adopted, and which I presume will be, 
do not deprive the people entitled to special relief from local legis¬ 
lation, where no general law has been passed. It should not, and 
there is nothing we cannot argue from any standpoint in reason 
that the Legislature is incapable of dealing with it. Now the 
amendment that I offer is plain and simple, no complication about 
it. Whenever you launch out and undertake to say how they shall 
do this, deal with this or that thing, unless you specify everything 
which the foregoing provision that has been passed on. and adopted, 
prohibiting and denying the Legislature the right to do it, you get 
up inextricable confusion, room for doubt, litigation and trouble. 
Now listen carefully at this: “The Legislature shall pass general 
law's,” not that they may, but that they shall pass general law's, 
under which local and private interests shall be provided for and 
protected. What farther do you w'ant to go? You give them 
ample power and leave it to them to do it, but gentlemen support¬ 
ing this proposition put in as a substitute for the section and pend¬ 
ing amendment, not only undertake to confer the power, but they 
have undertaken to tell the Legislature how to do it, and with 
another provision if it don’t work they can undo it and try another 
scheme. That should have no place in the Constitution. Here is 
a simple declaration that confers all the pou r er you wish to give 
the Legislature or General Assembly, which ever you may call it, 



2050 


O F FI CIA L PROC H F1) i X 0 S 


and every gentleman can feel a guarantee that it will he properly 
attended to just as much and effectually as that body attends to 
other matters committed to it, and I hope the substitute will be 
voted down and this simple proposition adopted. 

MR. BULOER—It seems to me that this Convention is going 
as far wrong with their limitation on the legislative power of this 
State, as the Legislatures in the past have gone wrong in enacting 
local laws. Now the proposition in Section 5 is to transfer from 
the representatives of the people in the General Assembly, from 
all parts of the State, the power to legislate, hack to the separate 
counties by their Commissioners’ Courts or Boards of Revenue. 
Now, I understand the purpose of the committee in reporting thi> 
section is to simplify the local laws in this State and to make Un¬ 
laws easier to find and easier to understand, and to curtail the ex¬ 
penses upon the people of enacting local laws and to make the 
laws better and more wholesome to the people of the State. I 
submit, sir, this section, if adopted, will do neither; hut will have 
quite a contrary effect in this State. It will not make the laws 
evidently any better or safer, because no gentleman on this floor 
will contend that his Commissioners’ Court at home is more capa¬ 
ble of legislating for the people of his county than the General 
Assembly of Alabama, composed of 100 select men. hi addition 
to that, they have a check upon them of thirty-three men in the 
Senate; and, in addition to that, they have the great safeguard of 
the veto power of the Executive of this State. I am one that doe> 
not believe the Commissioners’ Court is more capable of making 
laws for a county than this legislative body in Alabama. There¬ 
fore, I cannot believe that the laws would be better made. Now. 
Mr. President, will they be easier to find or easier to understand? 

I submit if the laws are put into one hook, though it be as large 
as the largest book written, they are easier found and easier un¬ 
derstood than if they are enacted in all the counties in Alabama 
and scattered all over the State, so no man might find them, and 
the wisest lawyer in Alabama cannot understand the laws, because 
they are scattered from one end of the State to the other, and they 
are put in sixty-six books instead of in one. T say as to that propo¬ 
sition, it falls to the ground. As to the expense of making these 
laws, I submit it will cost the people of Alabama largelv more 
money to have their local laws enacted under this proposed section 
of the Constitution than it will for the Legislature to do it. We 
put in this Constitution a limitation on the time which the Legisla¬ 
ture shall remain in session—fifty days. I have never known a 
Legislature in Alabama or in any other State to adjourn before its 
time expired by limitation. Now. if you take this work from the 
Alabama Legislature, they will give their whole time to as many 
general laws for local purposes as possible, and then to the general 
laws of the State. Fifty days is long enough to pass all the local 
laws necessary for the people of Alabama; and is long enough to 



CONSTITUTIONAL CONVENTION, 1901 


2051 


pass all the general laws for our State. Now if these Commission¬ 
ers in the different counties in Alabama are to be called together 
and organized into a legislative body, without limitation of time, 
as it appears from this ordinance, who can tell what the cost will 
be to the people of Alabama, though it comes out of the different 
counties of the State? 

MR. O’NEAL—Will the gentleman allow me to interrupt 
him ? 

MR. BULGER—Certainly. 

MR. O’NEAL—The substitute does limit their sessions. It 
limits their sessions to not over thirty days in two years; and to 
three days called meetings on each special subject; and not over 
three days when called especially to consider one or more subjects 
of local legislation. 

MR. JiULGKR—You multiply the number of counties in this 
State by the thirty days limit, and you will have more dollars to 
pay the Commissioners in Alabama than you have for the Alabama 
Legislature to do the same work. It makes no difference with 
the tax-payer whether he pays his taxes to support a county insti¬ 
tution or whether he pays it to support a State institution. It is 
a burden on him and it makes no difference into what treasury 
his mite may go. I submit that the cost of this legislation is not 
less than it will be under our present plan. I believe this Conven¬ 
tion has already adopted an ordinance here by which they go too 
far in restricting the Alabama Legislature in enacting local laws; 
and I believe that we have committed a great mistake when we 
provided that the Legislature should enact a law and the Legis¬ 
lature should not lie the judge of whether it was a local or general 
law. but that the courts should be the judge. I can see where 
many a hardship will come to parties- who have vested rights 
under existing laws and afterwards those laws are declared 
unconstitutional by the courts of the country. I think one of the 
wisest decisions in Alabama is when the Supreme Court said that 
the Alabama Legislature was the judge as to whether its law was 
a local law or a general law. 

MR. ROGERS (Sumter)—I rise to advocate the adoption of 
the substitute offered by the Chairman of the Committee on Local 
Legislation. It seems to me that this Convention in suppressing 
local laws have made a mistake that we are trying to do away 
with local legislation. If so, that is an error. The local laws of 
the State of Alabama are of far more importance to the citizens of 
Alabama than the general laws, upon the same principle that we 
are more interested in our Probate Judges than Ave are in the 
President of the United States. These large provisions, which 
e\en r man recognizes, don’t bear so directly upon the citizens. It 
has been asserted by the gentleman from Tallapoosa that it is 



2052 


OFFICIAL PROCEEDINGS 


safer to trust the making of local laws to a hundred men of the 
Legislature and thirty-three men in the Senate, than it is to the 
local county board. Now. Mr. President, and gentlemen of the 
Convention, you all know that is not the question. You all know 
that under what they call Senatorial courtesy to please a member 
of the General Assembly, one man comes here, not 100 nor 133, but 
one man comes here representing his county, sitting in the Senate 
over yonder, and can absolutely put through or block any legis¬ 
lation affecting his county in the House. I speak from personal 
experience; and no argument can be made upon this question dis¬ 
puting the ability of local county boards to enact good legislation 
for a county, that does not reflect upon the people of that county. 
Who elects the members of the Legislature? The people of the 
county. Who elects the Board of County Revenues? The people 
of the County. I assert that the people of Alabama use more dili¬ 
gence in the selection of this Board than they do in selecting mem¬ 
bers coming to the Legislature of Alabama. Why? Because they 
have the vested rights of the county in their hands and they pass 
upon all matters that go before them ; and in the expenditure of 
the peoples’ money they are very careful. I know how it is with 
us, and I presume it is so everywhere else. When you have this 
local board in your county accessible to all the people of the county, 
you will never have any Columbiana or Calera business coming 
up before the Convention. That will stop hereafter and nothing 
of the kind will be possible. No secret sessions, no midnight pas¬ 
sage of bills, no slipping bills through which are questionable be¬ 
cause this board sits there confronting all the people, whether it 
be the Board of County Revenue or a board created by the Legis¬ 
lature of Alabama. Now. Mr. President, it seems to me that every 
argument is in favor of creating a local County Board rather than 
against it. Some gentleman has said it is the purpose to make 
laws easy to find. He imagines, I suppose, as a great manv of them 
do, that we are making the laws of this State for the benefit of the 
lawyers of the State of Alabama. We are trying to pass laws for 
the benefit of the people of Alabama and I assert that in all counties 
the local laws are on record in books kept in the Probate office 
just exactly like they are kept in the Capitol of the State of Ala¬ 
bama. and are as easy to find, whether passed hv a local Countv 
Board or by the Legislature of Alabama. 


MR. SANFORD (MontgomeryWouldn't it be the same 
almost to require deeds to be registered in Montgomery? 

MR. ROGERS (Sumter) The same proposition. Now. Mr. 
President, I don t know that I can add anything more to the argu- 

l?lZ/ aVOr °l^ 1S v Ct, ? n - It , seems to nie that this section is 
absolutely essential. You know that you cannot pass any general 

wWt, u r g T l d ? C i f f ed ' nterests in the State of Alabama 
which would work equitably upon all portions of the State. 



CONSTITUTIONAL CONVENTION. 1901 


205.1 


MR. BULGER—Do you believe that the Legislature can pass 
laws covering every local question that could arise in the State? 

MR. ROGERS—I am satisfied they could pass laws covering 
all local questions in the State; but whether it would be such a 
cover as would keep them warm in winter and cool in the summer, 
is something that I do not know, but I do know that laws in Wal¬ 
ker County do not fit Sumter, and I know the people of Walker 
County know what they want better than the Legislature. And 
when these Boards are confronted with the people of their county, 
there will be no danger of such thing happening as took place 
before the General Assembly in reference to the Shelby County 
matter. And you will never have such an occurrence again as that 
in Alabama, if you will give to the local County Board the right to 
pass laws for the people. Of course, under the limitation of 
the Constitution of Alabama or under the limitations as sug¬ 
gested by my distinguished friend from Montgomery (Sanford) 
of the general laws of the State of Alabama. There can be no 
sensible argument urged against this proposition. Any man who 
would oppose it would oppose it upon the ground that his peo¬ 
ple have not got sense enough to select a wise Board to pass 
upon their matters, and that is the sum and substance of it. 

1 would like to know if there are men sitting here in this Con¬ 
vention who think that their people have exhausted their senses 
in sending them here. Don’t you suppose that they have got 
enough sense left to select men as good as you are.'' Why is 
it that these people can select such fine representatives to the 
Legislature and yet it is feared that they won’t be able to select 
satisfactory County Boards to handle these matters? 

MR. HARRISON (Lee)—I desire to move the suspension of 
the rules to introduce a short resolution. 

The resolution was read as follows: 

Resolution No. 241, by Mr. Harrison : 

Resolved, That the privileges of the floor of this Convention 
be and the same are hereby extended to Hon. John D. Little, 
Speaker of the House of Representatives of the State of Georgia, 
and the Hon. B. S. Miller, a member of the House of Representa¬ 
tives of the State of Georgia, during their stay in the Capital of 
Alabama. 

MR. SORRELL—I desire to discuss the amendment of the 
gentleman from Lauderdale, and to say that I cannot agree to that 
amendment, because of the fact among the many reasons that we 
are going out into an untried field. On yesterday we took from 
the Legislature of Alabama the power to enact local laws. We are 
brought today, having done that, face to face with the proposition 
as to what now is our remedy for the enactment of those local laws. 
I thought at the time that Section 1 was adopted that we were 



2054 


OF FI Cl A L P K( >C F. K 1)1 X<S 


making a mistake, in that we were going too far along the line of 
prohibiting local legislation. Have we forgotten the fact that al¬ 
though sir, that right max ha\e been abused, although meas¬ 
ures max' have been passed for the benefit ol individuals, and 
although the Shelby Court Mouse may have been established, 
notwithstanding this fact. >ir. shall we neglect to remember that 
under the law as it has existed, under the law that permitted 
local legislation to be enacted, that Alabama has grown and 
developed. We have invited capital into our fields that has 
found a safe and profitable investment. < hi yesterday we struck 
down the right of the Legislature to create local laws, and todav 
find ourselves seeking a remedy and a forum in which to seek and 
obtain a local legislation. I submit, .gentlemen of the Convention, 
that the proposition as submitted bv the gentleman from Lauder¬ 
dale is not the safeguard that they call it. 'balk to me about hold¬ 
ing out of this Convention that local boards in each countv can 


create laws. It is not because of am reflection I would east «m tin 
Board of County Commissioners or Hoard of Revenues, but I sub¬ 
mit, sir, that it is the history of tin* hill counties in Alabama that 
the Boards of Revenues and County Commissioners are not made 
up of men that the people of the countv look to create their law- 
Sir, it is an experiment that is untried and I believe would be un¬ 
wise. Whenever you delegate the uuthoritv of law-making power 
to a few men selected in a county. I submit that it is unwise, it is 
untried and the results cannot Ik* iore>een. I re-pectfullv submit 
that the proposition as presented bv the gentleman from Mont¬ 
gomery is fair and more preferable than tile one presented bx the 
Committee. One special objection that 1 have to the amendment 
as offered by the gentleman from Lauderdale, is the fact that thev 
provide in there that the Legislature mav absolutely suspend the 
Board of County Commissioners, oust them and create officer- of 
their own, the very thing that such a howl went up in \labam t 
four years ago along the line that the authority and the right of 
the Legislature to take from office men elected to these places 

?iw *!? Ce 11 in the hancIs of b ,)litician > t( > appoint them, f submit 
that the provisions appended to that ordinance offered bv the -en- 

th? n rn/ r0n ! LaU( - rdale , ar ° ,,,nvi>0 aml to he adopted In 

\ h y Convention. Insate because you provide in it that the Genera! 

-Assembly may suspend thee hoard, and c reate am hoard of equal 

sr : p' ” t 

criticise especially the action „f oSScV™ !,n IsU-lT Ik" 



CONSTITUTIONAL CONVENTION. 1901 


2055 


cause it is spoken by the majority vote and I humbly yield to that 
majority, but I do say to you that today in seeking a remedy to 
establish these local laws that it is one of the most important ques¬ 
tions that this Convention has faced : and the proposition as re¬ 
ported by the Committee, and as advocated by the gentleman from 
Lauderdale, I submit, gentlemen of the Convention, is unsafe and 
will not be for the best interest of Alabama to adopt it and let us 
find some remedy. Let us find some other way that would meet 
the universal approval of the State of Alabama, that we might 
enact our local laws, or go back into the hands of the men that 
from the day Alabama went into Statehood has enacted her local 
laws and had the pleasure of standing and seeing our State grow 
and prosper. And if nothing better can be found go back to the 
<>ld beaten paths and leave the question under the protection of the 
Legislature as w e have one and all enjoyed it and hope again to 
receive the fruits that will come to Alabama in her prosperity and 
in her greatness. 

i\l R. BLACKWELL—Mr. President, and gentlemen of the 
Convention: I am in sympathy, hearty sympathy, with the section 
offered by the Committee on Local Legislation. The gentleman 
who has just preceded me seems to have overlooked the great trou¬ 
ble we have had with local legislation and the necessity that exists 
for preventing the General Assembly from legislating on manv 
local matters. He seems further, to have overlooked the fact that 
if you take away from the General Assembly this power, there 
must be some body located somew’here that can attend to some 
local legislation for the counties. Now, Mr. President, I think it 
was in 1896 or 1898 that I examined and counted the laws and there 
are 946 local law's, and 48 general laws. In other words, nineteen- 
twentieths of those law's are local in their nature. 

Now, a legislative assembly costs the State of Alabama, as 
I am informed, about $50,000 a session and the nineteen-twentieths 
taken by local legislation would cost $47,500. So the local law's 
cost the State of Alabama anywhere from fifty to two hundred 
and fifty dollars each. We have said by these thirty-five excepted 
things that the legislature shall not hereafter enact laws on these 
subjects and who are we going to have to enact law's that the legis¬ 
lature cannot pass on? How would you provide general laws that 
would cover the necessities of each individual county of the sixty- 
six counties in Alabama? This seems to me to be a carefully 
guarded section. It provides that the local legislative power shall 
be vested in the court of county commissioners or in a board of 
revenue or some other tribunal established by the legislature of 
Alabama. Then, as a matter of fact, these are the parties who 
would know better what are the local needs of the county than 
any others, and it would be less expensive to have them enacted 
there than anywhere else. Now let me illustrate. A number of the 
last acts were to declare who should be liners between counties. 



2056 


OFFICIAL FKOCKKDINC.S 


xr , 11 ii r* ; introduced It >' 1 1 xid three times ami 

Now take such a bill. It is m ' about $300 for de- 

you have made the people ot Alabama p. > . , 

A . i-.„ r vim omtci that on me noaru 

clarnpe: that man a h.nr. Oil - •■ <(V u j, a liner. Then 

ot County Lommismomm. I ' lmer -oex before the Hoard 

the party who desires to he < la d m ^ ^ U ulllv 

of Countv Commissioners ami tU; . . it - . 

one- can act on it ittmtctliat. lt an.l mill. Im't; ; u ' 1 " """ 

sary. it cm,I,I he fixe! that the tttan Itmt-cll "..,,1.1 have 1.. pat 

the expense. 

MR. OATHS- -Cannot tit 
der existing lawA 

MR. BLACKWKI-L- It is nut w 
it can he done, ft has ne\er heci 
ties. 


CuminF-ii>tu*r - Omrt do that 


un 


MR 

islation ? 


It has between heat.-, hnt not i i 
;\T \\ < mid not that hi 


re urtet 

i 


cited to and 1 don’t think 
to between the mini 
; omntie-. 


[ w e 


!. mi and not 1e 


MR. BLACKMT'.LL It conic:- up-m them the power.-, if 
thev define that power now. and it i- the power Oat is legislated 
upon now and that is called legislation when acted upon b\ the 
General Assembly, and there is no objection to calling its legUla- 
tion, when acted upon by the l»oar«l; <n Countv t 0111 in i»ionei - 


MR. DICNT---I think that is the trouble. 1 would like to 
know what particular field of legislation y<m are going to couter 
on these courts. All ot thc~r matter- ! etei u c aie nn.ttrrs <*i 
administration. The legislature provide- the routine and the\ 
carry it into effect. And I want to kn«»w what particular field of 
legislation you want to conter upon tlw-r court-.' 


MR. BLACKAYELL—I’art of the dune- gcm-rall v acted on 
by the legislature and heretofore declared a- special legislation, 
call it bv what name you please, -nch a- saving who are liners, 
and similar matters that have been referred to. -tuck law matters, 
matters pertaining to separate school di-trict- and main questions 
of that character that you cannot Iegi-late on now. 


MR. SAMFORD—Would not the humeral Assembly, in pass¬ 
ing general laws for the government of the whole State, with ref¬ 
erence to these local matters, of nece--it\. place it in the hands 
of the courts of county commissioners or other courts as an admin¬ 
istrative court rather than as a legislative court?* 

MR. BLACKWELL—I do not care what -ort of a court you 
call it. whether administrative or legislative. and I have no ob¬ 
jection to the legislature saying the character of subjects they 
shall take charge of. The legislature ha- had charge of these sub¬ 
jects and the courts have not exercised them. If they will desig¬ 
nate these courts as courts to exercise authority over the sub- 




CONSTITUTIONAL CON VKNTK >\\ 1901 


2057 


ject in the general law, I have no objection. But we have taken 
it out of the hands of the General Assembly and I want to locate 
it in a proper court in the counties and it seems to me every 
argument is in favor of it. the saving of expense and as to many 
things now legislated for in a local way, it might be provided that 
the parties who obtain the local legislation should pay for it 
themselves. It may he that the matter is not in proper shape here 
exactly and that there should be some amendment fixing the num¬ 
ber of days the court shall sit and the right of the probate court 
to call them in special session as the Governor has the right to 
call the legislature, and to fix the term that it shall remain in ses¬ 
sion and suggesting that they shall only pass on what is men¬ 
tioned in the call, but with these safeguards I think that will be 
a proper tribunal to refer these subjects to. 

MR. HOWZK — I am satisfied the Convention is tired of 
speech-making, but I ask indulgence for a few words only on this 
subject. It seems to me that the original section as reported by 
the committee is preferable to the substitute offered by the gen¬ 
tleman this morning. I was at first inclined to favor the amend¬ 
ment offered by the gentleman from Greene, Judge Coleman, but 
upon reflection, I do not think it advisable for this Convention 
to adopt the suggestion of that amendment, in other words, I do 
not think it advisable for the Convention to put the Commission¬ 
er’s Court so completely in the attitude of a legislature. Now, my 
view is that many of the things that are enacted into local laws 
from these different counties are matters and things which can 
be obtained from the different courts of the State as courts, under 
the general laws even as they now exist or as they could here¬ 
after be framed, and that is not necessary for us as a Convention 
to lay so much stress upon the idea that we want the Commission¬ 
er’s Court to act as the legislature, so I think it would be unwise 
for us to place into this Constitution a measure of that character 
particularly because many of these things that are asked for by 
the people of the counties should be paid for by the counties ask¬ 
ing them as individuals or as corporations and not be a tax upon 
the people of the general county. If it is obtained in the commis¬ 
sioner’s court, you can say how persons applying for these things 
should be required to pay for them, as they apply for them. If 
you put it in the nature of a legislative act, why then no county 
can possibly be called upon to pay the expenses of it, where the 
individual alone should be required to pay. I think the amend¬ 
ment would suggest to the commissioner’s courts that they are a 
legislature or a branch of the legislature and that they are called 
upon to sit for thirty days every two years, and there is no neces¬ 
sity for that. Many of these things are matters which would re¬ 
quire but a few moments’ time to pass upon and enact. The pres¬ 
ent laws of the State provide ample time for the sitting of the 
Commissioners’ Courts, not only for the things they are called 
upon to perform, but for what they will have to perform under 



2058 


OF FI Cl A l. PK( >C K KOI NOS 


this Constitution if adopted. I do not think we should dignify the 
Commissioners’ Courts with the title of the Legislature to the ex¬ 
tent we would go in the amendment tacked on to the substitute, 
and I do not think the substitute ought to be adopted, because tin- 
original section is ample. The original section says : 

Sec. 5. The General Assembly may, by general law, confer 
upon Courts of County Commissioners. Hoards of Revenue or 
other counts, such power of local legislation and administration, 
touching all matters and things not provided for by general law, 
and not inconsistent with the provisions of this Constitution, as 
the General Assembly may. from time to time, deem expedient. 

1 would much prefer that the word "legislation” should be 
stricken out, but it may have a good purpose. 

MR. W EATHKRLA ••—\\ hv is it that the amendment of the 
gentleman from Montgomery which gives the Legislature a free 
hand to provide for these matters would not be better than Un¬ 
original proposition of the committee? 

MR. HOWZE—My answer to that is this: 1 think it more a 
matter of expediency than anything else. In this Article we base 
stricken out many things that cannot now be added under local 
legislation, and I think the Article as presented here will let tin- 
people see the fact that a provision is plainlv set forth hv which 
remedies can be had. 


MR. WEATHERLY—Directory merely. 

MR. HOWZE \es, but it is something that the people can 
see and will inform them that there is some provision bv which 
they can get relief for what has been taken a wav from them I 
do not think there is much difference between the two proposi- 
tions One ,s as good as the other. Hut I believe the people of 
e btate when they see this in the Constitution will see that the 
Convention has attempted to put before them plainlv where thev 
may go to get relief for what they may consider themselves de¬ 
prived of by taking away local legislation. 

Deoo^h^th?^ 0 L° U W; : m a " V ,urtIu ‘ r information to the 
erTlavv h .wo H \ TH ? G< i nera , 1 shall itself, under gen- 

for and proved?”''' ™ private '”""*** " ha " l™vi,lcd 

think thevo'^wf -.A J lKst an> , uerC( l that question virtuallv. 1 
reed v where rh5 1 * therC ’ an , ( We ,,oint them in this Article di- 



CONSTITUTIONAL CONVENTION. 1901 


2059 


amendment will prevail, but that the Convention will adopt the 
section as originally reported by the committee. 

MR. OATES—It seems to me this matter has been debated 
enough, and without any intention of cutting off anybody, I move 
the previous question on the section and all pending amendments. 

A vote being taken, the main question was ordered. 

THE PRESIDENT—The question is on the substitute of the 
gentleman from Lauderdale for the amendment proposed bv the 
gentleman from Montgomery to the section as reported. 

MR. O'NEAL—I ask unanimous consent to make an amend¬ 
ment to my substitute, simply changing grammar. 

No objection was made, and the amendment was read as fol¬ 
lows : 

“Insert after the words ‘J uc te e of Probate’ the following: ‘Up¬ 
on such notice as may be prescribed by the Legislature.’ Also 
strike out the words ‘and other’ after the words ‘with like’ and the 
last proviso of the substitute.” 

MR. O’NEAL—The purpose of that amendment is to require 
notice to be given in the event the Probate Judge should call a 
session of the Board of Commissioners or the Board of Revenue 
or such other tribunal as may be created for the purpose of en¬ 
acting special laws. 

THE PRESIDENT PRO TEM. — The question is on the 
adoption of the substitute offered by the gentleman from Lauder¬ 
dale. 


MR. O’NEAL—I want to make a few remarks. 

THE PRESIDENT PRO TEM.—The previous question ha> 
been ordered. 

MR. O’NEAL—But I have a right to conclude the argument. 

MR. DENT—I want to ask the gentleman a question. I 
have not heard any speaker who has advocated the clause under 
consideration draw the distinction I asked the gentleman from 
Morgan, that is, I am perfectly willing, speaking for myself, to 
confer upon the courts the power of administration over things 
upon which they have not acted heretofore, but I want to know 
exactly the field in which you are going to allow them to legis¬ 
late. I suppose you have thought on that, and I want to know 
about it. 

MR. O’NEAL—I will discuss that in my remarks. 

« 

Mr. President, there seems to be a general impression that the 
enactment of these provisions prohibiting the Legislature from 



2060 


OFFICIAL PROCKKD1NGS 


passing local laws upon certain subjects, striker down the power 
to create local laws. That is not the purpose at all. I he (.eneral 
Assembly still has the rights to pass local laws on all subjects, 
but it must not pass a local law on a subject which can be pro¬ 
vided for by general law. The gentleman who was speaking a 
moment ago said that we have struck down the power of the Leg- 
islature to pass local laws. He has totally misapprtheudtcl the* 
section. The gentleman from l a!lapoo>a said we will create sixty- 
five local Legislatures in the State. Don't we now create in every 
town in Alabama a Legislature. Is not the Board of Mayor and 
Aldermen in every town in Alabama vested with legislative pow¬ 
ers? There is a charter from the Legislature limiting and defin¬ 
ing their powers, and who can say that anv great evil has arisen 
in Alabama from conferring upon Boards of Aldermen the power 
of local legislation? Then, if no evil has arisen in the citv or 
town, why should evil arise in the count} in conferring upon some 
other tribunal of like character power to legislate on small mat¬ 
ters of local concern? The Commissioners Courts ought to have 
some of those powers. The Supreme Court has decided that it is 
a court of quasi legislative powers. It i> a court of roads and 
revenues, and all we ask is that you allow this court to exercise 
such powers of administration or legislation touching these small 
matters of local concern as the Legislature in it> wisdom deems 
proper to vest in them. 


Now it is not the purpose to give them any general powers 
of legislation. \Ye have to put some confidence in the Legisla¬ 
ture, and we have to assume that the Legislature is not going to 
abrogate its own powers and make Commissioners* Courts in ev¬ 
ery county, 

MR. ROBINSON—Will these siih-Legislatures, or Commis¬ 
sioners Courts, he bound by the limitations we put on the General 
Assembly? 

MR. O’NEAL—Not at all. 


MR. ROBINSON—They can 
jects? 


legislate on 


anv of these sub- 


UNEAL 1 hey would be just like the Board of Mayor 
and Aldermen of a city. The Board of Mavor and Aldermen 
passes an ordinance— 

MR. ROBINSON We have provided that the General As- 
sem ) y cannot pass any special law and certain other enumerated 

ma ers ou can the Commissioners Courts pass laws on those 
subjects? 


MR. () NEAL—If the Legislature 


'ests them with the power. 



CONSTITUTIONAL CONVENTION. 1901 


2061 


MR. ROBINSON —Could they change the fees of Justices of 
the Peace in each beat? 

MR. O’NEAL—No. sir. 

MR. ROBINSON—Why not? 

MR. O’NEAL—Because we enumerate a long list of matters 
in reference to which we forbid the Legislature from passing lo¬ 
cal laws. 

MR. ROBINSON—And a stock law is one of them. 

MR. O’NEAL—And we say in reference to those matters, 
they must pass general laws. 

MR. ROBINSON—But the General Assembly is not bound 
by that. 

MR. O’NEAL—Yes it is. 

MR. ROBINSON—And would the courts take judicial no¬ 
tice of those acts of those county legislatures? 

MR. O’NEAL—Let me finish answering one question before 
you ask another. 

MR. ROBINSON—If you object to it, all right. 

MR. O’NEAL—You will find this provision: “The General 
Assembly may by general law confer upon Courts of County Com¬ 
missioners, Boards of Revenue or other courts, such powers of 
local legislation and administration, touching all matters and 
things not provided for by general law.” Now the Legislature is 
required by general law as to all matters or things that they are 
prohibited from passing local legislation concerning. Therefore, 
the Commissioners’ Court could not exercise any legislative power 
in any of those subjects. I hope the Convention understands that. 
Hence it could not confer on the Commissioners’ Court power to 
deal with the fees of Justices of the Peace or stock districts, etc. 

MR. SMITH, M. M.—Would it be necessary for each county 
to have an Attorney General to define what the law is for them? 

MR. O’NEAL—We have Solicitors in every county already; 
and the same argument might be made against conferring on 
Boards of Aldermen any power of legislation. You may say that 
you are conferring on the Board of Aldermen of Decatur or Flor¬ 
ence powers to legislate. Who is to determine their power? It 
is to be determined by their charter. The Supreme Court says 
here is your power, you can legislate on the subjects enumerated 
.in this charter, and when you go beyond that charter, you violate 
the law, you have no power to do it and your legislation is void. 

MR. WHITE—These local legislatures are restricted as I un¬ 
derstand except on the subjects which are covered by general 
laws. Is that correct? 



2062 


OFFICIAL PROCKKDINOS 


MR. O'NEAL—No, sir; I don’t think you understand mv po- 
sition. 

MR. WHITE—Won’t the local legislatures have the whole 
field except where it is covered by general law . 

MR. O’NEAL—Not at all. How i> that quotum? I don’t 
understand it. 

MR. W HITE—Would not the local legislatures have entire 
control of all the field of legislation except that which is covered 
by a general law? 

MR. O’NEAL—Certainly. 

MR. W HITE—Then they have everything that is not cov¬ 
ered by general law. 

MR. O’NEAL—Here is what I want to say in reply to that. 
The act which creates these tribunals or the act which vests legis¬ 
lative power in these courts, defines the subjects on which they 
can legislate. Hence the Commissioners’ Courts could not go be¬ 
yond those subjects. Just like the charter of a municipal corpora¬ 
tion defines the subjects upon which the Board of Aldermen can 
legislate, and when the Board of Aldermen goes beyond the power 
conferred or that might be inferred from the grant or specific pow¬ 
ers, the action is not valid. Now this Article on Local Legisla¬ 
tion enumerates a long list of local matters as to which the Legis¬ 
lature is prohibited from legislating and as to which the Legisla¬ 
ture is required to pass general laws, and if the Legislature car¬ 
ries out the mandate of this article and prepares general law's on 
all these enumerated subjects, as to which they are prohibited 
from passing local laws, they could not confer upon Commis¬ 
sioners’ Courts or courts of like jurisdiction, power to legislate 
on any matter enumerated herein, but on all other matters they 
could. 

MR. WHITE—There will be sixty-six of these Legislatures? 
MR. O’NEAL—Yes sir. 

MR. W HITE—Five members in each House? 

MR. O'NEAL—Yes, sir. 

MR. WHITE-—That would make 330 members ? 

MR. O’NEAL—They have them now. 

MR. W HITE—W'e only have 100. 

MR. O NEAL But you have the Commissioners’ Courts 


now. 



CONSTITUTIONAL CONVENTION, 1901 


2063 


MR. WHIIE Then you give thirty-three days for legisla¬ 
tive purposes which would make up an expenditure of $35,000, be¬ 
sides the local bodies? 

MR. 1) Nlv\L—I have never made the calculation. But sup¬ 
pose it does cost $50,000. My information is that every local act 
in these volumes cost from $50 to $150 each. I get that informa¬ 
tion from the Secretary of State. 

MR. PETTUS—I want to ask a question which the gentle¬ 
man from Lauderdale has partly answered. This Section is not 
self-executing. I want to ask if the Commissioners* Courts have 
authority to pass any local legislation except on matters especially 
delegated to them by the General Assembly? 

MR. O'NEAL—Of course not. The General Assembly in 
vesting the bodies with legislative powers will define especially 
the extent of their powers and the subjects over which they can 
legislate. 

The time of the gentleman here expired. 

MR. CUNNINGHAM—Can I hav e unanimous consent to ask 
a question ? 

The consent was given. 

MR. CUNNINGHAM—I would like to ask the Chairman of the 
Committee if this Section now pending is adopted, could the Gen¬ 
eral Assembly authorize the Commissioners’ Courts or such other 
tribunal as may be created to grant divorces or relieve any minor 
of the disabilities of non-age, or change the name of any corpora¬ 
tion or corporate town? 

MR. O’NEAL—No, sir; That is provided by general law or 
the relief sought can be given in a court. The last part of the Sec¬ 
tion says : The General Assembly shall pass general laws as to 
the cases enumerated in this section. 

MR. CUNNINGHAM—The point I want to arrive at is this: 
Could the General Assembly, in passing a general law, delegate 
to the Commissioners’ Courts the power to Legislate upon these 
thirty-five exceptions or on any of them? 

MR. O’NEAL—On none of them, because on all enumerated 
subjects the General Assembly is required to provide general laws. 

MR. CUNNINGHAM — But suppose one of those general 
laws were to delegate it to the Commissioners’ Courts to pass on 
the granting of divorces or removing the disabilities of non-age. 

MR. O’NEAL—Granting of divorces is already inhibited there 
and the removal of the disabilities of non-age. 



2064 


OFFICIAL LKOCKFDIWS 


MR. CUNNINGHAM—Hut what I want to know is. it we 
are transferring* the authority from the General Assembly to leg¬ 
islate upon the questions here inhibited to the little sub-Legisla- 
tures created in the counties? 

MR. O’NEAL — That is not the meaning of this provision, 
and if it is susceptible of such meaning. I am willing to amend it. 

MR. CUNNINGHAM—Then l am willing to vote with you. 

THE PRESIDENT—The question is upon the adoption of 
the substitute offered by the delegate from Lauderdale for Section 
5, as reported by the committee. 

A reading was called for. and the clerk read the substitute 
as follows: 


The General Assembly may, by general law. confer upon 
courts of County Commissioners, Boards of Revenue or upon such 
other tribunal in each county as may be created by the General 
Assembly, such powers of local legislation and administration 
touching such matters and things which are not provided for by 
general law, and are not inconsistent with the provisions of this 
Constitution, as the General Assembly may, from time to time, 
deem expedient. Provided, such courts or tribunals shall not be 
authorized to exercise such powers of local legislation except dur¬ 
ing a term thereof held exclusively for that purpose, and that such 
term shall not extend beyond thirty day- and shall not be held 
more than once in two years. Hut special terms of such courts 
for such purposes of not more than three (lavs’ duration may be 
authorized to be called at any time by the Judge of Probate upon 
such notice as may be prescribed by the Legislature necessary to 
consider one or more special subjects of local legislation, and, pro¬ 
vided, further, that the General Assembly may abolish such boards 
or other tribunals and establish other courts or bodies with like 
powers in lieu thereof, when, in the discretion of the General As¬ 
sembly it may be deemed to be for the best interests of any county. 

A reading of the section for which the substitute was offered 
was called for and the minority report to Section 5 was read, be¬ 
ing Section 5 of Article IV of the present Constitution. 


THE I RLSIDLN 1 1 he question is on the substitute of the 

gentleman from Lauderdale for Section 5 of the report of the Com¬ 
mittee on Legislative Department, offered as an amendment to 
the report of the Committee on Local Legislation. 


A vote being taken, the substitute 
ayes to 70 noes on division. 


was lost by a vote of 46 


THE PRESIDENT The question recurs on the substitute 
of the Committee on Legislative Department for Section 5 report¬ 
ed by the Committee on Local Legislation. 



2005 


CONSTITUTIONAL CONVENTION. 1901 


A \ote l>ein^ taken, the substitute was adopted by a vote of 
<n ayes and 20 noes on division. 

MR. ROBINSON I move the adoption of the section as 
amended. 


HR I RRSIDRN 1 — 1 lie previous question has been ordered 
upon the section as reported and pending’ amendments, and the 
question is on the adoption of Section 5, as amended, and the ayes 
and noes ha\e been called for, and the question is, is the call sus¬ 
tained? 


I he call was not sustained, and a vote being taken viv a voce, 
the section was adopted. 

Section 6 was read as follows : 

Sec. 6. A general law within the meaning of this Article is 
a law which applies to the whole State; a local law is a law which 
applies to any political sub-division or sub-divisions of the State 
less than the whole—a special or private law within the meaning 
of this Article which applies to an individual, association or cor¬ 
poration. 

MR. O'NEAL—In making the stenographic copy of the re¬ 
port, I left out two words which I ask unanimous consent to insert. 
Insert the words “is one" between the word “Article" and the 
word “which" in the fourth line. 

By consent, the amendment was allowed. 

MR. O'NEAL—I move the previous question of this sixth 
section. 

MR. BOONE — Will the gentleman allow me to offer an 
amendment at end. The amendment simply provides that the 
courts can take judicial notice of any municipal law. 

MR. O'NEAL—Can they not do that now? 

MR. BOONE—No, they cannot; if those municipal laws are 
made private laws by this Constitution. 

MR. O'NEAL—Would it be safe to allow the courts to take 
judicial notice of those municipal laws? 

THE PRESIDENT — Does the gentleman yield for the 
amendment to be offered? 

MR. O'NEAL—No, sir; I don't believe I do. 

A vote being taken, the previous question was ordered, and a 
further vote being taken, Section 6 was adopted. 

MR. WATTS—I want to offer an additional section. 



2066 


OFFICIAL PROCEEDINGS 


THE PRESIDENT — There is a Section 7 offered by the 
committee, which the clerk will read. 

Section 7 was read as follows: The General Assembly shall 
pass general laws under which local and private interests shall be 
provided for and protected. 

MR. O’NEAL—That is just what we have adopted and we 
will withdraw that. 

MR. HARRISON—I move to lay that on the table. 

MR. O’NEAL—We ask leave to withdraw that section. 

Unanimous leave was given and the section was withdrawn. 

MR. BOONE—Now I ask leave to offer an additional section. 

The section was read as follows: Section 7. The courts can 
take judicial notice of any municipal charter. 

MR. BOONE—I do not suppose that it was the purpose of 
this Convention in abolishing a law that has been in existence ever 
since the case of Albritton vs. City of Huntsville, 60 Ala., that the 
Supreme Courts and all inferior courts would take judicial knowl¬ 
edge of municipal charters. That decision was also announced in 
the case of Barnes vs. Birmingham, 89 Ala., and unless this amend¬ 
ment is adopted in every case against a municipal corporation you 
would have to go to the trouble and expense under Section 6 mak¬ 
ing municipal charters private laws, of proving them as the Su¬ 
preme Court has again and again decided that a private law must 
be proved like any other evidence in a case. 

MR. O’NEAL—Will the gentleman allow me to ask a ques¬ 
tion ? 


MR. BOONE—Yes, sir. 

MR. O’NEAL—Could not the legislature in the absence of 
that provision pass a law making* private laws evidence in courts 
without further proof. Is not that purely a matter of legislative 
detail and ought that to be incorporated in the Constitution’ Is it 
not simply a rule of evidence? You sav that the private acts of a 
municipality shall be received in courts without further evidence’ 

MR. BOONE—Yes, sir. 

■MR. O NEAL That is a rule of evidence ? 

MR. BOONE— Yes, sir. 


MR. O’NEAL—Is not the power of the legislature to establish 
rules as to this matter unlimited? 


BOONE I do not know whether it would be under this 
subdivision or not. If you provide that it is a private law and 



CONSTITUTIONAL COXVKNTION. 1W1 


2067 


thereby change the laws of evidence in this State, it seems to me 
that all those matters would have to he proved as any other mat¬ 
ter of evidence. The minute this Constitution is put into effect 
it holds that it is a private law and being a private law it must be 
proved ; and from the time this Constitution is ratified and that 
law or rule of evidence is stricken down it would he a question 
whether the legislature could change it or not. But assuming it 
could change it. it could not be made effective until a meeting of 
the Cieneral Assembly to pass it. I ask the Chairman of the Com¬ 
mittee to allow this to be put in and not abolish the salutary rule 
in the interest of people and cutting down expenses of municipal 
corporations in defending suits and also limiting the expenses of 
plaintiff's bringing suits against municipalties where it would be 
necessary to copy in, at expense, long charters. The charters of 
the city of Montgomery and of Mobile make hundreds of pages 
and 1 do not see any necessity for copying them in and I do not 
see why it should not be provided that the courts should take no¬ 
tice of such matter. 

MR. O’NEAL—The only objection 1 have is that the legisla¬ 
ture can in their discretion provide any rules of evidence they may 
see proper. They can, by general law, provide that any private 
law passed by any municipality in the State shall be received in 
the courts without further proof. I am willing that this question 
be referred to the Judiciary Committee and if they say it cannot 
be provided for by the legislature. I am willing to let it come m 
here. 


MR. BOONE—No. 1 prefer to take a vote now. 

MR. O’NEAL—Then I move to lay the additional section on 
the table. 


A vote being taken the amendment was tabled. 

MR. WATTS—I offer an additional section. 

The amendment was read as follows: Amend the report of 
the Committee on Loc^l Legislation by adding an additional sec¬ 
tion, to be known as Section 7 as follows: 

Sec 7 No bill introduced as a general law into either House 
of the General Assembly shall be so amended in its passage as to 
become a special, private or local law. 

MR WATTS_That Mr. Chairman, is simply to provide for 

one omission in the Article on Local Legislation, to provide for 
SO .ha. a bill could no. be i"^uce< as a genera, 
law and then amended in its passage, so as to become a local law. 

MR. deGRAFFENREID—Have we not already adopted that. 

MR WATTS—No, sir. I move the previous question. 



2068 


OFFICIAL PROCEEDINGS 


MR. LONG (Walker)—A point of order. That is an entire¬ 
ly different ordinance, and entirely different section and it has 
to be referred and read three times before it can be adopted. It 
is very dangerous to pass ordinances that have not been referred 
to a Committee, or printed, in direct violation of the rules. That 
is the point of order I make. 

THE PRESIDENT—It seems to the chair that a Committee 
may amend its report, or any delegate may move to amend the 
report of the Committee, by changing any section, or to add addi¬ 
tional sections, and the point of order will be overruled. 

Upon a vote being taken, the main question was ordered. 

MR. O'NEAL—(Lauderdale)—I move that the entire article 
on Local Legislation be engrossed, and ordered to a third reading. 

MR. WILLIAMS (Marengo) — I have a little amendment, 
that I do not think the gentleman will object to. Just read it, and 
if he objects I will withdraw it. 

The amendment was read : Amend by adding Section 8 to this 
article: nothing contained in this article shall effect dispensaries 
or schools now having rights. 

MR. WATTS—I move to lay it on the table. 

MR. WILLIAMS (Marengo) — I ask unanimous leave to 
withdraw it, then. 

The leave was granted. 

MR. O'NEAL—I now renew my motion that the article be 
engrossed and ordered to a third reading. 

MR. V^AUGHN—Does that cut off the report from all further 
amendment? 

MR. O’NEAL—No, sir; after the Committee on Harmony re- 
ports you can amend it. 

THE PRESIDENT—It seems to the chair after it is ordered 
to a third reading it is not open to amendment. 

The next order will be the consideration of the report of the 
Committee on State and County Boundaries. 

MR. WATTS—I rise to a point of inquiry. 

THE PRESIDENT—The gentleman will state the point of 
inquiry. 

MR. WATTS—Does it not require on this ordinance that 
the ayes and noes shall be called upon its passage? 

THE PRESIDENT That will be necessary on the third 
reading. " 



constitutional c'oxvkntiox, \<m 


2069 


MR. COBB It is now very nearly time for adjournment and 
Before we go to another article, 1 move we adjourn. 

MR. JENKINS 1 ask th e gentleman to withdraw that mo¬ 
tion. 

MR. COBB—I will yield to the gentleman. 

MR. JENKINS ! desire to ask leave to send up this petition, 
and to have it printed, in the official report. 

Objection was made. 

MR. JENKINS - 1 move that the rules be suspended, and 
that this petition be printed in the proceedings. It is from a re¬ 
spectable colored citizen of the State. 

Upon a vote being taken the rules were suspended, and the 
petition is as follow-.; 

Snow Hill, Ala., July 5. 1901 . 
To the Hon. John B. Knox, President, and Honorable Gentlemen of the 

Constitutional Convention of the State of Alabama: 

Gentlemen— Presuming that you have laid the report of the Suffrage 
Committee on the table for a few days in order that the citizenship of the 
State may have an opportunity to express an opinion on the subject, I beg 
you to lend an ear to the following, which is not intended so much as a 
discussion or opinion, as it is an humble petition: 

Of the many grave and intricate questions which you are called upon to 
solve, perhaps none will engage more of your attention than that of the 
suffrage; certainly none is fraught with more difficulty, and danger of mis¬ 
carriage. This is not strange in the light of history, for every nation known 
to history has had to deal rigidly with the question of suffrage at some 
time before it measured up to the world’s standard in political affairs. It is 
therefore, that the true citizen of Alabama finds himself in deep sympathy 
with the members of the Convention, many, perhaps all, of whom are sin¬ 
cerely trying to find a way out of the darkness created by unlimited suf¬ 
frage, and a consequent appalling number of ignorant voters at every elec¬ 
tion, and the election too often, of unworthy, unscrupulous, and sometimes 
corrupt men to offices to which nothing but men of the highest integrity 
and the purest patriotism should be elected. 

There is a public sentiment in the South today which decrees that the 
ignorant negro must be disfranchised, and however the young and intelligent 
negro may regret to see his ignorant father deprived of the right which came 
to him by virtue of the course of events, he must nevertheless recognize 
the necessity of some sort of reform which will tend to the purification of 
our politics But he may he pardoned if he contend that whatever touches 
one element of our population ought to touch all under similar conditions. 
Not one of you will gainsay or even doubt the truth of the statement that 



2070 


OFFICIAL PROCFKIMW.S 


ignorance, immorality, and unworthiness should be taken out of the South > 
politics, whether it be the result of negro suffrage, Pole suftrage, or even 
white suffrage. One cannot read the report of your Suffrage Committee 
without sharing wdth them the great burden which they had to carry. Every 
word of it shows arduous labor on the part of the Committee. Neverthe¬ 
less, it will not be strange if your honorable body do not accept the entire 
report as the panacea for all of Alabama's political ills, and finally stamp 
it or any part of it with your disapproval. Already some of the recognized 
leaders in our political affairs have published to the world their disapproval 
of the “grandfather clause/* which allows young white men to vote became 
their fathers fought in certain wars and excludes negroes. 

One can scarcely think that Alabama will, with a grandfather clause, 
follow* the lead of other States which have not bettered themselves by the 
same. It will not be strange if intelligent men everywhere consider the 
grandfather clause unfair, unprogressive and a bar to the highest develop¬ 
ment of both races. If young white men throughout the State do not re¬ 
sent what would seem to place a premium upon ignorance for them and a 
premium upon intelligence for negroes, I am mistaken in my estimation of 
their race pride. If the poor and unfortunate class of white people do not 
resent the grandfather clause, and consider it a virtual acknowledgment 
of their inability to compete with the recently emancipated slaves, I am very 
much mistaken in their manhood. 

Besides, gentlemen, if I may be permitted to ask a question, if the right 
to vote can come to any man by inheritance, can this right be confined 
alone to the battlefield? Must it be confined to the actual bearing of arms 
any more than to the other and higher duties, or as for that matter, the most 
menial task performed in time of w*ar for the propagation of the same? Al¬ 
though Alexander Stephens and a thousand of his compatriots may never 
have fought a battle, or may not have borne arms in our civil war, what man 
of you would deprive the remotest of their descendants of the privilege of 
voting? Three millions of my race dug trenches, fed your mules, guarded 
your homes, and cultivated your lands that you might have subsistence 
while you struggled four long years with your brethren of the North; and 
though they did not actually bear arms, like many others who rendered 
valuable service to the Confederate cause, they did you a service without 
which you could not have waged the w'ar so successfully for such a time; 
yet under the grandfather clause you leave them out while thousands of 
others with no better qualifications, who never fought nor supported those 
who did fight, will be enfranchised. But if we may leave the white man 
out of the account for a moment, and take the grandfather clause at its face 
value, I beg to advance the opinion that the Southern negroes who have 
advanced far enough in the arts of civilization to think for themselves, will 
learn to doubt your gratitude and to distrust your sense of justice if by this 
clause you permit six thousand negroes who enlisted in the Confederate 
cause, and their descendants, the privilege of suffrage while you exclude 
three million others who did not enlist, but who served you at your homes, 
and without whose service the war could not have been carried on. 



2071 


CONSTITUTIONAL CONVENTION, 1901 

If >ou Pass a law permitting the descendants of white school teachers 
to teac in the public schools regardless of other qualific ations, and requir¬ 
ing a negroes whose fathers did not teach, to be examined rigidly for 
that privilege, veril} it would not be more disastrous to the white race in 
the end than would the grandfather clause reported by your committee. 

I sincerely believe that if you lay down a law which will operate in fa- 
\or of the white man because of his ancestry, and operate against the ne¬ 
gro because of previous conditions over which he did not and could not have 
any control, it will be a great step backwards, for it seems to me that if we 
allow heredity to enter too largely into our politics we drift aw ; ay from the 
basic principles of our institutions. 

Ii Alabama incorporate^ in her organic law a grandfather clause, being 
a leading State as she is. some other less scrupulous State may take the 
matter further and by similar statutes prevent the negro from operating cer¬ 
tain machinery, and perchance deprive him finally of working at certain gain¬ 
ful occupations. If you establish this as a principle and follow it up there* 
is not telling where we will find ourselves in the end. The South which has 
stood so long as the champion of the rights of the less fortunate people to 
labor at gainful trades and professions cannot afford to take any step back¬ 
ward. Since the close o! the Civil War Alabama has made great progress. 
It is left largely with you, gentleman, to say whether or not this progress 
shall continue. If you deal roughly with the negro in the matter of suf¬ 
frage he may lose that sunshine which has for centuries characterized the 
race, and made him so valuable a counteraction for the austere white man, 
and become a disgruntled element in our population. On the other hand 
if you inaugurate laws that will operate with equal justice, he will learn to 
love you more than ever for your kindness, to respect you more than ever 
for your integrity, and will resolve to help you to push forward the inter¬ 
ests of the grand State to which he forms a part. Any legislation which 
will tend to create a gulf between the races, to create the spirit of absolutism 
on the one hand and the spirit of distrust on the other, to disturb the tran¬ 
quility of either race will be greatly detrimental to both. 

Finally, gentlemen, we humbly beg you to remember that though we 
were forced here against our will, we have learned to love the land of our 
adoption; and if you of the dominant race will be generous in your deal¬ 
ings with us, generous in the matter of education, you will have at your 
door a people who will render you a service in the development of your 
State that cannot he rendered by any other people, a people who will not 
trouble your sleep with dynamite nor your waking hours with strikes. This 
is the people that appeal to you today to make a suffrage law' (though the 
test be the severest that is consistent with reason) that will operate for all 
men alike. We could not ask less, but for this we contend as just and right. 

Yours very respectfully, 


Wm. H. T. Holtzclaw. 



2072 


OFFICIAL PROCEEDINGS 


Leaves of absence were granted Mr. Graham (Talladega) 
for Saturday and Monday; Mr. Fitts for today and tomorrow; 
Mr. Miller of Wilcox for tomorrow and Monday. 

MR. OATES—I rise to a parliamentary inquiry. 1 desire the 
date announced that the report of the Committee on State and 
County Boundaries was reported. What was the date on which it 
was reported? 

THE PRESIDENT—June 25. 

MR. OATES — Does not the report of the Committee on 
Banks and Banking precede that; it is marked the 24th? 

THE PRESIDENT—The Committee on Banks and Banking 
reported before the Committee on State and County Boundaries 
but the report of that committee was not made a special order 
while the other report was. 

MR. COBB—I move we adjourn. 

The motion was carried and the Convention adjourned until 
3:30 p. m. 


AFTERNOON SESSION 

The Convention reconvened at 3:30 o'clock p.m. and upon tin- 
call of the roll 106 delegates responded to their names. 

Leaves of absence were granted as follows: Mr. Harrison for 
tomorrow; Mr. Jackson of Lee, for Saturday and Monday; Mr. 
Renfroe for today and Saturday; Mr. Macdonald for this after¬ 
noon; Mr. Sloan for Saturday and Monday; Mr. Weatherly for 
this afternoon; Mr. Morrisette indefinite leave of absence on ac¬ 
count of sickness in his family. 

THE PRESIDENT—The next order will be the consideration 
of the report of the Committee on State and County Boundaries. 

MR. CORNWELL—I have a substitute to that I desire to 
offer. 

MR. PARKER (Cullman)—The substitute would be out of 
order. 

THE PRESIDENT—Does the gentleman desire to offer a 
substitute for the entire report? 

MR. CORNWELL—Yes sir. 

MR. PARKER—There are three minority reports. The sub¬ 
stitute would be out of order now. 



constitutional CONVENTION. Will 


207.? 


THE PRESIDENT—As the Chair recollects the rule, it re¬ 
quires the consideration of these reports Section by Section, and 
the gentleman will he in order to offer his substitute to each Sec¬ 
tion as it is called. 

MR. CORNWELL—My substitute could not possibly come 
as a substitute to each Section. The difference is so radical that 
unless to the entire report it could not be offered as a substitute 
for each Section. J do not see anything in the rules bearing on 
that particular question. 

THE PRESIDENT — The Chair will examine the question 
and rule upon the point of order in a moment. 

MR. R LACK WELL—Under the rule, reports were to be 
considered Section by Section, and amendments were only allow¬ 
able when the Section was reached to which the amendments ap¬ 
plied. The custom in the Congress of the United States is that a 
committee makes a report, and the minority reports are consid¬ 
ered ami disposed of before anybody else is allowed to offer an 
amendment or substitute, so the Committee might perfect its 
article. 

MR. OATES -1 think my friend, the 1 gentleman from Mor¬ 
gan, stated the rule a little too broadly, that is true where they 
substitute a minority for a majority report, but where it applies 
to a Section, that does not apply. 

THE PRESIDENT-—The proposition that the Chair has under 
consideration is a motion by the gentleman from Jefferson to offer 
a substitute for the entire article prepared by the Committee. 

MR. OATES—Replying merely to the statement of the dele¬ 
gate from Morgan, he said the fundamental rule in Congress wher¬ 
ever there is a minority report it must be disposed of before any 
other amendment is in order. That is entirely true wheie the 
minority report is substituted for the majority, but where it re¬ 
lates onlv to one Section, that is not in ordei until that Section is 
reached. 

THE PRESIDENT—The gentleman from Montgomery is 
not speaking to the exact question. The question now under con¬ 
sideration upon which the Chair would be glad to be advised by 
members who are familiar with parliamentary practice is this: 1 he 
Committee on State and County Boundaries has submitted a report 
which is up for consideration. The motion of the gentleman from 
Jefferson is to offer a substitute for the entire Article. We have 
a rule that these Articles are to be taken up and considered Section 

by Section. 

MR. OATES—I stand corrected. I did not hear the first part 

of it. 



2074 


OFFICIAL PROCKKDIXC.S 


MR. HARRISON—We have no rule on that subject, but in 
the first report brought in the Chairman of the Committee moved 
to consider that report Section by Section, and that course has 
been followed. I have no recollection, I suppose the Chair has 
examined, but I don’t think we have any rule on the subject, but 
are governed by the action of the Chairman of the Committee in 
making the report to be considered Section by Section. 

MR. OATES—Unless there is a rule that directs otherwise, 
under the general parliamentary law, it is competent to offer a 
substitute for the whole report. 

THE PRESIDENT—Then what would become of the minor¬ 
ity reports to amend a particular Section? There are minority re¬ 
ports here directed to particular paragraphs or sections of this ma¬ 
jority report. Now Rule 51 reads: “When an ordinance or article 
is reported to the Convention and a minority report accompanies 
the majority report, the ordinance or article accompanying the 
minority report shall be considered an amendment, and the same 
shall be printed and the ordinance or article shall be read a second 
time; and said ordinance or article and minority report shall be 
placed on the Calendar and be considered on the third reading of 
the ordinance or article.” 

MR. SAM FORD (Pike)—-It occurs to me in that connection 
that the same rule would apply to the whole report as would apply 
to any section that was being- considered section by section. The 
committee proposed an entire report, the minority of the com¬ 
mittee proposes an amendment to the majority report or the report 
of the committee, and the gentleman from Jefferson proposes a 
substitute for the entire report. That being the case, it would be 
proper, it seems to me, for the Convention to consider, first, the 
substitute, then the amendment, and then the report under our 
rules. 

MR. HARRISON—I submit in the absence of a rule, the 
general parliamentary law applies. There was a minority report. 
The majority have a right to perfect their report so the Convention 
could judge between that report perfected and the minority report. 

MR. ROGERS (Sumter)—What would become of the sub¬ 
stitute ? 

MR. HARRISON—After the original report has been acted 
upon, that will be acted upon. 

MR. ROGERS—If the majority report is perfected, as he says, 
there would be no necessity for a substitute. 

THE PRESIDENT—The general parliamentary rule is that 
the friends of the measure have a right to perfect it by amendment 
before substitutes for the entire Article would be in order. 



2075 


CONSTITUTION.*,. COXVKXTIOX 


1901 


MR. OATES—I rise for m 

statement of the gentleman from , purpos . e « f concurring in the 
owing to the nature of the amend WIth this exception, it is 

report. Suppose it is in hostility''l^ nt pt ‘ nd,n *> r '*> way of minority 
not he said a perfect measure inri niaj . ontv , report; it could 
amendment to a portion of it Y 1 ls only " here it offers an 
siding officer to decide. whether•? PUrt ’ an<1 that is f,,r the pre- 
only to a portion of it, j concur w to th< ‘ "hole or not. If 

tor the whole thing would he i„ o^er!" = ' f " 01, tl, ‘* n a suhstitn( e 

difficulty in this matter e \AsTtated hv t u lat , th - l ‘ rc . '? 1,0 l ,ossil,lt ’ 

pro]>osition of parliamentuv i.. . o ' , K ‘ °! la ' r - >t 's a universal 
have the right first to perfect "it , la, f 1 le fneil, . is "{ the measure- 
attack it—especially when th-it ^ e ^ 0 je anything is allowed to 
hotly. Now, i,) 1 order"o Perfect ^ r<> ni the committee of the 

the original report and the on lnatter ' vou have to dispose of 
All inns, Ik* ,li „ "* " l ,h “* ‘TiKim.! re„„r,. 

loc,oil. ,„„l ,„v f'riomi S«!l l J"*' ca " * » aid to •>« per- 

" r ";," ,lla ' "><« is anyfh™r,V,hTom,Yv n h | 

T p °« it o, t 

attack by anvlmtly. either in sections or as a »*K CiS7, j, 

perfectct, these other motions, whether addressed to sections or 
to the whole, are out of order. r 

quiry ,R 1IO " KU -~ 1 ris( ‘ u > a question of parliamentary in- 

rHF ‘*. I> NESII)KXT—The gentleman will state his parlia¬ 
mentary inquiry. 

MR. HOWELL Does a minority report of a committee to 
a majority report stand the same relation as an amendment to the 
main question? 

THE PRESIDENT Minority reports arc treated as amend¬ 
ments. 


MR. HOW ELL—Is it not in order, if that he the case, to 
entertain the introduction of a substitute for both the main ques¬ 
tion and the amendment? 

THE PRESIDENT—Minority reports relate to amendments 
to particular sections only. Does the gentleman from Jefferson 
desire to he heard further on the point of order? 

MR. CORNWELL—I don’t see how this substitute I am 
offering can come in and be considered section by section when 



2076 


OFFICIAL PROCEEDINGS 


we are considering the committee's report; we take the commit¬ 
tee’s report, and there are two of them, in fact, there are three, but 
one especially readopts the present Article of our Constitution. 
Suppose the Convention should adopt that, what do you suppose 
would be done with the majority report then? You have covered 
the entire ground that the committee is supposed to look after; 
then my substitute has no place in the Convention. It would be 
no good. On the other hand, to offer a substitute after the report 
has been adopted by this Committee, what grounds would I have 
then to introduce it? This minority report is entirely different 
from the majority report, because the minority report covers the 
entire article and there is nothing left, yet it is signed by two men 
recommending the adoption of the present article in the present 
Constitution. If you adopt the majority report, then what will be¬ 
come of this minority report recommendation, and if you adopt 
either one or the other, what becomes of the substitute? The Con¬ 
vention ought to have the right to consider that substitute, it strikes 
me, before either one, otherwise the substitute is of no force or 
effect. 

MR. WHITE—This thought occurs to me, not being a par- 
liamentarian, but as suggested by some, that the Committee has 
the right to go on and perfect its measure. 

THE PRESIDENT—That is undoubtedly the rule. 

MR. WHITE—If that is true, where is the reason for going 
on and perfecting a measure which may be displaced for a sub¬ 
stitute ? 

THE PRESIDENT—The substitute is offered because the 
party who offers it supposes the measure is imperfect and needs 
improvement by the adoption of the substitute. The friends of the 
measure, before that question is tested, have the right to perfect 
their measure bv amendment. 

MR. WHITE—Then, when would the substitute be in order? 

THE PRESIDENT—As soon as the friends of the measure 
have perfected it by amendment. 

MR. WHITE—When will we know that? 

THE PRESIDENT—You will know that as soon as they 
cease to offer amendments. 

MR. WHITE—It seems to me that with this, like everything 
else, that the substitute ought to be considered first. 

MR. ROGERS (Sumter)—Going upon the ground that the 
friends of the measure have the right to perfect their measure and 
adopt this report section by section, before any substitute can be 
offered, I think it would be necessary to reconsider it after that 
is done before you could get it in. It seems to me clear when the 
section is adopted you would have to move a reconsideration of 



CONSTITUTIONAL CONVENTION. 1901 2077 

s ubs t it ute. W t" ^would^be ' nece^a ry *t k ^ >OU C u lUd offer 
one at a time and reconsider and th* 1 take the steps backward 

r;," ^ 

the entire frt icl!''theel'tiJman'says.’’""""'' reP ° rt Which “ VerS 

thnt^tatenu^ K h R dfp CuII T an ^"~ ,r, i e krent,eman is incorrect in 
'!x^ tctkm of tl!i article. 0 * """ ^ ^ * ectio " - - 


I t !/ iIv r ! > 1 tV <S - 1 D, ' NT ~T 1U ‘ ( r llairman °f tile Committee states 
that the gentleman is mistaken m saying that the minority report 
covers the entire article as reported. 

MR. BLACKW hLL I rise to make a further point of order, 
that there is really nothing before the House to offer a substitute 
tor. It was simply stated that the next thing in order was the 
<•(>ii>nlerati<m <»t the report and it has not been offered bv the Chair¬ 
man of the Committee, nor has the Chairman been heard 


1 Ill*. PRKS ID EXT—In the opinion of the Chair, in view of 
tlu* condition of this article, the fact that there is a minority report 
.inciting' mo>t of the sections and that there is a substitute which 
(he gentleman from Jefferson desires to offer to the entire report, 
it will be proper to take the article up section bv section when it 
-hall he open for amendment before the sections are adopted, as 
amended, and before the sections are adopted as amended, it will 
then he open to proposition of a substitute for the entire article, 
and no reconsideration will be necessary. The Secretary will read 
the first section. 


MR. PARKER — I believe the Chairman has the right to ex¬ 
plain the article. 


THK PRKSIDICN’T—There is n<> rule that I have been able 
to find which requires an article to be taken section by section. 

The gentleman may make his statement to the Convention. 

MR. PARKER—In presenting this article of the Constitu¬ 
tion to the Convention, the Chairman has no speech to make. I 
will siniplv content myself by saying that the Committee has 
carefully and patiently discharged their obligation and duty in 
accordance with our best judgment; and the result of its labors, 
is now the property of this Convention to do with as to the Con¬ 
vention seems best! I now move that we take up this article sec¬ 
tion by section, and if there are any amendments to the sections, 
they can be made as the sections are considered. 

MR. PROCTOR—I make the point of order that is already 
the rule of the House. 



2078 


OFFICIAL PROCEEDINGS 


MR. deGRAFFENREID—That was the rule adopted under 
the suspension of the rules when we took up the report of the 
Committee on Executive Department. 

THE PRESIDENT—The records do not seem to hear the 
gentleman out. That was confined to that particular article. The 
motion is that the Article be taken up Section by Section. 

And a vote being taken, the motion was carried. 

THE PRESIDENT—The Chair will state that the gentleman 
from Jefferson will not be cut off from offering his article as a sub¬ 
stitute at the proper time and before the Article is adopted. 

MR. CORNWELL—I will attempt to get the proper changes 
by amending the Sections as they come up. 

The Clerk then read the following: 

An Ordinance to create and define the State and County Boun- 
daries, and to regulate the location of county sites, and the forma¬ 
tion of new counties. 

Be it ordained by the people of Alabama in Convention as¬ 
sembled, That Article II. of the Constitution be stricken out, and 
the following Article inserted in lieu thereof: 

ARTICLE II. 

State and County Boundaries, County Sites and New Counties. 

Section 1. The Boundaries of this State are established and 
declared to be as follows, that is to say: Beginning at the point 
where the 31st degree of North Latitude crosses the Perdido River; 
thence East, to the Western Boundary Line of the State of Geor¬ 
gia; thence along said line to the Southern boundary line of the 
State of Tennessee, thence west along the Southern boundary of 
the State of Tennessee, crossing the Tennessee River, and on to 
the second intersection of said river by said line, thence up said 
river to the mouth of Big Bear Creek; thence by a direct line to 
the northwest corner of Washington County, in this State, as 
originally formed; thence southerly along the line of the State of 
Mississippi to the Gulf of Mexico, thence eastwardly, including all 
islands within six leagues of the shore to the Perdido River; thence 
up said river to the beginning; Provided, That the limits and juris¬ 
diction of this State shall extend to and include any other land and 
territory now acquired, or hereafter acquired, by contract or agree¬ 
ment with other States or otherwise, although such land and ter¬ 
ritory are not included within the boundaries hereinbefore desig¬ 
nated. 

MR. PARKER—The only change made in this Section is the 
proviso, “Provided, That the limits and jurisdiction of this State 
shall extend to and include any other land and territory now ac- 



CONSTITUTIONAL CONVENTION, 1901 


2079 


cjuired, or hereafter acquired, by contract or agreement with other 
States or otherwise, although such land and territory are not in¬ 
cluded within the boundaies hereinbefore designated.” This was 
added for the purpose if there should be any addition fro*} 1 the 
State of Florida, such addition would be within the jurisdiction of 
this State. I move the adoption of the Section. 

THE PRESIDENT—Unless some amendment is offered, the 
Convention will pass to the next Section. The Chair does not 
think it proper to adopt the Section in view of the proposition to 
offer a substitute. The Convention is now considering this report 
for the purpose of hearing such amendments as may be offered. 

MR. DENT—I would like to suggest a verbal amendment. I 
would sav “now held” instead of “now acquired.” 

MR. PARKER—We don’t know just when this Constitution 
will be adopted. We are not particular, however, about the phras- 
seologv. and if you want it we have no objection. 

THE PRESIDENT—The Clerk will read the next Section 
unless the gentleman wants to offer the amendment. 


MR. DENT—I offer that amendment. 


THE PRESIDENT—Send up that amendment in writing. 
MR. DENT—I don’t care enough about it to write it. Let 
them pass on. 


The Clerk then read Section 2 as follows: 

Sec 2 The boundaries of the several counties of this State 
as they now exist are hereby ratified and confirmed. 

MR. PARKER—That is substantially the same as the old 


Constitution. 

MR. CORNWELL—I desire to offer a substitute for that 
section. 


MR SAMFORD—In view of the fact that the gentleman from 
Jefferson has stated to the Chair that he would not offer his sub¬ 
stitute for this article, but would attempt to get his changes by 
amendment! it appears to me that it would be better to adopt these 
sections as we go along. 


MR. CORNWELL—I will attempt to get in by amendment. 


the changes I desire. 

THE PRESIDENT—We were simply pursuing this course 
in order not to cut off the gentleman. 

MR. PARKER—I move to adopt Section 1. 

And upon a vote being taken the section was adopted. 



2080 


OFFICIAL PK< K'KHDINC.S 


MR. PARKER—I move to adopt Section _. 

THE PRESIDENT—It is moved that Section 2 be adopted. 
MR. CORNWELL—I have sent an amendment up to that 
section. 


The amendment was read as lollous: 

“Until changed bv the General Assembly as allowed by this 
Constitution, the boundaries of the several counties o this State 
as heretofore established by law, are hereby rat.tied and contirmed 
And no new county hereafter formed shall contain less than bs.tXX) 
inhabitants, nor shall it have less assessed taxable ptopeitv than 
two millions, as shown by the last tax returns nor shall it contain 
a less area than 400 square miles: and it shall be entitled to one 
or more representatives under the ratio of representation existing 
at the time of its formation. 


MR. CORNWELL—Vou will notice a> to that .substitute, or 
amendment, whichever you choose to call it, that there are othei 
sections in this article that deal more or less with the same matter : 
and if necessary I will have to otter another sub>titute along the 
same line as embodied in that amendment. We all recognize the 
fact that Alabama, when it was first organized, had 23 counties. 
Today we have 66. Our constitutional area for a county is now 
600 square miles. I propose to reduce it to 400; but for informa¬ 
tion of the Convention I will state that further on I propose to 
offer a section, limiting the counties left to 600. I hat is, you can 
establish a new county, provided it has 400 square miles and so 
much taxable wealth. If you take into consideration what othei 
States are doing, benefits to be derived from small counties in the 
way of education, the benefits of brushing up against each other, 
the benefits to our country friends on account of better roads and 
local home government, which we all believe in, it will give our 
people opportunities they have not enjoyed heretofore. 


MR. deCRAKFENRElD—1 move to lay the amendment of 
the gentleman on the table. 


The yeas and nays were called for by the delegate from Cle¬ 
burne (Mr. Howell.) The call was withdrawn and was then re¬ 
newed by the delegate from Sumter (Rogers), but the call was 
not sustained. And a vote being taken on a division the motion to 
table prevailed by 69 ayes and 21 noes. 


MR. PARKER—I move the adoption of Section 2. 


MR. HARRISON—Under the ruling of the Chair, were not 
amendments only to be considered and then opportunity given for 
the substitute to be considered? 



CONSTITUTIONAL C0NVKNTION. 1901 


2081 


MR. PRESIDENT—The Chair proceeded under that rule, but 
the gentleman from Jefferson announced that he would prefer to 
offer his amendments to each section as read. 

MR. MOODY—There is a minority report embracing Sections 
2 and 3. 

THE PRESIDENT—The Secretary will read the minority 
report. 

THE CLERK—The minority report does not embrace Sec¬ 
tion 2. 

MR. PRESIDENT—The Clerk informs me that the minority 
report does not affect Section 2. 

MR. FOSTER—I think the Secretary is mistaken. 

The Clerk found the minority report referred to and it was 
read as follows: 

The undersigned member of the Committee on State and Coun¬ 
ty Boundaries does not concur in the report of the Committee as 
to Sections 2. 3 and 4. and he offers as substitute therefor the fol¬ 
lowing : 

Sec. 3. The boundaries of the several counties of this State 
as heretofore established by law, are hereby ratified and confirmed. 
The General Assembly may by a vote of two-thirds of both houses 
thereof arrange and designate boundaries for the several counties 
of this State, which boundaries shall not be altered, except by a 
like vote; but no new counties shall be hereafter formed of less 
extent than six hundred square miles and no existing county shall 
be reduced to less than six hundred square miles; and no new 
county 7 shall be formed which does not contain a sufficient number 
of inhabitants to entitle it to one representative under the ratio of 
representation existing at the time of its foundation, and leave the 
county or counties from which it is taken with the required number 
of inhabitants entitling such county or counties to separate repre¬ 
sentation. Respectfully submitted. 

Milo Moody, 

C. H. Miller. 

MR. ROBINSON—I want to offer a substitute. 

MR. BLACKWELL—I make the point of order that there is 
but one section before the House. 

THE PRESIDENT—The chair will rule if the committee de¬ 
sires to perfect that section it will have the opportunity to do so; 
and also to perfect three and four. 



2082 


O F FI Cl A L PROC KKDI NOS 


MR. COBB—I move the minority report be laid on the table 
so far as it affects Section 2. It is in the identical words. 

MR. PRESIDENT—It seems to the chair pursuing the same 
ruling that the chair announced awhile ago, that we will pass over 
Sections 2 and 3, and then 4, and give the friends of the measure 
an opportunity to perfect each section. Then the minority report 
will be in order, as it relates to all three sections. So, as there i> 
no amendment to Section 2, the secretarv will read Section 3. 

Section 3 was read as follows: 

Sec. 3. The General Assembly shall have power, provided 
that each house, by a majority of the members elected thereto, 
shall vote in favor thereof, to submit to a vote of the people re¬ 
siding within the territory proposed to be taken from one county 
and given to another, a change or alteration in count}' lines, but no 
such change or alteration shall be made unless such proposed 
change or alteration shall receive two-thirds of the votes of the 
qualified electors voting at such election, and provided, that no 
county line shall be changed or altered so as to reduce any old 
county below 500 square miles or which shall reduce the inhabi¬ 
tants in any such county below the number of inhabitants to entitle 
the county to one representative. 

THE CLERK—To which there are two minority reports; the 
one just read, which was signed by Messrs. Moody and Miller, and 
the other of which is as follows: 

We therefore move to amend the report by striking out “five 
hundred” where it occurs in Section 3, and adding in lieu thereof 
the word “six hundred." Respectfully submitted, 

J. E. Cobb, 

John H. Parker, 

E. C. Jackson. 

MR. HOWELL—I have an amendment to Section 3. 

MR. SAM FORI) (Pike) — 1 rise to a point of order. 

THE PRESIDENT—The gentleman will state his point of 
order. 

MR. SAMKORD (Pike)—The chair held a half minute ago 
that a minority had the same relation to the majority report as an 
amendment. That being the case, there are two minority reports, 
and that would be an amendment to an amendment and no more 
amendments can be offered until we can get rid of some of the 
amendments now before us. 

THE PRESIDENT—One of the amendments offered by the 
minority relates only to one section. 



CONSTITUTIONAL CONVENTION. 190! 


2083 


MR. PARKER (Cullman)—Yes. 

THE PRESIDENT-—It seems to the chair that where one 
of the minority reports relate to the three sections, the other to 
one, the rule suggested by the gentleman does not apply, hut the 
Convention will first consider the minority report which is con¬ 
fined by its terms to one section with a view of allowing the friends 
of the measure to perfect that section before the other substitute 
is considered, which relates to the three sections. 

MR. HOWELL—The chair will not entertain my amendment, 
then, until that is considered? 

THE PRESIDENT—The minority report will be considered, 
and then the gentleman will have an opportunity of offering his 
amendment. The chair will suggest that the gentleman from 
Chambers withdraw his amendment. The secretary will read the 
minority report which relates to Section 3 alone. 

This was done, and the amendment of the delegate from Cle¬ 
burne was read as follows: 

Amend Section 3, Article 2, by striking out the words “five 
hundred’" where they occur and inserting in lieu thereof “four hun¬ 
dred.” 

THE PRESIDENT—It seems to the chair the amendment of 
the gentleman should relate to the amendment. 

MR. HOWELL—I ask unanimous consent to withdraw the 
amendment, then, and to offer it at the proper time. 

THE PRESIDENT—It can come in now by striking out 
“six hundred” in the minority report and inserting “four hundred.” 

The change suggested by the President by unanimous consent 
was allowed, and the amendment was then read as follows: “Amend 
the amendment, the minority report, by striking out the words 
‘six hundred’ where they occur and inserting in lieu thereof “four 
hundred.’ ” 

MR. O’NEAL—What becomes of the minority report signed 
by Messrs. Moody and Miller? 

THE PRESIDENT—That relates to the third section and it 
will be taken up as soon as the third section is reached. 

MR. HOWELL—I asked to be allowed to give a few reasons 
for offering that amendment. 

I appreciate the fact that we will lead a forlorn hope from the 
expressions already had on this subject, but we have some reasons, 
and, to our minds, very plausible reasons, why the constitutional 
area of counties should be reduced to 400 square miles. 



2084 


OFFICIAL PROCEEDINGS 


In the organization of this State in 1819 in consequence of the 
sparsely settled condition of the country, it took 900 square miles 
to make a county. Possibly that was well enough in that day. 
Thirty-six years after that when the State had settled up and there 
was a demand and a reason for it, the Constitutional Convention 
of 1865 reduced it from 900 to 600 under which a number of new 
counties were organized in Alabama, Waste places were built up 
and people were situated much more conveniently at their county 
towns than they had been before. Thirty-six years have come and 
gone since that and if there was a reason for the reduction of the 
area of counties in 1865 the reason is stronger now why the consti¬ 
tutional area should be still further reduced. I have no personal 
interest in the formation of any new county, because situated 
where my home is, it would be impossible for the creation of a 
new county to put me any nearer the Court House than 1 am at 
present and I have no pique or ill-will against any town so that I 
have no interest in the formation of counties. I am too old to 
desire any office, and it occurs to me in framing this organic law 
that we hope will be the organic law for years to come, and in the 
rapid increase of the population and the development of our great 
State, are we prepared to say in all the years to come there shall 
be no county less than 600 square miles? There is to my mind a 
number of reasons for this measure. 1 appreciate the fact that the 
county towns, the Court House towns of Alabama as a rule are 
opposed to it because they are situated conveniently to the Court 
House and are put at no disadvantage in attending courts and going 
to the town and they feel like everybody else is the same wav. 
They remind me very much of the old lady who went out visiting 
one evening and before she returned there came up a cold blizzard, 
and when she got back to her house she was nearly frozen, and she 
said to one of her servants, you hitch up old John and go to the 
coal house and get some coal and take over to Widow Smith’s. 
While the man was hitching up she went in and got thoroughly 
warm, and then she went around to the coal house and said, “fohn. 
”1 think it is turning some warmer, and you need not carry the coal 
to Widow Smith’s.” So these gentlemen cannot appreciate the 
disadvantages of the people of the rural districts, that have to take 
a journey of forty miles to get to the Court House. I had a per¬ 
sonal experience this winter. During our County Court, which is 
in the place of a Circuit Court, there were witnesses before the 
jury that had to travel anywhere from twenty-five to forty miles 
and the weather was bad and the roads bad, and some of them had 
to walk and they were summoned and on account of the weather 
they refused to go. Attachments were taken and the Sheriff was 
sent and they were brought there and the Judge fined them $10. 
That is only one case out of many. Now they tell us if you dis¬ 
turb the present status of the counties it is going to beat the Consti¬ 
tution. I risk nothing in saying that that will be counterbalanced 



CONSTITUTIONAL CONVENTION. 1901 2085 

on the other side. I know sections of the country where they will 
say if this privilege is not given, let the Constitution go to the 
dogs. 

There are various advantages that grow out of the organiza¬ 
tion of new counties. Compare the State of Georgia with Alabama. 
Everybody who knows anything about Georgia knows there is 
not a State in the Union whose citizens are better satisfied with 
their State and the conditions than the State of Georgia. While 
that State has scarcely more than eight or ten thousand square 
miles more territory than Alabama, she has 137 counties to Ala¬ 
bama s sixty-six. Every man in the State of Georgia can get up 
and eat his breakfast, go to the county seat, and get back home 
before night. 

A Court House in a sparsely settled district is a civilizer and 
an educator, f remember just after the war new counties were 
organized along the Georgia line under the Constitution of 1865. 
Up to that time men had to travel forty miles through the piney 
woods to get to the Court House. Now the court houses are built 
up and you can see the marvelous improvement socially and every 
way and all attributable to these county towns in their midst. 
They^ are great educators. A man lives eight or ten miles from 
the Court House and he goes out and talks to the doctor and the 
lawyer and the preacher and the merchant and then he goes back 
home with a fund of information which his family gets. You put 
him forty miles from the county seat and he never gets there un¬ 
less the Sheriff is sent after him. I am surprised at the Chairman 
of this Committee. I remember and so does he some years ago 
that there was a mighty barren section up where his county is. 
It was said that a crow could hardly fly over it without carrying 
his rations. But there came a colony of Germans and settled down 
there and the first thing they did was to ask to organize a new 
county. Of course that was opposed by the fellows who live around 
the Court House. I remember that the Chairman of the Committee 
of the Legislature would not report the bill and it was reported bv 
another member of the Committee, and we got the county of Cull¬ 
man. and I am surprised that the gentleman from Cullman, coming 
here with a provision which practically says that we shall have no 
new counties, that we don’t care about any others. 

I don’t care to protract the discussion further. I have given 
some reasons and I will say to my Court House friends, and I like 
them all, a better class is not in Alabama, and they are sincere in 
what they say—that this article don’t create new counties. It is 
to be left to the good sense and the wisdom of the people of the 
Legislature within years to come, and it is a fact within my per¬ 
sonal knowledge that for thirty years the Court House towns have 
always controlled things, and unless they united on passing a 
measure it never passed. In view of that fact, I risk nothing in 



2086 


OFFICIAL FROCKKDINOS 


saying that in years to come, it will he the same way. and in view 
of the restrictions thrown around that article about the organiza¬ 
tion of new counties and about the removal of court houses and 
the fact that the Court House towns have always controlled things 
in the Legislature, it seems to me you can take no risk in allowing 
this measure to go in, that unless there is infinite merit in a propo¬ 
sition to create a new county, it won’t be done. 

Don’t let us shut the gates, so that in the next decade, when 
our population will be increased at least 25 per cent, and our great 
State filled up with people, we won’t be able to form any new 
counties and some of our people will have to go twenty-five or 
thirty miles to a Court House. 

Now they say that it will increase taxation. It may, but if 
these gentleman who desire to form a new county are willing to 
assume the taxation, they ought to be allowed to do it. It is just 
like a fellow who won’t allow his boy to go out and build him a 
home, but wants him to stay around home so that what he make> 
will go to the homestead. Let the boys go out and build their 
shacks and start to housekeeping, and in the years to come Ala¬ 
bama, instead of sixtv-six courthouses, schools and churches will 
have 100. 


MR. ROGERS (Sumter)—I do not feel that I can add any¬ 
thing to the remarks that hav e been made by the delegate from 
Cleburne. I simply want to go on record now as going in the 
band wagon of progress in this enlightened twentieth century. 
When States are first organized the counties are large, as a matter 
of course, because they have not a sufficient number of inhabitants 
or wealth to have smaller counties. But as the counties grow in 
wealth and the people increase, it has been the policy of all civilized 
countries to reduce the area of counties so that a man could go to 
is court house and attend to his business in one dav and get back 
home by night. 


Another reason as has been stated bv my friend is that the 
establishment of a court house congregates the officers of the coun¬ 
ty there and they build up improvements, schools and churches 
1 here can be no reason urged against this reduction, except two 
One is that it will reduce the pay of certain officers in the State of 

,f'fL an ; a ’ th f e . Probat . e and other officers, who draw their 

ving from the people of these counties. Another is that certain 
counties may be afraid if their areas are reduced thev will lose a 

ZTnf a tT U S! t 'f*™* "hich they have in dominating the 
!a\vs of the State of Alabama. Hut neither ..f these reasons is 
sufficient to retain these cumbersome counties, where men some¬ 
times reside forty miles from the court house. I submit whenever 
community has a sufficient amount of wealth and people and 

If a the S v wantlo t MT* C ° unt - V ’ ' ve shoul(1 Permit them to do so. 
If they want to tax themselves, that ,s their business They can't 



CONSTITUTIONAL CONVENTION. 1901 


20K7 


get out of paying their proportion of the debts of the old county. 
They are compelled, under the provision that we are to adopt, to 
assume their just proportion of the debt of the old county. 

No injustice will be worked on anybody, and no reasons can 
be assigned why those who live around court houses now should 
want to retain the counties unchanged, because thereby they will 
get a little more money. The money those officers receive does 
not belong to them. It belongs to the State of Alabama. 

MR. OATES—The gentleman stated that new court houses 
were great civilizers. Don't that depend on the number of barrooms 
around them? 

MR. ROGERS (Sumter)—No, sir; it depends on the number 
of churches that grow there. Whenever you build a new court 
house you have a clerk and a sheriff and a probate judge, and from 
their very necessity they establish schools, and their wives build 
the churches, and the barroom can go to the devil, where it ought 
to go. It has nothing to do at all in the civilization of this coun¬ 
try. 

The delegate from Washington here arose. 

THE PRESIDENT—Will the gentleman yield to a question 
from the delegate from Washington? 

MR. PALMER—No, sir: I don't want to ask a question. 1 
wanted to make a speech. 

MR. ROGERS (Sumter)—If that is the case, 1 shall desist, 
as I am sure we are all anxious to hear the delegate from Washing¬ 
ton. 


MR. PALMER—I would like to give a hit of my experience 
in regard to these new counties. I judge from the looks of the 
majority of these men's faces that 90 per cent of this Convention 
live at and near the court houses and you cannot appreciate nor 
realize what a farmer has to contend with who lives thirty or forty 
miles away from the county seat. I was horn and raised in the 
county of Wilcox, in a prairie county, and I resided there all mv 
life until three years ago last December. I lived at least twenty 
miles from Camden, the county seat of Wilcox, and the most of it 
was rough prairie road. At that time no railroad was built there 
and after standing it the greater portion of my life, that was one of 
the main objects of my pulling up and leaving mv homestead in 
Wilcox County, to get into more convenient quarters. 1 moved 
from there to Washington County, and I now live within five miles 
of St. Stephens, with a perfect road, high and dry and level. No 
one can appreciate, no one can know or realize the convenience of 
a man living on a good road near his court house over one that 
lives in the remotest section with bad roads to get to his court 



2088 


OFFICIAL PR< 


house. The thing is this: The officers build the court house, and. 
I am sorry to say, the most of the attorneys there seem to think 
a great deal of the people that live at a distance. I hey love them 
tremendously, and they are afraid they will tax themselves, and 
they are afraid they will spend their money in building court houses, 
for themselves. The court houses are built for our convenience, to 
keep our records, and so that all offenses against the law may be 
speedily tried. Now, you take men that live thirty or forty miles 
from the court house, and there is had roads to it. and they will 
submit to almost any intolerance before they will push a prosecu¬ 
tion against a man for any common offenses. The worry and 
trouble and labor of getting to the court house takes up so much 
time and expense that they pass over matters without prosecution, 
where otherwise, if they lived in close proximitv they would push 
the prosecution. 

Now gentlemen of the Convention, 1 am satisfied most of you 
live at or near court houses. They tell me that ninety-six lawyers 
are in this body. If that is so, there must he ninety of them that 
live near the court house. It is a mighty poor lawyer who is going 
to get off in the piney woods and hills. Now, another thing: The 
old lawyers, the way things are fixed now. get all the clients and 
you young fellows almost starve to death. Right here in Mont¬ 
gomery I will guarantee that a large majority of the lawyers are 
hardly making a living. You are over-shadowed by such a lawyer 
as the gentleman on my left and the one on my right, and you 
young lawyers hardly get enough money to allow you to smoke a 
’few cigars and occasionally drink a little liquor. I would vote for 
mv friend’s substitute if he would leave out that $2,000,000 propo¬ 
sition. 1 he 400 scjuare miles is all right, but von put in the $2,000.- 
(XX). and that will kill the formation of a new countv in every countv 
in the State except Bessemer, which I think the gentleman is work- 
ing for. But there is a safeguard in this. \ on get the population 
and get the representation and that is enough—if yon get popula¬ 
tion sufficient to support one representative in the Legislature and 
leave the old counties enough. That is sufficient. 1 hope the Con¬ 
vention will have consideration enough for people that live thirty 
or forty miles from the county seat and give up their selfishness 
and some of you get out of your counties and go into the new coun- 
Les and build up and develop the new countv. 1 am in hopes the 
Convention will vote for the 400 miles amendment. 


MR. LONG (Walker)—! think the Coimntion is ready to 
vote on this proposition. There is onlv one countv that has" not 
made any progress and that is the countv of Cleburne. It stands 
right close to the Georgia line where all that prosperity has been 
I move to lay the amendment of the delegate from Cleburne on 
the table. 



CONSTITUTIONAL CONVENTION. 1901 


2089 


1 he yeas and nays were called for by Mr. Howell of Cleburne 
and the call was sustained, and the result of the roll call was as 
follows: 


Alnion, 

Ranks, 

RarefieM, 

Boone, 

Browne, 

Burns, 

Cardon, 

Carmichael, of Colbert, 
Carnathon, 

Cobb, 

Coleman, of Walker, 
Craig, 

Cunningham, 

Davis, of DeKalh, 

Dent, 

rleGraffenreid, 

Eyster, 

Espy, 

Ferguson, 

Fletcher, 

Foster, 

Graham, of Montgomery, 
Graham, of Talladega, 
Grayson. 

Greer, of Perry, 

Harrison, 

Total—77. 


Messrs. President, 
Bartlett, 

Beavers, 

Blackwell, 

Byars, 

Carmichael, of Coffee, 
Case, 

Coter, 

Cornwell, 

Davis, of Etowah, 
Eley, 

Gilmore, 


AYES. 

Heflin, of Chambers. 
Heflin, of Randolph, 
Henderson, 

Hodges, 

Hood, 

How/e, 

Inge, 

Jenkins. 

Jones, of Montgomery, 
Jones, of Wilcox, 

Kirk, 

Knight, 

Ledbetter, 

Leigh, 

Long (Walker), 

Lowe (Lawrence), 
McMillan (Baldwin). 
McMillan (Wilcox), 
Maxwell, 

Merrill, 

Miller (Marengo), 
Miller (Wilcox), 
Moody, 

Murphree, 

NeSmith, 

Norman, 


NOES. 

Glover, 

Grant, 

Greer, of Calhoun, 
Haley, 

Howell, 

Jones, of Bibb, 
Jones, of Hale, 
Malone, 

Martin, 

Palmer, 

Parker (Cullman), 
Pearce. 


Oates, 

O’Neal (Lauderdale), 
O’Neill (Jefferson), 
Opp, 

Parker ( Elmore). 
i Philips. 

Pi 11a ns, 

Proctor, 

Robinson, 

Sam ford. 

Sanders, 

Sentell, 

Smith (Mobile), 
Smith, Morgan M., 
Spragins, 

Stewart, 

Thompson, 

Vaughan, 

Waddell, 

Walker, 

Watts. 

Weakley, 

White, 

Williams ( Barbour). 
Williams (Marengo). 


i Vt ills, 

Pitts, 

Porter, 

Rogers (Lowndes) 
Rogers (Sumter), 
Sanford, 

Sloan, 

Smith, Mac. A., 
Sorrell, 

Studdard, 

Whiteside, 

Wilson (Wash’gton), 


Total—36. 



2090 


OFFICIAL PROCEEDINGS 


ABSENT OK NOT VOTING. 


Altman, 

\ 1 iUMHl. 

1\eex . 

Ashcraft, 

1 ack>< >n. 

Kciiiro. 

Beddow, 

King. 

Rev noltl.s ( Chilton ) 

Bethune, 

Kirkland. 

Ke\nokU ( 1 {enr\). 

Brooks, 

K \ le. 

Searcv, 

Bulger, 

Lockliu. 

Selhrimer. 

Burnett, 

i .onia\. 

SoP.ie. 

Chapman, 

Long ( Butler ). 

S| Uh'll'.s, 

Coleman, of Greene. 

Lowe 1 ) el rerx >n !. 

1 <\ y loe, 

Duke, 

Macdonald. 

\\ eatherl) . 

Fitts, 

\! orrisette. 

\\ lief, 

Foshee, 

M ulkex, 

\\ iitLtnis ( KllllClf 1. 

Freeman. 

\ or wood. 

\\ iNoii ( Clarke L 

Handley, 

( ) Kear. 

V\ inn. 


So the amendment of the delegate from Cleburne \va^ laid mi 
the table. 

During the roll call. 

MR. HKDDOW—( )n thi> question I am paired with Mr. Sel- 
heimer. He would vote aye and 1 would vote no. 

MR. MILLER (Marengo) 1 now move to Mil>>titute the 
minority report of Hood and Miller tor the other minority report 
of Cobb, Parker and Jackson. 

THE PRESIDENT -The minority report >eem> to relate to 
three sections. 

MR. WHITESIDE—I have an amendment. 

1 H K PRESI DEN 1 W e will settle the question ;is to the 
minority report. 

MR. BLACKWELL—That minority report is to Sections 2 
2 and 4. 


1 HE PRESIDEN I — I hat is one minority report, and then 
one of the minority reports is confined to Section 3. 

MK. MILLER 1 have a substitute for Section 3. 

IHE PRESIDEN 1—Mni offer it as a substitute for the 
amendment offered by the gentleman from Morgan? 

MR. MILLER (Marengo)—-Yes. sir. 

MR. O )HR—Will it not suit your views just as well to strike 
out rive hundred and insert six hundred? 

MR MILLER—No, sir. Mr. President. 1 yield the floor to 
the gentleman from Hale. 



CONSTITUTIONAL CONVKNTION, 1901 


2091 


MR. deGRAb b ENREID—I offer as a substitute for the pend- 
in b r question, the following, which I ask the Clerk to read. 

THE PRESIDENT— For Section 3? 

M R. deGRAFFKNREID— Yes. 

1 HE PRESIDENT-—Or for the amendment offered? 

MR. de(jRAhIvENRRID—And for the amendment offered by 
tin* gentleman from Morgan, yes, sir. 

1 he amendment was read as follows: The General Assembly 
mu} , by a vote of two-thirds of both Houses thereof, arrange and 
designate boundaries for the several counties of this State, which 
boundaries shall not be altered except bv a like vote ; but no new 
county shall be hereafter formed of less extent than six hundred 
square miles, and no existing county shall be reduced to less than 
six hundred square miles, and no new county shall be formed 
which does not contain a sufficient number of inhabitants to en¬ 
title it to one representative under the ratio of representation exist¬ 
ing at the time of its formation, and leave the county or counties 
from which it is taken with the required number of inhabitants 
entitling such county or counties to separate representation/’ 

MR. deGRAFFENRFJD—As I understand it. the amendment 
offered is the provision now contained in the Constitution with 
reference to counties and county boundaries, and upon the adoption 
of that as a substitute, I call for the previous question. 

MR. BLACKW ELL—I will ask the gentleman to withdraw 
that. The majority of the committee have not been heard. 

MR. deGR Ah F ENREID—I will withdraw, but wish to submit 
a few remarks. Mr. President and gentlemen of the Convention, 
the matter that is presented to you is one of some importance to 
the State. It is one that has been sprung in this Convention and 
was not discussed in the campaign before the people. This Con¬ 
vention was called for the purpose of reforming the suffrage of 
this State, with a pledge on the part of some of the members of 
this Convention at least, that the taxes of the State should not be 
increased, but that they should be decreased if it could be done. 
Upon those issues we went before the people. Upon those is nes 
this Convention was called, and upon those issues most of the dele¬ 
gates to this Convention were elected by the people. We are not 
adopting a Constitution which will by virtue of our act be the 
supreme law of this State, but we are adopting a Constitution under 
a pledge that it will be sent back to the people for ratification by 
them. I am not informed as to the wishes of the people of Ala¬ 
bama upon this subject. I do not believe that there is a single 
delegate here who can truthfully rise in his seat and sav that he 
is authorized to speak for the people upon this subject. 



2092 


O F F i CIA L PR( )CF.KI) IN ('. S 


MR. HOWELL—I am, sir. 

MR. deGRAF F ENRF,II)—You art*, but there are no others. 
I did not think that there was one who could say he knew what 
the people of Alabama desired upon this subject. 

MR. FIOW FvLL—1 know what they want in my part of the 
county. 

MR. deGRAF F'ENRF*ID—In your part of the countv. Ex¬ 
cuse me, but- 

MR. ROGlvRS (Sumter)—If the gentleman will permit a 
question, some days ago in your eloquent wav you advocated in¬ 
creasing the pay of the Governor of the State of Alabama. Were 
you authorized to speak for the people of Alabama as to what they 
wanted done about that? 

MR. deGRAF FENRIvII)—We didn’t put it in the Constitu¬ 
tion, either. 

MR. ROGERS (Sumter)—But didn’t vou want to pul it in 
there? 

MR. deGRAKFENREID—Yes, I wanted to and I am willing, 
so tar as that small matter was concerned, to go before the people 
and say it was right. 

MR. ROGERS (Sumter)—Will the gentleman permit another 
interruption? 

MR. deGRAKFENREID—Yes. 

MR. ROGERS (Sumter)—We are willing to go before the 
people of the State of Alabama and say whenever you want count- 
ties of four hundred square miles, you shall have it. 

MR. HOWELL—I misunderstood the gentleman’s quest ion. 

I meant to answer that 1 knew what our people wanted. 

MR. deGRAKFENREID—In your section. 

MR. HOW'ELL—In my section. 

MR. deGRAF FENREID—I understand, and I did not dial- 
lenge that. I suppose every man here feels that he knows some¬ 
thing of the wishes of the people of his particular locality about 
this matter, but this is a subject in which all of the people of the 
State of Alabama are interested. 

Now some gentleman has referred to the State of Georgia, 
where we know they have a number of small counties. Jt was 
only a day or two ago that a distinguished gentleman of that 
State, who was in the State of Tennessee, where I happened to be 
said to me that he had read the report of this Committee and 



2093 


CONSTITUTIONAL CONVENTION, 1901 


t 1 . - ‘ e( . t() . that the State of Georgia had made a.grave 

h { [, ,n l )roxi( ln ^ ^ or so niany small counties, and that a num- 
. e 01 t!le county seats of the counties of Georgia were mere court 

. a st T* e an d postoffice, unable to keep up the officers 
and the dignity of a county. 


But. gentlemen, there is another matter 1 desire to place before 
• Vo f u * . L canu * . ere as I have already stated, for the purpose of 
Vi . or ” lin K the suffrage. That was the main purpose for which 
ns Convention was called. We would not have been here had 
it not been for that subject. Let us be very careful not to load 
t le Constitution down. Let us be very careful not to do anything 
here that may render it doubtful whether or not this Constitution 
w dl be adopted by the people when we send it back to them for 
i atiiRation. Remember that it is a matter of the gravest impor¬ 
tance to the State of Alabama, to its integrity and its prosperity, 
that we should be relieved from the ignorant and the vicious at 
the ballot box. Let us be careful not to do anything that will 
deflect the attention of the people from that subject when this in¬ 
strument is back to them for adoption— 


MR. CORNW ELL—I move to lay that amendment offered 
by the gentleman from Hale, on the table. 


MR. BLACKVViCLL-—1 will ask the gentleman to withdraw 
that for a while. The majority of the Committee have not had 
an opportunity to oppose the measure, and I would like to speak 
in opposition to the measure offered by the minority. 

MR. CORNWELL—1 will yield to the gentleman. 

MR. BLACKWELL—In behalf of the Committee, M r. Presi¬ 
dent and gentlemen of the Convention. T have no doubt that it is 
amusing to a good many of us here to see how readily we about 
face, in our ideas, when our interests suggest a change of front. 
You will notice, Mr. President, whenever we have got a measure 
here that we want to put in, we know it is not legislative in its 
nature and character, and whenever anybody else has got a measure 
that we don’t want, we know that it is legislative in its nature and 
character. You will notice, also that whenever a thing is offered a 
gentleman does not want, he says we are loading down the Con¬ 
stitution. You will notice he says we have got up something that 
the people don't know anything about, and yet when he supports 
anything that the people have not been consulted about, why he 
says, I am willing to risk it before the people. I am willing to 
risk anything before the people in this matter. 

Now, Mr. President, we live in a progressive age. The State 
of Alabama today has a population of practically two millions of 
people. The first limit in 1819 fixed the area of counties at nine 
hundred square miles to the county. In 1865 we had grown so that 
they said that six hundred square miles was a sufficient limit. We 



2094 


O FFICIA L PROC K KD 1 X('»S 


have got twice as many people here today as we had in 18fo, and 
we have grown much more rapidly since that time than we did 
from 1819 to 1865. Then if it were wise upon the part of our an¬ 
cestors to make that change because of the increased wants and 
demands of the people and the population of the State, is it not wise 
for us to do it? We are growing on all lines, and thi> Constitution 
is not to last only for this year, or until the meeting of the next leg 
islature. but the probabilities are that this Constitution will last for 
a half century to come. The probabilities are that in Alabama 
then, if we increase from now until that time as we have in the la>t 
thirty-five years, we will have seven or eight millions of people 
to accommodate before a new constitution is framed for the State 
of Alabama. Are we willing to say that because we have always 
done so and so that we are in favor of continuing to do so and so? 
Are we willing to say that we will have no better houses than our 
ancestors had? Are we willing to say that we will have no better 
schools than our ancestors had? Are we willing to sav we will 
have no better roads than our ancestors had? Shall there be no 
room for growth and development? Is it necessary for the family 
to live in the same house it has always lived in? As a matter of 
fact I am informed today that there are counties in Alabama where 
they have to go as much as forty miles to get to the court house, 
and we have had before this Committee petitions from people of 
St. Clair County, showing us that the topography of that countv 
makes it practically’ impossible for those people to ever change the 
conditions and get to their court house with any more convenience, 
as there is a great mountain intervening between them and their 
court house. \\ e have a statement made to us from Henry, Ge¬ 
neva and Dale counties, as to their inconveniences, being twenty 
miles or more from the records in their counties. The same state¬ 
ment is made as to a part of Mibb and Shelbv counties, and the 
same statement comes from Bessemer and from a part of Talla¬ 
poosa. 

AIR. HOWKLL —And Talladega and Claw 

AIR. BLACK\\ KLL lalladega and Clay also make it. Now 
there are only two States in the Cnion that have a larger area 
for their counties than the State of Alabama, and they are the 
States of I exas and \\ isconsin. As a matter of fact there are 
twenty-three States that have no limit at all as to county boun¬ 
daries. and here in our sister State of Georgia, they have counties 
w ith as small a limit as one hundred and twenty-one square miles. 

Air. SANFORD —As small as ninetw 

AIR. BLACKW KLL -And in the State of New A ork they 
have counties with as small a limit as fiftv-seven square miles. We 
all know’ that it is a fact that county seats build up towns. We 
know that the money invested in those towns becomes subjects of 
taxation, when frequently it is not a subject of taxation if it is 



CONSTITUTIONAL CONVKNTION, 1901 


2095 


kept in the pocket before it goes there. We know that they do 
build churches at such places. We know that they build schools 
there. We know that they become great civilizers and great edu¬ 
cational centres, and frequently the commercial metropolis of the 
County. At this age of the world it seems to me, when the people 
themselves are willing to impose this tax on themselves as my 
friend from \\ ashington said, they ought to be allowed to have the 
privilege and the opportunity of imposing the taxes, if they furnish 
additional conveniences to the people. Can you conceive of what 
Alabamians want for fifty years to come? I understand that in 
v onu* ol these populous counties now, and it is true in some of our 
North Alabama counties, that some of them have come to be so 
large that dozens and dozens of men, summoned before the grand 
jury, have to lay over and night, because the county is so big that 
as a matter of fact they cannot attend to tin* business and can’t 
summon witnesses in a day. New counties are needed in those 
places for the convenience of the people. That is what they are 
made for. There is no question of that. Are these unreasonable 
requests. 

It is wonderful how anxious we are to keep the people from 
taxing themselves. It is said that the county officers are opposed 
to it. W hy, sirs, as a matter of fact, some of our counties have 
grown so large that the fees of the offices of Probate Judge and 
Sheriff in those counties many times multiply several times the 
>alarv of the Governor of the State of Alabama. We understand 
that those selfish interests who get large fees out of the offices 
that thev hold, will suggest to these men that we do not need new 
counties, but what about the great body of the people? These men 
are alrcadv provided for. abundantly provided for, and are we mak¬ 
ing a Constitution simply for the office holders of the State of Ala¬ 
bama. or are we making a Constitution for the whole people of the 
State of Alabama. 

What do vou think of its possibilities of this State. The State 
Geologist, in a report to the Governor, says that Alabama has 
eleven thousand square miles of coal, and it reads like a fairy tale, 
but he says that at the present rate of consumption it will last the 
world for two hundred and seventy-five years. He says further 
that the monev for taking that out of the mines, as a matter of 
fact, will be two hundred times as much as the value of all the 
property in the State of Alabama, and we have these inexhaustible 
resources and we all want to show what our possibilities are in 
the future, and yet here we are building not for the great masses of 
the people, but we are building apparently for those who do not 
want the fees of the offices cut down in large counties, where they 
are office holders now. The committee itself is conservative, and 
very conservative in its estimate. 



2096 


OFFICIAL PROCKKDINV.S 


What are you going’ to do with these demands tor all the fu¬ 
ture? Are we to say that these counties with their present limits 
are to remain the limits for the time that this Constitution is to 
live? That is the idea of some of the members. As a matter of 
fact I hope that we will not he so short sighted as that. 


In addition to the coal that we have mentioned, we have in¬ 
exhaustible mines of iron, and we have the limestone rock to make 
the coal and iron into the merchantable product. We have all these 
resources in Alabama, and with the hope of the future, we see be¬ 
fore us the gildings of a coming day, brighter, more prosperous, 
more hopeful, than all the days that ha\o gone. 

THE PRESIDENT—The time of the gentleman has expired. 

MR. McMILLAN (Wilcox)—Like the distinguished gentle¬ 
man from Hale, T, too, realize that the primary object for which 
the Convention was called was to restrict the suffrage, and as far 
as possible to eliminate the negro from politics. 

MR. HOWELL—W ill the gentleman allow a question? Please 
tell us why we have been here nearly riftv (lavs and have never 
come to that question vet. 


MR. McMILLAN (Wilcox)—As 1 say. 1 feel that was the 
primary object of our being called together, but when we take into 
consideration that the fundamental law that we are now forming 
for the people, which I believe the people will in their wisdom see 
fit to ratify, will be our fundamental law for twentv-five or fifty 
years, and we must look to the future needs and necessities of our 
people, I claim that their necessities cannot be better subserved 
7 r ^ clucm £ the ar <* of counties. In the Constitution of 
1865 the Cc, ”^ ent «)n reduced the minimum area of counties one- 

min'! 5 S . t,l,art ' n,,leS - Vt tl,at tmu> ^ population 

numbered 600.000. I oday. sir. approximately two millions of peo¬ 
ple live within the confines of the yreat State of Alabama, and 
twenty-fne years from today, at the present rapid rate of progress, 
there will be approximately tour millions of people residing within 

h „ e ' )0r A7 s of the Sta ^ e °} Alabama. Shall we sav then with these 
.Sfhts before us. to the independent and progressive people that 
the same conveniences which sufficed twentv-five years a* , must 
su f.ee for one or two score years to come.' With all the lights 

... . . .• .... ^ »•<«« 


furthermore, this report does not >a\ that they shall but only 
wish. tHe Pe ° P,e Sh ° U,d bt ‘ 1Ct a ' 0ne to sett,e »»atters°as they 



CONSTITUTIONAL COXV'1 .N ITON. l'Ol 




Now, Mr. President, I contend that the formation of new coun¬ 
ties will build tip school centers. The material interests of the 
people will go forward, and the interests of the people will he 
better subserved, and 1 trust that the members of this Convention 
will grant the reduction. 


MR. COBB 1 merely desire to call the attention of the dele 
gates who will give me their attention, to the difference between 
the minority report made by myself and another, and the minority 
report now under consideration as an amendment to it. So tar as 
the extent of the area of the counties is concerned we are together. 
Both of these minority reports favor the retention of the area tit 
six hundred square miles for the old counties. The only difference 
is that the minority made by myself accepts the majority report 
of the committee so far as regards the machinery by which new 
counties are formed, and county lines changed, which it adopted 
will force the question through the Legislature to a vote of the 
people affected by it. The other minority report confers upon the 
Legislature absolute power to make new counties without regard 
to the wishes of the people, so far as those w'ishes can be ascer¬ 
tained by a vote. That is the only difference. 


There was no question before the Committee on County Boun¬ 
daries which gave us more vexation and caused more discussion 
than this question as to the area of the counties of the State. There 
are three propositions before you, and I beg the members of this 
Convention to get these three propositions well in mind. One 
of these propositions is, and that is the proposition of my friend 
here on mv left (Mr. Blackwell) to leave not only the new coun¬ 
ties with an area of not less than six hundred square miles, but to 
provide that no new county shall be formed with a less area than 
six hundred square miles. The majority report of the committee 
favored the establishment of an area five hundred square miles, 
both as applicable to new counties to lie formed, and to the old 
counties from which these new counties are taken. My report con 
templates leaving the old counties with an area of not less than six 
hundred square miles, and wherever it is desirable and practicable 
new counties mav be formed with an area of not less than four 
hundred square miles. Now these are the three propositions that 
are to be presented for your consideration. I say this, not because 
these propositions are now before you, but it is m order that vmi 
mav be advised of the course which 5s being pursued by the several 
divisions of the committee. The present proposition is whether 
von shall retain the majority report of oOO square miles, or whether 
Vou will strike out the word five and insert the word six bo that 
the pending proposition is that a county shall consist ot not less 
than 600 square miles. That is the only question, excepting the 
question that I have just presented to you. touching the manner 
in which the new counties shall be formed, upon which there i> a 
difference between the two minorities. 



2098 


OFFICIAL PROCFl’DINOS 


Now that is the whole question, and the whole ease. I do not 
propose now to enter into anythin# like an elaborate argument 
in support of my proj)osition of retaining 600 square miles a> the 
area of the old counties, f am fully aware of the force of the 
reasoning* which would ask a reduction from 6(X) to 500, hut the 
reasons upon that side are not all of the reasons in the case. There 
is another side to this proposition, and just to gi\e you a lew 
pointers, in the first place, by reducing the area of the counties 
from 600 square miles, now obtaining in the old countie>, to a !es>er 
number of square miles, you destroy the svmetrv of the old conn 
ties. Further than that, you incur the danger of leaving old coun¬ 
ties and making new counties with an insufficencv of wealth in 
them to sustain the counties with the proper dignity. Mv friend 
here speaks of the small counties in certain other localities to 
which he refers. Small counties, gentlemen of the Convention, 
belong to the thickly* populated States, where there is great wealth. 
They do not properly belong to a State where the population i> 
not dense enough to enable each one of the counties with dignitx 
to sustain the county which they form. With respect to what ha- 
been said of Georgia, the gentleman is entirely off the track when 
he says that the people of Georgia are content w ith their present 
condition. 

MR. HOWELL—Do you think the dignity of a countv is 
paramount to its convenience? 

MR. COBH—Yes, sir, I do: emphatically yes; hut there is no 
conflict between the dignity and the convenience. Convenience i> 
a relative term. Tt is not absolute, and, therefore, what vou m;u 
call convenience under one set of circumstances, would not In- 
entitled to that designation under other and different conditions. 

MR. ROGERS (Sumter)—What do you call the dignity? 

AIK. COBB (he dignity is the power ol a countv, being a 
I'art of the government of a State, to maintain itself with dignity. 
\\ ith population enough, with intelligence enough to maintain it¬ 
self, with that degree of dignity which applies to the State of Ala¬ 
bama m providing for all the machinery of its government. 

MR. ROGERS (Sumter)—How would you compare the dig¬ 
nity of Cleburne County with that of Jefferson? 

MR. COBB—I cannot make that comparison, because I am 
not prepared to know anything about these counties, but I sav 
that a county is not maintained with dignity as it is over here across 
the border in Georgia, where, as my friend over there told me the 
other day. a matter of his own personal knowledge the fudge of 
the Ordinary, (corresponding to the fudge of Probate of Alabama) 
could not get fees enough out of his office to support himself, and. 
therefore, he had about six days in the week to work on his farm 
and had one day to come to town to attend to business 



c ( )N ^titl:tio\ai 4 coxvkxtiox 


m\ 


2099 


M K. S.\\I-'( »R1-T| lat fs a Mcsm-,! 


A:',"'" 1 ’ llu! sl ' <rif !' “ n<l the 

diti<m Mi * '* friend says that is a blessed con- 

u\v‘i tint i c( ^°\ er l nilUMlt 1S different from mine. The 

l.!r tlu^c ;if ;?. r tV .? ,a , lH *f° r,nt *‘l; without the ability to provide 
tlav ill thr . j \ U 1° S , 10U , ( stay 111 t,u * lr I )la ^*es of business every 
«>f the nen* vl V ’ f U1< ir 10 * 1nl1 ^ 1 have P av enough to relieve them 
> u pullm^ the ropes over a nude six davs in a week 

thk i > ki*;sii)KXT- 


1 he time of the gentleman has expired. 

1 nio\ e that he be allow ed to continue hb 


MK. SAXKOKD- 
argument. 

AIK. C Xo, I do not care to consume further time. 

MR. I’AKKKR (Kin,«,rc)—Mr. President and gentlemen of 
tlu k munition | am very diffident when, for the first time I 
appear on the lloor since this Constitution convened, and if I was 
not impelled by a sense of duty, to express myself on this occasion. 

would content myself, as I have in the past, bv listening to the 
speeches of others and voting on the pending question. Hut I feel 
that it is my duty to make some remarks in line with the minoritv 
report that has been submitted to this Convention on this question. 
As Judge Cobb, who has just preceded me. has said, we do not 
take issue with the amendments proposed bv the gentleman from 
Hale in all particulars, but I deem that it is proper now to sav 
what I have to say in reference to this question of counties and 
countv boundaries. 


Mr. President, this is an economic question. The conditions 
in Alabama are such that it is unfortunate any number of square 
miles should constitute the unit of countv formations in Alabama. 
It we were ior the first time forming a Constitution for the State 
<>f Alabama, and we had the diversified interests that we have now. 
it would have been wise for our forefathers to have taken into 
account not only the area in square miles necessary to constitute a 
county, but also its population and taxable wealth, if that were 
the condition today, we would have no trouble in arranging coun¬ 
ties and county boundaries to suit the varied economic conditions 
in the .State of Alabama, but the old Constitution has fixed the 
constitutional limit of 600 square miles, under which most of the 
counties in the State were formed, and reducing the constitutional 
limit of the old counties would precipitate hitter fights in a great 
many counties in the State of Alabama and endanger the ratifica¬ 
tion of this Constitution. As has been already said, the purpose 
of this Convention was not to consider economic questions pri¬ 
marily. The people are not prepared for this question. It was not 
discussed in the campaign, and I venture to say that had the propo¬ 
sitions that have been agitated on this floor been discussed in the 
campaign, the people would not have sustained the call for this 
Constitutional Convention. 



2100 


OFFICIAL PROCEEDINGS 


Now, sir, as a member of the Committee on State and County 
Boundaries I take it upon myself to try and inform myself as to 
the sentiment of the people of Alabama on this question. I have 
sent letters all over the State of Alabama, and while it is true 1 
had to write to the officers of the county governments because I 
did not know who else to write to, yet the answers to these inter¬ 
rogatories were almost uniformly against the proposition of cutting 
down the area of counties and they further said it would endanger 
the ratification of this Constitution. The answer comes back that 
counties are already up to the tax limit, and any reduction of area 
will reduce the revenues of the counties and will, therefore, produce 
opposition on the part of old counties. Now, sir, if the Convention 
will bear with me just a moment, I will read a circular letter which 
T have addressed to the officeholders throughout the State of Ala¬ 
bama. I see gentlemen smiling when I make that announcement, 
and they say yes, as a matter of course the officeholders in the 
State of Alabama are opposed to it, but sir, whatever is, is, and if it 
is the fact that the officeholders in the State of Alabama are op¬ 
posed to it, have we not got to depend upon the political agencies 
that called this Constitutional Convention, and helped to promul¬ 
gate and produce this call? Haven’t those same agencies, sir. got 
to ratify or reject it? 

“As a member of the Committee on State and County Boun¬ 
daries, which has decided upon a report by a majority of one in 
favor of the reduction of the area of counties, I desire information 
for my guidance and that of the Convention on this subject, before 
a vote is taken, and for this purpose I am sending out this inquiry 
to the various counties throughout the State. I will thank you to 
give your best information and reply to the following questions 
by return mail: 

“First, what office, if any, do you hold in your county ? Second, 
was this question an issue, or was it discussed in your countv dur¬ 
ing the campaign? Third, what is the sentiment of your people 
on this question? Is it divided? If so in what proportion? How 
would a change in the present Constitution in this respect affect 
the ratification of the proposed Constitution If the area of coun¬ 
ties is reduced will it increase the county rate of taxation?” 

Now, sir, I received two hundred and fifty or more letters in 
answer to that inquiry. I have taken the trouble to abstract one 
hundred and sixty-three of those letters. The replies were this 
way: One hundred and twenty-three answers say there was no 
agitation of the question in their County, and that it was not an 
issue and was not discussed; twenty-eight say that it was dis¬ 
cussed— 

MR. GRAHAM (Talladega)—I see it is about 6 o’clock, and 
I have no doubt he would like for the Convention to have the full 



2101 


CONSTITUTIONAL CONVENTION. 1901 

benefit of the documentary evidence he has, and I ask the gentle¬ 
man to yield to me to make a motion. 

MR. PARKER ( Elmore)—I will. 

MR. GRAHAM (Talladega)—The court house question is a 
\ ery warm one here, but it is not so warm as the weather. We 
have done a hard week’s work, and as the thermometer registers 
one hundred and ten 1 move when this Convention adjourns this 
evening, that it adjourn to meet on Monday at 12 o’clock. 

There were expressions of dissent. 

MR. GRAHAM (Talladega)— 1 move a suspension of the 
rules for the purpose of putting that motion upon its passage. 

MR. GREER (Calhoun) -And upon that I call for the aves 
and noes. 

THE PRESIDENT-- In the opinion of the Chair a suspen¬ 
sion of the rules will not he necessary. The ayes and noes have 
been demanded. Is the call sustained? 

The all was not sustained, and upon a vote being taken a 
division was demanded. The secretaries expressed doubt as to the 
correctness of their figures. 

The clock struck the hour of 6 o’clock. 

MR. HEFLIN (Chambers)—1 now make the point of order 
that under the rules, this Convention stands adjourned. 

THE PR ESI 1 )I\NT—The ayes were 36 and noes 45. The 
vote will be verified. 

And by a vote of forty-four ayes and forty-seven noes, the mo¬ 
tion was lost. 

Leave of absence was granted to Mr. Vaughn of Dallas, for 
tomorrow and Monday, and thereupon the Conxention adjourned. 


CORRECTION. 

In the third column, proceedings forty-second day, during the 
course of Mr. O’Neal's remarks, the expression, “No, the gentle¬ 
man from Henry said there is a masked battery behind e\ery pro¬ 
vision of the repeal.” should read “every provision of the report.” 



2102 


OFFICIAL PROCEEDINGS 


FORTY-FOURTH DAY 


MONTGOMERY. ALA.. 

Saturday, July 13. 1 ‘>01. 

The Convention met pursuant to adjournment, was called t«< 
order by the President, and opened with prayer by the Rev. Mr. 
Howell as follows: 

O Lord, we thank 1 hee that we have been preserved through 
another night. and that this morning- finds us in the enjoyment of 
the usual health of body and mind, and now we are here to address 
ourselves to the work before us. We pray that Thou wilt accept 
our gratitude for till blessings of life, for home and friends and 
country. We are glad indeed that our lines have fallen to us in 
pleasant places. () help us to recognize that every good and per¬ 
fect gift comes down from the Father of life, and may we render 
to Thee the homage of our hearts and the service of our lives. For¬ 
give all our unforgiven sins, prepare us for every good word and 
work, and help us to live soberly and righteously in this world, 
and enable us when we all come to die to feel that we have done 
our duty. O Lord, be light and wisdom to us, guide in the way 
of truth and righteousness and to Thy name shall be all the praise, 
now and forever. Amen. 

L pon the all of the roll 88 delegates responded to their names. 

Leaves of absence were granted as follows: Mr. Carmichael 
(Colbert) for today: Mr. Jones (Wilcox) for todav. Monday and 
1 uesday ; Mr. Bulger for today and Monday; Mr. Sorrell for Mon¬ 
day; Mr. Cunningham (Jefferson) for Monday and Tuesday; Mr 
layloe for today: Mr. Cobb for Monday: Mr. Morgan M.'Smith 
for today and Monday. 

AIK. SAAIFORJ) ( Fhke) I move* that when this Convention 
adjourns this morning it adjourn to meet at 11 o’clock Monday 
morning'. 

MR. MALONE—I would like to amend by providing that we 
remain in session until 2 o’clock. 

MR. OR HER (Calhoun)—I understand a motion to ad journ 
is not debatable, but I think the particular time to which the ad¬ 
journment is taken is. 

I HR PRESIDEN I At any rate we w ill hear wise sugges¬ 
tions from the gentleman from Calhoun. 

MR. GREER (Calhoun) I would like to suggest that 1 think 
it would be wise for us to meet at the usual time on Monday. If 



(( xi'i i i rif)\ \i 


I'OXVKXTIOX, 1901 


21 (U 


lT,T'i,i;'.r‘, , r. 1 .!T' k ,'!"' r :‘ lu-r<, .. 

will remain *' U V' U * ' ulMlle>s ’ ail( l * hope the Convention 
I | t ' s ’ 1Uli lK n>ua * hours todax and reconvene du¬ 

ll > mil hum on next Aloud: 

t i an>acted. 


morning, m» that it'- buMne>> max h 


TIIH PR ESI I )l \T 
lion adjourn- at it- niornin 
at 11 o clock on Mondav. 


I he motion i> 
,U M*>>ion todax 


that 

that 


when this C'onxen- 
it adjourn to meet 


l ]>on 
x ote i»l 


a vote licinn taken a division \\a> called 
ix < - and ad noe- the motion wa> carried. 


lor, and 


l>x a 


M l\ dkAll AM i TalHdegai ' 

to leax e w ith nte on \ e-trrdax . and 
xeiition. and i a >k t«» Ik* pernnttet 
-ence < >1 it a ine< 1 l or t <« d ;i \ 


I he C on\ ention would not agree 
! decided not to leave the Con- 
1 to withdraw my leave of ab- 


1 lie leax e w a- granted. 

M K. dC * k A h h h. \ K h, I | ) w have on lx one se.vMon today 

1 niox e that the roll call he di-pen-ed with tliis morning and that 
tin* C<rnvention now proceed with the bu>ine>s that was on hand 
yesterday afternoon at adjournment. 

MR. ROGERS ( Sumter j 1 ask the gentleman to withdraw 
that for the purpose oi introducing' a sliort resolution.. 

MR. dcGRARPEX R HI I) All right. 

Resolution Xo. J-L\ h\ Mr. Rogers of Sumter: 

Resolved, I hat hereafter il a stenographer submits his notes 
to any delegate to correct his speech made hy said delegate, before 
'-uch speech is printed in tin* public record, such stenographer shall 
hereafter be debarred the duties and pax of stenographer of this 
convention. 


Referred to the Committee on Rules. 

MR R< >GERS (Sumter) The purpose of this stenographic 
report -. 

THK PRESIDEXTThe gentleman is not in order. The 
resolution is not debatable. The resolution has been referred. 

MR. HOWELL I move* that he he* allowed to debate it. 

MR. DAVIS (Etowah) I desire to offer a short resolution. 

MR. ROGERS (Sumter) — I move a suspension of the rules 
that I max* have tlii> resolution put upon its immediate passage. 

THK PRESII )KXT~ -The chair has recognized the gentleman 
from Etowah. 

MR. WADDELL- I rise to a point of order. 



2104 


OFFICIAL PROCEKDINGS 


THE PRESIDENT—There is nothing before the House. The 
clerk will read the resolution. 

Resolution No. 243, by Mr. Davis of Etowah: 

Resolved, That after Saturday, the 20th inst., the official 
stenographic report be discontinued. 

Resolved further, that the President of this Convention be 
authorized and instructed to cancel the existing contract with the 
official stenographers in accordance with the terms of this reso¬ 
lution, and that he be authorized to draw his warrant in their favor 
for such amount as may be due said stenographers, including tin* 
week ending July 20th, 1901. 

Referred to the Committee on Rules. 

THE PRESIDENT—The gentleman from Hale lias moved 
that the call of the roll be dispensed with. 

MR. PROCTOR—I desire to submit a report for the Com¬ 
mittee on the Journal. 

MR. deGRAh F ENREII)—I withdraw the motion for that 
purpose. 

The report of the Journal was read, stating that the lournal 
for the forty-third day of the Convention had been examined and 
found correct, and the same was adopted. 

MR. BROOKS—I rise to a parliamentary inquire. 

THE PRESIDENT—The gentleman will state the question 
of inquiry. 

MR. BROOKS—I understood the delegate from Sumter just 
now to offer a resolution in regard to the stenographic report of 
the remarks made by delegates upon the floor. I apprehend that 
the Convention, under the rules! has a right to consider that ques¬ 
tion without reference to the Committee on Rules, because it has 
reference to privileges of members on this floor. If the President 
will refer to rule 28 he will find that all resolutions, before thev 
are voted on, shall be referred to and reported from the Committee 
on Rules, except resolutions relating to the privileges of the Con¬ 
vention or its members. I apprehend that the resolution offered 
by the gentleman from Sumter (Mr. Rogers) has relation to the 
privileges of the members of the Convention. 

THE PRESIDENT—The gentleman rises to a question of 
personal privilege and discusses the privilege of another delegate. 
The resolution of the gentleman from Sumter related to the 
stenographic report, and to the conduct of the stenographers, and 
it was referred to the Committee on Rules, the gentleman not inov- 



CONSTITUTIONAL CONVENTION, 1901 2105 

St 1 Ci^re^ 

correct a state m mu~imid e' | t,l< - ^ ll ^ lr 'mfulge me one moment to 

<(tiestion of prr^malmM! 1,1, [7 ! ' <W " 0 ' T* *?• 3 

mentarv imjuirv. ^ ’ >l1t ro>( ‘ to a question of parlia- 

M R. WHITESIDE_i „ i. 

petition, ami have it read ‘ Sk unan,nim,s consent to introduce a 
T|U ‘ C ° nsent Uas Z"™- and the petition read as follows- 

To the Honorable Constitutional Convention. Montgomery. Ala.: 

,*?‘ ar e respectfully represent that whereas the Rail¬ 

road h’ nmiSM °" a PI >0 ' n t e d by the Governor and paid by the rail- 
^um^Sl’ha 1 r ,,t,re . fai,ure: an <*. -hereas ’the shipper and 
and making of r nl son ' L representation in the naming of ra tes 
cr Tha whcr" H ’p 2,‘ l ? <!r "Sc alien and arbitrary porv- 

' '** ' "Tuf q ' ht ; E p PreSS ' Td 'I’ h “>e and Railroad franchise- 
i i, - - w. tatt. , the power of these franchises to tax wiP 

ho< v'wdl Xl h u vStat ° AVt ‘ theref ? re re(,,u ‘ st that yo«r honorable 
' ' v,il *' e Us , a . commission, elected and paid hv the people 

view P aCX a franch,ses - wh,ch have Power to tax. within their re- 


Anniston Hardware Co., J. C. Si>ence. President: A. W Hell • 
Anniston Manufacturing Company by J. H. Goodwin. Treasurer ! 

turfnt’co ’ p fo' R . ob ' nson - President: Anniston Manufac¬ 
turing- Co.. I)}- I . A. Howel, Treasurer: Frank Nelson, Jr.; Anniston 

bupply C°„ by Owen Reynolds, President: J. M. Stringfellow; 
First National Bank, by J. M. Stringfellow. President; Anniston 
Iron Mills J. 1 Gardner Treasurer; Anniston Lime and Stone 
Co., b> K. H Cobh President; Connor Cobh Investment and Imp. 
Co., by R H. Cobh; Talbot Foard; Anniston Banking and Loan 
u\i r n vV el borne. President; Anniston National Bank W 
H. Me Elroy. President; Anniston Electric and Gas Co.. H. W. 
Sexton, Cm. M.; 1%. L. I urner & Co.; Anniston Cordage Co.. F. M 
Jones, Mgr.. Evans Brothers, Heflin. Ala.: Reid & Co.. Edwards- 
ville, Ala.; W. D. Snow, Model City Brick Works; J. L. Wikle; 
J. W. McEIrath, McElrath Drug Company. Burns & Billings- 
worth, John H. f -rye, Wellman Brothers, Rohn Brothers, Frank 
McIntyre, Sterne’s Grocery. Adler & Company. J. D. O’Bryant & 
Company, Ingrams. Anniston Trading Company. L. H. Caree. R. 
O. Watson. Elam Drug Company by W. H. Elam. Secretary; 
Stickneys Pharmacy by R. H. Stickney ; W. K. Lloyd, Anniston 
Bag Mfg. Co., by A. H. Henderson, President. 


MR. deGRAFFENREID—I now renew my motion. 

THE PRESIDENT—And dispense with the call of the stand¬ 
ing committees also? 



2106 


OFFICIAL PROCEEDINGS 


MR. deGRAF FENREID—Yes, hut if any of them have any 
report to make, I will not object to its being submitted. 

THE PRESIDENT—The special matters before the Conven¬ 
tion is the consideration of Section 3 of the Article reported by the 
Committee on State and County Boundaries. When the Con¬ 
vention adjourned the gentleman from Elmore had the floor. The 
question is on the amendment to the amendment offered bv the 
gentleman from Hale. 

MR. PARKER (Elmore) — Mr. President and gentlemen of 
the Convention, I realize that there is a spirit of restlessness per¬ 
vading this Convention this morning, and I regret sir that I did 
not have an opportunity to conclude my remarks on yesterday 
afternoon. As I have not before taken up any of the time of the 
Convention, I trust that the members of this Convention will bear 
with me for a little while, until I undertake to argue the correct¬ 
ness of the premises upon which we base our motion to substitute 
600 square miles for 500 square miles as reported by the majority 
of the committee. The first is, that this question was not in issue 
in the campaign, except to a very limited extent; the second is. 
that the sentiment of the people is divided, but largely against re¬ 
duction, and the third is, that in most of the counties the tax rate 
is already up to the constitutional limit, and hence any reduction 
in the old counties would decrease their revenues, interfere with 
the harmony and autonomy of the same, destrov their symmetry, 
and arouse influences against ratification which under former con¬ 
ditions would be in favor of ratification. 

Mr. Howell sought recognition. 

THE PRESIDENT—Does the gentleman from Elmore vield 
to the gentleman from Cleburne? 

MR. PARKER (Elmore)—I prefer not to be interrupted now. 

1 will take pleasure in answering any questions that the gentle¬ 
man desires to ask after my time has expired. 

Now, sir. I say that these premises, so far as my investiga¬ 
tion goes, cannot be disputed. I have sought every avenue of in¬ 
formation that has been open to me on this question. I have not 
sought to cater to the influence of the office holders of Alabama, 
because I have this stack of letters here from them, but, gentle¬ 
men of the Convention, you must recognize the fact that office 
holders in Alabama are a potent influence that may be for or 
against ratification, as their interests may be affected, and I tell 
you, sir, that a perusal of the stack of letters— 

MR. ROGERS (Sumter)—Will the gentleman permit a ques¬ 
tion? 

MR. PARKER (Elmore)—No sir. 



CONSTITUTIONAL CONVENTION. 1901 
MR. ROGERS (Sumter)—For illforraatio „. 


2107 


to the geiUlemanf hut~ Ini0re ^~~ I d ° not want to l)e discourteous 
a question k<K l RS (Sl,mter )— 1 would like to ask the gentleman 

order'^The ^ entlenian lroni Sumter will he in 

orcter. j in gentleman declines to yield. 

day an'ilLtrart (^ lmore )— As I undertook to say on vester- 

,\, rl »iade by me of 163 of these letters shows that 80 

{heir count ,*I n Hat th ' S ' SSUe ha(I nevcr »>een discussed in 

more nr in 20 PCr Cent ° f then ’ sav that jt was discussed 

favor of V i° PCr CC Q n o l - S&y that the sentin,t>llt of the county is 
muntv is „t,i a " ge: Per Cent sa >' that the sentiment of the 

: - ‘ k' l,st an .v change of county boundaries and county 

• • J*" c f. nt - sa - v /hat a change will not affect the result as 
to the ratification of the Constitution ; and 80 per cent, say that 
it will either defeat it or endanger the ratification of the Consti¬ 
tution. One hundred and thirteen out of 163 sav that the tax 
limit is already up to the Constitutional limit, and that any re¬ 
duction in area will either cause their counties to go in debt or to 
increase the tax rate, and thereby incur opposition to the ratifi¬ 
cation ot this Constitution. 


Now. gentlemen. I say these are the facts. They are the stub¬ 
born facts, and whether we will, or whether we won't, we cannot 
e them out in the calculation of the result on this proposition. 
If I had time I would like to read some of the answers that I have 
received, but. sir. I recognize that I have neither the time, and 
neither has the Convention the patience to listen to these replies, 
but, sir, I give you my word for it, that the abstract that I have 
made is not from any particular letters, but just as I took them 
out of this file, with the result that 80 per cent, of the people of 
Alabama are reported as saying that this question was not agi¬ 
tated. and are opposed to any change, and say that it will endan¬ 
ger the ratification of the Constitution, and that it would increase 
the tax rate, and that they are already up to the full limit of taxa¬ 
tion in their counties. 


THE PRESIDENT—The gentleman's time has expired. 

MR. COBB—I move that it be extended ten minutes. 

MR. ROGERS (Sumter)—I am willing for the gentleman to 
have his time extended if he answers my question. 

Objection was made to any extension of time. 

MR. THOMPSON (Bibb)—I desire, very briefly, to attempt 
to answer the argument made by the gentleman, and also to show 



2108 


OFFICIAL PROCEEDINGS 


the defect in the amendment, and the advantages of the commit¬ 
tee's report over the amendment as offered. In the first place the 
amendments that have been offered by the various gentlemen 
place no limitation whatever upon the action of the Legislature in 
this matter, except to require a two-thirds vote of both Houses. 
The committee, after careful investigation, has discovered that in 
many instances legislation has been passed that was not wanted 
by the people of the respective counties affected, and has sought 
to safeguard that interest, and we have provided that before any 
new county can be created or any county line changed, that the 
Legislature must pass an enabling act, providing for the calling 
of an election for that purpose, and that bill must have a vote of a 
majority of the members elected to each House, and in addition 
to that must receive a two-thirds vote of the people of the county 
to be affected, or a two-thirds vote of the people in the separate 
districts that are to be placed in a new county. 

MR. COBB—If the gentleman will pardon me, one of the 
minority reports recommends that verv thing. One of the reports 
you are now discussing. 

MR. THOMPSON —l don't think that the one before the 
House at present does. 

MR. COBB—They are both before the House. 

MR. THOMPSON—What is the substitute? Both are min¬ 
ority reports. 

THE PRESIDENT—The gentleman from Macon is not in 
order. 

MR. COBB—A parliamentary inquiry, that is all. 

THE PRESIDENT—The gentleman from Bibb has the floor, 
and has not been asked, nor has he yielded, and the chair cannot 
entertain questions of inquiry. 

MR. COBB—Will the gentleman vield? 

MR. THOMPSON (Bibb)—No, sir; not at present. Under 
the plan as proposed by the minority and substitute, it merely re¬ 
quires two-thirds of those voting upon that measure, which might 
be two-thirds of a hare quorum of the House, while we provide 
that it must he, under the plan reported by the Committee on Rep¬ 
resentation, 68 members, when otherwise only 46 might pass it. 
On the face, it seems that their report would place safeguards, hut 
when you come to consider it, it does not. The gentleman from El¬ 
more, a member of the minority, has come before von with some 
witnesses. The gentleman did not state. 1 believe, that each of his 
witnesses were interested parties. We all know how much interest 
affects a man. They were the County Commissioners, and I submit 
while county officials are usually fair and honest men. that their 



2109 


CONSTITUTIONAL CONVENTION. 1901 

own interests their own pockets, affect their evidence, as much as 
e in erest of parties may affect their evidence in civil cases, or in 
any other matters. Do you expect that a county officer would be in 
ta\or of cutting off a part of his county, and reduce his salary? It 
i> not human nature for a man to touch his own pocket. Therefore, 
his witnesses are not the best that might have been brought here, 
and submit, furthermore, that the gentleman had other evidence, 
either in his possession or within his reach, that he might have 
submitted. He brings here 163 letters, but, gentlemen of the Con¬ 
vention, he forgets to mention a petition signed by 300 citizens of 
his own county, presented to your committee, of which he is a 
member. If he conies to us as an unbiased speaker on this ques¬ 
tion, why did not he present all of the evidence within his reach? 
It seems that his own party is divided. He says that the people are 
divided upon this question. Yes, Mr. President, the people of 
Alabama were divided upon the question of calling a Constitution¬ 
al Convention. I he fact that the people are divided is no reason 
for his argument or for mine. We are here to formulate a funda¬ 
mental law for the State of Alabama, to exist for years. Then whv 
should we limit the legislature, and place upon it the same limita¬ 
tions that have existed for twenty-six years? 

MR. HOW’ ELL— Thirty-six. 

MR. THOMPSON—Thirty-six the gentleman savs. it strikes 
me it is only twenty-six since 1875. 

MR. PARKER (Cullman)—Sixty-five is what he refers to. 

MR. THOMPSON—Now then, if the history of our State had 
shown that the Legislature was anxious to legislate upon this sub¬ 
ject, there might be some reason for this legislation, hut our past 
history shows that the legislature has been extremely careful in 
enacting laws for the formation of new counties, only one having 
been created since our last Constitutional Convention. Now then, 
as I say. if the history of this State, showed that the Legislature 
needed limitations upon this subject, then there would he reason 
for this, hut it has not been true, and I submit to this Convention 
that it would he absolutely safe to leave the Legislature of Ala¬ 
bama without any limitation upon this subject, because the mem¬ 
bers of the (icneral Assembly would be placed in exactly the same 
attitude as the witnesses that are brought forward by my friend 
from Elmore. They would be interested parties. Self interest 
would demand that they should not enact any law creating a new 
county that would affect their own, and no new county would ever 
he created, except upon good cause, and where it xvas absolutely 
needed by the people. 

Now then as to the reduction from 600 to 500, I submit, gen¬ 
tlemen of the Convention, that if this report is allowed to stand 



2110 


OFFICIAL PR()CF.KD1 NOS 


at 500 square miles, that not over three new countie> in the State 
of Alabama can be created. 1 here may be a large countv in one 
place, which is surrounded by small ones, and there would not Ik 
sufficient area to make any great number of new counties with 
500 square miles as the limit. Therefore, there is no reason to tie 
up the communities, where they now need new counties, by "ay 
ing that a new countv shall not be created of less than LOO >qtiare 
miles. It strikes me our State has advanced wonderfully in the 
last quarter of a century. They can better afford counties ot .MX.) 
square miles today than they could 600 square miles when that 
limitation was placed. Therefore it is not a revolutionary scheme. 
It is not a matter that will raise any great antagonism, and in 
many places it will give the Constitution many votes for its rati¬ 
fication, in places where they are now distant thirty-five to litty 
miles from a court house. They talk about the tax rate, and the 
increase in the taxes, but they do not think of the many instances 
where people have to go thirty-five, forty or fifty miles to a court 
house, and stay there four or five days before he can gain admis¬ 
sion to the grand jury, paying their own expenses, with the loss ot 
time and worry, and that is a part of their expense, as much so a> 
the taxes that they pay into the treasury. Then why not take 
that into consideration, lvveil if it should cause the tax rate to be* 
a little more, it is more than over-balanced on the other side. 

ME. PARKER (Elmore)— I want to ask the gentleman a 
question. 

MR. THOMPSON—I think 1 will have to give him the same 
answer he gave the gentleman a while ago. 1 will answer when 
my time expires. 

THE PRESIDENT—The gentleman will proceed. 

MR. THOMPSON—Now then. I hope the Convention will 
cheerfully consider the Committee’s report, and when you consider 
it you will find that they have been very careful to guard the in¬ 
terests of the people at home, that they have not left the Legisla¬ 
ture as free as it has been heretofore, that while we strike dowm 
from 600 to 500 miles we place other limitations around it that 
make it much harder to get a new' county under our provision 
than it has been heretofore. 

MR. HOWELL—The gentleman from Elmore said that he 
would reply to my question when he got through w r ith his remarks. 
The gentleman from Bibb was then recognized and I had no op¬ 
portunity to ask a question. I will ask him if he will now permit 
me to ask him a question? 

THE PRESIDENT — The gentleman from Cullman was 
recognized. 



CONSTITUTIONAL CONVKNTION. IMOl 


JIM 


M K. PARKER (Cullman)—Whatever inav be the pleasure 
°i this House as to the number of square miles that there should 
be in a count}, 1 think that we ought to lay upon the table the 
substitute offered by the gentleman from Hale, and let the que> 
tion of s(juare miles come up directiv upon the minority report 
of Mr. Parker of Elmore and Judge Cobb. We have endeavored 
in our report to throw more safe guards around the change of conn 
tv lines and the establishment of new counties than heretofore. We 
have endeavored to incorporate* in Sections 3 and 4 of this Article 
the Democratic doctrine of self-government, of home rule, and 
to allow the people of the territory to say they should have a 
change or a new county and. therefore, without making an elab¬ 
orate argume:' 1 upon this question, I move to lav the substitute 
<>i the gentleman from Hale upon the table. 

MR. de< iR A h h ENREID—l pon that I call for the aves and 
noes. 

MR. }*»<)< )XIy--1 would like to ha\e the substitute read. 

1 11 E I * RES 11 ) EX 1 — The Secretarav will read the original 
section, and the* minority report signed by Messrs. Cobb, Parker 
and Jackson. 

The clerk read the* original section as follows: 

Sec. 3. 1 he General Assembly shall have the power, provid¬ 
ed that each house, by a majority of the members elected thereto 
shall vote in favor thereof, to submit to a vote of the people re¬ 
siding within the territory proposed to be taken from one countv 
and given to another, a change or alteration in countv lines, but 
no such change or alteration shall be made unless such proposed 
change or alteration shall receive two-thirds of the votes of th< 
qualified (‘lectors voting at such election. and, provided, 
that no county line shall be changed or altered so as to reduce 
any old county below 500 square miles, or which shall reduce the 
inhabitants in any such county below' the number of inhabitants 
to entitle the countv to one representative. 

The clerk then read the minority report as follows: 

“We, therefore, move to amend the report of the committee 
by striking out ‘500' where it occurs in Section 3, and adding in 
lieu thereof the w'ord ‘600/ 

“Respectfully subm it ted. 

“J. K. Cobb. 

“John H. Parker, 

“E. C. Jackson." 



2112 


OFFICIAL PROCEEDINGS 


The secretary then read the substitute offered by Mr. de- 
Graffenreid as follows: “The General Assembly may, by a vote 
of two-thirds of both houses thereof, arrange and designate boun¬ 
daries for the several counties of this State, which boundaries 
shall not be altered except by a like vote; but no new county shall 
be hereafter formed of less extent than 600 square miles, and no 
existing county shall be reduced to less than 600 square miles, and 
no new' county shall be formed which does not contain a sufficient 
number of inhabitants to entitle it to one representative under the 
ratio of representation existing at the time of its formation, and 
leave the county or counties from which it is taken with the re¬ 
quired number of inhabitants entitling such county or counties to 
separate representation.” 

MR. deGRAFFENRElD—Will the gentleman from Cullman 
permit me to make a statement, as he has made the motion to lay 
my resolution on the table? 

MR. PARKER—Yes. 

MR. deGRAFFENRElD—The substitute simply leaves it as 
it now exists in the Constitution of 1875. The gentleman has made 
a motion to table my substitute, and on that I call for the ayes 
and noes. 


THE PRESIDENT—The question is on the substitute of the 
gentleman from Hale to the minority report of the committee to 
Section 3 of the report of the Committee on State and County 
Boundaries, and the motion is to lay the substitute of the gentle¬ 
man from Hale on the table. Is the call for the ayes and noes 
sustained ? 


I he call for the ayes and noes was sustained. 
The result of the roll call was as follows: 

AYES 


Messrs. President. 
Bartlett, 

Beavers, 

Blackwell, 

Boone, 

Brooks, 

Byars, 

Carmichael, of Coffee, 
Cofer, 

Davis, of Etowah, 
Eley, 

Eyster, 

Gilmore, 

Glover, 

Grant, 


Grayson, 

Henderson, 

Hinson, 

Hodges, 

Howell, 

Jenkins, 

Jones, of Montgomery, 
McMillan (Baldwin), 

M alone, 

Martin. 

Miller (Wilcox), 
Murphree, 

X or man, 

Norwood, 

Palmer, 


Parker (Cullman). 
Pearce, 

Pettus, 

Pillans. 

Porter. 

Rogers (Sumter). 
Samford, 

Sanford, 

Smith, Mac. A., 

Sorrell, 

Spragins, 

Studdard, 

Thompson, 

Whiteside, 

Wilson (Washington), 

TOTAL—45 



CONSTITUTIONAL CONVENTION. 1901 
NOES 


2113 


Ashcraft. 

Foster, 

O’Neill (Jefferson), 

Banks, 

Graham, of Talladega, 

Opp, 

Barefield, 

Greer, of Perry, 

Parker (Elmore), 

Beddow, 

Handley, 

Phillips, 

Browne. 

Heflin, of Chambers, 

Proctor, 

Burns, 

Heflin, of Randolph, 

Robinson, 

Cardon, 

Hood, 

Rogers (Lowndes), 

Carnathon, 

Howze, 

Sanders, 

Case, 

Inge, 

Smith (Mobile). 

Cobb, 

Kirk, 

Stewart. 

Coleman, of Walker, 

Knight. 

Waddell, 

Cunningham, 

x.eigh. 

Walker, 

Davis, of DeKalb, 

Macdonald. 

Weakley, 

Dent, 

Maxwell, 

Weatherly, 

deGraffenreid, 

Merrill, 

Williams (Barbour), 

Espy, 

Miller (Marengo), 

Williams (Marengo), 

Ferguson, 

Moody, 

Win n. 

Fletcher, 

O'Neal (Lauderdale). 



TOTAL—53 

ABSENT OR NOT VOTING 


Almon, 

Jones, of Bibb, 

Pitts, 

Altman, 

Jones, of Hale, 

Reese, 

Bethune, 

Jones, of Wilcox, 

Renfro, 

Bulger, 

King. 

Reynolds (Chilton), 

Burnett, 

Kirkland, 

Reynolds (Henry), 

Carmichael, ol Colbert, 

Kyle, 

Searcy. 

Chapman, 

Ledbetter. 

Selheimer, 

Coleman, of Greene. 

Locklin, 

Sentell. 

Cornwall, 

Lomax. 

Sloan, 

Craig, 

Long (Butler). 

Smith, Morgan M., 

Duke, 

Long (Walker), 

Sollie, 

Fitts, 

[.owe (Jefferson), 

Spears, 

Foshee, 

Lowe (Lawrence). 

Tayloe, 

Freeman, 

McMiilan (Wilcox), 

Vaughan. 

Graham, of Montgomery, 

Morrisette. 

Watts, 

Greer, of Calhoun, 

' Iulkey. 

White, 

Haley. 

NeSmith. 

Willet, 

Harrison, 

Oates, 

Williams (Elmore), 

Jackson, 

O'Rear, 

Wilson (Clarke), 


During the roll call: 

MR. ASHCRAFT—I am paired with Mr. Selheimer of Jeffer- 
If he were present he would vote no and I would vote aye. 

MR. GREER (Calhoun)—I am paired with Mr. Almon; if 
he were here he would vote no and I would vote aye. 



2114 


OFFICIAL PROCEEDINGS 


MR. HALEY—I am paired with Mr. Carmichael (Colbert) ; 
if he were here he would vote no, and I would vote aye. 

MR. JONES (Bibb)—I am paired with the gentleman from 
Walker, Mr. Long; if he were present he would vote no and I 
would vote aye. 

MR. McMILLAN (Wilcox)—d am paired with the gentle¬ 
man from Dallas, Mr. Craig; if he were present he would vote no 
and I would vote aye. 

MR. NESMITH—I am paired with the gentleman from Dal¬ 
las, Mr. Vaughn; if he were present he would vote no and I 
would vote aye. 

MR. WHITE (Jefferson)—I am paired with the gentleman 
from Jefferson, Mr. Cornwell; if he were present he would vote 
aye and I would vote no. 

MR. HOWELL—I call for a verification of the vote. 

The Secretary proceeded to verify the vote and had completed 
the call of those who voted aye. 

MR. ROGERS (Sumter)—In the call the Secretary omitted 
the name of Mr. Pillans of Mobile. 

THE SECRETARY—He did not vote, he is not in the house 
now. 

MR. WADDELL—He voted aye. 

MR. deGRAFFENREID—He did not vote. 

MR. HOWELL—He voted aye. 

MR. CUNNINGHAM—I rise to a point of order. 

THE PRESIDENT—The gentleman will state his point of 
order. 

MR. CUNNINGHAM—That upon the certification of a voU 
those who are absent cannot vote, only those who voted. 

MR. SAMFORD (Pike)—I make the point of order in reply 
to that that before a vote has been announced that any gentleman 
has a right to register his vote or to change his vote. 

THE PRESIDENT—That is undoubtedly true. 

MR. WILLIAMS (Marengo)—I call attention to the fact 
that Mr.* Pillans stood right there and he did not vote. 

THE SECRETARY—I called his name twice. 

MR. WADDELL—I rise to a question of personal privilege. 
I was paired with Mr. Pillans. I was standing in the lobby at the 



CONSTITUTIONAL CONVENTION, 1901 2115 

time the vote commenced to be called. Mr. Pillans and myself 
walked into the hall together, and he said the pair is off, we will 
go in and vote. I took my seat and voted no and Mr. Pillans 
stood by the post and voted aye. 

MR. HOWELL—When his name was called it was a very dis¬ 
tinct ave, and I looked around to see who it was voting, and it 
was Mr. Pillans. 

MR. WADDELL—If he did not vote, I am paired with him. 

MR. HEFLIN (Chambers)—I rise to a point of order. 

THE PRESIDENT—The gentleman will state his point of 
order. 

MR. HEFLIN—The point of order is that when the verifi¬ 
cation of a vote is demanded no gentleman can change his vote, 
and gentlemen coming into the hall, who were not in the hall when 
the vote was being taken, cannot then vote. 

THE PRESIDENT—The question which troubled the Chair 
was this: Mr. Pillans was in the hall when the vote was being 
taken. If he was present and actually voted, but is absent when 
the verification is called for, the question of difficulty with the 
Chair is how to ascertain when the vote, as recorded by the Secre¬ 
tary is challenged by members. 

MR. ROGERS (Sumter)—I make the point of order, that the 
point of order of the gentleman from Chambers is not germane. 
It is not upon the question of voting absent men. but a man who 
was present and voted and is now absent, and here is a witness 
who came into the hall with Mr. Pillans, besides his fellow mem¬ 
bers from Mobile, who say that he voted aye, and several other 
members on the floor. 

MR. WINN—I would state that Mr. Pillans came to my desk 
and expressed a doubt as to whether he had voted right, as he 
had voted aye. 

THE PRESIDENT—The Secretary is directed to record Mr. 
Pillans as voting aye. 

MR. PROCTOR (Jackson)—I rise to a point of order. The 
rule requires every member to vote from his seat. According to 
the testimony the gentleman did not vote from his seat. 

THE PRESIDENT—The point of order comes too late. 

At this point Mr. Pillans came into the hall. 

THE PRESIDENT—Will the gentleman from Mobile please 
state whether he voted on the roll call? 

MR. PILLANS—I did. 



2116 


OFFICIAL PROCEEDINGS 


THE PRESIDENT—How did the gentleman vote? 

MR. PILLANS—I voted aye. 

THE PRESIDENT—The gentleman did vote when the roll 
was called. 

MR. PILLANS—Yes, sir. 

MR. ASHCRAFT—I rise to a point of order. 

THE PRESIDENT—The gentleman will state his point of 
order. 

MR. ASHCRAFT—I had the honor of obtaining the recog 
nition of the Chair, but I did not get to conclude my remarks. On 
the call of the roll I announced that 1 was paired with Mr. Sel- 
heimer of Jefferson, who, if present, would vote no, and I would 
vote aye. I now desire to change my vote from aye to no. 

THE PRESIDENT—Do you desire to disregard the pair? 

MR. ASHCRAFT—I do not disregard the pair when I decide 
to vote with the gentleman with whom I am paired, and vote the 
same way. 

THE PRESIDENT—How? 

MR. ASHCRAFT—From Aye to no. 

MR. GRAYSON—I rise to a point of order. Had the gen¬ 
tleman who is absent known that the gentleman would vote this 
way he would have paired with some one that would keep the 
pair, hence the gentleman has no right to vote. 

MR. PETTUS—I make the point of order after a verification 
of the vote is demanded, it is not in order for gentlemen to change 
their votes or revoke a pair. The gentleman could not change his 
vote upon a verification. 

MR. deGRAb FENREID— No demand was made from anv 
member of this Convention for a verification—the verification was 
being done by the Clerk. 

J'HE PRESIDENT The gentleman from Cleburne demand¬ 
ed a verification. 

MR. deGRAFFENREID—I did not know that. 

THE PRESIDENT 1 he Chair is in doubt as to whether a 
delegate who is entitled to vote can change his vote after a verifi¬ 
cation is called for. The Chair desires to examine the rule with 
reference to gentlemen coming in and desiring to have their names 

recorded. 



CONSTITUTIONAL CONVENTION. 1901 


2117 


MR* OATES -The rule which prevails in Congress, and I 
suppose it is the highest parliamentary authority, no gentleman 
has a right to change his vote while the roll is being called, but 
after the roll call is completed, and before the result is announced, 
any one in the hall has a right to get up and change his vote or to 
he recorded if he has not voted. 

THE PlvESIDRN 1 Rule 35 is as follows: “When any 
question is taken by ayes and noes, and a delegate who has been 
absent returns before the question is decided, he shall be priv- 
lleged to make inquiry of the subject before the Convention, and 
record his vote without discussion." 

MR. OATES—That is substantially the same, if he comes in 
before the result is announced. 

THE PRESIDENT—But the question here is the result has 
not been announced. 

MR. OATES—I do not think any gentleman has a right to 
change during the verification, but after the vote is verified, and 
before the result is announced, anyone voting has a right to 
change. 

THE PRESIDENT—Any time before the result is announc¬ 
ed, any gentleman may change his vote from aye to no. and the 
point of order will be overruled. The gentleman votes no. Where 
a member has paired with another, they are on opposite sides, if 
he decides to vote on the same side with the gentleman with 
whom he is paired, the Chair sees no reason why he should not 
do so. since he is not violating the principle but in line with the 
way the absent member would have voted. 

MR. SANDERS May a delegate now change his vote. 

THE PRESIDENT—Not while the noes are being called for 
verification, as soon as the noes are verified a member mav change 
his vote. ' 

After the verification. 

MR. SANDERS—I desire to change my vote from aye to no. 

THE PRESIDENT—The gentleman from Limestone desires 
to change his vote from aye to no. The Secretary will so enter. 

MR. PETTUS—I rise to a point of order. The delegate can 
not change his vote on a verification. The object is not to give 
the delegate an opportunity to change his vote, but to see if they 
are recorded right in the first instance. I make the point of order 
that the gentleman from Limestone can not change his vote at this 
juncture. 



2118 


OFFICIAL PROFKKD! X<»S 


THE PRESIDENT — The gentleman is correct; that the 
delegate can not change his vote while the vote is being verified, 
but after a verification of the vote and before the vote is announc¬ 
ed, in the opinion of the Chair, any delegate may change his vote. 

The result of the roll call was then announced, 45 ayes and 53 
noes. 

So the motion to table was lost. 

MR. deGRAFFKNRElD—I move the adoption of the >ul»ti- 
tute and upon that I call for the previous question. 

MR. GREER (Calhoun)—Does the gentleman move the pre¬ 
vious question on the adoption of the article or just the substitute. 

MR. deGRAKKKNRKI I)—(>n the adoption of the substitute 
that I offered. 


THE PRESIDENT—The Chair will state to delegates that 
after a question is stated the Chair will pause a moment to give 
delegates an opportunity to rise and address the Chair. Right 
in the midst of a sentence, it is a little awkward to be interrupted, 
which makes it necessary to state the question several times. The 
gentleman from Hale moves the adoption of the substitute offered 
by him and upon that demands the previous question. The ques¬ 
tion is, shall the main question be put? 

And upon a vote being taken the main question was ordered. 

MR. BLACKWELL—And upon the adoption of the substi¬ 
tute I demand the ayes and noes. 

THE PRESIDENT—The question is upon the adoption of 
the substitute, and upon that the ayes and noes are called. Is tin- 
demand sustained? 

The call was sustained. The result of the roll call was as 
follows: 


Ashcraft, 

Banks, 

Barefield, 

Beddow, 

Brooks, 

Burns, 

Cardon, 

Carnathon, 

Case, 

Cobb, 

Coleman, of Walker, 
Cunningham, 


AYES 


Davis, t>t DeKalh, 
Dent. 

'leGraftenreid, 

Kspy, 

Ferguson. 

Fletcher, 

Foster. 

Graham, of Talladega. 
Greer, of Perry, 
Handley, 

Heflin, of Chambers, 
Heflin, of Randolph, 


1 loud. 

Howell. 

How/.v. 

Inge. 

Kirk, 

Knight, 

1 .edbetter. 

Leigh, 

Long, of Butler, 

Macdonald, 

Maxwell, 

Merrill, 



CONSTITUTIONAL CONVENTION, 1901 


2119 


Miller (Marengo), 

Phillips, 

Walker, 

Moody, 

Proctor, 

Watts, 

Oates, 

Robinson, 

Weakley. 

O’Neal (Lauderdale). 

Rogers (Lowndes), 

Weatherly, 

O’Neill, of Jefferson, 

Sanders, 

Williams (Barbour), 

Opp, 

Stewart, 

Williams (Marengo) 

Parker (Elmore), 

Waddell, 

Winn, 



TOTAL—57 


NOES 


Messrs. President, 

Grayson, 

Parker (Culhnan). 

Bartlett, 

Henderson, 

Pearce. 

Beavers, 

Hinson, 

Pet tu s. 

Blackwell, 

H odges. 

1 ‘orter. 

Boone, 

Jenkins, 

Rogers (Sumter), 

Byars, 

Jones, of Montgomery, 

Samford, 

Carmichael, of Coffee. 

McMillan, of Baldwin. 

Sanford. 

Cofer, 

Malone, 

Smith, Mac A. 

Davis, of Etowah, 

M artin, 

Sorrell, 

Kiev, 

Miller (Wilcox), 

Spraggins, 

Eysler, 

Murphree, 

Stoddard. 

Gilmore, 

Norman, 

Thompson. 

Glover, 

Norwood, 

Whiteside, 

Grant, 

Palmer. 

Wilson (Washingtoi 



TOTAL—42 

ABSENT OR NOT VOTING 

Alinon, 

Jackson, 

Reese, 

Altman, 

Jones, of Bibb, 

Renfro, 

Bethune, 

Jones, of Hale, 

Reynolds (Chilton). 

Browne, 

Jones, of Wilcox. 

Reynolds, of Henry. 

Bulger, 

King. 

Searcy, 

Burnett, 

Kirkland. 

Selheimer, 

Carmichael, of Colbert, 

Kyle, 

Sentell, 

Chapman, 

Locklin. 

Sloan, 

Coleman, of Green, 

Lomax, 

Smith (Mobile), 

Cornwall, 

Long, of Walker, 

Smith, Morgan M. 

Craig. 

Lowe, of Jefferson, 

Sollie, 

Duke. 

Lowe, of Lawrence, 

Spears. 

Fitts, 

McMillan (Wilcox), 

Tayloe 

Foshee, 

Morrisette, 

Vaughn, 

Freeman, 

\l ulkey. 

White, 

Graham, of Montgomery, 

NeSmith, 

Willet, 

Greer, of Calhoun, 

O’Rear, 

Williams (Elmore), 

Haley, 

Lilians, 

Wilson (Clarke), 

Harrison, 

Pitts, 



During roll call: 




2120 


OFFICIAL i*K< U/FLIHNOS 


MR. GRKKR (Calhoun) 1 am paired with llu- gentleman 
from Lawrence, Mr. Altman. It he were i»re>ent he would vote 
no. 

MR. JONHS (Bibb)--! am paired with tile gentleman from 
Walker (Mr. Long) and if he were present he would vote ave and 
I vote no. 

MR. McMILLAN I am paired with the gentleman from 
Dallas (Mr. Craig) and if he were present be would vote ave ami 
I vote no. 


MR. WATTS—I do not understand the proposition. 1 jtmt 
came in, what is the question? 

THE PRESIDENT—The question is upon the adoption of 
the substitute proposed by the gentleman from Halt* (Mr. detiraf- 
fenreid). 


MR. WAl 1'S—I ask to be excused imm voting because I 
do not know what the question is. 

MR. WHITE—I am paired with the gentleman from leifcr- 
son (Mr. Cornwell) and if he were present' he would \ ote no and 
I vote aye. 


*VR. OXEAL 1 object to tin- gentleman from Montgomery 
(Mr. Watts) being excused from voting. Cnder the rules, that 
cannot he done without unanimous consent. 


THE PRESIDENT-objection is made to 
from Montgomery being excused from voting. 


the gentleman 


MR. W ATTS— ; The gentleman 
disposition to dodge any vote if he 
before the Constitution. 


ironi Montgomery is in no 
can understand the (juestion 


a- tn PRES 1 1)ENT—Tlu- question is on the majoritv report 

State fnd Connr° f R he °. rdm;mc V , rc l ,ort ^l !>>’ the Committee on 

stkute tr thAAl A UUn a T- Mu ‘ nnn,, rity has offered a >uh- 
S off 1 l h and the gentleman from Hale (Mr. de<'.raffenreid) 
has offered a substitute for the substitute. 

MR. \\ A r rS—If I can be informed of what the substitute w 
as offered by the gentleman from Hale I will vote ' 

way that ly** - ' "** W "»* *•'»«,„« »hich ever 

Having voted in the affirmative!'! nmv vKe no'tice th°M .! 0 a "' 
a reconsideration on Monday. * e that 1 VV1 1 mme 



CONSTITUTIONAL CONVENTION, 190! 


2121 


The result was then announced, 57 ayes and 42 noes, and the 
substitute offered by Mr. deOraffenreid was adopted. 

MR. O’NEAL—I move that the rules be suspended and that 
we reconsider the vote by which this substitute was adopted for 
the purpose of laying that motion on the table. 

MR. ROGERS (Sumter) — I make the point of order that a 
motion to reconsider the morning hour of the day preceding takes 
precedence over a motion to reconsider at once. 

THE PRESIDENT—The Chair recognized the gentleman 
from Henry to offer an amendment. 

MR. MALONE---1 want to amend this Section 3 as adopted. 

The Clerk then read the amendment as follows : 

To amend Section 3 by adding thereto the words “provided 
that out of the counties of Henry, Dale and Geneva a new countv 
may be formed under the provisions of this article for forming new 
counties so as to leave said counties of Henry, Dale and Geneva 
with not less than 500 square miles each.” 

MR. MALONE—I want to say a few words in behalf of the 
amendment and I will try not to take up too much of the time. 
If you will notice, the amendment is drawn so that while it is lo¬ 
cal and applies to no other section in Alabama, it is also drawn a 
fair straight proposition without any job or anything of that kind 
put upon the people at home. It is simply to permit those people 
down there in those three counties without affecting anybody else, 
if they desire under whatever provisions of law that may be made 
for forming new counties, without mapping out the county here, 
which I have every reason to believe our circumstances are strong 
we could have carried it through without attempting to draw the 
lines and leave this man out and that man in. and create no fric¬ 
tion in the ratification of this Constitution, for I assure you that 
the only trouble that we have down there is that they all want to 
get in. Nobody want to be left out. The way this is drawn, it 
leaves it to those people alone to draw their lines without assum¬ 
ing any authority upon my part or this Convention or putting 
anybody in or out. Every place will feel that they have a chance 
to go in where they want to and will therefore favor the proposi¬ 
tion. 


MR. RORJNSON—Are the delegates from all those counties 
in favor of that proposition. 

MR. MALONE—Practically so. T want to be thoroughly un¬ 
derstood on that question. I don’t want to mislead anybody'. Mr. 
Kirkland of Dale and my^self drew that resolution. Mr. Espy is 
here and Mr. Mulkey' of Geneva, who has not been here for a week 
or two, has not seen that proposition. 



1 \>1 


OI'IK'I \ I. l’K< K. f l. I *1 \ > i S 


MR. FOSTER—What arc hi- politic'.' 

MR. MALONE—W hile 1 do not like to retei to lu> politic.'. 
[ like to go above that, but he ha- not >eeti it an.I hi> individual 
views I cannot answer tor: hut 1 can 'Wear tor the view-* of f.c 
neva countv as a whole, that the people of f.cneva coiintv are al¬ 
most solid for this —1 won’t 'av alwniulvk solid We had that 
issue at home, and that is this: evervl.odv recognized that my part 
of the community almost had to ha\e a new cottntv, but ue all 
agreed not to block but one. All \w did was to let it be >4 ) > ltuatcd 
that nr might get «>ne otir.-chcv Mr wax nut hero and I 

have nut submitted that mdnidual pmp» >>iih >n to him it ha- 
been my understanding, but *»f omr-r In- can -prak it >r him-rlf. 
that he would nut at lea^i antagwui/c tin general pn»poMth>n »d 
five hundred square mile> all <«ut the Stair. I li.it i- m\ tuider- 
Maiiding. Now. a> the Om\ rut i« *n ha- -mi fit nut to adopt that, 
this comes in and iel> it appl\ t<> <mr c«>imt\ -<> far a> <> 11 » r<aiut , 
is concerned. Mr. Reynolds i> nut hur, In- m at lr;ut with u v It 
is fair to state that a "Teat mam in the tipper end ot hi- o»tmt\, 
which is nine miles from the extreme tipper end. am! -i\t\ from 
the lower end, are not all in ta\or <n it. I made a canva^ up there 
against tin* stronger man in llenrv Oitiiih and in that heat I ^ot 
somethin"- like maybe 40 per cent. .4 the \nte in hix own heat, but 
not a majority. I here w ere tour candidate-* from the district. I 
carried every one of those counties against the four, and in mv 
county where there was a primarv. 1 got a- main a> all of them, 
notwithstanding the fact that I wa- from a j»rutV»inn that i- not 
populai amongst the voters and wa> opposed to a \erv strong man. 
Mr. ivspy announced tlie same position that he would not fa\or the 
Convention making an arbitrary c»*unt\ up there, but he would 
favor a reduction of the area in order that tlum people might set¬ 
tle that for themselves, and he got l K) |RT Crnt . n f the votes of the 
entire county and carried every heat in the count v. It was prac¬ 
tically unanimous. 


r hope you all will excuse me b-r referring to our local con- 
c i ions just a little bit. \\ e are from a section of countrv which 
developed very rapidly of late from the fact that it was not set- 
ed before. We have settled the country up there since the law 
aking the public lands from sale and putting them under hotne- 

o-r^t a< " went in *-° e ^ ect - As a result everv 160 acres and in a 
great many instances eighty and fortv acres have been settled bv 
some white man who in a great many instances had nothing else. 

h,m ?° W m t,H ' matU ‘ r ‘,’ f colIrts ’ vve -‘Ircadv have three court 

vvoidff nni- < l Ur,COUnt ' p. t1at niat ter of expenses in this regard 
would not be increased it there were three counties. 

one Jf 1 u:f e i n |l eman fr ° t ni M rnorc happened casually to show me 
Tav Cr,11 $ 4 e 4 t0 " 1!C1 has referred and it came from the 
ec or o our county. The gentleman from Elmore did 



2123 


CONSTITUTIONAL CONVENTION, 1901 

not know that but I recognized the name and the '1 ax Collector, 
and the writer practically admits the proposition that it would 
ot affect us in the rate of taxation although he resides twenty 
miles from any locality. 

, I ARKKR (Elmore) Will the gentleman allow me to 

ask him a question? 

MR. MALONE—Ves. 

MR. PARKER (Elmore)—I have in my hand what purports 
tv the Ptoceedings of the Democratic Convention of your coun- 

wiI1 get to that in a moment and shall be 
p lf he , w .' 11 cal1 n, y attention to it so that 1 can explain it I 
Have no desire to avoid your questions, which I anticipate. I just 

that matt?? thr ° Ugh °" t,le other '’Otters and then will come to 

Now take into consideration the situation of our county. There 
ate two counties that are shoe strings and right down in this sec- 
ion some ol these people are twenty miles from their county 
sites and some over here are fifty or sixty and there are 35,000 in 
hose counties, none of whom are closer than twenty miles from 
their county site, lo be exact there are 32.125. Here one of the 
counties ,s fifty-five miles long and twelve miles wide and while 

I?/" * he ' VeS rs end u the Cf ; Unt - v the People have to go thirty-five 
nlies to the Court House, from the northeast corner they have to 
go thirty-five right through the country. There is no branch court 
or anything of the kind. In another county the length is sixtv- 
tive miles and the width sixteen or eighteen, and the county site 
now is nine miles from the upper end of the county and the lower 
end of the county have to go over fifty miles. People who can 
afford it and who live on the railroads can get on the train and In 
going out of the way can get to the countv site but the common 
people have to go through the country to get to the Court House 
and if it is a little matter they just put up with it. 

1 have mentioned the Court House question and the expense 
and \\hile I do not intend to say that everybody favors this I do 
say that a great majority of the people favor it'. 

m l h ^ tiU \ C ° f , the gentleman hert ‘ expired, and on motion of 
A r. White the rules were suspended and on the further motion of 
All. Sanford the time of the gentleman was extended ten minutes. 

MR. MALONE Now, as to the question brought up by the 
gentleman from Elmore as to the action of the County Convention. 

MR. SAMFORD—That relates only to Henry County? 

MR. MALONE Yes, sir. In our county everything is nom¬ 
inated by the white primary. The Convention is supposed to have 



2124 


OFFICIAL PR( >CKKDI NC»S 


little to do. This question is not supposed to come up in the 
County Convention, notwithstanding it was at issue su tar a> the 
delegates were concerned and the people expected when the dele¬ 
gates were elected that carried it with the population. Now, w hen 
we got to the County Convention at Headland, which is turty miles 
from the low-er end of the county the real question was the selec¬ 
tion of delegates to the State Convention. Xow I shall ha\e to 
go into district affairs just the least little bit. My friend Mr. 
Sollie was recognized as the wire grass candidate trom that dis¬ 
trict. He carried the four counties and carried Harbour County. 
He was inclined to believe that there would be some danger of the 
Harbour delegation not carrying out in spirit as w T ell as letter his 
instructions and while our county was also for the Hon. Jerry \\ il- 
liams of Harbour, we did not deem it best in view of all the facts 
to instruct for Mr. Williams when Mr. Sollie might need the wire 
grass counties to hold the other counties down. In accordance 
with that agreement the Chairman of the Convention, who was a 
partner of Mr. Espy and a friend of mine, agreed with us that a 
certain committee headed by Air. Lee of Columbia should be ap¬ 
pointed to select delegates to the State Convention. That agree¬ 
ment was made so that the friends of Mr. Williams could have 
proper representation although not to be instructed. For some 
unknown reason Mr. Lee was not put on that committee and that 
gave serious offense to Mr. Lee and his friends and they arose in 
the convention and stated they would not accept the positions to 
the convention. Now with that drawback operating against me 
I got 207 votes and the other man fifteen in the primary. Immedi¬ 
ately upon that w hen more than half the delegates had gone home, 
notwithstanding I had a vote of 207 to 15. Mr. Lee moved to in¬ 
struct the county delegates, of which I was one, against the re¬ 
duction of the area, which w as no doubt a hit at me, as he thought 
I had gone back on him. He afterwards expressed regret for do¬ 
ing that. The next beat below where the question of another new 
county was agitated where 1 got 71 to r\ one man representing the 
beat cast that beat against me. The lower beat where I got everv 
vote but one or two was the same way. And so it was right along 
although the race had been made on that issue and the people were 
overwhelmingly for it. \Yc have a population of 80,000 in the 
three counties. They are abundantly able to take care of them¬ 
selves. One of the counties when it was organized onlv a few 
years ago had 2,900 inhabitants. Now it has 19,000. We have 
doubled in the last decade. If we were to attempt to move the 
records from Abbeville to Dothan there would be another section 
fifty miles from us, and you would not give any relief to the south¬ 
east corner of Dale or the east side of Geneva, which would be 
from thirty to thirty-five miles away. 

I have explained to you that our people favor this movement 
almost solidly though I do not say all of them. Mr. Sollie is pres- 



CONSTITUTIONAL CONVENTION, 1901 


2125 


ent, and I have announced in his presence what I understand to 
be his position, and he will be able to speak for himself. Why 
Dale should object, I cannot see. The upper end of the county is 
willing- to give away two or three beats and a few could be taken 
from Geneva and with our section of Henry there could be carved 
out a most prosperous and promising new county. 

Now this substitute don't make the new county. All that 
my substitute does is to make possible the formation of that new 
county but it takes two-thirds vote of the legislature. Henry 
County will only have one Senator. Geneva and Dale will have 
two and the other counties will have three representatives to Hen¬ 
ry's one so that you will see that the matter is practically left to 
our own people. We are asking a fair proposition. No job at all. 

The average of the counties under my substitute would he 
571 and the population would be 45,5000 in round figures. 

Some of our commissioners go fifty miles to court. We 
haven't a tax collector in twenty miles nor a clerk. The result is 
that nobody knows anything about the wealth of our county. To 
give you an idea on that when I was on the City Council we sent 
a committee to Abbeville to raise the amount of assessed values 
in order that we might get more city taxes. Our assessed values 
were so very low, so entirely disproportionate to the real values, 
that we thought that was proper, but when we got there we found 
that we were paying so much more than anybody, that we came 
home without saying anything. 

As a further illustration of this idea there are five banks in 
the county doing a fair business and they are paying tax only on 
$5,000 on an average. One bank with $50,000 capital is paying 
taxes on $9,000 of property. The reason of this is that the sections 
are so far from the county seat that no one looks after it. 

MR. ESPY—I did not intend to take any part in this debate 
until the matter of the resolution offered in the county convention 
of Henry County was adverted to before this Convention. When 
I announced as a candidate for a delegate to this Convention the 
people of Abbeville, where the county seat is located, desired to 
know my position with reference to the establishment of a new 
county. The impression seemed to be that the delegates from that 
countv would make an effort to have this Convention itself es¬ 
tablish a new county. In answer to that query I wrote a letter, 
in which I stated that I would take no step, or make no effort 
to have this convention establish a new county, but that I did de¬ 
sire that the people of Henry County should know my position, 
and that I favored a reduction of the constitutional area so that 
future legislatures might establish new counties. I went before 
the people of my county, they fully understanding my position 
and after a very spirited and heated contest where there were four 



2126 


OFFICIAL FROCKKOI X(;S 


candidates, I received 90 per cent of the entire vote cast in inv 
county. I received more than as many again votes as the two de¬ 
feated candidates. I received nearly as many again votes as my 
colleague who was elected to this Convention. That being true. 
I myself am willing, after I have voted according to the resolution 
not to reduce the area of counties, to take the responsibility to sup¬ 
port this amendment as offered by my colleague, Mr. Malone, and 
go back to my people. In addition to what he has already said 
with reference to the necessity of the establishment of a new coun¬ 
ty, we desire to say this, that we are living in a flourishing and 
progressive section of the country. The town we are in is but an 
index to the country surrounding it. In 1890 the census gave us 
a population of 200. in 1900. 3,275. As a matter of fact we now 
have in that town about 4,500 inhabitants by actual count. I men¬ 
tion this to show the progress of the country. This Convention 
has gone on and said they will not reduce the constitutional areas 
of the counties. If this amendment is not granted we stand wifh 
a constitutional barrier confronting us until another Convention 
is called, which is not likely to be called at least in twenty-five 
years. If the spirit of progress goes on for the next ten years 
the delegates to this Convention can readily see the deplorable 
condition that we will be in. Now in reference to the wishes of 
the people of Geneva County. I know not what the entire people 
think, but I do know that the people residing in the territory that 
will be sought to be incorporated in any new county hereafter to 
be established are almost unanimous that the new county be cre¬ 
ated. I do know that the same condition prevails to a certain ex¬ 
tent as to the people of the eastern portion of Dale Countv also. 
Now we do not ask the Convention to establish a new county. 
Here is all we want. If you notice the reading of the amendment 
it savs the legislatures, under the regulations of this provisions 
may in the future, establish that county. Now I submit to the 
Convention that if the people of those three counties do not want 
this county established in the future, thev certainlv will not have 
it. Why? Because when they go to elect their representatives, 
if they want to make it an issue and a majority is against it, the 
men who advocate it will go down in defeat, but if the people want 
it, the advocates of the new county will triumph. And when such 
a question comes up before the legislature, everv fairminded man 
knows a legislature won’t carve a countv out of three other coun¬ 
ties where the representatives of those counties are opposed to the 
proposition. So when you resolve this amendment to its last 
analysis it means simply this: Remove the constitutional bar- 
n ? rS , at OUt t ^ iese three counties a new countv can be form¬ 

ed. We do not ask distinct regulation. We ask that it be fixed 
in such a manned that we can establish a new county and not be 
put in a position where that establishment can never be realized 
The only thing we ask is to reduce the area of the three counties 



CONSTITUTIONAL CONVENTION, 1901 


2127 


so that we may form the fourth county. As it now stands we 
cannot form a new county out of these three counties and all four 
counties have 600 miles. 

MR. SOLLIE—Mr. President and gentlemen of the Conven¬ 
tion. Individually I would gladly see the town of Dothan relieved 
from an embarrassing situation. But I do not think the gentle¬ 
man from Henry (Mr. Malone), who first addressed the Conven¬ 
tion on the matter, is exactly correct in his understanding of the 
territorial location of the counties. For instance, I think Geneva 
county is more than twelve miles wide and 1 think Henry county 
is more than sixteen or seventeen miles wide. Whether I am 
correct in that I do not know except from my general acquaintance 
with the country. 

MR. ROGERS (Sumter)—Geneva is not over twelve miles 
wide. 

MR. SOLLIE—I feel sure it is. 

MR. ROGERS (Sumter)—Here is the map with a scale and 
it is not over eleven miles. 

MR. SOLLIE—I have gone across that county so much that 
1 undertake to say Geneva county is more than twelve miles wide. 
It is fourteen miles from Dothan down to the postoffice where I 
live and ten or twelve miles down to the Florida line. My mother 
lived in the county twelve or fourteen years. My only effort at 
homesteading was in that county and I am so familiar with the 
county that the gentleman must be mistaken. 

But getting away from the question of territory and the shape 
of the counties. I admit so far as Dothan is concerned, that that 
city needs relief, and individually I would be glad to see the re¬ 
lief granted. But I feel that I am not a proper person to take a 
direct and personal interest in the matter, because I represent 
eight counties and some of those and perhaps the majority are 
against the proposition to reduce the constitutional areas of coun¬ 
ties. I feel if I am to vote for my constituency I would perhaps 
have to vote against the reduction as a general proposition and yet 
I thought Dothan should have the relief if the Convention wanted 
to reduce the areas and I was content to say nothing. 

Our condition in Dale is this: If there were no trouble be¬ 
tween Ozark and Newton, my county, except a small strip, would 
be unalterably opposed to any reduction of area. There is a little 
strip at the east end three or four miles wide that would like to be 
joined with Dothan in a new county, and for the reason that it 
would make them nearer the court house and it would be more 
convenient for them. But the other portions of Dale, apart from 
the court house proposition, are, I think, opposed to any reduction 
of the territory in Dale county. 



2128 


OFFICIAL PROCEEDINGS 


But I do not profess to know positively as to the present con¬ 
dition of Dale, as to whether it is willing to see some of its terri- 
tory taken or not. My law partner, Mr. Kirkland of Dale county, 
is not here. I have not conferred with him but I have supposed 
he would look after these matters and ascertain the wishes of Dale 
as to the reduction of the county area. But, as to making an ex¬ 
ception in the Constitution of Dale, Henry and (icneva and carv¬ 
ing* out a new county, that proposition is new, it has never been 
mooted in my county. I am quite sure that Mr. Mulkey is op¬ 
posed to the proposition. Some reference was made to his politics; 
but the people of Geneva—and a good many of them Democrats 
sent him here so that I think he is properly the mouthpiece of that 
county. 

When it conies to the county of Dale, Mr. Kirkland is the 
proper representative and I do not know his wishes. I understand 
that it is stated that this is satisfactory to him, but when he comes 
to thoroughly understand what the people of the county want, I 
do not know whether he will take that position or not. This is a 
new proposition. It is the proposition to make an exception of mv 
county and two others. 

Now, in regard to Henry county, I have been approached by 
a large number of citizens, some insisting that I stand by the ac¬ 
tion of the County Convention and saying that was the only au¬ 
thoritative body that has spoken and others taking the contrary 
position. Then in the light of the fact that Mr. Kirkland is not 
here and that Mr. Mulkey is absent as are also two of the repre¬ 
sentatives of the other counties that are to be affected by this and 
in view of the further fact that the representatives of Henry coun¬ 
ty stand, by the highest authority in the party, instructed against 
the reduction, notwithstanding I am in favor of giving relief to 
Dothan if it can be done consistently, I think it would be unwise 
for this Convention to act precipitately and hurriedly in carving 
a county out of these three counties without even consulting the 
wishes of those counties, that it would be unwise to make an ex¬ 
ception in this case with the representatives of two of the coun¬ 
ties absent and as far as I represent Henry county I must bow in 
humble obedience to the expressed will of the county convention of 
Henry county and vote against this proposition notwithstanding 
my desire to favor Dothan. I therefore move that the section to 
which this is an amendment, together with all amendments, be 
postponed for say six days. The reason for that is that the Cir¬ 
cuit Court at Geneva is in session and there are six or seven capi¬ 
tal cases and Mr. Mulkey is attending that court and I would like 
to have the matter postponed until he can return. 

MR. PARKER (Cullman)—I move to lay that motion on the 
table. 



non. 


CONSTITUTIONAL CONVENTION. 1901 2129 

MR. OA I'RS—I will ask the gentleman to withdraw that mo- 


MR. PARKER (Cullman)—I will if you will renew it. 

MR. OATES—I will yield the floor to you so that you can 
make the motion. 

\\ ithout ail) arrogance on my part, I say it. because it is a 
fact. 1 know more about this territory involved than any of these 
delegates, because I was acquainted with it before some of them 
were born and 1 have been all over it. 1 have been where the city 
of Dothan now stands when there was nothing there but the pop¬ 
lar spring and a little log grocery house. I never cast a vote any¬ 
where in my life except in the good old county of Henry until the 
last two elections when I had become a citizen of Montgomery 
county and had changed my voting place to this city. 1. too. have 
represented that county in the Legislature and I represented the 
Senatorial district which my brilliant young friend now represents 
in the Constitutional Convention of 1875, and I represented all of 
that territory in the Congress of the United States for fourteen 
years. I have attended court in each one of those counties. I was 
acquainted with that section before Geneva county had an ex¬ 
istence. I know the people of that country very well and hence 
my desire to lie heard upon this matter. 

It is a mistake to suppose that Henry county is only twelve 
or fifteen or seventeen miles wide. It is upon an average more 
than twenty miles wide. 

MR. MALONE—As a matter of fact I have here the township 
and range lines and there are three whole sections at the widest 
part and maybe at the bend of the river it might be eighteen miles. 

MR. OATES—I understand it perfectly well. I have the good 
luck to own lands in all parts of the county. I know where the 
lines go and while it is true you may find some points that are as 
narrow as eighteen miles across owing to the crooks of the Chat¬ 
tahoochee River, the general average is more than twenty miles 
and the length about 69 miles. 

MR. MALONE—The county is nearly rectangular and if it is 
twenty miles wide and sixty-nine long, that would give it 1,400 
square miles and the county has not that many square miles in it. 

MR. OATES—I am talking of the old county of Henry. You 
start in at the Florida line and to the upper part it is between sixty- 
five and seventy miles, and the average width is twenty miles. 

MR. MALONE—It cannot be twenty miles with that length. 
That would make 1,400 square miles. 



2130 


OFFICIAL PROCEEDINGS 


MR. OATES—I don't say it is over twenty miles all the way 
through. I say it would average that much, and I believe it will. 
That was before Geneva was made and before any of the county 
was taken off. At one time in the early history the counties of 
Dale, Geneva, Coffee and a good part of Barbour were all in Hen¬ 
ry County, named for the grand old patriot and orator of Virginia. 
All of those counties have been carved off of it. The Court House 
was once located at a point either in Dale or near Coffee. It did 
not remain there long and was removed to Columbia on the river 
and remained there until it was changed to Abbeville, where it is 
now. I remember in 1859 the terrible contest the people of the 
county had upon the proposition to change the Court House from 
Abbeville to another point which was thirteen miles south of 
Abbeville in the piney woods. It went even to the extent of blood¬ 
shed before it was settled. It was a hardship for men to come 
from the lower end of the county fifty miles up to Abbeville and 
a branch court was established at Columbia and subsequently 
since the wonderful growth of Dothan and the development of that 
section another was established at Dothan. 

Now a word about the instructions of the County Convention. 
I have heard the explanation of my friend the delegate from Hen¬ 
ry as to how that occurred and I have not as much respect for in¬ 
structions or platforms of conventions as I had when I was a 
young man. I know how such things are frequently procured, 
and unless it is a matter thoroughly discussed, well understood 
and fairly settled by the convention, it never has a great deal of 
weight with me, but I believe the motion made by the delegate 
from Dale (Mr. Sollie) to postpone this matter for five or six days, 
or until the other portions of this report are disposed of, should 
be carried. As he has stated that one of the delegates from Dale 
and the delegate from Geneva are not present, and I think that is a 
first class reason why a postponement should be had. The dele¬ 
gate from Geneva is doubtless trying to represent his people ac¬ 
cording to their wishes and is aware no doubt of one state of af¬ 
fairs in that county which has not been alluded to. And while 
that gentleman is of a different political faith from the most of us. 
I think he wants to do right so far as he understands it and he is 
not acting in a partisan sense. I know the eastern part of Geneva 
County some portions of which was taken from Henry, holds the 
balance of power and controls nominations and elections in the 
county and the people in the western end are more or less appre- 
sensive of the growing strength of the eastern part and I know 
the western part would gladly give up that eastern slice to an¬ 
other county so that part could be nearer a county seat in a new 
county. That would remove all apprehensions of change in the 
county seat. 

I have no objection to the proposition to carve out a new coun¬ 
ty from the three counties so that neither of them would be re- 



2131 


CONSTITUTIONAL CONVKNTJOX, 1901 

contain*Son' square nn * es and that the new county would 

I must se« • n Vt Fe mi u S ’ kut * ><Aore I can vote for the proposition 
A k ! 10w that no injustice will he done to any of those 
..... i. ‘ ’ a a, . r ' ote can t> e taken or otherwise their wishes 

u h , V lM ? C< l b f f .° re the new count 3 is formed. I don’t know 
r • K ‘ U °i > e< ?- v 110 Convention with reference to locating 
for th-it rpi nt " , C ? unties f° r that P a rt we have not passed on and 
f - ‘ j o o f,lvo f t u ‘ ni °tion to postpone the further consid- 
nation until the conclusion of the article. 

f I now renew the motion of the Chairman 

?1, • Committee to lay the motion to postpone upon the table. 

, matter tan come up on reconsideration Monday if it is de- 
smed, and there is no earthly use of delaying the matter, as Mr. 
Kirkland drew up the resolution with me. 

A \ote being taken on the motion to table, the motion to post¬ 
pone was tabled by a vote of 75 ayes and 16 noes on division. 

A viva voce vote being taken on the adoption of the gentle¬ 
man from Henry (Mr. Malone), the same was carried. 

SOLLIE I voted aye for the purpose of moving a re- 
consideration next Monday, and I now move a reconsideration of 
the vote hv which it was adopted. 

I HE PRESIDENT — Under the rules that motion will lie 
over until Monday. 

MR. MALONE—If it is in order I will move to suspend the 
rules and reconsider that now. 

MR. SOLLIE—Before that motion is put I desire to say to 
this Convention- 


MR. WADDELL—I rise to a point of order. 

THE PRESIDENT—The gentleman will state his point of 
order. 


MR. WADDELL—A motion to suspend the rules is not de¬ 
batable. 

THE PRESIDENT—The point of order is well taken. 

A vote being taken the motion to suspend the rules was car¬ 
ried. the ayes being 63 and the noes 22 on division. 

MR. ROGERS (Sumter)—I now move a reconsideration of 
the vote by which this Section was adopted, and I move to lay 
that motion on the table. 

MR. SOLLIE—I do not think the gentleman can make that 
motion. He has not had the floor. The Chair recognized me. 



2132 


OFFICIA l PROCKF.DINGS 


THE PRESIDENT—-The Chair had recognized the gentle¬ 
man from Dale. 

MR. SOLLIE—I had started to say- 

MR. WADDELL—I rise to a parliamentary inquiry. 

THE PRESIDENT—The gentleman will state the inquiry. 

MR. WADDELL—The gentleman who made the motion to 
suspend the rules was under the rules entitled to the floor. 

THE PRESIDENT—The Chair knows of no rule to that ef¬ 
fect. 

MR. SOLLIE—I wish to say that I do not object or oppose 
Dothan being relieved by the formation of a new county if these 
three wire grass counties are willing for that to be done. 

MR. ESPY—Mr. President. I would like to ask the gentle¬ 
man a question. 

THE PRESIDENT—Does the gentleman yield? 

MR. SOLLIE—No, sir; I prefer to get through my remarks 
if possible, but the gentleman may interrupt me at the end of 
eight minutes. 

I realize that Henry County is badly situated and if prac¬ 
ticable that it would be well to have a new county in the wire 
grass. But we have before us an article which will consume some 
days and here is a proposition not known to the people of the sec¬ 
tion, something in the nature of local legislation that is sprung 
upon the Convention by two delegates living in Dothan who get 
up and take advantage of a technicality in order to get the propo¬ 
sition to a vote and they would have this Convention of 155 mem¬ 
bers vote against a reduction in the area of counties of the State 
of Alabama for your sections and yet allow them in their section 
to have this resolution. And they do this in the absence of three 
out of four of the local representatives of the territory to which 
this substitute applies. And against the protest of one of the dele¬ 
gates they are undertaking to lay down the most extraordinarv 
rule for this wire grass section, a rule that will not apply to am 
other part of the State. 

MR. SAMFORD—Will the gentleman permit a question? 

MR. SOLLIE—After eight minutes. I say it is not fair to the 
people of the wire grass, notwithstanding my friendliness to Do¬ 
than. The people of that town are my friends personally and po¬ 
litically, but notwithstanding that fact I conceive it to be fair that 
the representatives of this section should at least be given an op¬ 
portunity to be here when a local measure bearing upon that ter¬ 
ritory alone is attempted to be put through, I think they should 



CONSTITUTIONAL CONVENTION, 1901 


2133 


be at least made aware that their interests are to be legislated 
against and should have their day in court here and that this Con¬ 
vention cannot in thi> case go ahead and consider this article in 
the absence oi those delegates and when they have not been put 
upon notice of the fact. The gentlemen from Dothan have made 
a showing for their side of the contention and they have procured 
affirmative action by this Convention. 1 do not say that Dothan 
is not entitled to this relief, but 1 say if this Convention, against 
the protests of persons now present, with only a small house, sets 
this precedent of taking up a local situation and dealing with it in 
the absence of the representatives of that section, what assurance 
have any of you that some day in your absence the Convention 
will not take up some matter affecting your territory and settle it 
against your wishes? 'Phis i> not doing what a Constitution 
should do. this is not making a Constitution for Alabama at large, 
but it is taking up a question affecting a certain section and in the 
absence of the representatives, or the most of the representatives 
of that section, disposing of the matter. 1 insist that the fair thing 
to do would be to reconsider this matter and pass it over until the 
delegates have an opportunity to be heard from. 1 say it is an ex¬ 
traordinary thing that an amendment should be sprung upon the 
floor of this Convention when perchance delegates happen to be 
absent and that amendment is railroaded through, the regular 
rules of procedure arc suspended and the matter, which is an ex¬ 
ception to the general rule is rushed through and settled beyond 

recall. 


MR. SANFORD (Montgomery)—How long do you wish the 
section postponed." 

MR. SOLLIK—To the end of the article so that the persons 
representing the territory may know that the amendment is befoie 
the Convention and maw if they wish, show cause why it should 
not be passed. If thev don't we will then go ahead and act on it 
and then I shall be ready to act with these gentlemen but until 
that is done I think it is unfair that the convention should take 
up a local situation and without hearing from the members rep¬ 
resenting that interest dispose of so important a matter. I trust 
you will not push this precipitate action upon the Convention 1 
trust that no exception to the ordinary procedure will be made 
as to this matter. Let the matter go over let these gentlemen 
have notice and it thev cannot show reasons why this action should 
not be taken, I will vote with these gentlemen, but I insist it is not 
right now to cut this matter off. I trust, gentlemen, will 
to reconsider the vote by which this amendment was passed, and 
postpone the matter and give opportunity for a hearing. 1 o la> 
this motion to reconsider on the table is against the spirit of fair¬ 
ness it is again-t precedent; it is extraordman in its charactti 
Sin amendment like this local in its character should he taken 



2134 


OFFICIAL PROCEEDINGS 


up and passed in the absence of those who represent the interests 
atfected. 

MR. COLEMAN (Walker)—That does not propose to make 
a new county, does it? 

MR. SOLE IK No. sir; but you reduce the area so that the 
county can be made. 

MR. COLEMAN (Walker)—If the people don’t want it. it 
won't be made. 

MR. SOLLIK—We don’t want to have our case prejudged 
and a wrangle precipiated upon us. We want the right to pass 
m the first instance on the question of whether we shall have 
a local contest precipitated. 

MR. ESP\ Is it not a fact that the people of these various 
counties will vote on the question and will also vote for repre¬ 
sentatives in the General Assembly and that their wishes can he 
made manifest then. 

MR. SOLLIE—It is but we should not put a spur in the side- 
ot the people goading on to them a local controversy. 

MR. CARMICHAEL (Coffee) — I make no pretensions to 
oratorical or torensic ability and have thus far not inflicted upon 
the Convention any punishment in the way of a maiden effort 1 
am not a delegate from Dale, Geneva or Henry, but I do come 
trom a county which touches upon Dale and Geneva, and I have 
taken considerable interest in the question of a new countv with 
Dothan for a county seat, for the reason that I was born and rear- 
ed in Dale county, that the closest ties bind me to Dale and for 
the further reason that, having frequently had business in the 
southern part of Dale, which would be in a new county if estab¬ 
lished, I know the feelings of the people of that section. 

Last winter it happened that I was in Montgomerv when there 
ua- a hard fight being made before the Committee on Countv 
boundaries, as to the formation of a new countv. 

eo„n^ OLU “ question was not the formation of a new 
county but providing for a new court house. 

th CARMICHAEL—I stand corrected. It was not as to 

the establishment of a new county, but it was practicallv taking- 
the county seat from Ozark and putting it at Newton. l'remem 
ber the gentleman himself argued that that would be prac¬ 
tically the result. I do not think the gentleman will dispute that 
proposition As I say, last winter I was at Montgomery during 
that contest and I examined at that time a large number of peti¬ 
tions sent from Dale against putting that new court house at 



CONS) I | UTJOXAl, CONVKNTIOX. ]';oi 2135 

' . ass '. ,t ' iaU ‘ <l with the people of Dale, and I 

business and Cf ! n ' Kt w,tk them as 1 make frequent visits in a 
here w tl^n n? C, L al "TV”" 1 1 can *ate that this is a live matter 
; r) ’ ,y kn ;? k - (1 ^- 1 am not so busy a man as the dele- 

K ah? bv fr, D i e f n ^ SUV U> not in sar ca.sm but deliberately. I am 

mi b ,V.l U ! H ‘ a talkative nature and 1 think 1 have seen 
■ , 11 he'd* c m Dale county in the last six months than has 

he delet e from Dale himself, for in pursuance of business. I 
ia\t i‘ lu (( o\(i ncaily every beat soliciting subscriptions for 
my newspaper. I was there just before the fight in relation to 
the establishment ot a coordinate court at Newton and just after¬ 
ward and the people were alive to the question. Why, men were 
traveling all over that section securing petitions and it was fre¬ 
quently said by the men who were caring for Ozark interest that 
as soon as the Constitutional Convention met that Dothan would 
ha\e a new county and that they were going to have a new court 

louse, and that would end the trouble. That was the principal 

argument Used. I he people oi South Dale, with the exception 
of Newton, signed a petition against establishing a court house at 
Newton with the idea that there would soon be a new’ county 

and thev wanted to be in it. 1 he people of Ozark do not oppose 

this provision. Mr. Kirkland aided in drawing up this amend¬ 
ment. The delegate from (ieneva (Mr. Mulkey) has not fought 
it. I state to this Convention that 1 traveled all over (ieneva 
county last winter and 1 state the fact that this question w r as be¬ 
ing discussed, and the people of Geneva are posted on it and they 
favor this amendment. The people of the west end favor it be¬ 
cause it simplifies the whole situation by lessening to a great ex¬ 
tent, if not removing entirely, any possibility of a row about the 
court house matter. The people of East Geneva favor it because 
it enables them more cheaply and easily to get to their court house 
to transact their business. That part of the county has a railroad 
running to Dothan which does not go on to Geneva, but stops 
eleven miles short and the people are thus not able to reach Ge¬ 
neva with anything like the ease they can Dothan. 


As to the statement that this matter has not been agitated, 
the Dothan papers, than which there are no two papers in Ala¬ 
bama more widely circulated in that section or more ably edited, 
have, for a number of years, advocated the holding of a Constitu¬ 
tional Convention for the purpose, not of enabling them to secure 
a new county through ordinary channels, but of actually establish¬ 
ing a county by the Convention itself and the people of that sec¬ 
tion are expecting some such action from this body. My good 
friend from Dale is unduly exercised and I think if w r e reconsider 
this vote and postpone this matter, w T hen he is properly advised, 
he himself will favor this proposition to enable a new’ county to 
be formed. 



2136 


OFFICIAL PROCEEDINGS 


MR. SOLLIE—I think the gentleman's last statement is most 
probable, but does that militate against the proposition that this 
amendment should be known to the delegates who represent that 
section? 

MR. CARMICHAEL—Mr. Kirkland of Dale and Mr. Mul- 
key of Geneva knew, as well as I did that this matter was coming 
up. They knew what the committee had reported and all about 
this matter. I do not arrogate to myself any superior intelligence, 
and I knew it, and they should be here and would be here fighting 
it if they objected to it. They have not been opposing it, they 
have not been going around mentioning it as they would if they 
were antagonistic to it. I have been in crowds where there was 
talk about it and they said nothing in opposition to it. Mr. Presi¬ 
dent, I move the previous question on the motion to reconsider. 

MR. SAM FORD—And a motion to table. 

MR. CARMICHAEL (Coffee) — I move to lay the motion to 
reconsider on the table. 

A vote being taken the motion to reconsider was tabled. 

THE PRESIDENT—The question recurs on the substitute 
offered by the minority as amended. 

A vote being taken the substitute as amended was adopted 
and a further vote being taken the section as amended by the 
adoption of the substitute was adopted. 

MR. PARKER (Cullman)—I move the adoption of section 2. 

MR. HOWZE—I would like to ask the Chairman a question 
as to section 2, whether it affects or conflicts with any litigation 
pending now.? 

MR. PARKER (Cullman)—None that I know of. 

THE PRESIDENT—The Secretary will read section 2. 

Section 2 was read as follows: Section 2. The boundaries 
of the several counties as they now exist are hereby ratified and 
confirmed. 

A vote being taken section 2 was adopted. 

Section 4 was then read as follows: 

Sec. 4. The General Assembly shall have power, provided 
that each house, by a majority of its members, elected thereto, 
shall vote in favor thereof to submit to a vote of the people within 
the boundaries of the proposed new county, the creation and for¬ 
mation of new counties, but no new county shall be created, un¬ 
less such proposed new county shall receive two-thirds of the 
votes of the qualified electors, voting at such election; and at the 



CONSTITUTIONAL CONVENTION, 1901 


2137 


.same time the question of a name and a county seat for such coun¬ 
ty shall be submitted to and determined by said electors; and, 
provided, that no new county shall be created or formed of less 
extent than five hundred square miles, and which does not con¬ 
tain a sufficient number of inhabitants to entitle it to one repre¬ 
sentative under the ratio of representation existing 1 at the time of 
its creation and leave the county or counties from which it is 
taken with the required number of inhabitants entitling such coun¬ 
ty or counties to separate representation, or which shall reduce 
any old county below five hundred square miles. 

MR. COBB—1 rise to a parliamentary inquiry. The action 
of the Convention just had utterly destroys this section 4. If you 
pass section 4 there will be an irreconcilable conflict between what 
vou have done and what is proposed to be done - what are you go¬ 
ing to do about it? 

THE PRESIDENT—The Chair is not going to do anything 
except Mich motions as may be made to the Convention. 

MR. COBH—Then I move to lay section 4 on the table. 

THK PRESIDENT—The Secretary is not through reading 
the section yet. 

The minority report was read as follows: 

MINORITY REPORT 


The undersigned member of the Committee on State and 
County Boundaries does not concur in the report of the Commit¬ 
tee as to Sections 2, 3 and 4. and he offers as substitute therefor 

the following: 

Section 3 The boundaries of the several counties of this State 
as heretofore established by law, are hereby ratified and confirm¬ 
ed The General y\ssembly may by a vote of two-thirds of both 
Houses thereof arrange and designate boundaries or the several 
counties of this State, which boundaries sha 1 no be 
cent by a like vote: but no new counties shall bt Ik reaper tonne 
of less 3 extent than six hundred square nnles and no existing coun¬ 
ty shall be reduced to less than six hundred square miles; and no 
new county shall be formed which does not contain a sufficient 
number of inhabitants to entitle it to one representative under 
the ratio of representation existing at the time of its formation, 
and leave the county or counties from which it is taken with the 
Required number of inhabitants entitling such county or counties 
to separate representation. 

Respectfully submitted. 

Milo Moody, 

C. H. Miller. 



2138 


OFFICIAL PROCEEDINGS 


MR. COBB—If you will allow me just a moment I will ex¬ 
plain the situation. 

THE PRESIDENT—Does the gentleman withdraw his mo¬ 
tion to table? 

MR. COBB—For the present. 

THE PRESIDENT—A motion to table is not debatable. The 
gentleman applies the gag himself. 

MR. COBB—[ will take it all back, and withdraw it. That 
is if I make a contract with the Chair to be recognized. 

MR. SANFORD (Montgomery)—1 ask a matter of inquiry, 
for information, can I now offer a substitute to Section 4 of the 
report of the committee? 

THE PRESIDENT—The Chair will state for the informa¬ 
tion of the gentleman from Montgomery that the gentleman from 
Macon has the floor, and if the gentleman can get him off the 
floor, and get in his amendment, before he moves to table, he will 
have a chance. 

MR. SANFORD—What do you say to it? 

MR. COBB—Put it in there and I'll see. 1 will let him put 
it in. 

The substitute was read as follows: 

“Substitute to Section 4 of the report of the Committee on 
State and County Boundaries— 

THE PRESIDENT—The Chair will state to the gentleman 
from Montgomery, that there is already pending a .substitute for 
Section 4, and to be in order the gentleman will have to shape his 
substitute so as to be a substitute for the pending substitute and 
the article. 

MR. SANFORD—d will put it in that manner. 

The reading of the substitute was continued * 

“Substitute to Section 4 of the report of the committee, and 
the pending substitute by the minority Committee on State and 
County Boundaries, Section 4. The General Assembly shall have 
power to create new counties, provided that no county shall con¬ 
tain within its limits less than four hundred square miles, or a less 
number of inhabitants than would entitle it to one representative, 
according to the ration of representation existing at the time of its 
creation; and provided further, that no county from which anv 
territory may be taken shall be reduced to an area of less than four 
hundred square miles, nor shall the population of such county be 
so diminished as to take away from it all of its representatives.” 



2139 


CONSTITUTIONAL CONVENTION, 1901 


Mr. Sanford sought recognition. 

MR. COBH I only yielded for the reading of that. 

MR. SAXTORI) ] have offered that, Mr. President- 
MR. COBB—There is a "pint” of order. 

M R. S A X 1* < )R I) 11 | have the floor 1 would like to give the* 

reasons lor ottering it. 

MR. CoBB 1 had the fl <x»r and welded for the reading— - 

MR. S.W’H >R1> *1 es. I offered it. Mr. President- 

MR. O MU'. Uo on. 


MR. S.\N1-<)RI) (Montgomery) Became while the 4th see- 
lion from a general reading of it intimates that it favors the forma¬ 
tion of new counties, it i- absolutely impracticable under that sec¬ 
tion to form a new county. There seems to be an impression that 
the people have a right to vote upon new counties. It is a thing 
unheard of in the history of Alabama. Alabama’s first county was 
formed in 1800. before Alabama and Mississippi were ceded hv 
f.eorgia to the United States. The county of Washington was 
formed. Its propriety, its limits, its purposes were never submitted 
to a vote of the people, nor was there any county submitted to 
the people for their approbation from that time down to the present 
in the history of Alabama. In 1819 there were twenty-seven coun¬ 
ties. Not one of them was ever submitted to a vote of the people. 
In 1821 Pickens county was formed. In 1824 Walker county was 
formed, and thus many were formed until in 1832 nine counties 
were formed, not one of which was ever submitted to the approval 
<>f the people. Since 1865 eight or nine new counties have been 
formed, including Cullman county in 1877. and not one of them was 
ever submitted for the approbation of the people. So that a vote 
of two-thirds is against the history of Alabama, for the people to 
sav whether a county shall exist or not. 


Let me sav to the Convention that counties are political sub¬ 
divisions formed for the use and benefit of the State. The ad¬ 
vantage to the people is an incident to it. It forms these counties 
so that its laws can he better enforced, and its taxes can he better 
collected lynching can he better prevented, and everything con¬ 
sidered it 'is for the advantage of the State that counties should 
be formed, for the smaller the county the more effective is the en¬ 
forcement of its laws. The more secure are the people in their 
!n^ lihertv an<l property. Now. Mr. President. I have advocated 
and do advocate counties of not less than four hundred square 
miles because it would lead to the establishment of many new 
towns It would lead to the construction of many railroads It 
would' afford markets for the products of the various plantations 
°hich do not now exist. An area of four hundred square miles 



2140 


OFFICIAL PROCEEDINGS 


will give to every citizen that is farthest from the center, a market 
town distant only fourteen miles, which will enable him, as the 
gentleman from Washington said yesterday, to go and return to 
his home almost between sun and sun. It would add to the en¬ 
lightenment of the people, as the gentleman from Cleburne says. 
Schools would spring up, and churches would be built. Jails would 
be established, as an object lesson for the lawless. Even a gallows 
would be erected possibly, that would have more effect in restrain¬ 
ing the vicious element of mankind than the commandment which 
says thou shalt not kill. These are the influences. You have mar¬ 
kets for your green meats, for your vegetable products and votir 
domestic manufactures. Why, in Georgia, and 1 refer to Georgia 
because I think most of my friends here are natives of that great 
State, they have so many small counties that I have seen so trifling 
a thing as the manufacture of woolen cordage by old ladies taken 
to the towns where they receive the market price for their products, 
so that it is even an advantage to the people in that particular. 
It calls the people closer together. They become more civilized, 
not merely because of the number of schools, but bv intercourse. 
Why it was said by a very great man that no question of impor¬ 
tance to civilization passed in Europe until it passed in France, 
and France owes it to the fact that her people mingle closely to¬ 
gether, and their enlightenment is advanced by their conversational 
opportunities. These are philosophical principles, and Alabama 
should have the benefit of them. I have mentioned this fact to 
show that when you bring the people together in small communi¬ 
ties, how factories spring up. In a little town in the North of 
England, where the weavers lived, thev were bankrupt and poor 
suffering for the necessities of life, when twenty-eight men com¬ 
bined to contribute 4 cents a week, and raised in that manner, after 
a while, $140. It was invested in a department store. In sixteen 
years that $140 had increased to $600,000 worth of taxable property 
lor the State. So we bring these people together. Thev form 
combinations, they establish department stores and factories and 
they become wealthy. Alabama can reduce its rate of taxation 
by the general prosperity of the people, and when you consider all 
of the facts connected with these things, whv it seems to me that 
the substitute or amendment which I have offered ought to be 
adopted. 

Over in Georgia one county has an area of onlv ninetv square 
miles, but the largest county has 1,145 square miles. The'average 
(,eor S' a Is 430 square miles to the countv. In Tennessee it is 
4(X) square miles to the county, and whv should Alabama not have 
the same for her counties? It was said vesterdav in 1800 thev had 
000 square miles, and in 1868 they had 600 square miles, and thirtv- 
six years after they want to have 400. 

THE PRESIDENT—The gentleman’s time has expired. 


CONSTITUTIONAL CONVENTION, 1901 


2)41 


MR. O NEAL (Lauderdale)—Will the gentleman allow a 
question before he takes his seat. 

MR. COBB—I yielded to my learned friend from Montgomery 
when I really had the floor, but he has made a speech utterly ob¬ 
livious of the fact that everything he said is already res adjudicata 
in this Convention. 

MR. SANFORD—Four hundred square miles shall be the 
area? 

MR. COBH—V es we have settled that question. 

MR. SANF< >RD—That 400 square miles shall be the area? 

MR. COBB—Shall not be. 

MR. SANFORD—Let me suggest to the gentleman that the 
Article is not complete yet. 

MR. COBB—It has been adopted. 

MR. SANFORD—Only protempore, and there is a committee 
here to reconcile inconsistencies, if there should be any. 

MR. COBB—Well, make your speech before the Committee, 
it is not exactly in order here. 

Now I simple want to call the attention of the delegates for 
one moment to the situation of this matter. The Committee on 
County Boundaries have three several reports here, the majority 
report, and two minority reports. As a substitute for one of the 
minority reports, this Convention has acted by adopting the old 
Constitution as it stood and now stands. That provision thus 
adopted covers all the questions about new counties as well as the 
changing of boundary lines of the old counties. So it is a matter 
fixed bv this Convention that we will not change the boundary 
lines of the old counties, so as to reduce any county below' 600 
square miles. That has been adopted, and there is a motion pend¬ 
ing to reconsider it. That is the situation. Now' in view of that 
fact. Mr. President, f move to lay upon the table—— 

MR. OATES'—Will the learned gentleman tell me w r hat is 
meant bv the “ratio of representation existing at the time of the 
creation of the new counties?” What is the ratio of representa¬ 
tion? 

MR. COBB—Where do you read that? 

MR. OATES—In the ninth and tenth line of the Fourth Sec¬ 
tion. 

MR. COBB—That has been the law in Alabama for twenty- 
six years. 



2142 


OFFICIAL PROCEEDINGS 


MR. OATES—But what is it? 

MR. COBB—I have never had my attention called to it. 

MR. ROBINSON—About 18.000 population. 

MR. COBB—“But no existing: county shall be reduced to less 
than 600 square miles and no county shall be formed which does 
not contain a sufficient number of inhabitants to entitle it to one 
representative under the ratio of representation existing: at the 
time of its formation.” Well, now at the time of the formation of 
the Constitution, Alabama had a ratio of representation of one for 
so many inhabitants. 

MR. OATES—I do not think my learned friend has quite un¬ 
derstood the question I asked. As I see it, there is no fixed ratio 
at all. It is provided that every county shall have one represen¬ 
tative in all constitutions. Now as the population changes, I sup¬ 
pose dividing: the whole population by the number of representa¬ 
tives, we see how many thousand we have in that way. Is that 
what is meant by ratio, or how do you get it? 

MR. COBB—I will explain, but I did not think that a matter 
that was in the Constitution for twenty-six years needed any par¬ 
ticular explanation. 

MR. OATES—Some old things are not well understood. 

MR. COBB—But I will explain my view of it. The Legisla¬ 
ture of the State of Alabama from time to time establishes the 
ratio of representation to the Cxeneral Assembly. That ratio is 
generally, one certainly from each county, and then one for every 
certain number of inhabitants. I believe that is the way that it is. 

MR. HOWZE—I make a point of order. 

THE PRESIDENT—The gentleman will state the point of 
order. 

MR. COBB—I won’t yield for that. 

MR. HOWZE We are all interested in this discussion upon 
the question of ratio, but I make the point of order that the Article 
the gentleman is sepaking to has been disposed of in passing the 
substitute offered in the report submitted by the gentleman from 
Hale. It seems to me when the Convention adopted that substitute 
it disposed of the subject matter of the Article to which the gen¬ 
tleman is speaking. 

MR. COBB—I am not speaking to that Article, but to the other 
articles, which I propose to lay on the table directly. 

MR. HOWZE—That is the very Article that the gentleman 
is speaking to. The one he proposes to lay on the table, and it is 
embraced in the Article we have already passed. 



CONSTITUTIONAL CONVKNTION, 1901 


2143 


MR. COBB—The gentleman is entirely mistaken. I am not 
off the track very far. I simply wanted the members of this Con¬ 
vention to understand exactly what they were called upon to do. 

MR. ROBINSON—If the gentleman will allow a question. 
Section 2 in the old Constitution was divided by this majority re¬ 
port into three sections. 

MR. COBB—Yes sir. 

MR. ROBINSON—And we have adopted the old Constitution, 
which disposed of Section 2, 3 and 4. 

MR. COBB—Of course, and I am going to lav them on the 
table, ii the gentleman will allow me to have time to do it. But, 
I was simply trying to get the matter as it exists properly under¬ 
stood by the delegates. 

THK PRKSIDKNT—The gentleman from Macon moved to 
lay upon the table Section 4, and the motion was never withdrawn 
by the consent of the Convention. The Chair omitted to ask 
unanimous consent for the gentleman from Macon to withdraw his 
motion to table. The question would be whether the gentleman 
from Macon shall have unanimous consent to withdraw his motion 
to table. 

To which objection was made. 

Mr. Cobb sought recognition. 

THK PRESIDENT—A motion to table is not debatable. 

MR. COBB—But I have not made it vet. I made a contract 
with the chair right there— 

THE PRESDTENT—The gentleman made a motion to table— 

MR. COBB—And withdrew it for my learned friend here to 
make a talk. 

THE PR ESI DENT—The gentleman could not withdraw his 
motion to table, except by unanimous consent. 

MR. COBB—Then I will renew it. T won't talk any more. 

THK PRESIDENT-—The Convention refused to give unani¬ 
mous consent to its withdrawal— 

MR. COBB—I wont’ talk any more. (Laughter.?) 

THE PRESIDENT—The question is on the motion to table 
section 4. 

MR. COBB—There is something more than that. Mr. Speak¬ 
er you have not covered the whole matter. It is not only section 4, 
but section 2 and 3 as made by the minority report. 



2144 


OFFICIAL PROCEEDINGS 


THE PRESIDENT—If the gentleman will confine his motion 
to table to the substitute to section 4. and the section, we will take 
up the other matter in a moment. 

MR. COBB—Yes. sir. 

THE PRESIDENT—The motion is to table the substitute to 
section 4, and section 4. 

Upon a vote being taken, the section and substitute were laid 
upon the table. 

MR. SANFORD (Montgomery)—1 give notice of reconsidera¬ 
tion for Monday. 

THE PRESIDENT—The chair will state that the journal is 
not in a very satisfactory condition with reference to section 2 and 
3. 

MR. COBB—I am coming to that right now— 

THE PRESIDENT—Let the chair make a suggestion as to 
that. As to section three there was a substitute pending, and 
thereupon the gentleman from Hale moved a substitute for that, 
which was adopted. That substitute was then adopted as an 
amendment to section 3, and as to section 3 it seems that the 
minority report as changed bv the amendment offered by the gen¬ 
tleman from Hale has been adopted— 

MR. COBB—And that puts out— 

THE PRESIDENT—Section 3. Now as to section 2, the Con¬ 
vention has adopted section 2, without consideration of a pending 
substitute for section 2. That pending substitute, however, was 
identical with section 2 as adopted, but in order to get the record 
straight, it seems to the chair that the vote whereby section 2 was 
adopted should be reconsidered and that the substitute for section 
2 should be laid upon the table, or disposed of in some wav and 
then Section 2 adopted. 

MR. COBB—Won’t it do to lay Section 2 as it appears in this 
majority report on the table? 

THE PRESIDENT That will not do because the Convention 
should not have proceeded to adopt section 2. and ignored the 
pending substitute for it. ^ 

MR. COBB Then I move to reconsider it for that purpose. 

The motion to reconsider the vote whereby section 2 was 
adopted was carried. 

MR. PARKER (Cullman)—I move that the substitute as of- 
terred by the minority of the committee to section 2. be laid upon 

the table. 



CONSTITUTIONAL CONVENTION, 1901 


2145 


And the motion to table was carried. 

MR. PARKER (Cullman)—I now move the adoption <>t sec¬ 
tion 2. 

The motion was carried. 

MR. COBH—Now, then, the next section. 

Section 5 was read as follows: 

“No county lines shall be altered or changed or in the creation 
of new counties shall be established so as to run within seven- 
miles of the county court house of any old count} /' 

MR. COBB—I move to lay the section on the table. 

MR. PARKER (Cullman)—That section is a new section, and 
was put there as a safeguard as to old counties, and I hope and 
trust that the Convention will adopt that section and I move its 
adoption. 

THE PRESIDENT—The gentleman from Cullman moves 
the adoption of the section as read. 

MR. O’NEAL—I move the previous question on that. 

MR. SAMFORD (Pike)—I move to lay it on the table. 

MR. WILSON (Washington)—1 call for an aye and no vote 
on that. 

The requisite number failing to rise, the call was not sustained. 

Upon a vote being taken, the Convention refused to table the 
section. 

THE PRESIDENT—The question recurs upon Section 5. 

MR. CUNNINGHAM—I move the previous question. 

The main question was ordered, and upon a vote being taken, 
the section was adopted. 

MR. COBB—The next section that we reach will create a 
great deal of controversy, and I move that this Convention do now 
adjourn. 

MR. NORWOOD—Will the gentleman withdraw for a mo¬ 
ment in order that I may send up a petition? 

MR. COBB—Yes, sir. 

MR. NORWOOD—I move that the petition be read. 

MR. COBB—I move that it be received without being read, 
and published in the official report. 



2146 


OFFICIAL PROCEEDINGS 


And referred to the proper committee. 

Upon a vote being taken, the motion, as amended, prevailed, 
and the petition is as follows: 

Petition from the Baptist Ministers’ Institute at Anniston, to 
the Alabama State Constitutional Convention: 


Anniston, Ala.. June 28th, 1901. 

Whereas, The doctrine of soul liberty, not only for themselves, 
but for all men everywhere has been one of the fundamental prin¬ 
ciples of the Baptist people throughout their entire history, a doc¬ 
trine for the establishment and maintenance of which our fathers 
spared neither their property nor their lives; and. 

Whereas. The actual membership of the white Baptist Church¬ 
es in Alabama amounts to more than one hundred and thirty thou¬ 
sand (130,000) souls, representing not less than one-half of the 
white family life in the State; and. 

Whereas, Many other citizens in Alabama of all faiths and of 
no religious connection, believe in the above mentioned principle of 
complete separation between the church and State; and. 

Whereas, If instead of this vast number, only a few of the 
people should claim the right of absolute religious freedom, thcv 
would still be entitled to its blessings, therefore be it 

Resolved, by the Baptist Ministers’ Institute, now in session 
at Anniston, Ala., that in the name of all parties concerned we do 
now most earnestly and respectfully petition the honorable mem¬ 
bers of the Alabama State Constitutional Convention, now re¬ 
casting the organic laws of our State, to make the clause guaran¬ 
teeing freedom of religion and the absolute separation of church 
and State, so clear that it will be impossible for anv to misunder¬ 
stand its provisions, and that public funds cannot under any cir¬ 
cumstances be appropriated to any kind of ecclesiastical institu¬ 
tion thereby infringing on the rights and violating the conscience 
of a free people. 


Resolved, further. That a committee consisting of L. O. Daw¬ 
son, Charles A. Stakely and W. B. Crumpton, be appointed bv this 
Institute to forward these resolutions to the Convention now in 
session at Montgomery, with the assurance that sincere prayer is 

EZ5A™ by t , he m, " , i ter i in attendanc e upon the Institute in 
behalf of the members of the Convention that thev may be divinelv 

both individually and collectively, in the great and impor¬ 
tant task of framing a new Constitution for our beloved State 


Referred to the Committee on Legislative Department. 
MR. OATES I wish to offer a short resolution. 



CONSTITUTIONAL CONVENTION. 1<>01 2147 


MR. COBB—1 move to adjourn. 

MR. OATHS—I desire to offer a resolution in regard to pairs, 
for reference to the Committee on Rules. 

MR. BURNS—I want to offer a short resolution in reference 
to adjournment. 

MR. SANFORD—I gave notice awhile ago that I would move 
a reconsideration of the vote whereby Section 4 was laid on the 
table. 

THH PRESIDENT—The chair recognized the gentleman 
from Macon. Does the gentleman yield to the gentleman from 
Dallas ? 

MR. COBB—I would have to know what it is before I yield. 

The resolution offered by Mr. Oates (Montgomery) was read 
as follows: “Resolved, That pairs shall be put in writing and filed 
with the secretary of the Convention, who shall, at the close of the 
roll call read the same.” 

Referred to the Committee on Rules. 

MR. COBB—I y ield to the gentleman from Dallas for a mo¬ 
ment. 

MR. BURNS—I sent my resolution up there by a page. 

MR. O’NEAL (Lauderdale)—I move that we do now adjourn. 

Upon a vote being taken, the Convention adjourned. 


FORTY-FIFTH DAY 


M O NTGO M ER Y. A LA.. 

Monday. July 15. 1901. 

The Convention met pursuant to adjournment, was called to 
order by the President, and opened with prayer by the Rev. Mr. 
McDaniels, as follows: 

Almighty God. we would begin this day in Thy strength. 
Thou dost love us. Thou didst so love the world as to give Thine 
only begotten Son. Thou didst give the Lord Jesus Christ, as a 
propitiation for our sins, and not for our sins only, but for the sins 
of the whole world. We pray Thy richest blessings to rest upon 
this Assembly. Bless them in every department of their work. We 
commend one another to Thy tender love. We would remember 



2148 


OFFICIAL PROCEEDINGS 


our loved ones at home, the sick, the dispirited and the disquieted. 
To the weary wouldst Thou give rest. Bless us in all of our de¬ 
liberations this day, and ultimately save us through the merits of 
our Lord and Savior Jesus Christ, Amen. 

Upon the call of the roll, eighty-seven delegates responded to 
their names. 

Leaves of absence were granted to the following: Mr. Mc¬ 
Millan (Wilcox) for today and tomorrow; Mr. Hood for today; 
Mr. Ferguson for today; Mr. Pillans for today; Mr. Carmichael 
(Colbert) for today; Mr. Eyster for today; Mr. Haley for today; 
Mr. Jenkins and Mr. Lowe (Lawrence) indefinite leave on account 
of sickness. 

The report of the Committee on Journal for the forty-fourth 
day of the Convention had been examined and found to be correct, 
and the same was adopted. 

THE PRESIDENT—The special order for this hour will he 
the consideration of the motion for reconsideration. 

MR. HOWELL—I announced on Saturday I would move a 
reconsideration this morning of the vote by which the substitute 
of the gentleman from Hale (Mr. deGraffenreid) was adopted, re¬ 
taining the provisions of the present Constitution as to the area 
of square miles in the counties. I did not do that to resort to anv 
dilatory tactics to consume time, but owing to the small House 
we had on Saturday I thought it would be proper that this matter 
should be settled this morning, if we could get the reconsideration, 
was to offer an amendment to sustain the majority report of the 
committee for five hundred square miles. 

THE PRESIDENT—The motion is to reconsider what sec¬ 
tion? 

MR. PARKER (Cullman)—The substitute for section three. 

THE PRESIDENT—What is the substitute the gentleman 
desires reconsidered? 

MR. HOWELL—It is the substitute offered by Mr. deGraffen¬ 
reid, and adopted, to section three. 

THE PRESIDENT—Does the gentleman desire to discuss 
it further? 

MR. HOWELL—I suppose it will not provoke any discussion. 
This question has been discussed at length, and while a very re¬ 
spectable minority of the House would prefer a reduction to four 
hundred square miles, that is settled; but we believe possibly that 
a majority would favor the majority report of the committee that 
recommended the reduction to five hundred square miles, and the 
minority square miles will be satisfied with the vote on that ques- 



CONSTITUTIONAL CONVENTION. 1901 


2149 


tion this morning. I have no disposition to discuss it. In my judg¬ 
ment this question has been discussed fully and everybody’s mind 
it made up on the question I suppose. So far as I am concerned, 
I am satisfied with the present discussion and will not discuss it 
further. 

MR. MOODY—I move to table the motion to reconsider. 

MR. PARKER (Elmore)—On that I call for the ayes and 
noes. 


The call not being sustained, a vote was taken, and a division 
called for, which resulted in a vote of fifty ayes and thirty noes 
and the motion to take was carried. 

MR. deGRAFFENREID—I rise to a question of personal 
privilege. 

THE PRESIDENT—The gentleman will state the question of 
privilege. 

MR. deGRAFFENREID—The substitute which was adopted 
by the House for section three, has been referred to as a substitute 
which was offered by me. It is a matter of some importance and 
I desire to say that the substitute was simply the minority report 
of Mr. Milo Moody and Mr. C. H. Miller, to the majority report. 
I did not want to be credited with the matter, because those gentle¬ 
men are entitled to it. I made the motion at the request of Mr. 
Miller, and conducted the fight for that amendment at his request! 

THE PRESIDENT—The present order will be the call of 
the roll of delegates for the introduction of resolutions, ordinances, 
etc. 


MR. SANFORD—There is a motion to reconsider after the 
one just before the House, the motion I made to reconsider Section 
4. I merely desire to call the attention of the House to the matter. 

THE PRESIDENT—The question will be upon a motion to 
reconsider the vote whereby this Convention adopted Section 4. 

MR. SANFORD (Montgomery)—It was laid on the table. 

THE PRESIDENT—The Chair will state to the distinguished 
gentleman from Montgomery, that in the opinion of the Chair, a 
motion to reconsider is not in order, where a section has been laid 
on the table. The proper motion, if the gentlemen will permit the 
Chair to suggest, would be a motion to take from the table. 

MR. SANFORD—I make that motion. I move Mr. President 
and gentleman of the Convention that section four, and its substi¬ 
tute, which was tabled on last Saturday, be taken from the table 
for further consideration and passage. It am aware that the Con- 



2150 


OFFICIAL PROCEEDINGS 


vention seems to be in favor of retaining- the area of 600 square 
miles— 


-I make the point of order that the motion 


IS 


-1 cannot hear what the gen- 


MR. REESE- 
not debatable. 

MR. SANFORD (Montgomery)- 
tleman says. 

THE PRESIDENT—The point of order made by the gentle¬ 
man from Dallas is that a motion to take from the table, like a 
motion to lay upon the table, is not debatable. 

MR. SANFORD (Montgomery)—Then by my ignorance of 
parliamentary tactics, I have been fairly trapped. I move to re¬ 
consider the action of the Convention on Section 4 on Saturday 
this morning, and I am told that is not the order, but it should be 

* rom the . tal)le - and when I make a motion in accordance 
with the suggestion of the President I am told that it is not debata¬ 
ble. I do not think that is just. Pardon me for differing from so 
learned a gentleman, but it seems to me it works an injustice. 

THE PRESIDENT—The gentleman can renew the motion 
to reconsider if he prefers. 

MR. SANFORD—I renew the motion to reconsider. 

THE PRESIDENT—The chair will rule the motion out of 

thr*,f S !t l S - n °u m ,° r 1 er to move to recon sider something which 
the Convention has laid upon the table. 

that not S d A eba I i?bk I ? _Then " ' '° ,ake ''' from the tabk ' 

THE PRESIDENT— That is true. 

MR. REESE—I rise to the point of order that the report of 
the committee is not at this time before the House. 

I rise to a question of personal privilege In 

^th stTtfnT^rfT 1 ° f kSt Sat r rday ’ S P rocee dings I am credited 
th stating that I live now in Geneva county. I do not know 

whether that is my mistake or the mistake of the stenographer but 

wh chever it may be, it is one and I would be glad to have it cor- 

countv butT, 'r 6 in Dale county. I used to live in Geneva 
county, but do not live there now. 

THE PRESIDENT—The stenographers will take note of the 

the^ll of d f ! 't g ? tIe T ian fr ° m Dale - The secretary will call 
the roll of delegates for the introduction of ordinances, resolutions, 

Mr. Brooks of Mobile offered the following resolution, No. 245 : 



CONSTITUTIONAL CONVENTION. 1901 


2151 


Resolved, That it is the sense of this Convention that all dis¬ 
cussions relating to the amendment and revision of the Constitu¬ 
tion should be free from caucus dictation operating upon the judg¬ 
ment and conscience of the delegates; that the proper forum of 
such discussions is the Convention, and that the proper method of 
giving effect to the wishes and interests of the people through the 
Convention is by the free and unrestricted action of their individual 
representatives in Convention assembled. 

MR. BROOKS—I move a suspension of the rules, Mr. Presi¬ 
dent, so that the resolution may be put upon its passage. 

Upon a vote being taken, a division was called for. 

MR. BROOKS—If I am in order I would like to have the 
resolution read again as some gentlemen did not hear it. 

MR. HEFLIN (Chambers)—I object, Mr. President. The 
vote has been put and I rise to the point of order that it would be 
out of order to reconsider the resolution at this time, a division 
having been called for. 

THE PRESIDENT—It seems to the chair that it would be 
in order to have the secretary read the resolution. 

The resolution was again read. 

MR. REESE—I move to lay the resolution upon the— 

THE PRESIDENT—The question is upon the suspension of 
the rules. 

MR. REESE—I make a point of order. 

THE PRESIDENT—The question is upon the suspension of 
the rules— 

MR. REESE—That resolution is not germane to any matter 
before this Convention, and the gentleman ought not to be offering 
it here. 

THE PRESIDENT—In the opinion of the chair the point of 
order is not well taken. 

By a vote of 31 ayes to 37 noes the Convention refused to 
suspend the rules, and the resolution was referred to the Commit¬ 
tee on Rules. 

Ordinance No. 420, by Mr. Burns: 

An Ordinance— 

The General Assembly or Legislature shall enact laws for the 
purpose of effectually enforcing the lien of agricultural, mechani¬ 
cal and railroad employees upon the products of their manual labor. 



2152 


OFFICIAL PROCEEDINGS 


Referred to the Committee on Legislative Department. 

Upon the call of the standing committees: 

MR. HEFLIN (Randolph)—I am directed by the Committee 
on Schedule, Printing and Incidental Expenses to report back to 
the Convention resolution 219 without recommendation. 

The resolution was read as follows: 

Resolution No. 219, by Mr. Beddow of Jefferson: 

Whereas, various resolutions have been adopted throughout 
the State requesting that this Convention patronize union labor bv 
having its printing done by members of the Typographical union, 
and that the union label be printed thereon, and 

Whereas the union of labor should be encouraged by the peo¬ 
ple of Alabama in Convention assembled. 

Therefore be it 

Resolved, That the Committee on Schedule, Printing and In¬ 
cidental Expenses be and they are hereby instructed to patronize 
the printing establishments having in their employment union labor 
and have the union label printed thereon. 

MR. HEFLIN (Randolph)—I just want to say to the Con¬ 
vention that a number of gentlemen appeared before the committee 
in favor of this resolution and explained its object and purpose. I 
will also say to the Convention that the Committee has already 
contracted with the Brown Printing Company, Montgomery, to do 
all the printing of this Convention, with the exception of the Jour¬ 
nal, and we explained that to the committee who came before us. 
They have numerous petitions here in favor of the resolution, and 
also some petitions against the resolution. We stated to the gen¬ 
tlemen we had already contracted, and they then said to us that 
they did not expect us to break the contract, but they wanted the 
label placed on all printed matter done by this Convention. Now 
I desire to give my time to the gentleman from Jefferson, Mr. 
Beddow. 

MR. SAMFORD (Pike)—I rise to a point of information. 

THE PRESIDENT—The gentleman will state the point of 
information. 

MR. SAMFORD—Is it in order to consider this report now? 
That is merely the report of a committee, and the rules of the Con¬ 
vention are that reports of committees shall lie over and be printed, 
and be taken up in their regular order. 

THE PRESIDENT—That applies to ordinances, but not to 
resolutions, where a committee reports resolutions. 



CONSTITUTIONAL CONVENTION, 1901 2153 

reoortedunderstand that to be the rule when it is 
of P a differ^t^nature entirely 0 * 1 RuleS ’ th ' S is a standin ^ committee 

-oesloon fh^® S | ID1 * :N ' T ~H seems to the chair that the resolution 
Ps reached endar and he taken u l> "'hen that order of business 


consideratfon^of H R ^ I make the point of order that the 

(.onsideration of this report is now out of order. 

MR. BEDDOW f rise to a point of parliamentary inquire. 

THE PRESIDENT—The gentleman will state his point of 
parliamentary inquiry. 1 

MR. BEDDOW Has it not been the uniform practice of this 

when e imn 0 de f> CC * i° first . day t0 take Up re I )orts of committees 
when handed it, and considered then? 


THE PRESIDENT—The uniform rule 
committees lie upon the table and be printed. 

MR. BEDDOW But how about resolutions? 


is that reports of 


PRESI DEN 1—With reference to the Committee on 
Rules it has been the uniform practice to take up the report of that 
committee because it is a privileged committee, and has the right of 
way under the rules. There is one order of business, No. 7, which 
is reports of Standing Committees, and Order of Business No 11 is 
consideration of ordinances and resolutions, which have been re¬ 
ported from committees. The resolution and report of this com¬ 
mittee, therefore, will not be in order until that order of business 
is reached. 


MR. BEDDOW—W ; hat order of business is that? 

THE PRESIDENT—Order of business No. 11 on page 0 of 
the rules. 

^ HE PRESIDEN 1 The next order of business will be the 
special order, which is the consideration of the report of the Com¬ 
mittee on State and County Boundaries. 'The secretary will read 
Section 6. 

The secretary read the section as follows: 

Sec. 6.—No county site shall be removed except by a two- 
thirds vote of the qualified electors of said countv, voting in an 
election held for said purpose, and when an election has once been 
held for such purpose no other election can be held for such pur¬ 
pose until the expiration of four years; provided that the county 
site of Shelby county of this State shall be and remain at Colum¬ 
biana, unless removed by a vote of the people as provided for in 



2154 


OFFICIAL PROCEEDINGS 


an act entitled "An act to provide for the permanent location of the 
county site of Shelby county, Alabama, by a vote of the qualified 
electors of said county," approved the 9th day of February, 1899, 
and the act amendatory thereto, approved the 20th day of February, 
1899, or by an election held under the provisions of this article. 

The Secretary then read the minority report as follows: 

MINORITY REPORT 

The undersigned members of the Committee on State and 
County Boundaries does not concur in the report of the Committee 
as to Sections 2, 3 and 4, and he offers as substitute therefor the 
following: 

Sec. 3.—The boundaries of the several counties of this State 
as heretofore established by law, are hereby ratified and confirmed. 
The General Assembly may b}' a vote of two-thirds of both houses 
thereof arrange and designate boundaries for the several counties 
of this State, which boundaries shall not be altered, except by a 
like vote; but no new counties shall be hereafter formed of less 
extent than 600 square miles and no existing county shall be re¬ 
duced to less than 600 square miles; and no new county shall be 
formed which does not contain a sufficient number of inhabitants 
to entitle it to one representative under the ratio of representation 
existing at the time of its formation, and leave the county or coun¬ 
ties from which it is taken with the required number of inhabitants 
entitling such county or counties to separate representation. 

Respectfully submitted, 

Milo Moody, 

C. H. Miller. 

MR. SANFORD (Montgomery)—I rise to a point of informa¬ 
tion. 

THE PRESIDENT—The gentleman will state his point of 
information. 

MR. SANFORD—If that is adopted, does that become a part 
of the Constitution of Alabama, or is it only an ordinance setting- 
aside the acts of the Legislature? 

THE PRESIDENT—It becomes a part of the Constitution it 
seems. 

MR. HEFLIN (Chambers)—A parliamentary inquiry: I un¬ 
derstand the substitute will be the first thing considered. 

THE PRESIDENT—The question will be upon the amend¬ 
ment, the substitute offered by the minority of the Committee for 
the majority report, the gentleman from Cullman is recognized. 



CONSTITUTIONAL CONVKNTION, 1901 


2155 


MR. PARKKR (Cullman)—Mr. President, and gentlemen of 
the Convention: Your Committee on this Section has sought to 
throw an additional safeguard around the old county seats of the 
counties of Alabama. We say here it will take an election and 
two-thirds vote ot the qualified voters of the county to remove the 
county seat. It was a unanimous report as to the main part of this 
Section. The Committee believe that the old county seats are, so 
to speak, vested rights of property, and we did not think the float¬ 
ing vote of a county should be able to move the county seat, and 
thus impose the burden of taxation upon the tax payers of the 
county. As to the proviso in this Section to which there is a 
minority report, when this question of the removal of the countv 
seat of Shelby County was first brought before the Committee, 
personally I was opposed for the Committee, or this Convention, 
to have anything to do with it, but after very careful investigation 
of this question, during some ten da vs and with testimony taken 
before the Committee, which occupies about 135 pages of close 
typewritten matter, it was so forced upon the majority of the 
Committee that there were wrong methods used to change the 
county seat of Shelby County, that we thought it was our dutv to 
see that the county seat of Shelby County should remain at Co¬ 
lumbiana until changed by a vote of the people. \\ e considered 
first whether this Convention had the right to go into local legis¬ 
lation. The distinguished attorney representing the Calera side 
admitted before our Committee that lie thought if it was placed 
in the Constitution we had that right. But it is not a question 
before this Convention now because by the action of this Conven¬ 
tion ten days ago excepting certain places from the Article on Taxa¬ 
tion and by the action on last Saturday in allowing my good friend 
from Henry to have a new county composed of parts of Henry, Dale 
and Geneva, this Convention has settled that it would go into mat¬ 
ters of local legislation, and so far as that is concerned, this is a mat¬ 
ter res adjudicata so far as this Convention is concerned. This com¬ 
mittee found on that investigation that there was but one member of 
the House who knew of the existence of this bill, as I say that was 
the only testimony before the Committee by any witness. It is 
true that there were filed with the Committee some letters from 
members of the House, but in making this report we did not consider 
those ex parte matters as evidence. There was no officer of the 
House who had any independent recollection of the passage of 
this bill. One witness said on direct testimony that he recollected 
something about it, but upon cross examination he admitted that 
lie had no independent recollection whatever, and that all he knew 
was by virtue of his handwriting on the back of the bill. There 
is no question but what that bill was kept off the Calendar of the 
House. Both sides admit that. There was no question that it 
was kept out of all the newspapers. Both sides admit that. There 
is no question but that the people of Shelby County were in total 



2156 


OFFICIAL PROCEEDINGS 


ignorance of that bill. Under those circumstances, as a question 
of expediency, we thought then, and we think now that it is al¬ 
ways expedient both in the private walks of life and in a Con¬ 
stitutional Convention, to do away with a wrong and to do that 
which is right. The people of Shelby County by the election of 
the present delegates to this Convention upon that issue have re¬ 
pudiated the act, or the attempted act, of the last Legislature, and 1 
think as a matter of right to the people of Shelby county that not 
only the original part of this section but the proviso should be 
adopted by' this Convention. 

MR. SENTELL—As a member of the Committee on State 
and County Boundaries, and as one of the two members who saw 
fit to sign a minority report in this case, or this, section, 1 feel it 
my duty to make some remarks upon this subject, and to explain 
to this Convention some of the reasons and motives which prompt¬ 
ed the minority in making this report. Mr. President, we con¬ 
cede to the majority the highest and purest motives in under¬ 
taking to put this section into the Constitution, and we are sat¬ 
isfied that they are doing what they believe is the proper thing 
to do under the circumstances, and we trust that no less will be 
accredited to the minority. Mr. President, we concede that this 
Convention has the power to put this in the Constitution. For 
the present this Convention has all power so far as law is con¬ 
cerned, we have the power to create and annihilate the laws of 
this State as suit our will. We have the power if we so desire to 
wipe out of existence many counties of this State and create new 
ones in their stead, we have the power to impose great burdens 
upon the people of this State, and we have the power to relieve 
these burdens as we see proper. Yes, there is no doubt but what 
we have the power, but, Mr. President and gentlemen of the Con¬ 
vention, there is a power that is greater than this Convention, that 
power which brought this Convention into existence and the 
power which can in one day wipe out all that this Convention can 
do in months. That power is the people, and I say the people of 
this State did not send the members of this Convention here to 
do just such as we will do when we put this article into the Con¬ 
stitution. Mr. President and gentlemen, this is a local matter. 
There is no question but what it is a local controversy in Shelby 
county. That fact is proven by' the many men who are here from 
Shelby county advocating both sides of this cause. I doubt not 
but what every member upon this floor has been approached In 
one or more citizens of Shelby county advocating one or the other 
side of this controversy. Each side has charges to make against 
the other, crimination and recrimination against the other side in 
this thing. Now, Mr. President, we say that this is not a proper 
matter to go into the Constitution. It is no part of the business of 
this Constitution to settle local controversies, and whenever we 



CONSTITUTIONAL CONVENTION. 1901 


2157 


undertake to do it, we detract that much from the force, the duty 
and completion of the Constitution. Now we were sent here to 
make a Constitution, and, as I said, not to settle local controver¬ 
sies, but the opposite side claim that because as they say fraud 
was practiced in passing this bill through the house, why then 
we are justified in taking up this matter and settling it in the 
Constitution. Mr. President, I hold that the question of fraud 
does not give us the authority and the right. If fraud was prac¬ 
ticed in the passage of that bill the courts of this country are the 
proper forum before which to make the fight, and the courts of 
this country are the proper authorities to set aside and declare in¬ 
valid the act, and they also have the right to go before the future 
Legislatures of this State, and if the Legislature desires it can at 
any time repeal that act. But, Mr. President, was there fraud 
committed? The minority of this committee are compelled to sa\ 
that in their judgment fraud has not been proven. It is a fact that 
the proof of fraud consists mainly in negative testimony. They 
infer fraud because nobody could be found who had any distinct 
and independent recollection of proof of fraud, because as one of 
the members of the Legislature and as having been an eye wit¬ 
ness, and a partaker in the last work of this past Legislature I 
wish to say and those who are present will bear me out in that, 
that I have often seen not more than two dozen members upon 
this floor at night sessions, and they were passing local bills at 
the rate of one every two or three minutes and nobody giving 
any attention except the man who happened to call up the bill and 
the man who was doing the reading. 

MR. THOMPSON (Bibb)—May I ask a question? 

THE PRESIDENT—Will the gentleman consent to be in¬ 
terrupted for the purpose of being interrogated? 

MR. SENTELL—Yes, sir. 


MR. THOMPSON—I desire to ask if you did not vote in the 
committee room for the resolution adopted by the committee re¬ 
citing that it was the sense of that committee that the people of 
Shelby county should have relief. Did you not vote for that reso¬ 
lution upon its passage? 


MR. SENTELL—I wish to state that what took place in the 
committee room is not a proper matter to be discussed on this 
floor but in answer to the gentleman I will say that he did not 
state properly the resolution that was before the committee. Mr. 
President, a<f I said before, I have seen not more than two dozen 
members upon this floor taking part in the passage of local bills, 
when they were going through at the rate of one bill every two or 
three minutes, and even those members who were present read¬ 
ing newspapers, discussing other matters and giving no attention 
to the voting The clerk would call the roll with one swift long 



2158 


OKRCIAL PROCEEDINGS 


call, and you could not distinguish one name from another, and no¬ 
body answered aye, yea, yes or no, not a man voted, and yet the 
journal shows a quorum voted in favor or against these hills. Ah, 
Mr. President, tell me that a man could remember that a bill pass¬ 
ed under those circumstances would be proof that it was fraudu¬ 
lently gotten through? I heard a member on this floor say dur¬ 
ing one of the last days of the Legislature that he could pass a 
bill through the House putting the Probate Judge of his county in 
the penitentiary and nobody would know it until it went to the 
Governor's office for his signature. That was a deplorable state 
of affairs. I will concede, but it is a fact, nevertheless. Now, Mr. 
President, as I said before, fraud is not proven, in my judgment, 
in this case. Now I have no interest in this affair; I know but 
few people in Shelby County, and those that I do know are mv 
friends. I have no reason for retaining the court house at Co¬ 
lumbiana, or having it removed to Calera. 1 am opposed to this 
Convention taking up this local matter and consuming $1,000 a 
day of the people’s money in trying to settle this question, when it 
ought never to have come into this Convention. There is another 
fact, or reason, why the minority saw fit to sign their report. The 
majority of this committee based their reason for putting it into 
the Constitution, it will be taken as positive proof that the Con¬ 
vention placed that fraud upon those individuals who took part 
in the passage of that bill. 

THE PRESIDENT—The time of the gentleman has expired. 

MR. KNIGHT—As a member of the late much abused Leg¬ 
islature, I desire to make a statement in this case. I think the 
journal, sir. will bear me out in saving that I answered nearly ev¬ 
ery roll call in that Legislature. I was watchful, and I will state 
here in my place, sir, that \ never heard mention of the removal 
of the county seat of Shelby County in that Legislature; never 
heard of such a thing. There were two bills for removal of countv 
seats introduced into that Legislature, and such bills are alwavs 
attractive; there are alwavs two sides to them, and 1 never heard 
this Shelby Count} removal before. 1 did hear of the removal of 
the county seat of Russell from Seale to Girard, and of the removal 
of the county seat of Baldwin County attracted a great deal of at¬ 
tention, but I never heard of such a thing as the removal of the 
court house from Columbiana to Calera. There never was such 
a bill offered in that Legislature that I ever beard of. [ am here 
to state in my place that I do not believe that Mich a bill ever 
passed. 

MR. 1HOMPSON (Bibb) — In the first place 1 shall ask the 
Convention to pardon me for again appearing before vou; and 
were it not for the fact that I was a member* of this Committee 
that spent from ten days to two weeks in considering this ques¬ 
tion, I would not now be before vou. Hut bv some means mv 



CONSTITUTIONAL CONVENTION. 1901 


2159 


mind has run through a different channel and by a different course 
than that of the distinguished gentleman from Crenshaw. The 
conversion of the distinguished gentleman to the opinion he now 
defends, has been as sudden as that of Saul of Tarsus. It came 
about in a night. After hearing the evidence in this case, gentle¬ 
men, it was my thought and it was so expressed, that my wish 
was that every one of the 155 members of this Convention could 
hear that evidence as we heard it. I submit, gentlemen, had you 
heard it, that you would not have hesitated one moment, any man 
who was unprejudiced and unbiased in this matter, could not keep 
from being forced to the conclusion that wrong was done the peo¬ 
ple of Shelby County. And, gentlemen of the Convention, in the 
tirst place as to the evidence adduced before us, it was not de¬ 
pendent upon the statement of any witness upon the stand, the 
physical evidence was before us. The actual bill itself, as it pur¬ 
ported to have been passed through the General Assembly, was 
presented and parts of another bill—the back of another bill and 
the body of another bill were presented; and it showed conclu¬ 
sively to our minds, gentlemen, that when that bill was introduced, 
it was one measure. When it got to the Journal .Clerk's office it 
was another measure. When it was being read from the Clerk’s 
desk, it was a bill to reduce the corporate area of the town of Ca- 
lera. When it got to the Journal Clerk’s office it was a bill to re¬ 
move the county site of Shelby County. When it went to the 
Committee on County and County Boundaries, it was a bill to 
reduce the corporate area of the town of Calera. That evidence 
was brought before us in the shape of the Acting Chairman of 
that Committee, who swore to us positively, as a disinterested 
man, so far as we knew, that he examined the bill, that he read 
the first page of it, practically the body of the first page, and was 
positive that it was a bill to reduce the corporate area of the town 
of Calera. That Chairman was Mr. W. E. Stripling of Elmore 
County. When this bill was introduced, if ever it was, the author 
failed to comply with the rule of the General Assembly, which 
required that the title of all bills be endorsed on the back. That 
was not done in this case. Your Committee failed to find where 
that rule was disregarded in any other instance, and it was con¬ 
clusive!}' proven that it was a physical impossibility for that cover 
to have been on the court house bill when it was in the hands of 
that Committee, for in making the holes through the body of the 
bill in attaching the cover to it when attached to the court house 
bill, several letters in the names of the members of the Committee 
were entirely punched out. Gentlemen, that was a badge of fraud 
that had to be explained. I submit to you that it was never ex¬ 
plained. There was a statement made that the cover was once on 
the Calera Incorporation bill, but that was before it was ever in¬ 
troduced in the House. If that was a fact, how came those names 
punched out? How was it possible for that change to have been? 



2160 


OKFICIAI, P ROC F K DIN (S 


Then again, the Calera Incorporation bill, the body of it I mean, 
and the back of the court house bill fit in every particular. And 
then the holes where they were pinned together fit precisely the 
crease in the paper—fit exactly, and didn’t fit anything of the 
kind in the court house bill. Now, as to the question of fraud. 1 
don’t believe any fairminded man can doubt it. Now the onlv 
question, it seems to me. here that has moved the minds of the 
members or delegates, is the question of expediency. As to that, 
my only reply would be to quote the words of a distinguished 
member of our Supreme Court in the case of Morris vs. The Elv- 
ton Land Company, where they say that principle should never 
be sacrificed at the altar of expediency. As to the form we offer 
this relief as a part of the Constitution, I would say that we have 
followed precedents as adopted in all other Constitutions as to 
that; and I shall refer the Convention to the Constitution of the 
State of Arkansas as found in Vol. 1 of American Constitutions, 
page 136, not in the schedule of separate ordinances, but in Sec¬ 
tion 4 in the body of the Constitution, as follows: "In the forma¬ 
tion of new counties no line thereof shall run within ten miles of 
the county seat of the county proposed to Ik* divided, except the 
county seat of Lafayette Countv." 

"Sec. 5. Sebastian County may have two districts and two 
county seats, at which County. Probate and Circuit Courts shall 
be held as may be provided by law, each district paying its own 
expenses." 


In the Constitution of the State of Illinois, found in the same 
work, page 543. and in the 2d Volume, same work, pages 448, 440 
and 4a0, in the Constitution of the State of Tennessee are num¬ 
erous exceptions of this kind. In every instance a local measure 
like this, it was always embraced in a Section of the Constitution 

o, 0 o 1 w,sh thr " lem,H - r - s of this Convention could see that 

Shelby County Court House Hill. To use a slang phrase, gentle- 
men. it was a "dandy." It places a fine of SI.000'upon each mem¬ 
ber ot the Commissioners Court, or fudge of Probate, if thev 
taded to comply with the terms of it. „r if thev failed to lew a tax 
to pay the bonds issued, it saddled aboslutelv a debt of $30000 

l ' P ,° n t t , le , PCi 'L >k ' 0l S . lu ‘ ll, , v C ' ountv - l’ ! -wd there by a board not 
Ntlectcd by the people ot Shelby Countv. but absolutely named 
in this measure, who could spend this mmiev without accounting 
o any person on earth, and didn’t have to render an account to 
any body. 1 hey could absolutely spend every cent of it for attor- 

sides the’’W0 < 000 V ti r * hclfi acc( , nintab,c anywhere on earth. Be- 
hfr i T ' they were authorized to draw warrants upon 
County I te.iMuer tor such additional sum that they might 
see tit. and I submit that ,t was shown that that matter vva" se¬ 
cretly done and that the people of that countv would never have 
consented to any such measure: and I ask. gentlemen of the Con- 



C( >\ ST I I' IT 1 () X AI, C(»X V K X TIO X. j W1 


2101 

\ ention, are you willing to place the stamp of your approval upon 
yuch a measure as this? After it is placed upon us it is not a ques- 
tion of expediency. It is not a question as to what the effect mav 
be in Shelby County or elsewhere. The question is what is the 
right in that matter, and having found the right then will we. by 
refusal to act, stamp approval by the members of this Convention 
° Mich a fraud as that has has been shown to be, thus enabling’ 
those Commissioners, as named in that bill, to settle a debt and tax 
upon the people of Shelby County, without their consent? They 
aie left without a remedy. While I do not claim to know all the 
law, nor any very considerable part of it, but I think 1 know that 
with the records of the House in the shape they are in, showing 
everything regular on its face, the people are left without a rem¬ 
edy anywhere on earth, unless given by this Convention. 

MR. HI LS Mr. President, if 1 am correct 1 v informed, thi- 
is the forty-fifth working day of this Convention. Jn five davs 
all of the time that was in contemplation when this body was call¬ 
ed, when the people delegated it to come here will have been con¬ 
sumed. I think it may be fairly said that the work of this Con¬ 
vention is not half done and the time is nearlv gone. What a dis¬ 
proportion that brings up to the minds of the delegates: Out of 
fifteen Articles this Convention has to write, onlv four have been 
written. The paramount issue, the one this Convention was call¬ 
ed to pass upon, the one the people had most in mind when we 
were sent here, will not have been touched at the hands of thP 
Convention when the entire fifty davs shall have elapsed. Here 
today on the 45th day of this Convention after regulating local 
egislation, after an attempt to build a Chinese wall against local 
legislation, here we are engaged in the plainest project of local 
legislation that could be conceived by the mind of man. Why this 
Constitutional Convention is asked to stop and write down and 
make a part of this Constitution for our children and our chil- 
dren’s children a proposition as to where the Court House shall 
he in Shelby County. Now do you think that people of Alabama 
at large are lying awake at night thinking of where the Court 
House of Shelby County is or ought to be? Do they care any- 
1 J 1 a b°ut it? Do you think they are caring anything about what 
-Mr. So-and-so did in the Legislature? Thev are not giving a rap 
about that. The people of this State want" us, I believe, to stay 
here as long as it is necessary to write a fundamental Constitution, 
and to prepare things that are necessary to go into the Constitu¬ 
tion. Now as long as we are here engaged in that task, I don't 
believe they want us to turn aside- 

MR. ROGERS (Sumter)—I would like to ask the gentleman a 
question. You state that the people of Alabama are not lying 
awake at night—troubling about- 

MR. FI I IS Lnless the hot weather keeps them awake. 



2162 


OFFICIAL PROCEEDINGS 


MR. ROGERS (Sumter)—Troubling about the affairs in Shel¬ 
by County. Don’t you think if the people in Alabama were shown 
that such a proceeding as this went on in the Legislature that 
they would lie awake at night? 

MR. FITTS—I was just coming to that. I heard the ex¬ 
pression fraud used and the expression that the people were over¬ 
reached. It seems to me that these are fitter terms for courts of 
justice and that the Constitutional Convention has nothing to do 
with fraud. That is what the courts were inaugurated and brought 
about for to determine whether frauds were committed. Will 
the Constitutional Convention adjourn itself into a court, if so 
what sort of a court will it be? A Justice Court, or what other 
sort of a court? What has this Convention to do with fraud? 
Gentlemen, how is this Convention to determine this question? 
By a committee? If we are to brand sixty-nine men who voted 
for this bill as fraud or fraudulent, then I say the Convention as 
a whole (if we are going into this matter), that this Convention 
ought to stop and hear the evidence and see whether we indi¬ 
vidually believe those gentlemen to have been guilty of fraud. 

MR. REESE—The gentleman says that 69 men voted for that 
bill. Is he able to say that he knows that anybody voted for it 
except the representative from Shelby county? 

MR. FITTS—I don’t know whether anybody voted for it or 
not. Don’t the Journal show that 69 voted for it? 

MR. REESE—Yes, sir. 

MR. FITTS Then the Journal shows the record and is con¬ 
trolling. I was not there and if the Journal show's that 69 voted 
for it, it looks like they voted for it. I don’t know anything about 
these charges of fraud or improper conduct. I don’t think this is 
the tribunal to determine that. These good people of Shelbv 
county are divided on this matter. The proposition that is made is 
the same as suggested in the inquiry from the distinguished gen¬ 
tleman from Montgomery when he arose at the beginning of this 
matter a few minutes ago and said: “Can it be true that this thing 
is to be written down into the Constitution of this State or is it 
to be considered a part of the schedule to it?” I don’t think that 
this matter has any place in the Constitution of the State, nor 
acted upon by the people of the whole State_ 

MR. O NEAL Will the gentleman permit a question? 

MR. FITTS—Yes, sir. 

MR. CD NEA.L- If the Convention see fit to concur in the re¬ 
port of the majority, in your judgment could that act be a sep¬ 
arate ordinance? 



CONSTITUTIONAL CONVENTION. 1901 


2103 


MR. FITTS—I think it ought to be a separate ordinance and 
only to be voted for in Shelby county and there ratified or not. 
Why ask the people of this entire State to pass upon this section 
in the Constitution in the fundamental law of their liberties of the 
whole State? It will be patch work that wilt bring derision upon 
the instrument itself. 

MR. BROWNE—Would you say the Henry county matter 
would bring derision upon the Convention to let the whole State 
vote upon that? 

MR. FITTS—I was not here on Saturday and am not respon¬ 
sible for what they did on Saturday. If I had been here I would 
have risen in my seat and protested against local legislation in 
this Constitution. We ought to stay here and make a Constitu¬ 
tion and take as much time for deliberation upon it as is necessarv : 
but we ought not to make local laws for Henry county, Shelbv 
county or any other county, no matter how good the people are; 
and there are no better people than there are in Shelby county, 
those that live at Calera and Columbiana both, but this is an old 
sore and an old controversy. There have been charges and coun¬ 
ter charges between them for years. They have held elections and 
had the same old controversy for years. You can’t make people 
think alike by writing it in the Constitution when that county 
has its natural division of sentiment. People will divide upon it. 
The question whether the beautiful city of Calera or the more 
beautiful city of Columbiana should have the court house will be 
a sore question when you are dead and when I am dead, if the 
county stays geographically like it is. The frogs at Calera are 
hollering for the court house and the whip ’o wills at Columbiana 
are hollering to keep it there, the people are divided upon the 
proposition and you can’t bring them together. What does Calera 
need to complete its beauty but a court house? If you had a court 
house standing out there at that railroad crossing, beautifying 
that lovely landscape standing among the lime kilns, wouldn’t it 
be a joy to every man who has to ride by there on the cars through¬ 
out the whole State? Columbiana also needs the court house and 
the people there look upon its location there with the same devo¬ 
tion and the same love and some desire to keep it. You can’t set¬ 
tle this controversy for these good people in this way. You can’t 
make peace where peace will not abide. They are divided upon 
this subject and they are going to stay divided and it will not 
help the Constitution by attempting to put this piece of local legis¬ 
lation in the Constitution of the State. Whenever you bring new 
provisions into the Constitution of the State, whenever you put 
new language into the Constitution of the State, you incur the 
weight of criticism and the weight of such objections that the new 
provisions bring. Whenever you leave the language of the Con¬ 
stitution as it was you have only to incur the fact that the people 
were not expecting a change upon a point where no change had 



2164 


OFFICIAL PROCEEDINGS 


been agitated and you have no additional weight to carry, but if 
you put this local legislation in this Constitution to be voted upon 
all over this State, it will be a matter that those parties who ad¬ 
vocate the ratification of this Constitution must be constantly ex¬ 
plaining to the people of Alabama and constantly explaining them¬ 
selves for having put it in there. 

MR. OATES—I have never made any investigation of this 
controversy one way or the other, but since examining the report 
and the legal questions involved, I have an opinion about it which 
I will briefly express. Now I am unalterably opposed to this mat¬ 
ter being brought in as a rider upon the Constitution, and I gather 
from w'hat I have heard said, what seems to me an erroneous opin¬ 
ion by some in regard to the power of this Convention and work 
to be done. As this is now presented, if passed it certainly does 
go before the whole people of the State to ratify our action in ab¬ 
rogating an act of the Legislature, changing the location of the 
Court house at Shelby County. The people of other counties have 
got nothing to do with it, no interest in it, and they don’t want to 
vote on the one side or the other. That of itself shows the im¬ 
propriety of placing it here. Then awhile ago when my friend, 
the delegate from Tuscaloosa, was on the floor, some gentleman 
suggested an inquiry that if we pass a separate ordinance repeal¬ 
ing or abrogating that law, would it have to be ratified by any 
people except those of Shelby County? That is a very erroneous 
impression. Why, sir, this Convention is the legislative, judicial 
and executive department. It is the whole thing of the govern 
ment of the State of Alabama. It is the entire people here through 
their delegates. When I address the gentlemen on this floor as 
delegates, I address them by what they are called in the enabling 
act, and I think higher than what is generally used in legislative 
bodies. They are delegates and are elected by the whole people of 
the State to make a Constitution—not only to make a Constitu¬ 
tion, but they have the power to pass ordinances, laws or any¬ 
thing else which they see proper. If they want to reach this mat¬ 
ter by way of a repeal of a law which has been passed, a separate 
ordinance is the thing, and if this Convention passes it, then they 
meet the question as to whether it goes to the Governor. It has 
been done in some cases, but I don’t know that that is usual. It 
is a law and will have to stand and the people of the State have 
nothing to do with it. In considering the testimony, I admit that 
the testimony shows the clearest kind of a case, all the way 
through, in favor of that law. 

It is very doubtful, to, say the least of it, from the hasty ex¬ 
amination I have made, but a court has great difficulty, in fact 
a court according to adjudications, has no power to set aside a 
solemn enactment of the Legislature upon evidence. It requires 
something more. They examine the records to see if the records 
sustain it as a legal enactment, but even if such were the case 



2165 


CONSTITUTIONAL CONVENTION. 1901 


herln^ S nf C M C0Uld n0t be annulled by litigation they have pending 
f ^ presumption in favor of the records, if any difficulty 

■ d im .that^ is presented, there is no trouble in that event, 
in my opinion, for the friends of the Columbiana controversy 
here to get a separate ordinance which would repeal that enact¬ 
ment of the General Assembly, or the Legislature, which, it seems 
to me, wi 1 be the proper way to go at it. Now, sir, such an idea 
seems to be that anything done by this Convention has got to be 
ratified by a vote of the people. Not so. This Convention has 
passed a resolution very properly and unanimously to submit the 
Constitution which it frames, back to the people of the voters 
ot the State of Alabama for ratification. That is entirely proper 
and that is correct. Why, sir, let me say this Convention is not 
going to adjourn in the time which appropriations were limited 
, b .y tbe General Assembly. You will have to go beyond that. 
What are you going to do about your compensation and expenses 
tor it.' You have got to resort to the powers of legislation which 
is vested in this Convention. 


R [ K - J° NES . (Montgomery) — Is my friend of the opinion 
that this Convention has any power to appropriate money beyond 

the time that the Legislature has fixed that these delegates shall 
receive pay? 

GA 1 ES Y es, sir; if I have an opinion about any legal 
question, I know it has that power—an entire power in that regard. 
(Applause). It has power to do what is proper to do. I am not 
utraid myself that it is going to exercise anything improper in this 
matter, and I don’t care about consuming the time, sir—I don’t 
know the controversy between these parties. I know one thing 
t tat the controversy about the location of a court house in a countv 
is always one of bitterness between counties. I don’t know who 
is at fault or who is right about it. I don’t undertake to settle 
that; but, sir, this proviso hitched on here to the Constitution of 
the State is entirely improper and should be stricken therefrom 
If the gentlemen were to try it in a different shape by bringing 
up an ordinance to repeal the act, then it presents a very different 
question. But in its present shape, I cannot, for one, conscien¬ 
tiously vote for it. I don’t care to say anything more. 

MR. O NEAL I asked the question of the gentleman—I pro¬ 
pounded a question to the gentleman from Tuscaloosa which seems 
to have been misunderstood. I agree with you as to the impro¬ 
priety of incorporating this as a rider on the Constitution. I asked 
this question: Could we pass a separate ordinance for the ratifi¬ 
cation of the people of Shelby County, or any other county ? 
Wouldn’t it be a law if we adopted it? 

MR. OAT KS—You can make it a law, or you can submit it 
to a vote of the people. 



2166 


OFFICIAL PROCEEDINGS 


MR. O’NEAL—Wouldn’t it be simply a matter of grace upon 
our part as to whether we submitted it? 

MR. OATES—I have said the Convention had the power to 
make it an absolute law if they wanted to. 

MR. BROWNE — I desire to say in the opening* of my re¬ 
marks that the gentleman from Shelby (Mr. Beavers) introduced 
an ordinance similar to the one recommended by the gentleman 
from Montgomery and that the attorney for Calera, Mr. Martin, 
appeared before the Committee and spake against the ordinance 
and took the position that this Constitutional Convention had no 
right to pass a separate ordinance upon this question. I differed 
with the gentleman, but, as there seemed to be some doubt in the 
minds of some upon that subject, the Committee took the Calera 
view of the question and put it in the Constitution. 

Now, Mr. President, every lawyer upon this floor who has 
ever studied constitutional law knows full well that an ordinance 
is as much a part of the Constitution as any other part of it. It 
makes no difference whether you call it a resolution or an ordi¬ 
nance, or a section or an article. If it is enacted by this Conven¬ 
tion it is a part of the Constitution. The Calera people put the 
friends of Columbiana in this attitude : They appeared before the 
Committee and with a Pennsylvania case undertook to show that 
this Convention had no right to pass the ordinance. Mr. Martin 
was asked if he denied the right to give relief to Columbiana from 
that fraudulent measure, if the relief was incorporated in the body 
of the Constitution. He admitted that we had the right to do that. 
But it makes no difference whether this relief is given by an or¬ 
dinance or in the body of the Constitution. Members well know if 
it is passed in its present shape the Committee on Harmony can 
take this and all other matters out of the body of the Constitution 
and incorporate it in the schedule as separate ordinances, and that 
is the way it is done in the constitutions of most of the States. 

Now, in answer to the gentleman from Tuscaloosa (Mr. Kitts) 
as to whether this is an innovation in a Constitutional Convention, 
1 have yet to find a Constitutional Convention that has not en¬ 
acted some local measure. Even the Constitutional Convention of 
1875, although called by an act of the legislature expressly saying 
it should not pass separate ordinances, did not pass separate or¬ 
dinances, and, to get around that provision, they incorporated 
them in the Constitution. 

Mr. President, here is the celebrated Shelby Court House bill, 
and I say, with all due respect that no man who differs with the 
majority, no intelligent man, can look at the bill with the ear¬ 
marks of fraud on it and read the testimony of Mr. Dean him¬ 
self and not come to the conclusion that this thing was passed 
in a most damnably fraudulent manner. He came out in the news- 



CONSTITUTIONAL CONVENTION, 1901 


2167 


papers and said in answer to a suggestion from Mr. Striplin, that 
the cover must have been changed, that this cover was on it when 
the members of the Committee signed it. His attention was then 
called to the fact that the tape and the brads were cut through 
the names of the Committee signing it and he got sick and it took 
a week for him to get well enough to come back and explain it, 
and the way he explained it was that this cover was once the 
cover to the Calera Land bill, and he took it off and pasted it on 
this before it was introduced. Talk about testimony, Mr. Striplin 
came here and without having seen the Land Limit bill of Calera. 
when he took that bill up he said this was not the bill that was in 
that blank cover when I reported it. I am not certain but mv 
recollection is it was a little bill about Calera land limits. 

I asked the Secretary of State to go down to his office and 
get me the land limit bill and when he brought that Calera land 
limit bill, there were the tell-tale evidences of fraud. The pin holes 
in that Calera Land Limit Bill are identical with the pin holes in 
the cover that is on this bill removing the county seat. The seven 
members whose names are signed on the book say they never 
signed such a bill. One of them says “I recollect, the bill I sign¬ 
ed was a land limit bill.” Mr. Dean admits that he and Albert 
Wilson went and got Mr. Martin to draw this bill and he says 
he immediately got the bill back to go and show it to Mr. Oliver 
and he kept it until he himself handed it to the Committee and 
got a favorable report. Then he says he went and got it again. 
“\\ hat for ?’ “To show it to Mr. Oliver.” He says as a reason 
why it never got in print that he went and got the bill as soon as 
it was introduced and kept it until it was passed. Mr. Brown of 
the Brown Printing Company, swore that Albert Wilson came 
with Mr. Dean down to his establishment at the last of the session 
and Mr. Dean put this bill on the Calendar and came afterwards 
and took it off the Calendar, so that it never appeared on the Cal¬ 
endar. 

MR. LONG (Walker)—May I interrupt the gentleman with 
a question? 

MR. BROWNE—Yes. 

MR. LONG (Walker)—Is it not a fact that this same man 
Brown afterwards took that back and said it was Senator Oliver, 
instead of Mr. Dean? 

MR. BROWNE—Yes, Mr. Brown said he was not certain it 
was Mr. Dean but that it was a stout man. But he did know Al¬ 
bert Wilson the man who owns the Calera Land Improvement 
Company, and Albert Wilson was sitting right there, and never 
took the stand to deny what was said. They did afterwards go 
to Mr. Brown and Mr. Brown wrote this letter: 

“Montgomery, Ala., June 14, 1901. 



2168 


OFFICIAL PROCEEDINGS 


"Mr. Dean — Having seen Mr. Oliver and after talking 
with him in regard to Shelby Court House bill, think it must have 
been himself (Mr. Oliver) instead of you coming to the office in 
regard to Calendar.” 

That makes no difference. He doesn't take a word back of 
what he says which shows the fraud, f don’t care where you sad¬ 
dle that damnable fraud. Mr. Dean admitted in his testimony that 
he had told Mr. Oliver to pass this bill and that he did not pro¬ 
pose to let the people of Shelby County know anything about it. 

MR. LONCi (Walker)—May I ask the gentleman a question? 

MR. BROWNE—I beg pardon, but I only have two or three 
minutes and I decline to be interrupted. 

Mr. Dean undertook to explain as to the cover. Here is a 
very carefully drawn cover and he said he did not want the bill 
to go without a good cover. But how is this cover on another 
hill which was offered by Mr. Dean? Why it is so thin you can 
read it from one side as well as from the other. It is drawn up 
by Mr. Dean in his own handwriting and the title is on the back. 
It is all right to introduce this bill without any cover, but this 
county seat bill he had to put another cover on. Here is the ab¬ 
solute badge of fraud. There is the land limit bill and the pin 
holes and the folds of the paper of that bill are identical with this 
cover now on the county seat bill, and Mr. Dean admits that that 
bill was once in this cover. When this bill was brought from the 
Secretary of State’s office, no one thought it was more than one 
bill, but seeing some writing through it I pulled this part down 
and there is the land bill underneath. Two of these bills, identical¬ 
ly the same, were introduced and Mr. Dean admitted when this 
Court House bill was introduced he went and got it. All that the 
Clerk has in the way of a. memorandum is the number, they call 
it a jimmy, 1587. Then Mr. Dean kept it until he says he got a 
favorable report on it. All he had to do was to say I want to keep 
this bill 1587, you keep the title of it, and the Clerk would do it. 
and then he had the wrapper taken off of this bill and put the 
Court House bill in it so as to make the Journal show that the 
bill had passed. 

Mr. Martin has filed a brief in which he states that the two 
clerks said that they had a distinct recollection of it. I have just 
exactly what they did say. When the bill was held up before them 
and when they say' the memorandum on the back they said, "I 
recollect that that bill was passed on that dav. But on cross ex¬ 
amination Mr. K. F. Jones says: ‘O. When do you remember to 
have first seen the bill?’ ’A. I know only from seeing my journal 
which I made up pn the day it was said to have passed.’ ‘Q. Have 
you any independent recollection?' ‘A. No. sir; I could not swear 
positively that I saw it, except that I know from the journal, and I 
know I compared the second reading from the bill.’ 



CONSTITUTIONAL CONVENTION. 1901 


1W) 


A ” d ^ r * Martin in his brief tells you that he swore that he 
did. Mr. J. C. Adams, the Clerk, on cross examination, said: 

Q. I will now ask you if you, as Clerk of the last House, if you 
have any recollection of having read that Court House bill?” “A. 
No sir, I do not.” 

Again on page 75: “Q. You have no independent knowledge 
of that bill.” “A. No sir.” 

Now I move to lay the minority report upon the table. 

MR. HEFLIN (Chambers)—I would like to ask the gentle¬ 
man a question. 

THE PRESIDENT—Does the gentleman yield for a ques¬ 
tion? 

MR. BROWNE—I do not withdra w my motion to table. 

MR. GILMORE—I would like to ask a question. 

THE PRESIDENT—Will the gentleman allow the gentle¬ 
man to ask him a question? 

MR. BROWNE—I will if the House permits it by unanimous 
consent, but I will not withdraw the motion to table. 

MR. GILMORE—Did not Mr. Jones say that he would swear 
that that was his signature on the bill and that nothing could be 
passed fraudulently without the concurrence of a Clerk? 

MR. BROWNE—I do not know about that latter part. He 
said that was his endorsement on the back of the bill but on cross 
examination he said he had not recollection of it other than hav¬ 
ing made the entry. 

MR. GILMORE—He said it was his signature? 

MR. BROWNE—Yes, sir. 

MR. GILMORE — And didn’t he say that no bill could be 
passed fraudulently without the concurrence of a Clerk? 

MR. BROWNE—I don’t think he did. 

MR. GILMORE—I heard his testimony. 

MR. BROWNE — And we have his testimony, and every 
member of the Committee knows that Ed Jones stated he only 
recollected the bill by the signature. 

MR. GILMORE—I want to ask the gentleman if he is not 
the attorney for the Columbiana people? 

MR. BROWNE—I am the kind of attorney for the Colum¬ 
biana people that before God in Heaven I will always be against 
the perpetration of a damnable fraud of any kind. I am the at- 



2170 OFFICIAL PROCEEDINGS 

torney for the Columbiana people, but I am an attorney without 
a fee. 

MR. GILMORE—We have heard that before. 

MR. BROWNE—You asked the question and 1 answered it. 

MR. GILMORE—I don’t know whether you are an attorney 
without a fee or not. 

MR. HEFLIN (Chambers)—I would like to ask the gentle¬ 
man ff this matter is not now in the Supreme Court for settle¬ 
ment? 

MR. BROWNE—I will say that this matter is not in the 
Supreme Court because I do not know a lawyer in the State of 
Alabama who is fool enough to get the Supreme Court of Alabama 
to go behind the Journal of the General Assembly. It is there 
upon the face of the bill itself, and the Journal imports absolute 
variety and you cannot go behind it. 

MR. WILSON (Washington)—I rise to a question of per¬ 
sonal privilege. 

MR. HEFLIN (Chambers)—I am informed it is in the courts 
of Alabama for settlement in three different ways. 

MR. deGRAFFENREID—I call for the regular order. There 
is a motion to lay the minority report upon the table. 

MR. WILSON (Washington)—I rise to a question of per¬ 
sonal privilege. On account of our relationship wdth the gentle¬ 
man so frequently referred to, Mr. Albert Wilson of Montgomery, 
my brother, Mr. Wilson of Clarke and myself have had nothing 
to do with this matter. WE have discussed it with no one. I do 
not know how the delegates feel. But the gentleman has seen 
fit to drag into his discussion my brother, Albert Wilson of Mont¬ 
gomery. And I would like to be accorded the privilege of an¬ 
swering for him the question why he did not go on the stand and 
refute the charges that he was a partv to removing that bill from 
the calendar. 

MR. BROWNE I make the point of order that the gentle¬ 
man is not rising to a question of privilege. 

MR. WILSON What reflects on my brother reflects on me. 

I have tried to demean myself decently in this matter and have 
kept out of it until I have been dragged into it. 

MR. BROWNE—I only state a matter that came before the 
committee, I have only given the testimony of the Brown Printing 
Company people. 

MR WHLSON (Washington)—I admit that and that is the 
reason I have had nothing to do with it. 



constitutional CONVENTION, 1901 


2171 


1 HE PRESIDENT—In the opinion of the Chair the ques¬ 
tion to which the delegate from Washington is addressing himself 
is not a question of personal privilege. The question is on the 
motion to table. 

MR. BROWNR—On that I call for the ayes and noes. 
as follows: 


The call for the 


Ashcraft, 

Barefield, 

Bartlett, 

Beavers, 

Bethune, 

Blackwell, 

Boone, 

Brooks, 

Browne, 

Bulger, 

Burns, 

Carnathon, 

Case, 

Chapman, 

Davis, of Etowah, 
Dent, 

deGraffenreid, 

Foshee, 

Grant, 

Grayson, 

Greer, of Calhoun, 
Handley, 

Heflin, of Randolph, 
Henderson, 

Hodges, 

Ayes—74. 


Banks, 

Beddow. 

Byars, 

Cofer, 

Coleman, of Greene, 
Davis, of DeKalb, 
Duke, 

Kley, 

Fitts, 

Fletcher, 

Nays—30. 


ayes was sustained and 

AYES. 

Howell, 

Howze, 

Inge, 

Jones, of Bibb, 

Jones, of Hale, 

Jones, of Montgomery, 
Kirk, 

Knight, 

Leigh, 

McMillan, of Baldwin, 
Malone, 

Martin, 

Maxwell, 

Miller (Marengo), 

Miller (Wilcox), 
Murphree, 

Norman, 

Norwood, 

O’Neal (Lauderdale), 

Opp, 

O’Rear, 

Palmer, 

Parker (Cullman), 

Parker (Elmore), 

Pearce, 

NOES. 

Glover, 

Graham, of Montgomery, 
Greer, of Perry, 

Harrison, 

Heflin, of Chambers, 
Locklin, 

Lomax, 

Long of Butler, 

Long, of Walker, 

Lowe, of Jefferson, 


the roll call resulted 


1 ‘ettus, 

Phillips, 

Pitts. 

Porter, 

Reese, 

Reynolds (Chilton), 
Robinson, 

Rogers (Sumter). 
vSamford, 

Sanford, 

Smith (Mobile), 
Smith, Morgan M. t 
vSpears, 

Spragins, 

Stewart, 

Stoddard, 

Tayloe, 

Thompson, 

Waddell, 

Weakley, 

Weatherly, 

Whiteside, 

Williams (Barbour). 
Winn. 


Merrill, 

Oates, 

Proctor, 

Smith, Mac. A., 

Sol lie, 

Walker, 

Watts, 

Williams (Marengo). 
Williams (Elmore), 
Wilson (WaslTgton). 



2172 OFFICIAL PROCEEDINGS 


ABSENT OR NOT VOTING. 


Messrs. President, 

Gilmore, 

Mulkey, 

Almon, 

Graham, of Talladega, 

NeSmith. 

Altman, 

Haley, 

O’Neill, of Jefferson, 

Burnett, 

Hinson, 

Pillans, 

Cardon, 

Hood, 

Renfro, 

Carmichael, of Colbert, 

Jackson, 

Reynolds, of Henry, 

Carmichael, of Coffee, 

Jenkins, 

Rogers (Lowndes), 

Cobb, 

Jones, of Wilcox, 

Sanders, 

Coleman, of Walker, 

King, 

Searcy, 

Cornwall, 

Kirkland, 

Seiheimer, 

Craig, 

Kyle, 

Sentell. 

Cunningham, 

Ledbetter, 

Sloan, 

Eyster, 

Lowe, of Lawrence, 

Sorrell, 

Espy, 

Macdonald, 

Vaughan. 

Ferguson, 

McMillan (Wilcox), 

White, 

Foster, 

Moody, 

Wiliet, 

Freeman, 

Morrisette, 

Wilson (Clarke). 

So the motion to 

table prevailed. 



During the roll call. 

THE PRESIDENT—The present occupant of the chair de¬ 
sires to state that he was offered retainers on both sides of this 
case and he does not feel warranted in voting on the question. 

MR. CARDON—I am paired with Mr. Sorrell. He would 
vote aye and I would vote no. 

MR. GILMORE—I am paired with Mr. McMillan of Wilcox, 
he would vote aye and I would vote no. 

MR. MOODY—I am paired with Mr. Almon. He would vote 
no and I would vote aye. 

MR. SENTELL—I am paired with Mr. Graham of Talladega. 
He would vote aye and I would vote no. 

MR. WHITE—Before I was elected a delegate to this Con¬ 
vention I was approached by the friends of one side of this con¬ 
troversy who offered me a fee. I was never employed, but on that 
account I feel a delicacy in the matter and would like to be excused 
from voting. 

THE PRESIDENT Unless there is objection the gentleman 
will be excused. 

MR. WHITESIDE—I have an amendment I desire to offer. 

The amendment was read as follows: “Amend Section 6, Ar- 
title II, of the report of the Committee on State and County Bonn- 


CONSTITUTIONAL CONVENTION. 1901 2173 

daries by striking out the word ‘two-thirds’ in the first line of said 
section.” 

THE PRESIDENT—The question will be upon the amend¬ 
ment of the gentleman from Calhoun and the gentleman from Cal¬ 
houn is recognized. 

MR. WHITESIDE—According to my conception this two- 
thirds rule is in contravention of common right and subversive of 
Democratic principles. I think it ought to be stricken out and I 
move the previous question on the amendment and the article- 

MR. HOWELL—I hope the gentleman will withdraw that 
motion. Others of us have amendments we would like to submit. 

MR. O’NEAL—I move to lay the amendment on the table. 

THE PRESIDENT—The gentleman from Calhoun moves the 
previous question on the amendment as offered by himself and the 
sections reported by the committee, and the gentleman from Lau¬ 
derdale moves to lay the amendment of the gentleman from Cal¬ 
houn upon the table and the question is on the motion to table. 

MR. GREER (Calhoun)—I call for the ayes and noes. 

The call was not sustanied. 

MR. PEARCE—I would like to hear the reading of the amend¬ 
ment. 

THE PRESIDENT—The amendment is to strike out the two- 
thirds vote and leave it to be removed by a vote of the people. 

MR. CHAPMAN—Has it two-thirds majority? 

THE PRESIDENT—It has not. 

MR. SANFORD (Montgomery)—I move to insert the word 
“majority.” 

MR. REESE—I make the point of order- 

THE PRESIDENT—The gentleman from Calhoun moved 
the previous question and the gentleman from Lauderdale moved 
to table the amendment of the delegate from Calhoun and the 
question is on the motion to table. 

A vote being taken the motion prevailed, the vote on division 
being 49 ayes and 38 noes. 

MR. PEARCE—I desire to offer an amendment. 

THE PRESIDENT—The question now is on the motion of 
the gentleman from Calhoun for the previous question. 

MR. WHITESIDE—I ask unanimous consent to withdraw 
my motion for the previous question. 



2 174 


OFFICIAL FROCK FI.) I NOS 


Objection was made to the gentleman withdrawing his mo¬ 
tion, but by a vote of the Convention on division, by 65 ayes and 
22 noes the gentleman was allowed to withdraw his motion for 
the previous question. 

The amendment of the delegate from Marion was read a- 
follows: “Amend Section 6 by striking out the word two-thirds in 
the first line and inserting in lieu thereof the word 'majority.’ ’ 

MR. PEARCK—Mr. President and gentlemen of the Con¬ 
vention— 

THE PRESIDENT—If the gentleman desires to finish hi> 
remarks this morning he must compress them into a small compass, 
ft is only one minute and a half until adjourning time. 

MR. PIERCE—I do not offer this amendment to reflect un¬ 
kindly on the committee in any way as I am very fond of them 
politically, personally and every other way. As I understood the 
chairman of the committee the other day he stated that they had 
fully safeguarded the troubles that have grown out of this court 
house question. If this kind of an amendment had been propetlv 
observed it would have complete safeguarded the troubles that 
have grown out of this court house question. I offer this amend¬ 
ment because it is in accord with Democratic principles and I 
hope it will be adopted. I do not want to consume the valuable 
time of this Convention in discussing a matter that discusses itself. 

THE PRESIDENT—The hour for adjournment has arrived 
and the Convention will stand adjourned until 3 :30 and the dele¬ 
gate from Marion (Mr. Pearce) will have the floor. 


AFTERNOON SESSION 

The Convention met pursuant to adjournment, there being 61 
delegates present upon the call of the roll. 

Leave of absence was granted to Mr. Searcv of Tuscaloosa 
for today. 

1HE PRESIDEN 1—When the Convention adjourned, it had 
under consideration Section 6 of the report of the Committee on 
State and County Boundaries, the gentleman from Marion, Mr 
Pierce, had the floor. 

PIERCE Mr. President and gentlemen of the Conven¬ 
tion, if there is any principle in the Democratic party that I appre¬ 
ciate more than any other it is the principle of the majority ruling. 
It safeguards the will of the common people, as I look at it—and 
I dont use the word “common” as it is used in connection with 
the word unclean” in the Bible. I mean the body of our people of 



CONSTITUTIONAL CONVENTION, 1901 


2175 


good common sense, and the men who make the money to pay the 
taxes to build court houses. In my judgment, if you were to adopt 
this two-thirds rule in reference to moving local court houses, so 
far as moving court houses is concerned the question would be 
about at an end. 

Now, it was argued here the other day in debating the ques¬ 
tion as to quorum that one vote could elect a President, or one 
vote could elect the Electoral College which elected the President. 
Now, would any gentleman deny the people the right, by a ma¬ 
jority vote to locate a court bouse when it was argued by gentle¬ 
men on this floor— 

MR. d e C KA FERNREID—May I ask the gentleman a ques¬ 
tion ? 

THE PRESIDENT—Will the gentleman yield for a question? 
MR. PIERCE—Yes, sir. 

MR. deGRAFFENREID—Wasn’t that argument made when 
there was an attempt to change the jury law. to say that three- 
fourths of a jury could bring in a verdict? 

MR. PIERCE—Yes, sir. 

MR. deGRAFFENREID—Didn’t you vote for that? 

MR. PIERCE—On Saturday I did. but in a moment I re¬ 
pented of it and I have been repenting of it ever since, and I have 
asked the good Lord to forgive me for it, but I have doubts of 
whether he will ever forgive a man of my size and sense for doing 
such a thing. Now. gentlemen, it is well enough to safeguard 
these evils. We have had a fair demonstration of that in this Con¬ 
vention, but as I stated in the forenoon, if the principles of the 
great Democratic party that the majority have had no trouble in 
Shelby County. It was a want of that principle that caused them 
that trouble and not by having that principle, and with all due 
respect to this Committee, a man should never overreach the great 
principles of the Democratic party to ward off any particular dam¬ 
age or any particular trouble that might come up, as I have no 
doubt but what those principles properly crystalized into law would 
safeguard everything through. It is a conceded fact that the great 
duty of government is to protect the people in their rights, and 
prevent them from damaging one another. As I before stated, I 
have no doubt if you were to adopt this two-thirds rule that the 
people would never be able to move court houses hereafter, and 
while I don’t think that this Committee intentionally over-reached 
the great principles of the Democratic party, I think it was cer¬ 
tainly a little mistake they made, as the principles of the Demo¬ 
cratic party, the majority ruling, will certainly meet all the safe¬ 
guards that anvbody would want. Now. gentlemen. I don’t want 



2176 OFFICIAL PROCEEDINGS 

to consume the time of this Convention. I wish to close and mo\e 
the previous question with my amendment. 

THE PRESIDENT—The gentleman from Marion moves the 
previous question upon his amendment offered by him this morn¬ 
ing. The question is, shall the main question be now put? 

MR. WADDELL—I ask the gentleman to withdraw that for 
a moment. I will renew it. 

MR. PIERCE—If you will allow me to reinstate my motion, 
I will withdraw it. 

MR. WADDELL—I will renew the motion when I conclude 
my remarks. 

MR. PIERCE—Very well. 

MR. WADDELL—But our governmental system is not 
founded on majority rule. On the contrary, our whole fabric was 
woven upon a different theory altogether. Our forefathers saw 
the evil of this rule and placed a check and true balance wheel 
upon its operation. The President of the United States is not 
elected by a majority vote, and the Senate of the United States 
was created for the sole purpose of putting a check upon the House 
of Representatives and the veto power was given to the President 
in order that this check might be enforced both against the Senate 
and the House. Then why should we attempt to enforce this rule 
here when the interests of our smaller subdivisions are so vital? 
Our State Government has recognized the principle, and has given 
this power to the Governor and to the Senate. Our counties and 
county seats are vitally affected by this moving. We vote a bur¬ 
den upon the tax payers of the county by a mere majority of one, 
and the probability is that nine-tenths of all of the tax payers in a 
county would be opposed to the removal. We create an enormous 
debt upon them without allowing them a voice in the matter, 
whereas, if we placed it upon a two-thirds basis they would have 
a chance to protect themselves. There are vested rights, Mr. Presi¬ 
dent, in a county seat, the old county seats of the State, which 
should not be ruthlessly violated by a bare majority vote. Is it 
right that those that have to bear the burden- 

MR. HOWELL—Will the gentleman permit me to ask him a 
question? 

THE PRESIDENT—Will the gentleman vield? 

MR. WADDELL—No, not at present. 

THE PRESIDENT—The gentleman declines to yield. 

MR. WADDELL—Is it right that those that have to bear the 
expense and burden of the removal should have no voice in the 
matter? It is upon this theory that checks have been placed upon 



CONSTITUTIONAL CONVENTION, 1901 


2177 


our National and State governments. It would he oppression if 
it were otherwise. In fixing a two-thirds rate we give tax payers 
a chance and a voice in the election. We relieve to a great extent 
that feeling of anxiety which has been constantly manifesting itself 
in the Legislature of our State in the shape of local bills to perma¬ 
nently locate county seats, and put the people of the several coun¬ 
ties at rest upon the question, without preventing where it is ab¬ 
solutely necessary a removal of the county seat. Wherever it is 
absolutely necessary to have a removal, there will always be two- 
thirds of the people in favor of it. This matter of keeping the 
court houses of our State on wheels, so to speak, is the cause of 
more local strife than all the other questions with which our people 
have to deal. These evils were apparent to this committee, and in 
their wisdom they have solved the question, and in my opinion, 
Mr. President, they have wrought a great good to the whole people 
if this report be adopted. Let us rally to their support in their 
attempt to give to the people a government more in accordance 
with our institutions. Mr. President, T call for the previous ques¬ 
tion. 

MR. GREER (Calhoun)—1 would like to ask the gentleman a 
question. 

THE PRESIDENT—Will the gentleman permit a question? 

MR. WADDELL—Yes sir. 

MR. GREER—I would like to ask the gentleman if his theory 
that it should take two-thirds to locate a county seat does not give 
to the men who live at the county seat just twice as much power 
as those who are less fortunately situated? 

MR. WADDELL—It does not. 

MR. PIERCE—May I ask the gentleman a question? 

THE PRESIDENT—Does the gentleman vield to the gentle¬ 
man from Marion? 

MR. WADDELL—Yes, sir. 

MR. PIERCE—I did not want to interrupt you, but in your 
speech you said our forefathers advocated the doctrine of a tw r o- 
thirds vote. I just want to know for information how long has 
it been since that crowd died. 

MR. WADDELL—The National Convention. I think recog¬ 
nized that. 

MR. PIERCE—The Government has not done it since I have 
been living. 

MR. O’NEAL (Lauderdale)—Will you withdraw your mo¬ 
tion until I can offer an amendment? 



2178 


OFFICIAL PROCEEDINGS 


MR. WADDELL—I will with the consent of the gentleman 
from Marion. 

MR. O’NEAL—Will the gentleman from Marion consent to 
withdraw? 

MR. PIERCE—No sir, we cannot do that. 

MR. WADDELL—I call for the previous question. 

MR. PIERCE—Withdraw nothing. 

THE PRESIDENT—The previous question is demanded. 

MR. HEFLIN (Chambers)—Will the gentleman please with¬ 
draw that for the purpose of allowing an amendment? 

MR. PIERCE—No sir. 

MR. O’NEAL—I raise the point of order that the motion is 
not seconded. 


THE PRESIDENT—The question is, shall the main question 
be now put? 

MR. PIERCE—I call for an aye and nay vote. 

THE PRESIDENT—The question is, shall the main ques¬ 
tion be put? 

MR. PIERCE—I withdraw the request for an aye and no vote 
now, I want an aye and nay vote on the amendment. 

MR. O’NEAL—I move to lay on the table. 

MR. PIERCE—On that I call for an aye and nay vote. 

The call for the ayes and noes were sustained. 

MR. HOWELL—Wouldn’t it be well to announce that amend¬ 
ment so the House would understand. 


THE PRESIDENT—The amendment is to strike out two 
thirds vote and inserting a majority vote. 

Upon the call of the roll, the vote resulted as follows: 


Ashcraft, 

Banks, 

Blackwell, 

Brooks, 

Bulger, 

Cardon, 

Carnathon, 

Davis, of DeKalb, 
Davis, of Etowah, 


AYES. 

Dent, 

deGraffenreid, 

Eley, 

Fletcher, 

Foshee, 

Grayson, 

Haley, 

Harrison, 

Hinson, 


Howze, 

Inge, 

Knight, 

Leigh, 

Miller (Marengo), 
Miller (Wilcox), 
Moody, 

Murphree, 

Norman, 



2179 


CONSTITUTIONAL CONVENTION, 1901 


Norwood, 

Oates, 

O’Neal (Lauderdale), 
Opp, 

Palmer, 

Parker (Cullman), 

Total—45. 

Messrs. President, 
Barefield, 

Bartlett, 

Beavers, 

Beddow, 

Bethune, 

Boone, 

Browne, 

Burns, 

Byars, 

Case, 

Chapman, 

Cofer, 

Coleman, of Greene, 
Duke, 

Foster, 

Glover, 

Graham, of Montgomer\ 
Grant, 

Greer, of Perry, 

Total—59. 


Parker (Elmore), 
Phillips, 

Sentell, 

Spragins, 

Stewart, 

Thompson, 

NOES. 

Handley, 

Heflin, of Chambers, 
Heflin, of Randolph, 
Henderson, 

Hodges, 

Howell, 

Jones, of Bibb, 

Jones, of Hale, 

Jones, of Montgomery, 
Kirk, 

Ledbetter, 

Locklin, 

Long (Walker), 

Lowe (Jefferson). 
Macdonald, 

Malone, 

Martin, 

Merrill, 

O’Rear, 

Pearce, 


Waddell, 

Walker, 

Weakley, 

White, 

Williams (Barbour), 
Williams (Elmore). 


Pettus, 

Pitts, 

Porter, 

Proctor, 

Reese, 

Reynolds (Chilton), 
Robinson, 

Rogers (Sumter), 
Samford, 

Sanford, 

Smith (Mobile), 
Smith, Mac. A., 

Smith, Morgan M., 
Spears, 

Studdard, 

Tayloe, 

Watts, 

Whiteside, 

Wilson (Wash’gton). 


ABSENT OR NOT VOTING. 


Almon, 

Altman, 

Burnett, 

Carmichael, of Colbert, 
Carmichael, of Coffee, 
Cobb, 

Coleman, of Walker, 

Cornwall, 

Craig, 

Cunningham, 

Eyster, 

Espy, 

Ferguson, 

Fitts, 

Freeman, 

Gilmore, 

Graham, of Talladega. 


Greer, of Calhoun, 
Hood, 

Jackson, 

Jenkins, 

Jones, of Wilcox, 
King, 

Kirkland, 

Kyle, 

Lomax, 

Long (Butler), 

Lowe (Lawrence), 
McMillan (Baldwin), 
McMillan (Wilcox), 
Maxwell, 

Morrisette, 

Mulkey, 

NeSmith, 


O’Neill (Jefferson), 
Pillans, ^ 

Renfro, 

Reynolds (Henry). 
Rogers (Lowndes), 
Sanders, 

Searcy, 

Selheimer, 

Sloan, 

Sollie, 

Sorrell, 

Vaughan, 

Weatherly, 

Willet, 

Williams (Marengo), 
Wilson (Clarke), 
Winn. 



2180 


OFFICIAL PROCEEDINGS 


THE PRESIDENT—It appears upon casting up the vote, 
there are forty-five ayes and fifty-five noes, and the motion to 
table is lost. The question recurs upon the motion of the gentle¬ 
man from Russell, the previous question upon the amendment. 

MR. OATES—The motion is upon the original section as re¬ 
ported. 

THE PRESIDENT—On Section 6 and the pending amend¬ 
ment. 

MR. OATES—Will the gentleman from Russell withdraw the 
amendment? 

MR. WADDELL—If the gentleman from Marion withdraws 
it, I am willing. 

By a vote of 52 ayes to 36 noes, the previous question was or¬ 
dered. 

THE PRESIDENT—The question will be first upon the 
amendment offered by the gentleman from Marion, which is to 
strike out two-thirds for the removal of the court house and insert 
a majority. 

A vote being taken, the amendment was adopted, and on a 
further vote being taken, the section as amended was adopted. 

MR. PARKER (Cullman)—I move that the Article as adopted 
be engrossed and ordered to a third reading. 

THE PRESIDENT—The next order of business will be the 
consideration of the report of the Committee on Banks and Bank¬ 
ing. 


MR. FLETCHER—I move that this article be considered sec¬ 
tion by section. 

A vote being taken, the motion was carried. 

THE PRESIDENT—The Secretary will read the first section. 

The section was read as follows: 

Section 1. The General Assembly shall not have the power to 
establish or incorporate any bank or banking company or money 
institution, for the purpose of issuing bills of credit, or bills payable 
to order or bearer, except under the conditions prescribed in this 
Constitution. 

On motion of Mr. Fletcher, the section was adopted. 

Section 2 was read as follows: 

Sec. 2. No bank shall be established otherwise than under a 
general banking law, nor otherwise than upon a specie basis. 



CONSTITUTIONAL CONVENTION. 1901 


2181 


MR. OATES—I have an amendment which I had intended to 
offer at the conclusion of the report, but it may just as well be 
offered here. 

The amendment was read as follows: Amend Section 2 of 
Article IV by adding - to said section the following: Provided, that 
any bank may be established with authority to issue bills to circu¬ 
late as money in equal amount to the face value of bonds of the 
United States or of this State, county or city, convertible into 
specie at their face value, which shall before such bank is au¬ 
thorized to issue its bills for circulation be deposited with the 
State Treasurer or other depository prescribed by law, in an amount 
equal to the aggregate of such proposed issues, with power in said 
treasurer or depository to dispose of any or all of such bonds or a 
sufficient amount of specie to redeem the circulating notes of such 
bank at any time and without delay, should such bank suspend 
specie payment or fail to redeem its notes on demand. 

MR. OATES—That amendment can do no harm, and, under 
existing circumstances, would do no good. But we cannot say just 
what is to come, and I think it is well to have this provision in this 
Article. You all know that the State of Alabama in two of our 
State Conventions, declared in platform in favor of the repeal by 
Congress of the 10 per cent tax imposed upon the issues of State 
banks. When the last one was enacted, it was followed up by the 
national platform with a plank declaring in favor of its abolition. 
The question was up in Congress, elaborately discussed and com¬ 
mented upon and failed by the few votes of accomplishing a repeal. 

MR. SAMFORD (Pike)—Just a question for information. If 
we do not adopt the amendment you suggest, and put it in the 
Constitution, and the time should ever arise when we might have 
State banks, would not the Legislature of the State have authority 
to establish them without any Constitutional provision? 

MR. OATES I don’t think it would, because we are now con¬ 
sidering a Constitutional restriction of authority upon the estab¬ 
lishment of banks, and the Legislature would not have the power 
to establish banks contrary to its provisions, and, therefore, I offer 
this as an additional section. 

I was proceeding to say that this 10 per cent tax originated in 
this way. When the unfortunate Civil War came on we had 
through all the States of the Union a similar system of banking, 
which was a deposit of one dollar for every three of the bank’s 
circulation, and when specie payments were demanded, the banks 
were unable to respond and that culminated in loss. After the war. 
in 1866, the banking system which had been started for the pur¬ 
pose of maintaining the credit of the Federal Government was con¬ 
tinued. In the struggle which the Federal Government was under¬ 
going with the Confederacy, its credit had fallen to 50 cents on the 



2182 


OFFICIAL PROCKFDINGS 


dollar, and Secretary Chase and all others well knew that when 
the credit of the Government of the United States went down to 
the low point which it bade fair to, the success of the Confederacy 
was an assured fact. So, in order to sustain it, Mr. Potter of New 
York wrote a letter to Secretary Chase, suggesting 1 the national 
banking system. It was my fortune to see that original letter, 
which has been preserved. Mr. Chase sent for him and they ad¬ 
vised together and framed the first National Bank Act. It was 
submitted to Congress, and, with a few changes, became a law. 
The object and purpose of it was to create a market for the bonds 
of the Government. It did create that market by authorizing the 
holders of those bonds to use them for banking. And to issue 90 
per cent of their face value in circulating notes. They were pur- 
chaseable then at 50 cents on the dollar, but as soon as this vast 
market was made for them, they appreciated until they reached 
par and went above par. That resuscitated and sustained the credit 
of the Federal Government, and was more potential in giving to 
it success in putting down the Confederacy than were the Federal 
guns at Gettysburg. It was the one stroke of all in the war 1 that 
prostrated the Confederacy. 

MR. WALKER—Is it the purpose of your amendment to 
allow the establishment of State banks not upon specie payments? 

MR. OATES—I will explain that. At the close of the war 
these National Banks had in circulation about $75,000,000. They 
expected to get much more. The system was intended for com¬ 
mercial purposes. It never had the necessary elasticity. It was 
simply intended to create a market for the bonds of the Federal 
Government, but they conceived the idea that they might extend 
its circulation to a vast amount, and this purpose was declared at 
the time the Federal policy was declared with John Sherman as 
Secretary of the Treasury, to retire nearly all the greenbacks, which 
was over $500,000,000. When that policy began, it was understood 
that there would be a necessity for a greater volume of paper 
money, and then the National Banks, desiring to supply that de¬ 
mand, brought influence to bear on Congress which imposed on 
the State Banks a 10 per cent tax, which they knew the State banks 
could not survive. It was tantamount to saying that no State bank 
should issue these notes, although it had been decided more than 
fifty years before in the Kentucky case that the States had a right 
to have banks of issue and it went on to discuss that at greater 
length than I have time to refer to. That was the object and pur¬ 
pose of that 10 per cent, tax and it completely squelched the State 
banks, as much so as if the Congress of the United States had had 
the power and had passed an act declaring that no State should 
have any such banks. It taxed the State banks out of existence. 
Now the question of the repeal or modification of that tax is not 
settled. It is the only reminder of the acts of the Federal Govern- 



CONSTITUTIONAL CONVENTION. 1901 


2183 


ment in robbing the States of the rights they had under the Consti¬ 
tution which still remains in full force and I trust the day is not 
far distant when men will be in the Congress who will see the in¬ 
justice of it and repeal or modify that odious tax. 

Now should that be done before this Constitution ceases to be 
the organic law of Alabama, we may want to avail ourselves of it. 
'Phis amendment is not obligatory but it provides that banks may 
be created as banks of issue with a deposit of solvent bonds con¬ 
vertible into specie at their face value, whether of the United States, 
the State of Alabama, or any county or city, an equal amount dol¬ 
lar for dollar with the issue of such bank or banks, with the power 
in the depository on the failure any time of any bank to redeem its 
bills in specie to sell and convert those bonds into a sufficient 
amount to redeem them. Other parts of this ordinance requires 
that every bank shall redeem its bills in specie on demand. I want 
that to be in operation, but at the same time it is perfectly prac¬ 
ticable to incorporate this and let it remain so as to be of use 
should the time come, as I hope it may when you can broaden 
your basis of circulation with perfect security and make bonds 
which are convertible into specie the source and basis of banking 
and will add to your circulation on as safe a basis as the national 
banking system. I think it would be of such elasticity as to furnish 
the State with what money is needed. It will expand and contract 
according to the demand and will add to our internal wealth. 

MR. ROBINSON—Is there any provision in the Constitution 
which prevents the Legislature from doing this? 

MR. OATES—When you adopt this other provision you can 
do it? 

MR. ROBINSON—What Section do you refer to? 

MR. OATES—The Section which declares that no bank shall 
be established except on a specie basis. I want to make it on a 
bond basis convertible into specie. 

MR. WALKER—Does the gentleman construe the provision 
as contained in this Section as anything more than a requirement 
that any bank shall meet its notes on demand in specie. 

MR. OATES—No bank can be established except on a specie 
basis. 

MR. WALKER—But is not the extent of that requirement 
that it shall meet its notes in specie on demand? 

MR. OATES—But I am inclined to think you had better 
have mote room for the establishment of such a system if you can 
get it. It does not do any harm but leaves it to the Legislature 
to put it in force. 



2184 


OFFICIAL PROCEEDINGS 


MR. FLETCHER—We had hoped that this would be one 
Article which would escape the pruning- knife that has been so 
freely used in this Convention. The distinguished gentleman 
from Montgomery for many years in Congress endeavored to 
have this tax on State banks repealed, but it was not done. As long 
as that tax remains we are hampering the Constitution and accom¬ 
plishing no purpose. We think the Legislature is perfectly com¬ 
petent and if at any time this law imposing the tax is repealed the 
Legislature can take the necessary action relative to State banks. 
I can see no purpose or object or anything this amendment ac¬ 
complishes and I therefore more to lay it on the table. 

A vote being taken, by 38 ayes to 50 noes. the House refused 
to table the amendment. 

MR. OATES — I now move the previous question on my 
amendment to this Section. 

A reading of the amendment was called for and it was read as 
follows: 

Amend Section 2 of Article XIV. by adding the following: 
Provided, that any bank may be established with authority to 
issue bills to circulate as money in equal amount to the face value 
of bonds of the United States or of this county or city— 

MR. COLEMAN (Greene)—A circulation based on city and 
county bonds? 

The reading was continued as follows: 

Convertible into specie at their face value, which shall, be¬ 
fore such bank is authorized to issue its bills for circulation, be 
deposited with the State Treasurer or other depository prescribed 
by law, in an amount equal to the aggregate of such proposed is¬ 
sues with power in the said treasurer or depository to dispose 
of any or all of such bonds for a sufficient amount of specie to 
redeem the circulating notes of such bank at any time and with¬ 
out delay, should such bank suspend or fail to redeem its notes 
on demand. 

MR. O’NEAL—Do you intend that the bonds of a city shall 
be used regardless of their value? 

MR. OATES—No, sir; and that is not the language. 

MR. O'NEAL—It says “city bonds.” Von can get city bonds 
in this State not worth ten cents. 

MR. OATES—There is no such proposition there. 

MR. SAMFORD (Pike)—I rise to a point of order. 



CONSTITUTIONAL CONVENTION. 1901 


2185 


MR. OATES—If the gentlemen will just let me alone a min¬ 
ute and contain themselves, I will straighten that out, I ask unani¬ 
mous consent to strike out the words “county and city/* 

A vote being taken the previous question was ordered. 

MR. deGRAFFENREID — I would like to know if that 
amendment says “United States bonds and bonds of this State 
or of a State? 

THE CLERK—Of this State. 

MR. O’NEAL—At their par value? 

THE CLERK—At their face value. 

A vote being taken the amendment was adopted and a fur¬ 
ther vote being taken the section as amended was adopted. 

The Clerk then read Section 3 as follows: 

Sec. 3. All bills or notes issued as money, shall be at all times 
redeemable in gold or silver and no law shall be passed sanction¬ 
ing, directly or indirectly, the suspension of any bank or banking 
company of specie payment. 

A vote being taken the section was adopted. 

The Clerk then read Section 4 as follows; 

Sec. 4. Holders of bank notes and depositors who have not 
stipulated for interest, shall for such notes and deposits, be en¬ 
titled in case of insolvency, to the preference of payment over all 
other creditors. 

MR. WATTS—I have an amendment. 

The amendment was read as follows: Amend Section 4 of the 
report of the Committee on Banks and Banking by adding at the 
end thereof the following: “Provided, this section applies to in¬ 
corporated banks only.” 

MR. WATTS—My reason for offering that is this. This sec¬ 
tion in the old Constitution has, on several occasions within the 
last year or two, been the subject of much discussion amongst the 
lawyers throughout the State as to whether it applied to incor¬ 
porated banks or all banks. This amendment is simply to remove 
that question in the future. 

MR. HARRISON—I desire to ask the delegate from Mont¬ 
gomery what good reason there is for excluding private banks, 
not incorporated under the provisions of this Article? 

MR. WATTS—Because the whole section applies to incor¬ 
porated banks and not to private banks. 



2186 


OFFICIAL, PROCEEDINGS 


THE PRESIDENT—The Chairman of the Committee indi¬ 
cates that the Committee is willing to accept the amendment and 
the question will be on the adoption of the amendment offered bv 
the gentleman from Montgomery. 

MR. HARRISON—I trust that amendment will not be adopt¬ 
ed. If it needs amendment, according to my views it should be* 
amended so as to include all banks and bankers whether incorpor¬ 
ated or not. As stated by the delegate from Montgomery, I am 
aware that there has been a difference of opinion among lawyers 
as to the proper construction, and in \ iew of that I would like to 
offer an amendment saying that all bankers whether incorporated 
or not are subject to the provisions in this Constitution. 

MR. WILLIAMS (Marengo)—1 have such an amendment al¬ 
ready prepared. 

MR. HARRISON—Then I will yield for you to offer it. 

The amendment referred to was sent up to the Clerk. 

MR. HARRISON—I think this protection should be given 
to the depositors of all banks, whether incorporated or not. When 
anybody sets up a bank and receives deposits, why should thev 
be exempt from the law. They go under the name of a bank and 
many innocent people go there to deposit and the effect of this 
amendment offered by the gentleman from Montgomery would be 
to take away any protection from the depositor in one of these 
private banks, a bank not incorporated. It seems to me of all 
banks on earth they should be made responsible and made to come 
under this provision of the law. 

MR. WATTS—Don't this whole article apply to incorporated 
banks. Down in another section here it says the State shall not 
be a stockholder in any bank. Can any construction be put on 
that save that it is an incorporated bank? 

MR. HARRISON—If it is susceptible of that construction. 1 
want to amend it so as to make it apply to all banks. I can see 
no reason why incorporated banks should be held up to this ac¬ 
countability and private banks not. 

MR. WATTS—But does not the whole article apply to in¬ 
corporated banks? 

MR. HARRISON—Not necessarily. 

MR. WATTS—Does not the amendment I offer make clear 
what the purpose of the article is? 

MR. HARRISON—But you do just what I don’t want done. 



CONSTITUTIONAL CONVENTION. 1901 


2187 


The amendment of the delegate from Marengo (Mr. Williams) 
was read as follows: Provided this section shall apply to all banks 
whether incorporated or not. 

MR. HARRISON—That is what 1 want. 

A vote being taken the amendment of the delegate from Ma¬ 
rengo, which was offered as a substitute for the amendment of 
the delegate from Montgomery (Mr. Watts) was adopted. A fur¬ 
ther vote being taken the said amendment was adopted as an 
amendment to the section, and a still further vote being taken the 
section was adopted. 

Section 5 w*as then read as follows : 

Sec. 5. Kvery bank or banking company shall be required 
to cease all banking operations within twenty years from the time 
of its organization, (unless the General Assembly shall extend 
the time), and promptly thereafter close its business; but shall 
have corporate capacity to sue and shall lx* liable to suits until its 
affairs and liabilities are fully closed. 

On motion the said section w^as adopted. 

Section 6 was then read as follows: 

Sec. 6. No banks shall receive directly or indirectly a greater 
rate of interest than shall he allowed by law to individuals for lend¬ 
ing money. 

On motion the section was adopted. 

Section 7 was then read as follows: 

Sec. 7. The State shall not be a stockholder in any bank, nor 
the credit of the State ever be given, or loaned, to any banking 
company, association or corporation. 

MR. WATTS—I have an amendment. 

The amendment was read as follows: Amend Section 7 of the 
report of the Committee on Banks and linking as follows: Strike 
out the words “the State shall not” and in lieu thereof insert 
“neither the State nor any political subdivision thereof shall' and 
insert the word “shall” between the word “nor” and the words 
“the credit” in line 1. 

A vote being taken the amendment was adopted and a fur¬ 
ther vote being taken the section as amended was adopted. 

Section 8 w as then read as follows : 

Sec. 8. The General Assembly shall by appropriate laws, pro¬ 
vide for the examination by some public officer, of all banks and 



2188 


OFFICIAL PROCEEDINGS 


banking institutions and trust companies engaged in banking busi¬ 
ness in this State. 

MR. DAVIS (Etowah)—T offer an amendment. 

The amendment was read as follows: Amend Section 8 of 
Article XIV' by adding at the end of the section the following 
words: “And each of such banking companies or institutions shall 
through its president or such other officer as the General Assem¬ 
bly may designate under oath make a report of its resources and 
liabilities twice a year.” 

MR. DAVIS (Etowah)—1 do not desire to comment at length 
on that amendment. It seems to me its wisdom is apparent. 
Where people are depositing their money in a bank they have a 
right to know the standing of that bank, its resources and liabili¬ 
ties, and I can see no reason why a State bank should not be un¬ 
der the same rule in that respect as a national bank. 1 feel that 
the amendment would add strength to the banking institutions of 
the State. 

MR. ASHCRAh 1—1 desire* to offer a substitute for the pend¬ 
ing section and amendment. 

The substitute was read as follows: Amend Article XIV a> 
reported by the committee by striking out Section 8 thereof. 

MR. ASHCRAFT—The Constitution does not prohibit the 
Legislature from enacting such regulations for State banks and 
private banks as it may deem proper from time to time. I think 
it is proper to leave this power in the hands of the Legislature. 
So far the Legislature has not deemed it wise although the ques¬ 
tion has been several times agitated in the Legislature, to require* 
State banks to submit to an examination. There is not, relatively 
speaking a great number of State banks and the expense incident 
to their examination in any manner that would provide additional 
security for their depositors and stockholders would be very great. 
An examination that would not be of that thorough character to 
give proper information about the bank would be no examination 
at all, as has been demonstrated several times. During the panic 
the percentage of failures of national banks was greater than the 
percentage of failures among the private banks. Now as the leg¬ 
islature is not prohibited at all in this regard, if the public at an\ 
time should demand a provision for the* examination of State 
banks, such a provision would be enacted. I don’t think we should 
put it in our organic law because if it should prove unsatisfacton 
to our people there! would be no way to get out of it. 

MR. SANFORD (Montgomery) — They could amend tin* 
Constitution. 

MR. ASHCRAFT — But that is very difficult, as we haw 
learned. I therefore trust the amendment will prevail. 



CONSTITUTIONAL CONVENTION, 1901 


2189 


MR. MALONE— I wish to oppose the amendment of the dele¬ 
gate from Lauderdale. If there is anything in, this State that we 
should do it is to open a way for State banking institutions for 
the people of Alabama. We are getting away from the conditions 
that prevailed years back and a great many of our people are 
accumulating money and it will be only a short time before we 
will have a lot of savings banks. I submit that the average de¬ 
positor is completely at the mercy of a bank. He cannot go to the 
bank and say you must show me your books. He doesn't know 
a thing in the world about them. So far as the legislature is con¬ 
cerned we all know that only a few years ago when a bill similar 
to this was up and came near passing the private banks of the 
State headed by a prominent institution in Montgomery, and as¬ 
sisted by myself, for which I got caught afterwards, defeated the 
measure. There is no use talking about members of the Legis- 
ture, for when three or four banks from a representative’s district 
come down on him he can hardly help voting with them. 

MR. ROGERS (Sumter) — Is it your opinion that the ex¬ 
amination of the National banks we now have are a benefit or in¬ 
jury to the public? 

MR. MALONE—It is a decided benefit, and I speak from ex¬ 
perience. 

MR. ROGERS (Sumter)—Would not an examination of am 
bank, to be beneficial, have to take up the account of each indi¬ 
vidual depositor as well as debtor, and is this ever done? 

MR. MALONE—Sometimes. 

MR. ROGERS—And, therefore, the report of the examiners 
deceives the public more often than it gives them information in 
an examination of a bank thoroughly you will have to take up the 
account of every individual depositor and creditor of the bank to 
see how he stands, discount his notes and everything. 

MR. MALONE—These reports made by the examiners do not 
go to the public, unless it is shown by the examination that the 
bank is insolvent. These five annual statements are made up and 
sworn to by the officers of the bank and printed. The examina¬ 
tion that the examiner makes never becomes public and it is one 
of the best safeguards possible. 

MR. HENDERSON—In your opinion does the average man 
know anything about the solvency or insolvency of a bank or are 
they looking to its published statement? 

MR. MALONE—When made by an officer, yes sir. 

MR. HENDERSON—How can an average man tell from a 
statement whether a bank is solvent? 



2190 


OFFICIAL PROCEEDINGS 


MR. MALONE—The bank examiner can report that himself. 

MR. HENDERSON—That would have to be based upon the 
idea that the examiner is familiar with the local conditions and 
with the value of the conditions? 

MR. MALONE—I certainly would presume there were com¬ 
petent officers at the head of it. Just the other day there was a 
bank in the city of Buffalo, the president of which had been presi¬ 
dent of the Bankers’ Association of the United States, who stood 
high and whose opinion was regarded as authority. Yet the bank 
examiner examined his bank and closed it up, and, as a matter of 
fact, by closing that bank saved much money to the creditors. 

MR. HENDERSON—Is it not your opinion that the adopt- 
tion of this section will have a tendency to drive depositors from 
State and private banks to National banks for the reason that 
State and private banks would be examined by State officers, and 
the National banks by National bank examiners? 

MR. MALONE—If the gentleman gets too close I will have 
to call taw on him. I think unquestionably it will be a benefit 
to have these examinations. I do not believe it will help the men 
not examined. Unquestionably it will bring more deposits to 
those that are examined, and I submit that it is worth $20 for anv 
man to have an expert go through your business. 

MR. COLEMAN (Greene)—You stated just now that you 
and some others at the last term of the Legislature, or the term 
just before that, succeeded in defeating a law similar to this? 

MR. MALONE—In the Legislature. 

MR. COLEMAN (Greene)—At that time you were running 
a private bank? And now you are running a National bank? 

MR. MALONE—Yes, sir; and those are my views exactly. 
One of my stockholders came to me and said: “Y’ou are making 
a mistake, you are putting your competitor across the street where 
he will get as much business as you will. What do you mean?” 
It is not necessary for me to call names. He said for that very 
reason you had better let it alone. My reply was that I came here 
to give tne people of Alabama the benefit of tny experience in any 
line and not to attend to my own business. I can take care of 
that. I have been in both of these lines. I have only been in the 
National for a year and a half, and what I am trying is to get the 
little banks where men who put away their little savings will al¬ 
ways be able to get them. Y T ou all know that the first little start 
you get is the hardest. 

MR. HARRISON—Does the article reported by your com¬ 
mittee contemplate an examination of the National banks by State 
inspectors? 



CONSTITUTIONAL CONVENTION. 1901 


2191 


MR. MALONE—Certainly not. 

MR. HARRISON—Would not the words bear that construc¬ 
tion? 

MR. MALONE — Rut the United States would not permit 

that. 


MR. HARRISON—Then you had better guard it. 

MR. MALONE—The United States law would not permit it. 

The delegate from Henry (Mr. Malone) moved the previous 
question, but withdrew it for Mr. Henderson. 

MR. HENDERSON — I desire to say a few words on the 
pending section. This is a matter, it seems to me, entirely for leg¬ 
islative enactment and has not place in the Constitution. 

If I properly understand the purpose of a Constitution, it is 
for restricting and limiting the bounds within which the legisla¬ 
tive machinery may work, or rather to say what the legislature 
shall not do, than to say what it shall do. All rights which the 
people do not reserve in their Constitution are delegated to the 
General Assembly to legislate upon. By the adoption of this Sec¬ 
tion you say to the legislature, you shall do something which the 
Constitution does not forbid you from doing. In my opinion the 
adoption of this Section means the creation of new and additional 
officers without benefit to the people. People put their money in 
banks not because the banks are examined, but because either of 
confidence in the management of those in charge or from personal 
or political influence. Examinations as we all know, do not pre¬ 
vent bank failures. Possibly most of you know there were more 
national bank failures in the panic of 1893 than there were failures 
of State and private banks. 

If the purpose of this Section is to protect the people against 
bank failures and I suppose this to be its purpose then it should 
be constructed as to provide a board of examiners to issue license 
only to such persons to engage in the banking business who, in 
the opinion of the board have all the requisite fitness to success¬ 
fully conduct such business. 

MR. MALONE—Is not that a matter purely one for legisla¬ 
tive enactment? 

MR. HENDERSON—This section, yes, and that is what I am 
speaking for. I say the legislature has a right to provide for the 
examination of State banks without the Constitution saying they 
shall or may do it. 

MR. MALONE—We want to make it mandatory. 



2192 


OFFICIAL PROCEEDINGS 


MR. HENDERSON — You want to legislate. How many 
.men in this Convention can tell the solvency or insolvency of a 
bank by looking at a published statement. You can see the amount 
of cash on hand, amount of deposits and loans but of the char¬ 
acter of loans you cannot judge and a State Bank Examiner would 
know little more. The people do not like to have their private af¬ 
fairs pried into by State officers. The adoption of this section 
would cause the shifting of deposits from State and private banks 
to National banks over which State officers would have no con¬ 
trol and thereby be the means of discrimination against State and 
private banks and in favor of National banks. There are a few 
things which the people want at the hands of this Convention and 
as I understand them they are these : 1, Limiting the right of 

suffrage; 2, less frequent elections; 3, limiting the Legislature in 
the passage of local bills; 4, relief from unjust discrimination in 
freight rates; 5, a division of the school tax fund in proportion as 
it is said by the two races. They may have wanted some others 
but I am sure they wanted no new offices and I do not think they 
wanted any material changes in the present Constitution aside 
from those I have mentioned. Aside from the pledge imposed by 
the party platform I was pledged to my people on two other propo¬ 
sitions and they were: first, support no measure in this Conven¬ 
tion whereby the salary of State officers would be increased or 
fixed in the Constitution. The other was to support no measure 
whereby the number of State officers would be increased. On 
account of this pledge, Mr. President, I voted against the measure 
before this Convention in the early session to increase the salary 
of Governor. * 

Mr. President, the spirit of governmental paternalism is grow¬ 
ing stronger. The tendency is to try to accomplish too much by 
legislation. Men expect and depend too much on government to 
aid them in their business. No people ever was nor ever can be 
legislated into prosperity. These are some of the reasons why I 
think this section of the report on banking should not be adopted. 

MR. COLEMAN—Mr. President and delegates of the Con¬ 
vention: The discussion of this question shows how closely peo¬ 
ple look after their own interests. Every officer of a national 
bank in this Convention who has spoken thus far favors the adop¬ 
tion of Section 8. Those who are interested in State banks are 
opposed to it. 

I have persistently voted during the sittings of this Conven¬ 
tion against every enactment which properly belongs to the Legis¬ 
lature, and for that reason, continuing to do so, shall vote for the 
substitute offered by the gentleman from Lauderdale. But while 
that is so, it is due to the Convention to say that the examination 
proposed in this Section is really putting a clog or a burden on the 
State banks and putting them at a disadvantage as compared with 



CONSTITUTIONAL CONVENTION. 1901 


2193 


a National bank. Really a bank is judged by its officers and di¬ 
rectory more than anything else. The people put their money in 
these banks according to their confidence in the business capacity, 
solvency and integrity of those who manage banks. 

MR. MALONE—May I ask the gentleman if he is a private 
banker? 

MR. COLEMAN—I am going to tell it all. I do not have to 
be asked. I am speaking about what I know. The big failure 
the other day occurred immediately after a report by a National 
Bank Examiner and not before. It is utterly impossible for any 
ordinary examiner not acquainted with local conditions and securi¬ 
ties to examine a bank and report with any certainty upon its 
condition. 

MR. WALKER—Is it not a fact that the big failure in Buffalo 
occurred in a few days after a report by a National Examiner cer- 
tifying the condition of affairs of the bank and that they were all 
right? 

MR. COLEMAN—That is just what I stated a few moments 
ago, and there are more failures of national banks than of State 
banks proportionately. 

MR. MALONE—Is it not a fact that that very failure was 
caused by the report of the Examiner? 

MR. COLEMAN—On the contrary the E xaminer reported it 
all right. But so far as you are concerned, that has been demon¬ 
strated. You opposed this when you were interested in the State 
bank and as soon as you get in a National bank you advocate it. 
That is enough on that proposition. 

MR. MALONE—Let me ask you- 

MR. COLEMAN—I cannot yield any more. 1 do not want 
mv time consumed. 

What we object to is increasing fees and charges on your 
State institutions. If they voluntarily want it the Legislature can 
at any time without this provision adopt just such a law as is pro¬ 
vided for here. It is purely a legislative matter and ought not to 
be in the organic law. It is a question of fees and charges. 

The gentleman asked me if I was interested in a State bank, 
and I say yes, but I am telling you what I know and I am speak¬ 
ing to you candidly about it. It is the confidence the people have 
in the integrity and solvency of your directors that gets the de¬ 
posits in the bank. There is an opinion in the country that because 
a National bank has bonds deposited it is more secure than a State 
bank, but that does not rest upon any solid foundation. 



2194 


OFFICIAL PROCEEDINGS 


Now I want to say to the delegates here, if you, increase the 
fees and charges against banks by examination, you are bound 
to have officers to do this examining. You create new offices. If 
it should become necessary, let it be done, but I contend that now 
there is no necessity for it and I do think the delegates to this Con¬ 
vention ought to keep in mind the great principle that we are 
framing an organic law and we are not here legislating purely. 

MR. MALONE—I move to lay the substitute on the table. 

A vote being taken on a division, by 61 ayes to 23 noes the 
substitute was laid on the table. 

MR. O’NEAL—I now move the previous question on the Sec¬ 
tion and the amendment. 

A vote being taken, the main question was ordered, 

MR. HEFLIN (Chambers)—I move to table the amendment 
and the original Section. 

THE PRESIDENT—It is too late after the previous question 
has been ordered. The question is on the adoption of the amend¬ 
ment of the delegate from Etowah. 

MR. HEFLIN (Chambers)—I hope the Convention will in¬ 
dulge us just a moment. A good number of delegates voted a 
moment ago thinking they were striking out this Section. 

THE PRESIDENT—Those same delegates will be able to 
express their will on the adoption of the amendment. 

MR. deGRAFFENREID — On the adoption of the amend¬ 
ment I call for the ayes and noes. 

The call was not sustained, and a vote being taken the amend¬ 
ment was adopted. 

MR. HARRISON—If this matter is adopted it ought to be 
correct, and it ought not to be left in language that would apply 
to national banks. The language is very broad. 

MR. O’NEAL—The great argument of the National bank is 
that they are required to be examined. 

MR. HARRISON—By National bank examiners, but they are 
here required to be inspected by State officers. I favor the re¬ 
port but this matter ought to be corrected. 

MR. BOONE—I rise to a point of order. The previous ques¬ 
tion has been ordered and it is not debatable. 

A vote being taken the Section as amended was adopted. 

MR. ROGERS—I vote aye for the purpose of moving a re¬ 
consideration of this Section tomorrow morning. 



CONSTITUTIONAL CONVENTION, 1901 


2195 


MR. SAMFORD (Pike)—I was rising to give notice for that 
same purpose. 

MR. REYNOLDS (Chilton)—I have an additional Section to 
offer. 

The amendment was read as follows: 

Amend the report of the Committee on Banks and Banking 
by additional Section, to be known as Section 9 as follows: Sec. 9. 
If necessary for the payment of any creditor or depositor of an 
incorporated bank, each holder of stock therein shall be held liable 
for double the amount of stock held by such stockholder in said 
bank. 

MR. REYNOLDS (Chilton)—I was a member of the Com¬ 
mittee on Banking and, I reserved the right when the Committee 
reported to offer this amendment at the proper time. It was not 
the views of the entire Committee, but some of the Committee 
agreed with me on this question. 

When men associate themselves together and organize a bank 
and hold it out to the world as a place to receive deposits and to 
take care of the people’s money, I see no reason why the law 
should not at least make them partly responsible for failures when 
the people’s money is squandered. A corporation can be organized 
with $25,000 of capital and pay the, President $5,000 and the Sec¬ 
retary $4,000 and in a few years they have nothing left but a tin 
box. An advertisement of a bank carries with it that it is a place 
of safety to deposit money, and banks of an insolvent or unsafe 
character generally get the money of poor people and widows. No¬ 
body who investigates puts their money there. 

It is an everyday occurrence that Presidents of banks are 
skipping out, and when people put themselves up as having a bank, 
a place of deposit, the law cannot be too strong in taking care of 
the money that is deposited with them. People put their money 
in a bank without hope of reward, they draw no interest and they 
place it there simply for safety, that it may be taken care of, and 
the money that is generally lost is money belonging to people who 
can the least afford the loss. Business people for two years be¬ 
fore the failure of a bank have been keeping clear of that bank, 
and it is only the money of poor people and widows that is left 
there to be lost, and I can see no reason why the law of our State 
should not at least make stockholders of a bank partly responsible 
for the money deposited in their bank. 

MR. KNIGHT—I move to lay the amendment of the gen¬ 
tleman on the table. 

A vote being taken by 49 ayes and 30 noes on a division the 
amendment was tabled. 



2196 


OFFICIAL PROCEEDINGS 


MR. WILLIAMS (Marengo)—I have an amendment to the 
Article. 

The amendment was read as follows: “Amend Article on 
Banks and Banking, by adding Section —. That the provisions 
of this Article shall apply to all banks, trust companies and indi¬ 
viduals doing a banking business, whether incorporated or not. 

MR. FLETCHER—I move to lay the amendment upon the 
table. 

Upon a vote being taken, a division was called for, whereupon 
a reading was demanded. 

MR. WILLIAMS (Marengo)—It has been suggested that I 
insert in there “except National banks.” If I can get unanimous 
leave to insert “except National Banks,” I would like to insert it. 

MR. PARKER (Cullman)—A point of order. The vote has 
been put, and a division called for. 

Upon a vote being taken, the motion to table was lost. 

MR. O’NEAL (Lauderdale)—I desire to offer an additional 
section. 

THE PRESIDENT—The question is now on the section of¬ 
fered by the gentleman from Marengo. The House has declined to 
table the section. 

MR. WILLIAMS (Marengo)—I ask unanimous leave to in¬ 
sert the words “except National Banks.” 

The leave was given, and the amendment made. 

THE PRESIDENT—The question is upon the adoption oi 
the section offered by the gentleman from Marengo. 

MR. WINN—It seems to me that the action of the Conven¬ 
tion in reference to banking in this State and State banks, is some¬ 
what hasty and inconsiderate. Let’s take it practically and see 
what is the result. You talk of doubling the responsibilities of 
the stockholders of State banks. Let us see what the operation of 
such a provision is. Here is a State bank, organized probably a 
year ago, and the stock was subscribed and issued under the laws 
of the State, and now you put in the Constitution a provision that 
the responsibilities of those stockholders shall be double the 
amount that they have subscribed.— 

MR. WILLIAMS (Marengo)—A point of order. The gen¬ 
tleman is not speaking to the amendment at all. 

THE PRESIDENT—The point of order is well taken. 



CONSTITUTIONAL CONVENTION. 1901 


2197 


MR. deGRAFFENRElD—I rise for the purpose of opposing 
the amendment offered by the gentleman from Marengo. His 
amendment makes section 8 applicable to all banks doing business 
under the State law in Alabama, whether such banks are corpora¬ 
tions or are conducted by individuals. The result of that amend- 
ment, if adopted, will be to drive all individuals out of the banking 
business. So far as I am concerned, I am entirely disinterested in 
me matter. I am somewhat interested in a State bank, which is a 
corporation, but I represent no one who is doing a banking busi¬ 
ness on his individual account. However, we all know that peo- 
ple do not like to have their private affairs too thoroughly investi¬ 
gated by public officers. We know for instance, that the back tax 
commission law has not been a popular measiire in Alabama, be¬ 
cause the people resented the idea that their affairs were to be 
gone too thoroughly into by the officers of the State. If you 
pass this law, you drive every individual in Alabama out of the 
banking business There are a good many people in this State who 
own property other than that which they have invested in the 
banking business. They have other business interests besides the 
banking business in which they may be engaged. I have in mv 
mind a citizen of well recognized financial ability, who resides 
in the town in which I live. He has a bank and does a banking 
business. Part of his assets are invested in that bank, but a large 
part of his assets are not invested in the bank. He may owe debts 
other than the debts that are due by him on account of the bank. 
In order to get an intelligent report as to his condition, you would 
not only have to ascertain how much he owed as a banker, but 
how much he owed as an individual to other people, and you 
would have to find out not only how much money he had invested 
in the banking business, but what he had invested in other en¬ 
terprises, in order to make a report upon his financial standing and 
responsibility. ^ 


0 . * Jt d u CS SCem t0 me that whenever you get to that pass in this 
btate, whenever you get to the point that a man, in order to en- 
gage in a private enterprise, which is a lawful business, must re¬ 
port his aifairs to the State twice each year and get into the pub¬ 
lic prints you absolutely drive him out of business, because the 
banking business is not more lucrative than a great many other 
characters of business in this State. 

MR. O’NEAL If it is a private business, does he not receive 
the moneys of the public, just like a National bank, and ought not 
the public to be entitled to some protection, if he has a private 
bank, or an incorporated bank, or a National Bank? 

MR. deGRAFFENRElD The reasons for the establishment 
of examiners for national banks is not applicable to an individual 
who engages in the banking business. In the first place, as we 



2198 


OFFICIAL PROCEEDINGS 


know the national banking law authorizes the bank which is con¬ 
ducted under that law to issue bills which circulate as money. It 
goes further and requires that the stockholders in the bank shall 
be liable in double the amount of their stock, all because the gov¬ 
ernment of the United States itself is more or less involved in the 
financial integrity and proper conduct of the bank. But when you 
come to the individual, when you come to the man that lives in a 
community, the deposit is made with him on account it may be 
of personal friendship, on account of personal association or on ac¬ 
count of the manner in which he is regarded by his neighbors. He 
is not made a depository as is the national bank for the public 
funds, because every national bank that exists in the United States 
is liable to be made* a depository of public funds. For that reason 
its officers are quasi public officers, and as the institution is in fact 
a public institution, it becomes the government which called it into 
existence, and gave it authority to act, to see that the bank is prop¬ 
erly conducted, as far as it can do so. With an individual engag¬ 
ing in a lawful business, it has never been heard of anywhere I do 
not believe, that any public officer should pry into his private af¬ 
fairs more than into the private affairs of any other individual in 
the Commonwealth. I will state that we have in a great many 
small communities in this State individuals who conduct a small 
business, that is in reality a banking business, who do good in the 
community where they live, but if you adopt this law, you will 
drive them out of that business and for that reason I am opposed 
to it, and I move to lay the amendment offered by the gentleman 
from Marengo upon the table. 

MR. WILLIAMS (Marengo)—I will ask the gentleman to 
withdraw that motion. 

MR. deGRAFFENRElD—I will if the gentleman will let me 
renew it. 

MR. ASHCRAFT—I rise to the point of order that the same 
motion has been submitted to this house and voted down. 

MR. deGRAFFENREID—Then I withdraw it. I did not 
know that. 

THE PRESIDENT—The point of order is well taken. 

MR. WILLIAMS (Marengo)—In answer to the position that 
the gentleman from Hale takes that national banks ought to be 
examined, and that State banks ought not to be examined, and that 
this section should not be incorporated into the Constitution, I will 
say with him that on the proposition before the house I voted to 
strike this particular Section 8 from the Constitution, but the Con¬ 
vention saw’ fit to keep it in there. The Convention seeing fit to 
retain that section, in my opinion a safeguard should be thrown 
around all of the banks, all of the trust companies and all banking 



2199 


CONSTITUTIONAL CONVENTION, 1901 


institutions, whether private, incorporated or individual bankers, 
and my idea is to make this section apply to all banks and banking 
institutions. As a matter of fact this is legislative; no one denies 
that and no one can doubt it, but as it is there let us make it go 
far enough to cover the whole thing. 


Now as to the matter of prying into private affairs, I desire 
to say that we find these private matters investigated in the na¬ 
tional banks. They have large depositors, and if perchance some 
squeamish fellow has gone over to a private bank, or a State bank 
and there deposited his funds because he does not want to have 
his private affairs looked into, it strikes me that man has builded 
his house on a sandy foundation. It is just for such fellows as 
that, along with the balance, that it strikes me this section should 
be adopted, so as to say to that man whether that bank is safe, oi¬ 
ls not safe. Suppose the bank is decided not to be safe by the pub¬ 
lic examiner, the particular individual who doesn’t want his affairs 
inquired into is told of it, and don’t you believe he will take his 
money out. It is like an old fellow in Texas, who had sixty thou¬ 
sand dollars in bank and in 1894 during the panic banks began 
to go under everywhere, and he took the sixty thousand dollars 
out and carried it home; the next day he carried it back to hhe 
bank. He wanted it in the bank, for although it was not the safest 
place in the world yet he wanted it there rather than at home 
where it was absolutely unsafe. 


.. ™ ow friend apparently argues that the Tax Assessor and 
the lax Collector will come around and assess more taxes and 
collect more taxes, because the public examiner would point out 
in his report the amount an individual had deposited in that bank 
Is that true of the national banks today? I know one of them 
that is supposed to have two hundred and fifty to three hundred 
thousand dollars, and I think it pays on forty-five or fifty thou¬ 
sand dollars. I do not think the matter of taxes applies any more 
to these institutions after an examination than it did before. 


Now the national banking laws make the individual stockhold¬ 
ers liable for an amount equal to the amount of stock that thev 
have in the bank. This Convention voted that proposition down 
just now. That is a safeguard that the national banking law has 
placed around the depositors in that national banks This Con¬ 
vention however, has voted down a similar proposition to throw 
that safeguard around the State banks. National banks not onlv 
have that safeguard but they have a further safeguard of an ex¬ 
amination by a public examiner. This Convention, having said 
you shall not have the first safeguard for banking institutions, 
then let us have all the safeguards we can get, and let that safe¬ 
guard be a public examiner of all banks, trust companies and bank¬ 
ing institutions or bankers in the State. 



22(10 


OFFICIAL PROCEEDINGS 


It is very clear that the private banking- apparently and the 
State bankers are the ones who are kicking here today. We do 
not find the national banks kicking. As has been said by my friend 
from Greene, they have found the good in this thing, and we big 
depositors, to the amount of five or ten dollars it may be do not 
mind having bank examiners know we have got that five or ten 
dollars in there, but we want it to be safe, or just as near safe as 
the State of Alabama can make it. 

MR. COLEMAN (Greene)—I rise once more in behalf of the 
public interests. There are a great many communities where von 
could not do a National banking business profitably at all, par¬ 
ticularly in agricultural districts. Under the National banking act 
any State bank can be converted into a National bank without 
any trouble. The law is ample, but because of the remoteness 
from commercial centers, and because of the necessity of supplying 
funds to the farmer, the bank, by virtue of the State laws, can 
take security upon his crop, upon his mules, or upon his lands. 
The bank can furnish him money to run his crop, and you cannot 
do that under the National banking system, without evading the 
law, and the State banker would do an honest, straightforward 
business under the State banking law. 

This is the first Convention I have read of, and I read a good 
deal on the subject, where the people of a State did not interfere 
to protect their own institutions. Here the purpose seems to be 
to strike down, as far as possible, your State banks, and elevate 
your National banks. The very purpose of the amendment offer¬ 
ed by the distinguished delegate from Montgomery is looking for¬ 
ward to a time when State banks can do a business upon other 
lines. You could not carry on that kind of a business under the 
National banking system. You could not issue State bonds. Noth¬ 
ing but National bonds would do, and it seems to me it is time to 
call a halt. You now have your State examiner provided for. You 
have now a duty imposed upon State banks, twice a year to furn¬ 
ish a sworn statement, and now you propose to hamper these 
country banks still further. I say, Mr. President, and delegates 
of this Convention, not only is this legislation, but if you desire 
to keep in a satisfactory condition, and perpetuate your State in¬ 
stitutions, it is time to withdraw burdens from them. 

MR. HENDERSON (Pike)—I do not think there is any ne¬ 
cessity of making an exception as to National banks, as proposed 
in the amendment, because the State has no authority over Na¬ 
tional banks in any way. 

Should this State adopt the system, requiring examiners for 
the banks, those examiners could not examine a National bank, 
notwithstanding it were not excepted from this provision. 



CONSTITUTIONAL CONVENTION, 1901 


2201 


Now there seems to be an erroneous idea upon the part of 
some of the members of this Convention as to the purpose of the 
examination of National banks. They are examined to show 
whether or not the officers of the bank have complied with the 
National banking- law, which law prohibits the National banks 
from lending money to any one person— 

MR. MALONE—Do you say that the prime motive is not 
to find out whether the bank is insolvent or not? 

MR. HENDERSON—I mean exactly what I said, that E to 
ascertain whether there is a violation of the National banking law 
by the officers of the National bank. 

That law provides that a National bank shall not lend more 
than one-tenth of its capital stock to any one firm, corporation or 
individual. The examination, in one sense, is for the purpose of 
seeing whether that law is violated. Another provision of the Na¬ 
tional banking law is that a certain percentage of the deposits 
shall be kept on hand in cash. The National bank examiner goes 
to the bank and the very first thing that he does is to tell the 
cashier to hand over the keys to his chest or money safe, and the 
next thing he says is: “Hand me your keys to your bills'- receiv¬ 
able.” The examiner never informs the cashier in advance that 
he has come, and this is for the purpose of keeping the cashier from 
replenishing his cash from other sources, after he finds that the ex¬ 
aminer is in town, and in handing over his keys to the bills receiv¬ 
able it is to prevent him from substituting or swapping notes, in 
order to cover up some error or some mistake or fraud, he is try¬ 
ing to perpetrate upon the government. 

Now we have no State banking law in this State except the 
general provision that persons can associate themselves together 
and organize a bank under the banking law. The State does not 
provide that a State bank shall only lend a certain percentage of 
its money or capital, to any one firm, corporation or individual. 
The bank can absolutely lend all of its money, capital and de¬ 
posits/ to one firm, corporation or individual, and it is not in vio¬ 
lation of any' State law. Then, what is the purpose of the examina¬ 
tion? 

Speaking of the amendment, why should the State seek to in¬ 
vestigate the affairs of a private bank any r more than it should 
seek to investigate the affairs of any other private business? The 
private bank is not operating under a State law, but is operating 
as any other individual conducts his private business, and people 
put their money into private banks, State banks and National 
banks because of the confidence they have, and not because the 
banks are examined. 

As an instance I will read to this Convention some comments 
of the American Banker on the recent failure of the Seventh Na- 


2202 


OFFICIAL PROCEEDINGS 


tional Bank of New York. This is read for the purpose of carry¬ 
ing out my argument, showing that it is not a matter of examina¬ 
tion which causes people to put their money in banks, but simply 
a matter of confidence in the management, confidence in the man¬ 
agers, or because of personal or political influences. 

“In the absence of an official statement from the temporary 
receiver, it is impossible to do more than suggest the possible 
causes of the suspension of the Seventh National Bank. It will be 
recalled that in May, 1899, the control of this institution passed 
from the hands of a body of men who had managed it with the 
utmost conservatism, into the charge of men of quite a different 
type—the pushing, ambitious, enthusiastic type. Among them 
there were several gentlemen whose political associations gave 
promise of public business. Under the new management the de¬ 
posits of the bank rose rapidly. An energetic canvass for interior 
bank accounts steadily increased the resources of the institution 
from that quarter. The president under the new regime was Wil¬ 
liam H. Kimball, the National bank examiner of New York, a man 
of whom it cannot be said that he lacked either knowledge or abil¬ 
ity. The Board of Directors was made up of gentlemen of first- 
rate standing, as their names show. * * * with the forces thus at 
work in the interest of the Seventh National Bank the deposits 
rose in two years from $1,600,000 to $6,500,000.“ 

Now, Mr. President, the condition of the Seventh National 
Bank was discovered not by the examination of an officer, but it 
was because of the inability of the bank to meet its obligations to 
the New York Clearing House on a certain day. In other words 
they delayed settlement, which was not their usual custom. They 
delayed meeting a large draft against them by the Clearing House 
on a certain day. 

MR. MALONE—Isn’t it the fact that the bank failed because 
they loaned one concern, in violation of law, $1,600,000? 

MR. HENDERSON—I will answer that in time. Now be¬ 
cause this bank was late in meeting its obligation for something 
over $1,000,000 through the New York Clearing House upon a par¬ 
ticular day, not because they did not meet it, for they did meet it, 
but because they delayed in meeting it, contrary to their usual cus¬ 
tom, the State bank examiner was sent to make an investigation, 
and when he made his examination he found that this particular 
bank, the Seventh National Bank of New York had loaned one firm 
in the city of New York $1,600,000 when its capital was only $300,- 
000. Under the banking law it should not have loaned this firm 
but $30,000, and in fact it did lend them $1,600,000. I say this to 
show you that it was not primarily because of the examination of 
the officer that it was discovered the bank had violated the law, but 
because he was sent there to examine this bank, the bank having 
failed to meet its obligations, as was its usual custom. 



CONSTITUTIONAL CONVENTION, 1901 


>2itt 


THK PRESIDENT—The time of the gentleman has expired. 

MR. O'NEAL (Lauderdale)—I do not think the purpose of 
this amendment is to strike down the interests of the private 
hanks, hut rather to increase their efficiency and usefulness. Now 
the gentleman says in his argument that the system of examination 
of the National Government for National banks has proven utterly 
inefficient. It is strange to me that if the system which now pre¬ 
vails has been as inefficient as the gentleman claims, that Con¬ 
gress still retains it. 

The experience of every man who has any familiarity with Na¬ 
tional banks shows that it is a safeguard against fraud and cor¬ 
ruption and insolvency. That is all we seek. What is a private 
bank? This amendment just says that a private bank must be put 
in the same category as the incorporated bank. The private bank¬ 
er asks the public to deposit money with him; they invite the 
widow, the orphan, the helpless and ignorant, to come and deposit 
their money with him, and we simply ask that the same safeguards 
and same protection should be accorded to the depositors in a pri¬ 
vate bank, that are guaranteed to the depositors in an incorporated 
bank. The experience of every community shows the necessity of 
this action. In my own town, a bank that did the business of the 
whole valley, that had been insolvent for over twelve months, re¬ 
ceived deposits up to the very hour it closed its doors. If this ex¬ 
amination had been made and the fact that it was utterly insolvent 
had been known thousands of poor, helpless people would have 
been saved from ruin and penury, and yet, as the gentleman from 
Greene says, that banker had the confidence of the entire com¬ 
munity. He was a man of standing and had the confidence of 
the business public. They deposited their money there, on account 
of the implicit confidence in his high character and integrity, and 
knowledge of the business, and yet that bank failed and men de¬ 
posited their money there up to the very last moment. Private 
banks were organized in our communities up there without a dol¬ 
lar of capital, and who became the victims of these institutions? 
Not the shrewd business man, but the ignorant and the unwary, 
the poor working man, and it is our duty to throw safeguards 
around that class of people in this State. That is our purpose. 
The shrewd business man may ascertain the condition of the 
banker, when the bank doors are swung open inviting the public 
to make deposits, but the poor and the ignorant go and make their 
deposits when in fact the bank may at the very time be abso¬ 
lutely insolvent, simply spreading a net to catch the unwary. 1 
say that not a single argument can be, made here in favor of ex¬ 
empting private banks from this examination. The same argu¬ 
ment which applies to an incorporated bank would apply to a pri¬ 
vate bank. 



2204 


OFFICIAL PROCEEDINGS 


MR. COLEMAN (Greene)—Don’t you know that with a pri¬ 
vate association not incorporated, the parties are liable for every 
dollars’ worth of property they have? 

MR. O’NEAL—Yes, of course I know they are liable, but 
they may be insolvent, and if the fact of their insolvency were 
known, the public would not make deposits, and the public would 
not be robbed as is sometimes the case. I have known instance 
after instance where the public was simply robbed, because the 
condition of the bank was unknown. If these reports are made 
and the public are informed of their condition, then we take it out 
of their power to perpetrate a fraud of that character. So the 
principal purpose of these examinations by the national govern¬ 
ment, is not to see that the officers have complied with the laws 
on the subject of banking, but it is to acquaint the public with 
the fact of whether or not the institution is solvent or insolvent. 
Let the private banker make known his resources and then the 
public can determine whether he is solvent or insolvent, and then 
if they do not want to deposit they need not do so, and if thev 
make a deposit they do it with their eyes open. 

MR. COLEMAN (Greene) — Did you ever hear of a Na¬ 
tional Bank Examiner making any report on a bank? 

MR. O’NEAL—He does not make a report, but he makes the 
examination, and he ascertains its condition, he knows if it is in¬ 
solvent or violates the law, and makes it known to the Comp¬ 
troller of the Currency, and if the banking institution its violating 
the law, or if it is insolvent, it is closed, and so if a private insti¬ 
tution is insolvent, it ought to be closed, and closed by the State 
of Alabama. 

MR. deGRAFFENREID—Don’t you know that a National 
Bank Examiner does not pass upon the value of the securities of 
the bank, the notes and other evidences of debt that they hold? 

MR. O’NEAL—Why, I think that the National Bank exam¬ 
ining system can be improved, and ought to be improved, and I 
am satisfied that the legislature of Alabama will improve it. I do 
not think all the virtue and wisdom is in the United States Gov¬ 
ernment. I think the legislature of Alabama, can take advantage 
of the defects, if any exist, in the system now prevailing with ref¬ 
erence to national banks, and they can inaugurate a system more 
perfect in Alabama than that which now prevails under the na¬ 
tional government. 

Before my time expires, I move the previous question on this 
amendment. 

Upon a vote being taken the main question was ordered, and 
upon a further vote the section was adopted. 



CONSTITUTIONAL CONVENTION. 1901 


2205 


MR. FLETCHER—I move that the article be engrossed and 
ordered to a third reading. 

Upon a vote being taken the motion was carried. 

MR. DAVIS (Etowah)—I move that we adjourn. 

THE PRESIDENT—The next order of business will be the 
consideration of the report of the Committee on Legislative De¬ 
partment. 

MR. OATES—As the time is so short before adjournment, 
leaving but a few minutes, I hope the motion made by the gentle¬ 
man to adjourn will prevail, because I do not think anything will 
be gained by entering upon the consideration of the report this 
evening. 

Upon a vote being taken, the Convention adjourned. 

CORRECTION 

The proceedings of the forty-fourth day in seventh column on 
first page, the remarks of Mr. Malone should read as follows: 

Mr. Reynolds is not here, he is at heart with us. It is fair to 
state that a great many in the upper end of his county, which is 
nine miles from the extreme upper end, and sixty from the lower 
end, are not all in favor of it. I made a canvass up there against 
the strongest man in Henry County and I got something like 40 
per cent of his vote in his own beat, but not a majority. 

On first column of second page in the remarks of the same 
gentleman the verbs should be changed from present to past 
tense to make the sentence read as follows: 

As a further illustration of this idea there were five banks in 
the county doing a fair business and they were paying tax only 
on $5,000 on an average. One bank with $50,000 capital was 
paying taxes on $9,000 of property. The reason of this was that 
the sections are so far from the county seat that no one looks 
after it. 

See in remarks of Mr. Sollie on a question of personal priv¬ 
ilege in first column of today’s report. 



2206 


OFFICIAL PROCEEDINGS 


FORTY-SIXTH DAY 


MONTGOMERY, ALA. 

Tuesday, July 16, 1901. 

The Convention met pursuant to adjournment, was called to 
order by the President, and opened with praper by the Rev. Mr. 
C. B. Daniel, as follows: 

Almighty God, we come openly and boldly to a throne of 
mercy to find grace to help in time of need. We beseech Thee 
to bless this Convention in all their deliberations this day. Ac¬ 
cording to our individual necessities let Thy grace come to us this 
day. We ask Thee to come into our heart and see our need exact¬ 
ly, and supply our want out of Thy grace, that we may not be 
hindrances to one another, but helps; that we may throw no cloud 
upon each others path, but all the possible sunshine and joy. Help 
us to “bear one anothers burdens, and so fulfill the law of Christ.” 
In our prayers we would remember our loved ones at home, the 
sick, the weary shut up with pain, the poor, the desolate, the feeble, 
the infirm, the friendless. The Lord’s blessings be upon this city, 
this State, the whole earth—its nations and peoples and tongues 
and languages. We ask these blessings through the merits of our 
Lord and Savior, Jesus Christ. Amen. 

Upon the call of the roll 120 delegates responded to their 
names. 

Leaves of absence were granted as follows: Mr. Ashcraft, to¬ 
day and until noon tomorrow; Mr. MacA. Smith for today; Mr. 
Graham (Talladega) for today; indefinite leave for Mr. Beavers 
on account of sickness. 

Mr. Cobb (Macon) here took the chair. 

THE PRESIDENT PRO TEM—The secretary will call the 
roll of delegates for the introduction of ordinances, resolutions, 
etc. 


MR. deGRAFFENREID—I move that the call of the roll this 
morning for the introduction of ordinances be dispensed with, and 
that the rules be suspended for the purpose of making that mo¬ 
tion. 


MR. SAMFORD (Pike)—Before that is put I ask unanimous 
consent to introduce a short resolution and have it referred. 

The consent was given and the resolution was read as follows: 

Resolution No. 246: 



CONSTITUTIONAL CONVENTION, 1901 


2207 


Resolved, That the General Assembly of this State is hereby 
instructed at its next session to reduce the tag tax on fertilizers 
to an amount not to exceed 10 cents per ton. 

MR. SAMFORD (Pike)—I ask that the resolution be referred 
to the Committee on Amending the Constitution and Miscellane¬ 
ous Provisions. 

And the resolution was so referred. 

Upon a vote being taken the rules were suspended and the 
call of the roll of delegates dispensed with. 

MR. KNOX—Mr. President, I desire to make a report for the 
Committee on Rules. 

The same was read as follows: 

Resolution No. 247, by Committee on Rules : 

Resolved, That the report of the Committee on Suffrage be 
taken up for consideration by the Convention immediately after 
the reading of the Journal on Tuesday, July 23d, unless sooner 
reached in its regular order; provided that if the Convention on 
that day has under consideration the report of any other standing 
committee such report shall be laid aside and shall be again taken 
up as soon as the article on Suffrage and Elections has been dis¬ 
posed of. 

MR. KNOX—The resolution just offered is in accordance 
with the action of the Democratic caucus by which this matter 
was considered, and the Committee on Rules direct me to report 
that resolution to carry their action into effect. I therefore move 
the adoption of the resolution, and upon that I move the previous 
question. 

Upon a vote being taken the main question was ordered, and 
upon a further vote the resolution was adopted. 

The report of the Committee on Journal was read: 

MR. BROWNE—I desire to call attention to an error in the 
Journal. Mr. Banks is shown to have voted no on a motion made 
by me to lay upon the table the minority report— 

MR. KIRKLAND—I rise to a point of order. The question 
before the House is the adoption or rejection of the report of the 
Committee on the Journal. 

MR. BROWNE—I rise for the purpose of showing that the 
Journal is incorrect. 

MR. KIRKLAND—I misunderstood the gentleman from Tal¬ 
ladega. 



2208 


OFFICIAL PROCEEDINGS 


MR. BROWNE—The Journal shows that Mr. Banks voted 
no upon the motion made by me to lay upon the table the minori¬ 
ty report in the Shelby matter. Mr. Banks is not present, but he 
did vote no, and immediately thereafter changed his vote to aye. 
I call on the gentleman from Calhoun (Mr. Martin) to substan¬ 
tiate my statement, as he sat next to him. Is that not correct? 

MR. KIRKLAND (Dale)—I cannot state. I was not here 
and do not know whether that was the case or not, but I was in¬ 
formed by Mr. Julian, the secretary, that the report of the Com¬ 
mittee on the Journal is correct, and the Journal itself is correct 
and that the gentleman, Mr. Banks, I believe it is, would answer 
that the Journal is in fact correct. 

MR. BROWNE — I state, Mr. President, that I distinctly 
heard the gentleman vote from my seat over here. He did vote 
no, and the secretary could not hear, because he went on with the 
calling* of other names, but Mr. Banks immediately afterwards 
said I voted aye, and the gentleman from Calhoun, Mr. Martin, 
who was sitting close to him, can coroborrate my statement. 

MR. MARTIN—That is my recollection of the matter. 

MR. BROWNE—I do not desire to change his vote, but 1 
desire the Journal to speak the truth. He did change his vote 
from no to aye, and the secretary did not catch it as he was calling 
the roll. 

MR. deGRAFFENREID—If I am in order I move that the 
matter as to how Mr. Banks voted be deferred to some other time 
when Mr. Banks is present, and he then be allowed to say how he 
did vote upon that question. 

MR. BROWNE—I am perfectly willing to that, so the Journal 
is not approved as it stands. 

THE PRESIDENT PRO TEM. — The question is on the 
adoption of the report of the Committee on the Journal. 

Upon a vote being taken the report was adopted. 

The President here resumed the chair. 

MR. LONG (Butler)—I rise to a question of personal privi- 

lege- 

THE PRESIDENT—The gentleman will state the question 
of privilege. 

MR. LONG (Butler)—In the stenographic report of yesterday 
the stenographer has me voting no on this question. I will state 
that I was not in the hall at the time and did not vote at all. If I 
had been here I would have noted no and I am perfectly satisfied 
with the report as given, but I do not know at what future time 



CONSTITUTIONAL CONVKNTION. 1901 


2209 


the stenographer may see fit to use my proxy and vote me, and 
I object to his voting me without my knowledge and consent. 

MR. KIRKLAND—1 rise to a question of personal privilege. 

THE PRESIDENT—The gentleman will state the question 
of privilege. 

MR. KIRKLAND—On last Saturday, as the roll of this con¬ 
vention will show, I was not present. 1 expect it will show that 
I was not present by reason of leave that I had obtained from this 
Convention. At that time the consideration of the report of the 
Committee on State and County Boundaries was up for consid¬ 
eration, and in the course of the debate, the gentleman from Hen¬ 
ry offered a resolution, amending the report of that Committee, 
and in his address to this convention, stated that I had assisted 
in preparing that resolution. During the course of the debate be¬ 
fore this Convention the gentleman from Coffee, whom I take it 
assumed to act for the constituency that I represent, also made 
the same assertion that I was present and assisted in the prapara- 
tion of that resolution. I deny before this Convention, that I had 
any connection whatever with the preparation of the resolution, 
but if I had been here I state I would have voted for its adoption. 
I just want the record to show that is the case. I did not help 
to prepare it. I was in favor of the motion and would have voted 
for it, if I had been here, and I only want the record to show that. 
Further I want to state that I understand it has been said that 
I left because of this matter. I do not know what gentleman on 
the floor has done it but it has been brought to me that it has been 
charged by members of the Convention, that I left here to dodge 
this issue. I state Mr. President that I have never yet been known 
to dodge any issue. I always do my fighting open and above 
board, where every man may see and know what I do, and mav 
always be able to place his finger upon me, and always find me 
contending for what I conceive to be my duty. Tf I had been here. 
I repeat I would have voted for this resolution, and I do not see 
how that can be said to be dodging the question. 

MR. MALONE—I rise to a question of personal privilege. 

MR. ROGERS (Sumter)—I pursuance of the motion which 
I made on yesterday that I would move a reconsideration todav of 
Section 8 of the Article on Banks and Banking. I would be pleased 
to have the clerk to read it. 

The Chair recognized the gentleman from Henry. 

MR. MALONE—I want to explain that I made the statement 
in the language quoted in the stenographic report, and I want to 
say that I went to Mr. Kirkland and said that we did not know, 
judging by the action of the Convention on these former reports, 
what the action of the Convention will be, and I always like to be 



2210 


OFFICIAL PROCEKI>1 XT.S 


prepared for a defeat, and want to draw up a bill to offer in the 
event we get beat. He said he did not want to have anything to 
do with establishing the lines down there, and I said let me put in 
a provision that these lines are temporary, and let us make the 
law as elastic as possible for legislation. He said I think there 
is some merit in that. I won’t say what l will do, but you go and 
draw up a resolution and bring it to me and I will look over it. 
I went off and drew up the identical resolution, the very paper, 
and carried it back to Mr. Kirkland, and he said I think that covers 
the ground and it is all right. Now as far as dodging the question, 
it is the reverse. I stated in advance to Mr. Kirkland, and had 
given him my word that I would not attempt to do anything, that 
he could feel assured that no advantage would be taken"of him and 
instead of dodging the question it was a question of confidence 
in carrying out the agreement. I believe those are about the con¬ 
ditions. 

MR. KIRKLAND—I think that is about right. I think you 
understood that I had agreed to the drawing up of the resolution, 
but it \vas the statement in the stenographic report that I assisted 
in drawing the resolution. I deny that I assisted in drawing it. 

MR. MALONE—I expect that I am to blame for that, but 
it took place just about as you and I agree now. 

MR. BANKS—I understood since I came into the hall that I 
am recorded as voting no on the proposition to table the minority 
report of the Committee on County Boundaries. If the President 
remembers, I called his attention to the mistake I made at the 
time, and asked to have my vote changed. 

THE PRESIDENT—The Chair distinctly heard the correc¬ 
tion of the gentleman from Russell, but the Secretary, in calling 
the roll, his mind being upon that, failed to hear the remark of the 
gentleman. The correction will be made. 

MR. ROGERS (Sumter)—The question now under considera¬ 
tion is a motion to reconsider Section 8 of the article on Banks and 
Banking, which I will have the clerk to read. 

The section was read as follows: 

Sec. 8. The General Assembly shall by appropriate laws, pro¬ 
vide for the examination by some" public officer, of all banks and 
banking institutions and trust companies engaged in banking busi¬ 
ness in this State. And each of such banking companies or in¬ 
stitutions shall through its president or such other officer as the 
General Assembly may designate under oath make a report of its 
resources and liabilities at least twice a year. 

Now Mr. President, because there is a system of examination 
of national banks operating in the State of Alabama, this provi- 



CONSTITUTIONAL CONVKNTION, m\ 


221 \ 


sion has upon its face the appearance of being just, but the ex¬ 
amination made of national banks and the report which goes only 
to the Comptroller of the Currency at Washington, bears no re¬ 
semblance to this system of police espionage which you propose 
to place upon the private institutions of the State of Alabama. Yes¬ 
terday this discussion took something of a personal nature, as a 
question between the rights of the national bank and the private? 
bankers who occupied seats on this floor. That was unfortunate 
because we are apt to judge men from our own mean natures or 
from the bounty of our virtues. Now I wish to say in this connec¬ 
tion, that I have no connection whatever with any bank, national. 
State or private, in the State of Alabama, I am so unfortunate at 
this time, gentlemen, as to not even have any deposits in any of 
the banks of the State of Alabama, but I am making this proposi¬ 
tion because I see the result that it will inevitably have upon the 
private banking institutions of the State. Whenever you clothe 
the Governor, or any other authority in the State of Alabama, with 
the power to send a man out all over the State to examine into the 
private affairs of its citizens, you give him the power to strike 
down that institution, because when that report is submitted to 
him, if he chooses to do so, and who doubts but what in instances 
he will choose to do so, submit this report to the tax collectors of 
the State of Alabama, and they will thereby be enabled to jump 
on the deposits of citizens in this bank. 

Gentlemen, it is unfortunate in the State of Alabama that we 
have a great many citizens who have money who try to escape 
taxation, but gentlemen a great many of us are like Tom L. John¬ 
son. We fight for principles when, they are not in existence, but 
we have got to do business in accordance with human nature as 
we find it, and not like we would like to make it. So gentlemen, 
if you do have this examination of State Banks, you will inevita¬ 
bly drive the private banking institutions of the State out of busi¬ 
ness, and the State banks will change their charters and go into 
the national banking system, because it is a very easy matter to 
make such change. Do not deceive yourselves at all with the idea 
that this system of examination bears any resemblance to the 
system of examination of national banks in this State. They are 
just as different as night is from day. In one case the govern¬ 
ment of the United States sends an examiner, who look into the 
solvency of the institution and reports to the Comptroller of the 
Currency at Washington. In the other case you send a man who 
takes up the private affairs of the banker or banking institution, 
and find out the number and amount of deposits in the bank, and 
submits it to the Governor. We have no laws upon the subject 
of banking institutions in the State of Alabama, except a general 
provision that banks may constitute themselves into corporations 
to do business. Then what is the sense of putting this ordinance 



2212 


OFFICIAL PROCEEDINGS 


in there, unless you connect it with the general system? I submit 
that this is purely a legislative matter, and should be left to the 
Legislature of the State of Alabama. 

MR. REESE—Will the gentleman allow a question? 

MR. ROGERS (Sumter)—\\ ith the greatest pleasure. 

MR. REESE \\ ould not it be a good idea to make the coun¬ 
ty tax commissioner ex officio bank examiner? 

MR. ROGERS (Sumter)—If you want to have it so that a 
man can go into the private affairs of everybody because he is an 
officer, it does not make any difference what* particular officer 
is clothed with this power. You might give it to the Sheriff or the 
Probate Judge, or to any other officer. I was going to say Mr. 
President, something has been said about arraving influences 
against the adoption of this Constitution— 

AIR. BAREMEED I would like to ask the gentleman if a 
man has a thousand dollars on deposit in a bank and a man has 
forty acres of land, why tax his land out here, and allow the man 
with the thousand dollars to escape taxation? 

MR. ROGERS (Sumter)—I am afraid that the gentleman 
from Monroe is playing to the galleries this morning. ' I am not 
in favor of the thousand dollars escaping taxation, but I say this, 
if you tax it in a State bank, or a private bank, the man will with¬ 
draw it and put it in the National hank, where it will escape taxa¬ 
tion. That is the proposition and not a proposition that anybody 
that has got money should escape taxation. 

I was going on to say, it seems to me that we have said a 
great deal in this Convention here about arraying influences 
against the adoption of this Constitution. I am *not in favor of 
keeping out, or putting anything into this Constitution merely 
upon grounds of expediency, but, Mr. President, we will have to 
submit this instrument to the people of Alabama for ratification 
and I tell you you can look well towards putting any proposition 
in there which will submit the citizens of this State to annoyance. 
What private bank is going to gladly and willingly and cheerfully 
accept a provision which he knows is going to put his competitor 
in the National banking business on the opposite side of the street 
to him at a great advantage? Why, in the city of Tuscaloosa, 
where one of the members of this committee resides, who favors 
this report, there is an institution which has been established there 
for 50 years; it is a private banking institution, and if this ma¬ 
chinery is put into operation, it will work greatly to the disad¬ 
vantage of that private institution. Down in the city of Dothan, if 
you please, there are two gentlemen, one who has iust retired from 
the State banking business, and gone into the National banking 
business, and his competitor across the way was going to look with 



CONSTITUTIONAL CONVENTION. 1901 


2213 


approval and glad welcome upon a provision which this gentleman 
fought himself when he was in that business, and now approves r 
l tell you you are going outside the rights of this Convention. We 
are going into the Legislative Department, and I hope that the 
Convention will reconsider the proposition, which at least bears 
all the ear marks of private interest which is desired to be per¬ 
petuated in this Constitution, the great fundamental law of this 
State. 

MR. O'NEAL (Lauderdale) — 'The gentleman from Sumter 
says this is purely a legislative matter. If this is a matter entire¬ 
ly within the domain of the Legislature, it is very singular that 
body has never given the people of Alabama anv relief in reference 
to this important question. We know that for over a quarter of 
a century there has absolutely been no examination of private 
banks in this State. We know that one reason that private banks 
have not prospered in Alabama is due to the fact that there is ab¬ 
solutely no protection afforded to the depositors in those insti¬ 
tutions. 

MR. ROGERS (Sumter)—If the gentleman will permit an in¬ 
terruption, the reason why National banks have succeeded in this 
State as opposed to the private banking institutions, is because the* 
government of the United States permits the bonds of the United 
States to draw interest, while deposited for security, and he there¬ 
by gets double interest upon his money. 

MR. O'NEAL—Yes, but the private banks have a great many 
powers which the National banks cannot exercise. They can lend 
money on bonds and securities which are absolutely prohibited to 
National banks, and I say I but voice the sentiment of every citi¬ 
zen of the State, who has had connection with these institutions, 
that sufficient safeguards are not thrown around the deposits, and 
those who have dealings with those institution— 

Mr. deGraffenreid addressed the chair. 

THE PRESIDENT—Does the gentleman yield to the gentle¬ 
man from Hale? 

MR. O'NEIL—I will in a moment. 1 cannot make an argu¬ 
ment and answer questions every second. Let me finish the argu¬ 
ment. 

Now suppose an effort is made in the Legislature to create 
a bank examiner, what is the result? The result is the managers 
of these institutions flock to the Legislature, and by their influ¬ 
ence prevent any action, whereas the depositors, the parties that 
are interested, will not take the trouble to come here and make 
any demands on the Legislature. 



2214 


OFFICIAL PR(>CKK1 )I \LS 


Now an institution of that kind, if it is insolvent, can still con¬ 
tinue business. I remember an instance of that kind. A private 
bank after the bank had failed, refused to pay check after check, 
though its doors were open, and they were ready to receive monev 
from any depositor, but absolutely declined to pay any checks 
that might be presented. Why, under the system that prevails 
in the government service of the United States, that would not he 
tolerated a moment. After a bank becomes insolvent it is put in 
the hands of a receiver. 

The gentleman says that this will he an unpopular matter 
with the people of Alabama. That it will array opposition to the 
ratification of the Constitution. In my judgment the most popu¬ 
lar thing we could do if we look at it purely from that standpoint, 
would be to say to the people of Alabama you may deposit your 
money in private banks and you shall enjoy the same safeguards 
and protection that are given to depositors in National institution.-. 
Say to those who deposit their little mites in these private banks, 
because in many places there are no banking institutions, you have 
a right to go and read the papers and ascertain the condition of 
the institution, whether it is solvent or insolvent, and it shall no 
longer be a net to draw in the unwary, the ignorant and the poor. 

Now I have no connection with a bank of any kind. State or 
National. The only connection I have unfortunately is to fre¬ 
quently be on the wrong side of the ledger, but this is a matter 
of principle, and I think that a measure ot this kind is demanded 
by the people of Alabama. I think a measure of this kind will go 
far towards letting the people of Alabama understand that we are 
here to protect the great masses of people, uninfluenced by power, 
or by any institutions of this kind. W hy the gentleman intimates 
that if we undertake to pass this measure, if we undertake to sav 
that these institutions must be examined, it will array all these 
private institutions against the ratification of the Constitution. f 
am sure that argument will not prevail with this Convention. Are 
we to truckle to any class of people in this State. Are we to falter 
in the discharge of our honest duty, because it may array the 
moneyed classes against the ratification of this Constitution? When 
we pander to the moneyed classes to an extent that we do injus¬ 
tice to the great masses of the people in Alabama, then we ought in 
be condemned. YY hy the gentleman says it will he expensive 1 and 
the State Examiners— 

MR. REESE Does the gentleman think it wise or expedient 
that we should multiply issues which might become unpopular 
and might work against the ratification of this Constitution? 

MR. O NEAL—No, I do not think it wise to multiply issues. 
\Ye are not multiplying issues. Wv are simply passing such a 
bank law as exists in every other State almost. YY 7 e simply pass a 



CONSTITUTIONAL CONVKNTION. 1901 


2215 


law to furnish protection to the public, and it is our duty to do 
that. We do not intend to do any injustice to any private hank, 
or any private banking* institution. If I believed, with the gentle¬ 
man from Sumter, that the effect of this law would be to injure 
any of these institutions, I would certainly oppose it, but I think 
he is under a misapprehension. I think that such legislation as 
this, or such a Constitutional provision, would go far towards re¬ 
storing the confidence of the public in such institutions, and mak¬ 
ing them strong and powerful in Alabama. That is my honest 
judgment. 

Now in reference to the matter of expense. We have in this 
State a number of examiners, appointed by the Governor. I Ex¬ 
aminers who are skilled accountants, and whose business it is to 
examine the State and State officials. Why could not these ex¬ 
aminers perform these duties without any additional expense? It 
could be done without a dollar of expense to the State. The State 
is now paying these examiners- 

MR. ROGERS (Sumter)--I have not said anything about ex¬ 
pense. 

MR. O’NEAL (Lauderdale)—The argument has been made 
here in opposition to this section that it would entail useless ex¬ 
pense, unnecessary expense upon the people of Alabama, and cre¬ 
ate a number of unnecessary offices. I say in answer to that argu¬ 
ment, that the bank examiners appointed now by the Governor, 
receiving a salary, could be ordered by him to make an examina¬ 
tion without a dollar's addditional cost to the people of Alabama. 

THE PRESIDENT—The gentleman's time has expired. 

MR. FLETCHER — The purpose of the Committee in the 
adoption of that Section was the protection of the people. We 
thought as a matter of fact that private individuals where confi¬ 
dence was reposed in them by people depositing money with them 
would certainly have no objection to making an exhibit of the fi¬ 
delity and good faith with which they acted in reference to their 
money. We do not propose to take advantage of any private in¬ 
stitution in the State of Alabama, nor had we any purpose to re¬ 
flect on any private banking institution of Alabama. Our onlv 
purpose was for the protection of the people. Private banks, like 
public ones, ought not to have any objections to making an ex¬ 
hibit to the people who have had confidence in them and who have 
placed their money with them. Now, Mr. President, this matter 
has consumed enough of the time of this Convention and it was 
fully discussed on yesterday and adopted by the Convention, and 
I move to lay the motion to reconsider on the table. 

MR. ROGERS (Sumter)—Under a proposition to lay upon 
the table as the mover of this resolution, have I not a right to 
close? 




2216 


OFFICIAL PROCEEDINGS 


THE PRESIDENT—The question is upon the motion of the 
gentleman from Madison to lay upon the table the motion to re¬ 
consider. As many as favor the motion to table will say aye. 
and those opposed no. It seems to the Chair the ayes have it,-- 
the ayes have it. 

MR. ROGERS—Division. 

MR. O’NEAL—I make the point of order that the gentleman 
did not make a call for a division until the President had stated 
that the ayes had it,—that was before the call for division was 
made. 

MR. WILLIAMS (Marengo) — l hope the Chair will allow the 
division. 

MR. ROGERS—I call for a division and await the pleasure of 
the Chair; it is purely for the Chair to decide; and I am perfectly 
willing to repose in the justice of the Chair without any inter¬ 
ference from you gentlemen on the other side. 

THE PRESIDENT—The Chair paused after announcing that 
it seemed to the Chair that the ayes had it, and looked in the di¬ 
rection of the gentlemen from Sumter, supposing that probably 
a division might be called for. The gentleman did not rise, and 
the Chair thereupon made the announcement of the Result, 

MR. GRANT—I called for a division before the decision was 
made. 

MR. O’NEAL—I withdraw my point of order. 

THE PRESIDENT—The Chair will submit the question of 
a division to the Convention. 

A vote being taken there were fifty-five ayes to forty-three 
noes and the motion to table prevailed. 

MR. WILSON (Washington)—I regret to recur to a matter 
that has been so decidedly settled by this Convention, and it is not 
for the purpose of reconsidering or in any manner changing the 
vote on the main question, but simply to offer an amendment that 
I concede to he just, equitable and fair. 

THE PRESIDENT—For what purpose does the gentleman 
rise? 

MR. WILSON—I rise to move a reconsideration of the vote 
by which Section 6 of the article on State and County Boundaries 
was adopted yesterday. 

THE PRESIDENT—Did the gentleman vote in favor of it? 

MR. WILSON—Yes, sir, the gentleman did for that purpose. 



CONSTITUTIONAL CONVENTION, 1901 


2217 


THE PRESIDENT—The question will be upon tlie motion 
to reconsider the vote by which this Convention adopted the re¬ 
port of the Committee on State and County Boundaries, Section 6. 

MR. WILSON—I am not here to criticise the action of this 
Convention on yesterday in annulling the act providing for the 
removal of the court house of Shelby county, on the contrary, I 
think in the main that action is correct, on the ground that I con¬ 
sider it against public policy to take from a people the right of a 
voice in these matters, but as this Convention has set out to do 
the fair thing, I believe that they will remove all doubt on the 
proposition that they mean in fact and in truth to do what is fair 
and proper. Now, Mr. President, in Section 6, as adopted, relative 
to that Shelby county matter, we have put ourselves in the atti¬ 
tude of correcting the errors of the Legislature in order that jus¬ 
tice might be done. Let us not go so straight up that we will 
lean the other way. The proposition I refer to is simply this, there 
is a provision in Section 6 as reported and as adopted that the 
court house shall remain at Columbiana until removed by a vote 
of the people under the provisions of an act approved February 
9, and the act amendatory thereto of February 20, 1899. Now, 
Mr. President, I do not propose to go into the motives of either 
of the parties to this contest. That has been settled, but I do say, 
and I say that it does not take any very learned lawyer to see and 
understand the proposition, that it is clearly within the power of 
the Commissioners of Shelby county to issue their warrants and 
erect a $50,000 court house at Columbiana before the people of 
Shelby county have a voice in the matter, if they see fit to do so. I 
don’t mean to charge that they will do this at all, but I simply say 
that it is clearly within the power of that body to do it, and as we 
have stepped in and said to one side you shall not move this court 
house until the people have had a voice in the matter, then I say it 
is only fair to say to the other side that neither shall you erect 
an expensive court house at Columbiana until the people of Shelby 
county shall have had a voice by a vote of the qualified electors of 
that county. Mr. President, for this reason, and for no other, I ask 
this Convention to reconsider that vote, and if that vote is recon¬ 
sidered I will offer this amendment : “Amend Section 6 by adding 
the following: 

“Provided further, that no new court house shall be erected at 
Calera or Columbiana unless the question has been submitted to a 
vote of the qualified electors of Shelby county within the time and 
under the provisions of an act to provide for the permanent loca¬ 
tion of the county seat of Shelby county, approved February 9, 
1899, and an act amendatory thereto approved February 20, 1899.” 

MR. SMITH (Mobile)—I voted in favor of the report of the 
committee. I am satisfied from the investigation made by the 
committee that in fact and in truth no act of the General Assem- 



OFFICIAL PROCKF.m XC.S 


11 18 


bly was passed authorizing the removal of this court house, and I 
am satisfied from the report of that committee, and what I heard 
in regard to that matter, that it was made to appear that there 
was such an act of removal simply by virtue of fraud and, there¬ 
fore, although I was opposed to introducing such matters, which 
l considered largely legislative in the Constitution, yet 1 deemed 
this to be so extreme a case as justified us in voting in favor of tin- 
report of the committee. 1 have no regrets whatever upon the sub¬ 
ject, if I had it to do over again. I should certainly vote in favor of 
that report. Hut the suggestion now comes that an advantage 
will be taken of the delay which we have made in thi> matter in 
the interest of justice, and that in the heat of the struggle and in 
the feeling of injustice that has been done to Columbiana, they will 
feel justified in taking almost any measure — 

MR. YVILS( )N--“Could” be taken, not “will be. 

MR. SMITH—I am speaking for myself. There is a feeling 
that they would be justified in taking almost any steps in order 
to prevent the people who had ill treated them and fraudulently 
in regard to this matter, and that they would feel justified in do¬ 
ing it under the circumstances which exist, when they would not 
take that step under other circumstances, and, in order to defeat 
the people of Calera, should they have a majority of the countv 
in their favor, they might go to work and erect expensive buildings 
and thereby put a penalty upon the removal if it should happen that 
the county was in favor of it, and that Hoard would simply shift 
part of the responsibility from one shoulder to another, to take tin- 
benefits of a fraud which the report of the committee says was per¬ 
petrated by those interested in Calera, and afford an opportunity 
to those interested in Columbiana to perpetrate, not to the same 
extent, but a similar fraud, so far as my view goes, in the same 
controversy, I am opposed to giving either of these parties am 
undue advantages in this controversy, and I think, therefore, that 
now that we have made the delay, now that we have corrected the 
fraud that was perpetrated in the Legislature, we ought to tie the 
hands of both parties until a vote can he had in the county, and 
the people can say where they want the court house erected. The 
amendment which the gentleman showed me this morning seems 
to be fair, and seems to carry out that purpose, as it merely re¬ 
stricts the erection of buildings at either of these controverted 
points until the matter can he determined by the people. I am in 
favor of reconsideration for the purpose of considering that amend¬ 
ment, and when introduced, 1 shall again vote for the report of tin- 
committee. 

MR. GRANT (Calhoun) — 1 voted for this proposition from 
a broader point of view than seems to be entertained by the gen¬ 
tleman from Mobile. I want to say to this Convention frankly 
that if I had supposed that we were here settling a mere court 



CONSTITUTIONAL CON VKNTIOX. m 1 


>>V) 


house controversy between Calera and Columbiana, that I would 
have voted against the proposition to put this thing in the Con¬ 
stitution. 1 voted for the proposition upon the ground that a 
fraud had been perpetrated upon the whole State of Alabama, and 
that the Legislature, the highest law-making body of the people, 
had been outraged in the passage of the bill. Now, if we are to 
descend from that position to arrange the details of a settlement 
between these two villages as to whether or not the court house 
should ultimately go to one or the other, I think we have left the 
high ground upon which we acted. Now, I don't think, Mr. 
President, that if you would put the proposition of a local measure 
before this body that it would have any consideration whatever, 
no matter what the merits of the case were. The sole considera¬ 
tion to my mind that governed this body was that here a fraud 
had been put upon the whole people of the State of Alabama, and 
that from that fact it became a State question, and we set a good 
example—rather, we put a peremptory mandamus against opera 
lions of this kind in legislation any more. Now, if we reconsider 
this question and begin to arrange the details as to whether the 
Commissioners' Court of Shelby County may erect a court house 
at Columbiana, or may not, or what the people of Calera have 
done, we descend from the mountain the altitude of our position, 
descend to the merest trivalities of detail and get down to local 
legislation in fact, and T, therefore, am opposed to a reconsidera¬ 
tion. 

MR. deORAKFKNRKII)—May 1 ask the gentleman a ques¬ 
tion before he takes his seat? 

THE PRKS11)KNT— Will the gentleman permit a question? 

MR. GRANT— Yes, sir. 

MR. deORAM- ENREI1)—Isn t it a tact that this Conven¬ 
tion has already provided in another article that no countv can 
issue bonds without a vote of the people? 

MR. GRANT f think so. 

M R. deGRA KKKNRK1J)- -Wouldn't it, therefore, be impos¬ 
sible for Shelby County to erect a court house anywhere without 
borrowing- money? 

MR. GRANT— 1 think so. 

MR. WILSON ( Washington) Is it not a fact that the Coun¬ 
ty Commissioners in any county have a right to issue their war¬ 
rants to any amount? 

MR. GRANT-—I don't know about that. 

MR. WILSON -1 would like to state for the gentleman's in¬ 
formation that in my county of Washington, we have just built 




2220 


OFFICIAL PROCEEDINGS 


a $5,000 jail without any bonds—on warrants only. And isn’t it 
a fact that this provision the gentleman from Hale is talking about 
is not yet a law and will not become a law until this Constitution 
is ratified by the people of Alabama. 

MR. COLEMAN (Greene)—I voted against the adoption of 
this section upon the ground that I thought the matter rightly be¬ 
longed to the Legislature. I rise now for the purpose of calling 
attention to a construction that might be placed upon the section. 
Some may think it rather far-fetched or technical, but nevertheless 
it admits of an argument, and I am not prepared to say that this 
section goes too far in its present shape. I would vote for the re¬ 
consideration that it might be amended, and I desire to call the at¬ 
tention of the delegates to the reading of this section: ‘Provided, 
that the county site of Shelby County, in this State, shall be and 
remain at Columbiana unless removed by vote of the people as pro¬ 
vided for in an act entitled ‘An act to provide for the permanent 
location of the county site of Shelby County by a vote of the quali¬ 
fied electors of said county, approved, the 9th of February, 1899, 
and an act amendatory thereto, approved February 20th, 1899, or 
by an election held under the provision of this article.” Now 
when the court house is removed as provided by the act of 1899 
and amendatory act thereto, it can never be removed at any time 
in the future, however much it may be desired to be removed, un¬ 
less by an election held under the provisions of this article. Now 
I will invite the gentleman’s attention to show me where there 
is any provision in this article under which an election can be held. 
If it had read “or by an election held under the law passed by the 
legislature in pursuance of carrying out the provisions of this 
article” it would meet the question, but when it says it cannot be 
removed except by the act of February, 1899, at all, or by an elec¬ 
tion held under the provisions of this article, and there is no pro¬ 
vision in this article providing for an election, I cannot see, but 
what we are running some risk. That is the only purpose for 
which I would vote for the reconsideration—that it might not re¬ 
main there always. 

MR. BROWN (Talladega)—I submit that the Committee used 
the proper language when they said “or held under the provisions 
of this article.” The provision of the article is, that by law it mav 
be so arranged that they can have that election. 

MR. COLEMAN—Will you please point out where it is? 

MR. BROWNE—No county seat shall be removed except by 
a two-thirds vote of the qualified electors in said county.” That 
does not carry itself into operation, but the legislature must carry 
it into operation, and when the legislature enacts a law, it is in 
conformity with that provision. 

MR. COLEMAN—That is the very point I made, if you will 
amend it. 



CONSTITUTIONAL CONVENTION, 1901 


2221 


MR. BROWNE—-It is, as the gentleman said, very far fetch¬ 
ed; One of the provisions of this article is that it must be by two- 
thirds, which is now changed to a bare majority. In answer to 
the suggestion made by the gentleman from Calhoun, I thought, 
Mr. President, that all lawyers in this assembly knew that the 
county could not issue bonds except by direct authority of legis- 
lation—that is the law. 

MR. WILSON—And did you think that all the lawyers knew 
that the commissioners could not issue warrants? 

MR. BROWNE — The gentleman did not ask in regard to 
warrants. 

MR. WILSON—I beg pardon, I did. 

MR. BROWNE You may have done so afterwards, but you 
bonds. There is no provision in existing law allowing 
bhelby County to issue any bonds, and therefore they could not 
bund a $50,000 court house. There was a law passed in this bill 
allowing the Commissioners of Calera to issue $35,000 of bonds 
which this Convention has wiped out. Now the Committee left 
it s°, if they saw fit at any time before the expiration of the law 
passed two and a half years ago, can within thirty days hold that 
election, and in the name of Heaven do the gentlemen fear that 
j e Columbiana people can build a $50,000 court house within thirtv 
days and deprive them of the right under that election of two years 
ago. The only reason the Committee had in leaving that provision 
in here was so they could hold the election under the law of three 
years ago, because the law provided for a majority vote to remove 
the court house, where the Committee required a two-thirds ma¬ 
jority, but now that has been amended by this Convention, so 
that at any time in the future ten years, as well as within the time 
prescribed by the other law of three years ago, they can move the 
court house from Columbiana to Calera or anywhere else by a bare 
majority of the people. 

MR. THOMPSON (Bibb)—On behalf of the Committee I 
desire to say just a few words on this subject. The argument 
made by the distinguished gentleman from Greene has been fullv 
met * . h e words as used by the Committee in this proviso are 
unambiguous, plain and simple, and we have provided that that 
court house question may be settled by this act which I have before 
me, and under that act they can have their election upon thirtv 
days notice, and within thirty-one days hold their election The 
matter is now tied up in the courts, nothing can be done prior to 
the ratification of this Constitution, if the Calera people want an 
election they can vote under the act approved February 9, 1899. 

. t ^ ie * r °. wn ac L drawn up by their own representative, that 

is all the security that may be required. Doubtless other gentlemen 
may not be informed of some of the provisions of that act. In 



OFFICIAL P ROC KK1 >IX CS 


)>>? 


their own act. passed by the people of Calera, there is a proviso 
that they did not like the sound of their own production, however, 
it provides for the deposit of a sum of money as a guaranty before 
they call that election. No wonder they would like to get that 
proviso out. I think sufficient time of the Convention has been 
taken up, and I move to lay the motion to reconsider on the table. 

MR. BEDHOW—On that I call for the ayes and noes. 

The call was not sustained. 

The question then recurred on the motion to table, which was 
adopted by 62 ayes and 22 noes. 

MR. REESE—I ask unanimous consent to introduce a short 
resolution relative to Senator Pugh. 

Unanimous consent was recorded, and the resolution was read 
by the Clerk as follows: 

Resolution 248, by Mr. Reese: 

Whereas, Our distinguished citizen and statesman, the Hon. 
James L. Pugh, now lies upon a bed of sickness. 

Resolved, by the people of Alabama in Constitutional Con¬ 
vention assembled. That the sympathy of the Convention is ex¬ 
tended to our valued citizen, together with its hope for his speedy 
recovery. 

MR. REESE—I move the suspension of the rules so that 
resolution be placed upon its immediate passage. 

The motion to suspend the rules was carried. 

MR. REESE—f move the adoption of the resolution bv a 
rising vote. 

The resolution was adopted unanimously on a rising vote. 

THE PRESIDENT—The next order of business will be the 
special order which is consideration of the report of the Committee 
on Legislative Department. 

MR. OATES—The Committee on Legislative Department con¬ 
sidered making the present Constitution its basis, and considered 
all the provisions carefully and well, and saw proper to add some 
new sections. 

I do not think it is necessary for me to consume time to ex¬ 
plicitly notice all these changes, in as much as the report and the 
proposed ordinance has been printed and in the hands of the dele¬ 
gates an ample length of time for everybody to have familiarized 
themselves with them. Every delegate here is supposed to be 
familiar with the defects in the provisions of our present Constitu¬ 
tion admitting of abuses in the matter of legislation. Of course 



CONSTITUTIONAL CONVENTION, 1901 


2223 


every one knows that this department of the State Government 
is first in importance, the legislative, the medium through which 
the people of the State have laws enacted, bad laws repealed, and 
defective laws amended, and in order that there may not be any 
abuse of this power, it is essential that these statutes should con¬ 
stitute rules of proceeding which will carefully guard against anv 
wrong or reckless and hasty action upon the part of the Legisla¬ 
ture or any member thereof, from the vast accumulation of local 
legislation. We heard on yesterday, or the day before from a gen¬ 
tleman who has the honor of being a member of the House of 
Representatives, and also a delegate upon this floor, my learned 
young friend from Crenshaw, as to the manner in which local 
measures were passed, especially towards the heel of the last ses¬ 
sion. With but a dozen of the members present, the roll called 
rapidly, the names of the whole membership for their aye or their 
no vote, and that it was very rare that any one answered aye or 
no, and yet the bills were decided to have been passed by a ma¬ 
jority vote. Such things ought not to be, and leads to inextricable 
confusion, and affords opportunities of getting measures before the 
country the authority of which is doubted by people interested. 
We had an exhibition on yesterday with regard to one of these 
local measures. Others may be equally defective. It is very much 
to the discredit of the General Assembly or Legislature, whichever 
you see proper to call it, and ought in the future to be avoided. 
Now, sir, your Committee endeavoring to remedy these things have 
made changes and tightened up the Rules of Procedure, so that as 
far as can be done these things will be prevented in the future. As 
it will become necessary as we go along considering the ordinance, 
Section by Section to explain each in its turn, I shall not dwell or 
undertake to do that here, and I want to say furthermore that this 
Committee consisting of eighteen members besides the Chairman, 
as a rule are men of experience and learning, and most of whom 
took an interest in this work, are not in harmony on all the pro¬ 
visions of the report. They differed in opinion. The report, Mr. 
President, is simply the way that the majority voted. Some points 
the Chairman is not with the majority, but with the minority, and 
the course I propose to adopt is that when I reach such a provision, 
having explained it, to call attention of that member of the Com¬ 
mittee who took the lead on the other side, and let him take the 
management of it where I could not, and ought not. being opposed, 
to undertake to manage it when my desire is to change it. Then, 
again, sir, I wish to state to the delegates here, impress upon them, 
I, as the Chairman, am not going to pursue a course of doggedness, 
I will endeavor to fully explain to this body the reasons for the 
changes made from every point, and to respectfully answer anv 
question which any delegate desires to ask, and then if this Con¬ 
vention sees proper to refuse, and set aside the recommendation of 
the Committee, that is your work, I will have discharged my duty 



2224 


OFFICIAL PROCEEDINGS 


when I have presented it to you fairly and in a manner which you 
cannot fail to understand. Now, Mr. President, without consuming: 
any further time, I move that the ordinance be taken up and con- 
sidered Section by Section. 

MR. DENT—I second the motion. 

Mr. Robinson here took the Chair. 

THE PRESIDENT PRO TEM—The gentleman from Mont¬ 
gomery moves the consideration of the report Section by Section. 

And upon a vote being taken the motion prevailed. 

The Clerk then read Section 1 as follows: 

An Ordinance to create and define the Legislative Department. 

Be it ordained by the people of Alabama in Convention as¬ 
sembled, That Article IV. of the Constitution be stricken out, and 
the following Article inserted in lieu thereof: 

ARTICLE -. 

Legislative Department. 

Section 1. The Legislative power of the State shall be vested 
in a Legislature, which shall consist of a Senate and House of 
Representatives. 

MR. OATES—The gentleman will discover a change made in 
this first Section. I wish to give the Convention the reasons why 
the Committee has thus recommended: 

You will see in the present Constitution that this first Section 
is that the legislative power of the State shall be vested in the 
General Assembly, which shall consist of a Senate and House of 
Representatives. The words General Assembly are stricken out 
and the word Legislature recommended by the Committee. In 
this age of brevity and hurry to accomplish the tasks of life, we 
do not wish to use words unnecessarily. The old style used in 
constitutions touching this point were, many of them, very cum- 
berous; and it is only in the more recent years that changes have 
been made. I wish to call the attention of the Convention briefly 
to the constitutions of the different States on this point: 

For instance : The State of Illinois—Be it enacted by the peo¬ 
ple of Illinois, represented in General Assembly. 

Idaho—Be it enacted by the Legislature of the State of Idaho. 

Georgia—Be it enacted by the General Assembly of the State 
of Georgia and it is hereby enacted by authority of the same. 

Florida—Be it enacted by the Legislature of the State of 
Florida. 



CONSTITUTIONAL CONVENTION. 1901 


2225 


Delaware—Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Repre¬ 
sentatives of the State of Delaware in General Assembly met as 
follows: 

South Kakota—Be it enacted by the Legislature of the State 
of South Dakota. 

Connecticut—Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Repre¬ 
sentatives in General Assembly convened. 

Colorado—Be it enacted by the General Assembly of Colorado. 

California—The people of the State of California represented 
in Senate and Assembly, do enact as follows: 

Arkansas—Be it enacted by the General Assembly of the State 
of Arkansas. 

Wisconsin—The people of Wisconsin represented in Senate 
and Assembly enact as follows: 

Wyoming—Be it enacted by the Legislature of the State of 
Wyoming. 

Nevada—The people of the State of Nevada, represented in 
Senate and Assembly, do enact as follows. 

Nebraska—Be it enacted by the Legislature of the State of 
Nebraska. 

Montana—Be it enacted by the Legislative Assembly of the 
State of Montana. 

Missouri—Be it enacted by the General Assembly of the State 
of Missouri as follows. 

Massachusetts—Be it enacted by the Senate and House of 
Representatives in General Court assembled and by authority of 
the same. 

Michigan—The people of the State of Michigan enact. 

Minnesota—Be it enacted by the Legislature of the State of 
Minnesota. 

Mississippi—Be it enacted by the Legislature of the State of 
Mississippi. 

Maryland—Be it enacted by the General Assembly of Mary¬ 
land. 

Maine—Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Represen¬ 
tatives in Legislature assembled, as follows: 

Louisiana—Be it enacted by the General Assembly of the 
State of Louisiana 



2226 


OFFICIAL PROCEEDINGS 


Kentucky—Be it enacted by the General Assembly of the 
Commonwealth of Kentucky. 

Kansas—Be it enacted by the General Assembly of the State 
of Iowa. 

Indiana—Be it enacted by the General Assembly of the State 
of Indiana. 

Pennsylvania—Be it enacted, etc. 

Oregon—Be it enacted by the Legislative Assembly of the 
State of Oregon. 

Ohio—Be it enacted by the General Assembly of the State 
of Ohio. 

North Carolina—The General Assembly do enact. 

New York—The people of the State of New York, represented 
in the Senate and Assembly, do enact as follows. 

New Jersey—Be it enacted by the State and General Assembly 
of the State of 

Virginia—Be it enacted by the General Assembly of Virginia. 

Washington—Be it enacted by the Legislature of the State 
of Washington. 

Vermont—It is hereby enacted by the General Assembly of 
the State of Vermont. 

Utah—Be it enacted by the Legislature of the State of Utah. 

Tennessee—Be it enacted by the General Assembly of the 
State of Tennessee. 

South Carolina—Be it enacted by the General Assembly of 
the State of South Carolina. 

Texas—Be it enacted by the Legislature of the State of Texas. 

Rhode Island—It is enacted by the General Assembly as fol¬ 
lows. 

West Virginia—Be it enacted by the Legislature of West 
Virginia. 

So the Convention will see at once that the States of Alabama, 
Arkansas and twenty-four others enumerated, use the words “Gen¬ 
eral Assembly,” and seventeen, including nearly all the later States 
admitted into the Union, use the word “Legislature.” Then, again. 

I wish to call the attention of the delegates to the fact that all of 
our textbooks, those on Constitutional Law, for insance: “Cooley’s 
Constitutional Limitations,” Ordinaux’s Constitutional Legisla- 



CONSTITUTIONAL CONVENTION. 1901 2227 

tion, ,, "Hare on American Constitution Law,” “Smith on Constitu¬ 
tional Law,” “Sedgwick on Statutory Construction,” in fact all of 
our elementary text-books, largely every one of them use the term 
Legislature.” Now I have noticed it and in debating our pro¬ 
ceedings, even the chairmen, men who have in their reports lan¬ 
guage “The General Assembly”—it is high-sounding, old-fashioned 
and old-time language, but they more frequently speak of the 
Legislature” than they do of the “General Assembly.” You go 
forth in the country, among the common people, and it is but one 
time in a thousand you will hear it called the General Assembly. 
They speak of it as the “Legislature/ \V e want to use a term 
which is equally applicable, and which is briefer, half the length 
of the other, and a thing- commonly used by our people. These 
reasons and none other actuated the committee in making this 
recommendation; and I move its adoption. 

MR. HARRISON—I offer an amendment. 

The clerk then read the amendment as follows: 

“By amending Section 1 of the report of the Committee on 
Legislative Department: “Amend Section 1 by striking out the 
word “Legislature” where the same occurs therein, and inserting 
in lieu thereof the words “General Assembly.” 

MR. HARRISON—I have listened with some pleasure to the 
remarks of the distinguished chairman of the committee, which 
fail to satisfy me that the word Legislature was any better or 
more significant than the words General Assembly, which we have 
been using for the last decade or more in Alabama. In fact, I don’t 
know but that it never has been “Legislature” in the Constitution. 
Perhaps, at an early period, it was called Senate and House of 
Representatives; but “General Assembly” has been used a long 
time. It is referred to in the other Articles in the Constitution as 
“General Assembly” and we are accustomed to it. It is true it is 
two words, but only a few more letters than the word “Legislature;” 

T can’t see any good reason for the change, upon the theory that 
we were to make as few changes as necessary, and I don’t think 
it wise to make this change and then perhaps have to change every 
article where the General Assembly is referred to in the Constitu¬ 
tion in order to conform to it; but I simply offer this amendment 
now at its incipency to test the views of the Convention. Indi¬ 
vidually, I prefer the words General Assembly; but in order to test 
the Convention, I offer that amendment without consuming time 
to make any speech on it. 

MR. BEDDOW—I move to lay the amendment of the gen¬ 
tleman from Lee on the table. 

And upon a vote being taken, it resulted in 51 ayes and 38 
noes; and the motion to table the amendment prevailed. 



2228 


OFFICIAL PROCEEDINGS 


THE PRESIDENT PRO TEM.—The question is upon the 
adoption of Section 1 as reported by the committee. 

And upon a vote being taken, the section was adopted. 

MR. HOWELL—I desire to submit a report from a special 
committee, which, I believe, under the rules, is a privileged ques¬ 
tion. 


THE PRESIDENT PRO TEM—The chair is not informed 
that it is a privileged question. 

MR. deGRAFFENREID—I have a minority report as to that. 

THE PRESIDENT PRO TEM—Is there objection to receiv¬ 
ing the report of the special committee? 

Objection was made. 

MR. HOWELL—I move that the rules be suspended and that 
the committee be allowed to report. 

THE PRESIDENT PRO TEM—The gentleman from Cle¬ 
burne moves that the rules be suspended in order that the special 
committee may make their report. 

And upon a vote being taken, on a division it resulted in 73 
ayes and 16 noes, and the rules were suspended. 

The clerk then read the report of the special committee as 
follows: 


REPORT OF THE SPECIAL COMMITTEE. 

Mr. President: 

The Special Committee to whom was referred the matter of 
cutting down expenses by dispensing with some of the employes 
of the Convention, have carefully and impartially considered the 
same and a majority of whom desire to submit the following report 
and recommend the adoption of the same: 

We recommend, 

First—The dispensing with all clerks of committees after today 
except the clerks of the following standing Committees: 

1. On Rules. 

2. On Order, Harmony and Consistency of the Whole Con¬ 
stitution. 

3. On Suffrage and Elections. 

4. On the Journal. 



CONSTITUTIONAL CONVENTION, 1901 


2229 


And these clerks who are retained are expected to serve other 
Committees when necessary. 

5. We recommend that the two messengers be dispensed with, 
as we have assurances that the postmaster of this city under the 
free delivery system, will deliver the mail here three times a day 
and carry off what mail matter is to be sent off. 

6. We further recommend that five of the ten pages be dis¬ 
posed with and in order that each of these pages have an equal 
chance to be retained, we suggest and recommend the following 
plan, that the Secretary and Asssitant Secretary in the presence 
of the President of this Convention, write the names of the ten 
pages upon slips of paper and place these slips in a hat and then let 
the Secretary draw out the slips and the first five names drawn 
out shall be those who are retained as pages. 

7. We recommend' that the clerical force in the office of the 
Secretary of this Convention be retained. 

The aggregate reduction in expenses by the reduction of em¬ 
ployees here recommended will be $26 per day. 

\^ery respectfully, 

W. P. Howell, 

J. E. Cobb. 

B. B. Boone. 

Committee. 

The Clerk then read the minority report as follows: 

THE COMMITTEE ON ECONOMICS. 

Minority Report. 

Your undersigned member of this committee regrets to say 
that he is unable to concur with the other members of the Com¬ 
mittee in their recommendation that the pages selected by this 
Convention shall be reduced to five in number; and I recommend 
in lieu thereof, that the pages which have been selected to wait 
on the Convention shall be retained. 

Since the organization of this Convention, many of the Com¬ 
mittees have made their reports and the members of the Conven¬ 
tion have ceased to offer ordinances for the consideration of the 
Convention. 

For this reason, I am of the opinion that the Clerks recom¬ 
mended by the Committees to be discharged can be dispensed 
with, but the same conditions, so far as the service of the pages is 



2230 


OFFICIAL PROCEEDINGS 


concerned, that existed when the Convention was organized, still 
exists. 

Respectfully submitted, 

Ed. deGraffenreid. 

MR. WILLIAMS (Marengo)—I desire to offer an amend¬ 
ment to the minority report. 

PRESIDENT PRO TEM—The question before the Conven¬ 
tion is the substitution of the minority report. 

MR. WILLIAMS—I have an amendment to the minority re¬ 
port. 

MR. WHITE—I make the point of order that this matter is 
not now properly before the Convention. 

MR. BEDDOW—On yesterday morning this same point of 
order was up, and while it was true for the first time since this 
Convention met this rule has been invoked, it was invoked on the 
report of the Committee on Printing, etc., which reported upon a 
resolution concerning union labor in this State. I rose for informa¬ 
tion; and the Chair made this ruling—- 

PRESIDENT PRO TEM—The Chair has decided that point 
of order. 

MR. BEDDOW—Does the Chair refuse to hear the ruling? 

PRESIDENT PRO TEM—The Chair has decided that point 
of order. 

MR. BEDDOW—Then I appeal to the house. 

And upon a vote being taken the Chair was sustained. 

MR. HOWELL—I would like for the House to allow me a 
few moments. 

PRESIDENT PRO TEM—The gentleman from Marengo has 
the floor and has sent up an amendment. 

The Clerk then read the amendment offered by Mr. Williams 
of Marengo as follows: “To amend the minority report bv adding 
thereto ‘and the messengers' after the word pages wherever it ap¬ 
pears." 

PRESIDENT PRO TEM—The gentleman from Marengo 
moves to amend the minority report by including messengers and 
the question before the Convention is on the adoption of the amend¬ 
ment to the minority report. 

MR. HOWELL—I desire to say in behalf of the majority of 
that Committee, that it has been one of the most delicate and diffi- 



CONSTITUTIONAL CONVENTION, 1901 


223 1 


cult duties we have had to perform since this Convention began, 
and if left to our feelings, respect and love for these dear boys, we 
would have brought in a different report; but that could not be 
our guide in this matter. We had no personal interest in a single 
employe who is affected by this report. We believe it is our duty 
to the citizens and taxpayers of Alabama, although in the aggre¬ 
gate the amount is small, but there is a principle in it that we 
woud not ignore; and I do not believe any disinterested man on 
this floor will pretend to say but what we can with all safety and 
with all propriety dispense with these employes suggested in the 
report; and while it is a painful duty, yet those feelings and sym¬ 
pathies are not to govern us; and we insist that the report of the 
majority be adopted. Now I felt it due myself and to this com¬ 
mittee to make this statement. I shall be content with whatever 
this Convention does. We have done our duty as, we saw it; and 
there is no complicated question in it and leave it for the Conven¬ 
tion to decide for themselves. 

MR. WILLIAMS (Marengo)—I yield my time to the gentle¬ 
man from Sumter. 

MR. ROGERS (Sumter)—Mr. President and gentlemen of 
the Convention. At the assemblage of this Convention, whether 
wisely or unwisely, there were appointed for this body ten pages 
and two messengers I say wisely or unwisely is the question for 
gentlemen who have their sons upon this floor to decide. Speaking 
for myself and with all due respect to those gentlemen, I would 
never like for a child of mine to be launched out on the great sea 
of this world in politics in this way; but these young men are here 
and it is too small a question for this Convention to go into the 
peanut business and send these little boys home. If you could 
introduce a resolution here cutting down the membership of this 
body from 155 to 100, I would gladly vote for such a provision as 
that; but I would never vote to humiliate a child in this Conven¬ 
tion. I have infinitely more respect for the little boy who has the 
possibility of the future of his life before him and who is aglow 
with hope than I have for the gray-headed man who has never 
accomplished anything in this world. Therefore, I move the adop¬ 
tion of the amendment offered by the gentleman from Marengo; 
and upon that I ask for the previous question. 

MR. deGRAFFENREID—I would ask the gentleman to with¬ 
draw that. 

MR. ROGERS (Sumter)—For what purpose does the gentle¬ 
man ask me to withdraw the call for the previous question? 

MR. deGRAFFENREID—I will state for the purpose of mak¬ 
ing a few remarks on the minority report and then I will call for 
the previous question afterwards upon the amendment to the min¬ 
ority report. 



2232 


OFFICIAL PROCEEDINGS 


MR, ROGERS (Sumter)—For that purpose and no other l 
withdraw the call for the previous question. 

MR. deGRAFFENREID—The appointment of this committee 
was precipitated, I presume, by a resolution introduced by me 
several days ago, which sought simply to reduce the number of 
clerks to committees. It was my opinion then and it is now that 
possibly a good many of the standing committees had already made 
their reports; and we coud consistently get rid of the services of 
some of these committee clerks and save the State some small 
expense thereby. Some other gentleman introduced a resolution 
dispensing with the pages or a part of them. The same conditions 
that existed in this Convention when these pages were appointed 
still exist; and for that reason I have been opposed to cutting down 
their number. So far as the two messengers are concerned, if the 
Convention in their wisdom decides to retain them, it will all he 
satisfactory with me. I have nothing to say upon that matter. 

MR. HARRISON—I would like to ask the gentleman if it was 
the intention of the committee to prevent the Committee on Cor¬ 
porations, which has not completed its labors, of the use of its 
clerk, until their report was made, which I think will be within the 
next two or three days, and I trust that we he allowed to retain 
our clerk until the report is made. 

MR. deGRAFFENREID—So far as I am concerned, I think 
that will be entirely proper and right. If the Convention acts 
upon the matter of this minority report and these gentlemen desire* 
to amend the report and except from the operation of it two or 
three days the clerk of the Committee on Corporations, I shall not 
object. 

MR. HARRISON—Your motion for the previous question 
would cut off all debate. I wanted to amend- 

MR. deGRAFFENREID—I move the adoption of the minority 
report and upon that I call for the previous question on the amend¬ 
ment offered by the gentleman from Marengo and the minoritv 
report. 

(The President here resumed the chair.) 

Upon a vote being taken the main question was ordered. 

MR. HOWELL—I call for the ayes and noes to see how many 
men here are willing to waste the public money. 

The call was not sustained. 

MR. HOWELL—Doesn’t the committee have a little time to 
reply after the previous question? 

MR. WILLIAMS (Marengo)—The point of order is too late. 
He called for the ayes and noes himself. 



CONSTITUTIONAL CONVENTION. 1901 


22.13 


THE PRESIDENT—The Chair will recognize the gentleman 
from Marengo as the mover, if he desires to discuss this question. 

MR. WILLIAMS (Marengo)—No, sir; I do not care to 
speak. 

THE PRESIDENT—The previous question was not ordered 
on the report of the committee. 

MR. HOWELL—I called for the ayes and noes. 

THE PRESIDENT—The call was submitted but not sus¬ 
tained. 

THE PRESIDENT—The amendment of the gentleman from 
Marengo retains the messengers as well as the pages. 

MR. COBB—I call for a division on that, separate vote on the 
pages and mesengers. 

THE PRESIDENT—There is no occasion for a division. The 
question must he submitted in separate order because they are 
separate motions. The motion of the gentleman from Marengo 
favors the retention of the messengers, and the minority report as 
offered retains the pages. The question is on the amendment of 
the gentleman from Marengo. 

Upon a vote being taken, the amendment offered by the gen¬ 
tleman from Marengo (Mr. Williams) was adopted. 

MR. deGRAFFENREID—I don’t want anything done that 
will cut off the gentleman from Lee. 

THE PRESIDENT—The question is not debatable. The 
question is upon the adoption of the amendment offered by the 
minority committee, as amended, which retains the pages and the 
messengers. 

Upon a vote being taken, the minority report was adopted. 

MR. HARRISON—I dislike to ask anything that appears to 
be a special favor. But I desire to offer an amendment. 

The clerk then read the amendment offered by Mr. Harrison 
of Lee, as follows: “To amend so as to allow the clerk to the 
Committee on Corporations to be retained by said committee dur¬ 
ing the present week, or until the report of said committee is 
made/' 

MR. HARRISON—In the advocacy of that amendment. T 
desire to state very briefly- 

MR. HOWELL—I desire to say that the committee will ac¬ 
cept that amendment. 



2234 


OFFICIAL PROCEEDINGS 


MR. HARRISON—I wanted to state the reasons which I 
thought woud be satisfactory to the Convention, but if the com¬ 
mittee accepts it, that ends it. 

MR. OATES—I desire to amend in this: “That the Com¬ 
mittee on Legislative Department be allowed to retain its clerk 
until the consideration of this report be finished. I ask that for 
this reason only: The clerk is very efficient and can aid me a good 
deal. I don’t; know whether it will be adopted and there may be 
changes, and I will need his services. I hope to get through in a 
few days. I offer that as an amendment to the amendment to 
retain him until this report is finished. 

MR. HOWELL—The gentleman from Montgomery will allow 
me to state that the Clerk of the Committee on Order and Harmony 
has been retained because that committee has not reported, and 
another committee or two have retained their clerks who will serve 
those committees, when needed. 

MR. OATES—I will say, in reply to that, that they would be 
of no service to me in this matter, because Mr. Swanson, the pres¬ 
ent clerk, is perfectly familiar wdth all those things, has all the 
memoranda and everything of that kind, and can aid me greatly. 

MR. HOWELL—I will accept that. 

THE PRESIDENT—The chairman of the special committee 
indicates a willingness to accept the amendment. The question 
will be on the amendment offered by the gentleman from Mont¬ 
gomery; that the Committee on Legislative Department be per¬ 
mitted to retain its clerk until the consideration of the report is 
finished, and upon a vote being taken the amendment was adopted, 
and the question now is upon the amendment of the gentleman 
from Lee. 

MR. C'OFER—I desire to make a motion in order to give these 
committees an opportunity to retain their clerks until they get 
through their reports. I make a motion to lay the section as re¬ 
ported by the committee upon the table. 

Upon a vote being taken, the motion to table was lost. 

A further vote being taken, the amendment of the delegate 
from Lee was adopted, and the report, as amended, was then 
adopted. 

THE PRESIDENT—The special order now before the Con¬ 
vention is the consideration of the report of the Committee on Leg¬ 
islative Department. 

MR. WHITE—I would ask if it would not be proper to adopt 
the amendment of the delegate from Montgomery. 



CONSTITUTIONAL CON VKNTIOX. 1901 


2235 

^ HK PRESIDEN I—Jt has been adopted. Both amendments 
were submitted and adopted. 

Section 2 of the report of the Committee on Legislative De¬ 
partment was then read as follows: 

Sec. 2. The style of the laws of this State shall he: "He it 
enacted by the Legislature of Alabama," which shall not be re¬ 
peated, but the Act shall be divided into sections for convenience, 
according to substance, and the sections designated merely by 
figures. Each law shall contain but one subject, which shall be 
clearly expressed in its title, except general appropriation bills, 
general revenue bills, and bills adopting a code, digest or revision 
of statutes; and no law shall be revived, amended, or the provisions 
extended or conferred, by reference to its title only; but so much 
thereof as is revived, amended, extended, or conferred, shall be 
re-enacted and published at length. 

MR. OATES—The only change recommended by the commit¬ 
tee is the change in the first part of the section, which is the same 
as was made in the first section, which has alreadv been passed 
upon— be it enacted by the Legislature of Alabama.” The latter 
part of the change is in regard to Sections of Acts. You will find 
a, good many Acts that have been passed repeat in even section 
Be it further enacted,” which is wholly unnecessary, and this 
provides that it is not necessary to repeat those words in the subse- 
quent sections. 

MR. JONES (Montgomery)—What is vour opinion if the 
Legislature put it, “be it further enacted,” in some of the subse¬ 
quent sections? Would that invalidate the Act or that part of the 
Act? 

MR. OATES—I don’t think it would vitiate it at all. 

J IR - JONES—The courts have held if you leave out the word 
Alabama,” or anything that is mandatory, it vitiates the law. 

MR. OATES—I do not think the repetition of “he it further 
enacted” would invalidate the law. 

^MR. JONES—Would the gentleman accept “need” instead 
of “shall?” Make it read “need not” instead of “shall not?” 

MR. OATES I do not think it is necessary. but if it is insisted 
on, I do not care. 

The amendment of the delegate from Montgomerv was read 
as follows: “Amend Section 2 by striking out the word ‘shall' 
where it first appears, and insert the word ‘need’ in place thereof 
in line 2.” 

A vote being taken, the amendment was adopted. 



2236 


OFFICIAL PROCEEDINGS 


MR. O’NEAL (Lauderdale)—I have an amendment. 

The amendment was read as follows: 

Amend Section 2 by striking out the word ‘‘legislature in the 
second line and adding in lieu thereof, the words ‘General As¬ 
sembly.”’ 

MR. OATES—That question has been considered in the first 
section and the vote there was adverse to the gentleman’s propo¬ 
sition I therefore move to lay the amendment on the table. 

A vote being taken the amendment was tabled, and a further 
vote being taken the section as amended was adopted. 

Section 3 was then read as follows: 

“Sec. 3. Senators and Representatives shall be elected by the 
qualified electors on the first Monday in August, nineteen hundred 
and two, and every four years thereafter, unless the legislature 
shall change the time of holding elections. The terms of office 
of the Senators and Representatives shall be four years, commenc¬ 
ing on the day after the general election, except as otherwise pro¬ 
vided in this Constitution. Whenever a vacancy shall occur in 
either House the Governor shall issue a writ of election to fill 
such vacancy for the remainder of the term.” 

MR. OATES—This section, as recommended here, retaining 
the first Monday in August as the day for electing these officers, 
did not meet the approval of the Chairman of the Committee, who 
favored the Tuesday after the first Monday in November. I will 
state to the Convention that the delegate from Mobile (Mr. l’.rooks) 
and the delegate from Sumter (Mr. Chapman) were the members 
of the Committee who most strongly advocated this in this form. 
I. therefore, propose to yield the floor to the delegate from Mobile 
(Mr. Brooks.) 

MR. [ONES (Montgomery)—Would it be in order to offer 
an amendment? 

MR. BROOKS—If the gentleman will yield to me for a mo¬ 
ment. 

MR. JONES—I will yield. 

MR. BROOKS—I do not rise for the purpose of discussing 
the point referred to by the Chairman of the Committee, although, 
before I get through, I hope to have something to say on that sub¬ 
ject. 

The Section reported by the Committee proposes a change in 
the present Constitution, which, as I conceive it, is not only a 
serious but an injudicious change. It proposes that hereafter the 
representatives shall be elected every four years instead of every 



CONSTITUTIONAL CONVENTION. 1901 


2237 


two years; and a subsequent section requires that the legislative 
sessions shall be had every four years, instead of every two years. 
Now, it is impossible to discuss one of these points without at 
the same time discussing, to a certain extent, the other, they are so 
intimately connected. In the discussion of these two points con¬ 
nectedly three phases of the question have been presented. The 
first point of view is favorable to that which now obtains under 
our present Constitution, namely, biennial elections and bi-ennial 
sessions. The third is favorable to the proposition in this section 
to quadriennial elections and quadriennial sessions. Now I can¬ 
not get my consent to the change proposed. I prefer to have 
biennial elections and bi-ennial sessions. If I cannot get that, I 
would prefer to have quadrennial elections and bi-ennial sessions. 

I have heard no good reason assigned for this change. Gentle¬ 
men refer to the action of this Convention in eliminating from the. 
legislative action hereafter so much in regard to local laws— 

MR. OATES—Will the gentleman allow me. I did not state 
that there are two questions involved in this section. One is that 
the August election shall be retained and the other is whether the 
elections shall be quadrennial or biennial as heretofore. The first 
question, as to whether you will have elections in August or No¬ 
vember. is the question I presented but both are involved in it. 

MR. BROOKS—Probably the gentleman from Montgomerv 
did not hear my opening remarks when I stated that I would not 
confine myself to the particular issue he raised, but ■would discuss 
the proposition contained in the section and in discussing that it 
was hard to separate the question of quadrennial elections and 
sessions. 

MR. TONE'S (Montgomery)—Will the gentleman allow me 
to offer an amendment which is in line with his remarks and then 
lie can discuss it. 

MR. BROOKS-—I would prefer the gentleman to wait until 
I get through. 

MR. JONES—I yielded the floor to you. 

MR. BROOKS—I say that contention falls to the ground 
when we recollect that over one-half of the States have in their 
constitutions the section we have been squabbling over for the last 
few days on local legislation. The provisions in that regard that 
we have adopted are not new with us but are contained in a ma¬ 
jority of the Constitutions of the States of the Union, and not one 
of those States has seen fit under the operation of that constitu¬ 
tional enactment to change the terms of office of their representa¬ 
tives or the time when their legislature shall meet, simply because 
it is not necessary. 



2238 


()FFICIAL PROCKKDINGS 


Gentlemen have held up as an object lesson on more occasions 
than one the volume of the local and special laws of the legislature 
to show what the legislature has done in that regard and then tliev 
argue that having eleminated the power of the General Assemble 
over so many questions of local legislation, that in the future that 
thing will not be possible. Then they have held up the very thin 
volume of the general laws passed, but they do not show the num¬ 
ber of general laws that were not acted upon and were not reached 
because of the pressure upon the time of the legislature by reason 
of local legislation, and they do not show us how many laws are 
on the statute books that may have to be repealed because the 
legislature did not have time to give the necessary deliberation and 
attention to them. So I say that we have not done anything in 
removing from the legislature the power to pass this local legisla¬ 
tion that shows that we will not need a General Assembly even- 
two years as much as we do now for the purpose of general legis¬ 
lation. 

THE PRESIDENT—The time of the gentleman has expired. 

MR. BROOKS—I make the point of order that I am not dis¬ 
cussing any amendment but a provision in the report. I am en¬ 
titled to speak thirty minutes. 

MR. OATES—I agreed with the gentleman from Lee (Mr. 
Harrison) that he would offer an amendment. 

MR. JONES—I object. I had the floor to offer an amendment 
and yielded and have not yet had a chance to offer my amendment. 

THE PRESIDENT—It seems to the Chair that the gentle¬ 
man from Mobile is correct. He is opposing the adoption of the 
section. 

MR. BROOKS—I do not want to inflict myself on the Con¬ 
vention, but I do want to be heard attentively if I can be for I 
have fixed convictions in regard to this section. 

Now so much for the question of substituting quadrennial 
sessions for biennial sessions on the ground that there is no need 
for our representatives to come together every four years, I am 
opposed to it. 

MR. FOSTER—Will the gentleman permit we to ask him a 
question in the way of a suggestion? 

MR. BROOKS—Yes, sir. 

MR. FOSTER—Does the gentleman know of a civilized State 
in the world that has quadrennial sessions? 

MR. BROOKS—I am glad the gentleman called my attention 
to that, because I want to state all of the forty-five States in the 



CONSTITUTIONAL CONVENTION, 1901 


2239 


Union have biennial elections and biennial sessions with the ex¬ 
ception of seven of the States which have annual elections, namely, 
Maine, Massachusetts, Connecticut, Rhode Island, New Jersey, 
New York and Pennsylvania, and the single exception of Missis¬ 
sippi, which as has quadrennial elections and quadrennial sessions 
and those quadrennial sessions are divided into two, one for gen¬ 
eral laws and the other to deal with local legislation alternating 
every two years. That seems to be the experience of all the States 
and a majority of them having the same constitutional provisions 
that we have adopted in regard to local legislation. They are all 
having biennial elections and sessions with the exception of the 
seven which have annual elections and sessions and with the ex¬ 
ception of Mississippi, which as has been suggested, is a purely 
agricultural community. 

] remember a good many years ago that brilliant Virginia 
statesman, Henry A. Wise, made an eloquent address to the people 
in behalf of the claims of the Old Dominion for the services of its 
ablest and best men in State affairs. He contended that their best 
men were attracted more by the honors of Federal elections and 
Federal preferment than by those of the State. He argued that 
the State was the repository of those great governmental powers 
and agencies with which the people were most brought into con¬ 
tact, and that their liberty and happiness and protection depended 
more upon the just administration of State affairs than Federal 
matters. If that was true then, it is equally true now, when there 
is a tendency to centralization of Federal power, when that power 
constantly impinged upon the rights of local self government and 
when the dominating influence of Federal affairs are more and 
more apparent. But while the State offers to her best men the 
highest field for the inculcation of statesmenlike views and for 
the exercise of the highest qualities of political genius, it is true 
also that the interests of the State demand that the people should 
from time to time have an opportunity frequently to assert them¬ 
selves in the election of their representatives and to have a cor¬ 
responding opportunity through representation coining fresh from 
the people, to revise, review and modify, if need be, in the legis¬ 
lative halls, their governmental powers and agencies in so far as 
needs and requirements made it necessary. 

Now we have enlarged the powers of the Executive and we 
propose to give the Executive some quasi legal power in the mat¬ 
ter of revenue bills, but I submit that the interval of four years 
is too long and that we ought to retain the constitutional provision 
which we now have for biennial elections and biennial sessions. 
The best safeguard against the corroding influence of stagnation 
among the people is to let them have a free movement in all that 
pertains to their interest, in coming together from time to time 
and electing their representatives and getting the benefit of the 



2240 


OFFICIAL PROCEEDINGS 


educational influence of free institutions upon the hustings in 
speeches and discussions and then have an opportunity of going 
to their Legislature once in two years and having their needs and 
requirements looked into the subserved. Not only that, but we live 
in an age of rapid thought and progress and quick in great de¬ 
velopment, going sometimes by leaps and bounds. And who knows 
what may occur within two years, much less four years when it 
may be necessary for the law-making body of the people to as¬ 
semble together to modify existing laws or enact new ones which 
have a bearing upon the peculiar or particular circumstances that 
may then exist? 

Now, Mr. President, this section in my opinion needs to be 
amended in two or three particulars. I do not care about amend¬ 
ing it as to the time of holding elections and on that point l am 
in line with the provisions as reported by the chairman of the 
committee and believe our State election should be held in August. 
I do not believe they ever should be and certainly hope in my lift* 
time they never will be on the same day that Federal elections are 
held, for the simple reason that although the Federal laws which 
have heretofore interfered with our elections may have been re¬ 
pealed and although it may not be the purpose of Congress to 
ever enact such laws again, still the moral effect of having State 
elections is bad, and I tell you the Federal power will exert its 
dominating influence on that day if possible whichever party is in 
power and our interests and general welfare depend upon the hold¬ 
ing of these two elections on entirely separate and distinct days. 

MR. JONES—I have an amendment to offer. 

MR. BROOKS—I have not yielded yet, but 1 am going to 
retire in a short time and will give the gentleman an opportunity 
to offer his. amendment then. But I want to say that I have in¬ 
tended no discourtesy in insisting on my right to hold the floor. 

Now I am going to read as the concluding part of my remarks 
an amendment which I propose and will then yield to the gentle¬ 
man to offer his amendment. My amendment is as follows : 

Amend Section 3 of the report of the Committee on Legisla¬ 
tive Department by striking out all after the section number and 
insert the following: Senators and Representatives shall be elected 
by the qualified electors on the first Monday in August, 1902, and 
every two years thereafter unless the Legislature shall change the 
time of holding elections. The terms of office of the Senators shall 
be four years, commencing on the day after the general election, 
except as otherwise provided in this Constitution. Whenever a 
vacancy shall occur in either house, the Governor shall issue a 
writ of election to fill such vacancy for the remainder of the term. 

MR. OATES—Before the amendments are considered, I ask 
unanimous consent to make a correction of punctuation. In the 



CONSTITUTIONAL CONVKNTIOX. \'M 


2241 


third line, after the word “elections,” there should be a full stop, 
and the next word would begin with a capital. It is simpl\ an 
error of the printer. 

THE PRESIDENT—The secretary does not use the printed 
report, but has the original, and the error does not occur in that. 

MR. JONES—I offer an amendment. 

THE PRESIDENT—The chair would suggest to the gentle¬ 
man that there is an amendment pending and his amendment 
would have to relate to that amendment or the gentleman can with¬ 
hold it until the Convention passes on this amendment. 

MR. JONES—Well. I will do that. 

MR. deGRAKEENRE1D—I move to lay tlu* amendment of 
the gentleman from Mobile on the table. 

A vote being taken, the amendment ot the delegate from Mo¬ 
bile was tabled. 

MR. JONES—I now offer my amendment. 

The amendment was read as follows: 

“Amend Section 2 by striking out all after the words 1902 
and insert in lieu thereof the following words: ‘Representatives 
shall be elected every two years thereafter and Senators every 
four years thereafter, so that the term of Representatives shall be 
two years and that of Senators shall be four years, commencing 
on the day after the general election at which they were elected, 
except as otherwise provided in this Constitution. Whenever a 
vacancy shall occur in either house, the Governor shall issue a writ 
of election to fill such vacancy for the remainder of the term. 

MR. JONES—I offer this specific amendment because I do 
not desire to trespass upon the patience of the House longer than.- 

THE PRESIDENT — Will the gentleman explain wherein 
his amendment differs from the amendment of the gentleman from 
Mobile? 

MR. JONES—Yes, if you do not take it out of my time. In 
my amendment the Senators are elected in 1902 and hold for four 
years, and the Representatives elected hold for two years. 

THE PRESIDENT—What was the amendment of the gen¬ 
tleman from Mobile, which was laid on the table? 

MR. JONES—It makes no difference: you can offer a propo¬ 
sition that has been laid on the table. 

THE PRESIDENT—It seems to the chair the amendment is 
practically identical with the amendment of the delegate from Mo¬ 
bile, and if it is, the gentleman would not be in order. 



2242 


() P FICIAI, P RO C E r• I) IN lS 


MR. JONES (Montgomery)—Then I have the floor and you 
can put my amendment on the floor or anywhere else, and I will 
speak on the main question. There cannot he any point of order 
on that. 

I am opposed to this section in toto. This is one of the most 
important matters that has come before this Convention. It is a 
thing that has been discussed and mooted by scholars, jurists and 
publicists and plain common-sense people from time to time, so 
that it is hardly possible to adduce anything new on the subject. 

After the Revolution, as everybody knows who has studied 
history, some of the States, like Virginia, held on to the old Eng¬ 
lish system and elected their Representatives for seven vears. 
Other States elected them every six months, and some of them 
every year. Then when the Constitution of the United States 
was under discussion, some things were said which are familiar to 
us all, but perhaps I may be pardoned for recalling them. Fischer 
Ames said. “Tyranny begins where annual elections end." Read¬ 
ers of history are also familiar with the fact that such a thing, 
even in E'ngland centuries back, as having the legislative power, 
put to sleep for four years, excited the indignation of the House 
of Commons and in the time of Charles II they enacted a statute 
that Parliament must meet at least every three years. I believe 
there is no State in this Union, unless it is the State of Mississippi, 
where they allow the legislative power to go to sleep for four 
years, so that it cannot be put in motion during that time unless 
the Governor calls it together on some extraordinary occasion. 

The Executive going into power is generally given a longer 
tenure of office, but on the formation of the Constitution of the 
United States, and of nearly every Constitution the people have 
framed, they have insisted on having the legislative power in ses¬ 
sion at least every two years. 

Now who are the Legislature? They are the masters, and the 
master ought to visit his premises at least once every two years. 
Now. human nature is pretty much the same, and officers are 
pretty much the same, but we know by universal experience that 
the Executive generally regards the Legislature as somewhat of a 
nuisance. He is glad to get rid of them. Now, we have officers 
in office for four years. They might do something requiring im¬ 
peachment, and it is not to be expected the Governor would call 
the Legislature together to impeach himself; and this people, if 
they put such a thing as that in the Constitution, may be the vic¬ 
tims of outrageous wrong by the Executive, false policies enforc¬ 
ing law, and have no redress on earth. 

Here comes up great questions. Federal questions it may be. 
You have a couple of Senators to elect and your Executive mav 
not be in harmony with the prevailing thought of the people, and 



CONSTITUTIONAL CONVKNTION. 1901 


11 40 


yet for four years the Executive will put Senators in there di¬ 
rectly opposed to the will of the people, or whom the people do not 
want. I submit that is not wise. 

Now, it is said that the people are tired of frequent elections. 
So they are: but there ought to be a happy mean. The elections 
for the Legislature do not tear people up like the elections for the 
higher executive officers, what are known in common parlance as 
the ‘'paying offices/' Then, another thing, take an illustration 
from Aldermen. An Alderman goes in for four years and the first 
two years he is absolutely arrogant. He does not care for public 
opinion. But in the last two years, trying to make up for that, 
he absolutely debases himself in the other direction trying to meet 
the approbation of the people. We want to give our young men 
a chance. They are the hope of the country. They ought to have 
a chance to legislate, and the people ought to have a chance to 
send them here to educate them in the great business of govern¬ 
ment. 

There is an additional reason. Under this section all of the 
Senators go out at the same time, at the end of four years, and 
there is a brand new 7 Senate and House. It has been the policy of 
framers of Constitutions in Alabama for half a century back to 
allow one-half of the Senators to go out every two years, so that 
in every legislature there are some men who are familiar with the 
business. 

MR. MACDONALD—Do J understand the gentleman to sug¬ 
gest that we had better have legislatures every two years for the 
purpose of sending the young men to them? 

MR. JONES—I said w r e had better give them opportunity to 
be trained in the great business of government. 

MR. MACDONALD—Then you think the legislature should 
he a kind of political kindergarten? 

MR. JONES—To some extent, yes. Because when people 
do not exercise themselves with their government, they soon have 
inefficient officers. 

I was proceeding to say that this section precipitates on the 
State every four years a fresh set of legislators, instead of retain¬ 
ing one-half of the Senators who are presumed to be familiar with 
legislation. They all go out and I do not see any reason for this 
change. I have not heard anything adduced in favor of this change 
except that the people are tired of elections. But the only way to 
retain our liberties is sometimes to get tired in efforts to retain 
them. 

MR. MACDONALD—Is not there an additional reason that 
we should have the cost of an election and the cost of a session of 
the legislature every two years? 



2244 


OFFICIAL PROCEEDINGS 


MR. JONES—I understand that is one of the reasons advo¬ 
cated and the main reason; and we are putting up against the cost 
of a legislature, twenty-five or fifty thousand dollars, all of the 
evils that may happen to the people when they cannot have their 
legislative department in session once every two years. Why, Mr. 
President, we have been so constrained in our legislation, the legis¬ 
lature being absorbed in local matters, electing solicitors and Sena¬ 
tors, that apparently the people have not been able through their 
representatives to give attention to grave economic problems and 
matters of reform that concern the State and which are not in their 
nature political. 

THE PRESIDENT—The time of the gentleman has expired. 
The gentleman is discussing his amendment. 

MR. JONES—No, sir. I am not discussing my amendment, 
the Chair said my amendment was not in order. 

THE PRESIDENT—To what point is the gentleman speak¬ 
ing? 

MR. JONES—Generally, against the ordinance. I think if 
the Chair had listened there could have been no doubt in his mind 
as to what I was driving at. 

THE PRESIDENT — The Chair understood the gentleman 
was advocating his amendment. 

MR. JONES—I beg pardon, but it was not my fault that the 
Chair so misunderstood. What is the ruling- of the Chair? 

THE PRESIDENT—There was an amendment pending and 
the gentleman from Montgomery offered his amendment. 

MR. JONES—But I understood the Chair ruled that amend¬ 
ment out of order. 

THE PRESIDENT—The Chair has not ruled but the Chair 
is prepared to rule on that question now. 

MR. JONES—If the Chair will pardon me, when the Chair 
ruled my amendment out of order I remarked that the amendment 
could he put on the floor or anywhere else, I did not care about 
it and that I would speak generally on the section. 

THE PRESIDENT—The gentleman made that statement and 
without pausing to await the ruling of the Chair the gentleman 
proceeded to a discussion of the amendment. When an amend¬ 
ment is offered and is read before the Convention, it is before the 
Convention for consideration until it is withdrawn by consent of 
the House or until it is ruled out of order by the Chair and the 
Chair as a basis for ruling upon the question asked the gentleman 
to explain the difference between his amendment and the amend- 



CONSTITUTIONAL CONVENTION. 1901 


2245 


ment offered by the gentleman from Mobile. Without making an 
explanation the gentleman proceeded to a discussion of the ques¬ 
tion and has consumed ten minutes in the discussion of the amen 
ment, because the amendment was before the Convention and n 
he was not discussing the amendment, he was not in order. 

MR. JONES—Then how was the gentleman from Mobile m 
order? 


THE PRESIDENT—At the time the gentleman from Mobile 
was discussing the question, there was no amendment pending. 

MR. JONES—I submit that I had a right. The Chair indi¬ 
cated that my amendment was not in order and I proceeded then 
to discuss the main question, saying that the amendment could 
be put on the floor if the Chair wished, that I did not care for it. 
[ did have the understanding from what the Chair said that m> 
amendment was not in order, but was out of order and was < is 
cussing the section generally, and so stated to the Chaii. 


THE PRESIDENT—The gentleman from Montgomery stat¬ 
ed that his amendment might be put on the floor, but it was not 
put on the floor, but is on the desk of the Secretary and is now 
before the Convention until the Chair rules otherwise and it was 
upon that amendment that the gentleman was addressing the Con¬ 
vention, if he was in order at all. 

MR. JONES—I beg pardon. I thought and said that I would 
speak upon the main proposition and I started out by saying that 
I was opposed to it in toto. Upon that there can be no mistake, 
as the stenographer has it down. I would like to know what the 
Chair does rules, if I am in error. 


THE PRESIDENT — The Chair has not ruled upon the 
amendment at all, but in the opinion of the Chair the amendment 
is not in order as it substantially sets forth the same provisions 
that weie embodied in the amendment offered by the gentleman 
from Mobile, and the amendment of the gentleman from Mont¬ 
gomery would not be in order without taking from the table the 
amendment offered by the gentleman from Mobile. 


MR JONES—Then am I not in order to discuss the general 
subject and was I not entitled to thirty minutes on that? 

THE PRESIDENT—The gentleman may discuss the general 
question. 


MR. OATES—I would like to explain as some of the gentle¬ 
men do not seem to understand this as well as my friend, the gen¬ 
tleman from Montgomery. I stated when this section was read 
that I had made the report but I was not in accord with it and that 
the delegate from Mobile in the Committee was the leading man 
advocating it in its present shape in regard to holding elections in 



2246 


OFFICIAL PkOCFFDlN'C.S 


August; and, therefore, I yielded the floor to him and he spoke 
generally in the first place. 

MR. JONES—I understood that perfectly well, but I under¬ 
stood that the rule of the Convention was that members had thirty 
minutes when speaking on the general subject. 

MR. O’NEAL—T call for the reading of both the amend¬ 
ment offered bv the delegate from Mobile and that offered by the 
delegate from Montgomery, so that we may see what they are. I 
think there is some difference. 

MR. HARRISON-—I have an amendment. 

The amendment was read as follows: 

Amend Section 3 by striking out the words “first Monday in 
August” where they occur therein, and insert in lieu thereof the 
following: “The Tuesday after the first Monday in November.” 

MR. O’NEAL — I rise to a point of order. The amend¬ 
ment offered by the delegate from Mobile (Mr. Brooks) was never 
read by the Clerk. It was read by Mr. Brooks in the course of hi' 
remarks but was never sent to the clerk’s desk and never read bv 
the Clerk. 

THE PRESIDENT—The amendment was read and was dis¬ 
cussed by the delegate from Mobile for over thirty minutes and the 
Chair regrets that the gentleman from Lauderdale did not hear 
the reading and the discussion despite the efforts of the Chair to 
maintain order. 

MR. HARRISON—The object of the amendment is to change 
the time of holding elections from August to November to cor¬ 
respond with the general election. This was formerly the custom 
in Alabama until changed by the Constitutional Convention of 
1875, when on account of hostile legislation threatened on the part 
of Congress, the Constitutional Convention which then met chang¬ 
ed the time of holding the elections to August. The reasons were 
good then. They have been intimated by the delegate from Mo¬ 
bile, but I submit that we have reached the time in Alabama when 
we need apprehend no fear of Federal intervention in our elections. 
I am satisfied that the change will be in the interest of economv 
as well as meet the general view of the people not to have so main 
elections. I do not think it is wise when we are going to have an 
election in November to have an election in August. We should 
save not only the expense of the election but avoid stirring up the 
people in August and in November of the same year. I don’t care 
which sentiment prevails so far as the proposition of the Commit¬ 
tee as reported is concerned, I am in favor of it with this amend¬ 
ment, but should they succeed in changing the Section and having 
biennial elections, still this amendment should be adopted. I think 



CONSTITUTIONAL CONVENTION, 1901 


2247 


the interests of the people will be subserved in the two aspects that 
f have referred to, economy, useless expenditure of time and money 
and stirring up the people. This can apply to the Section as it now 
stands and if the Convention in its wisdom should see proper to 
have biennial elections and sessions, this will still apply. 

MR. SOLLIE—Will the gentleman answer a question? Does 
your amendment make it mandatory that the election shall be in 
November, or does it leave it optional with the Legislature? 

MR. HARRISON—It leaves it as reported bv the Committee 
unless it shall be changed by the Legislature. 

MR. SOLLIE—It leaves it optional? 

MR. HARRISON — It only fixes it until the Legislature 
changes it. 

MR. CHAPMAN—[ shall detain the Convention but a few 
moments, in support of the report of this Committee as to this 
Section. It seems to me that August is the proper time for an 
election, to subserve the best interests of the people of the State. 
That is at a period of the year when the farmers have less to do. 
They are through with their work of making a crop and have not 
begun the work of gathering it. It is at a time, Mr. President, 
when we can attend to elections, and to a canvass, better than at 
any other period of the year. We have gotten used to it in such 
a way that we all know that in August and during the summer, 
comes a period of canvassing, of elections, of barbecues, dinners 
and camp meetings, and such things as that, and they go prettv 
much hand in hand. If we change the time to November it comes 
at a time when our farmers are all busy. They are more especially 
busy then than at any other time during the fall. They are busy 
gathering corn and cotton, and- 

MR. SANFORD (Montgomery)—And sowing wheat. 

MR. CHAPMAN—Sowing wheat, as suggested by my learn¬ 
ed friend from Montgomery, and I submit they have less time 
the second Monday in November than they have at any time dur¬ 
ing the summer months. 

Again, Mr. President and gentlemen of the Convention, I am 
absolutely and utterly opposed to having the Federal elections and 
State elections come on at the same time. No matter if there is 
no fear of interference from the Federal authorities. I concede 
that there is none now, and probably will not be in the future, but 
there is a certain influence, whether it comes direct from Federal 
authority, or in an indirect way through Federal money, why it 
comes and the State elections are more or less influenced by Fed¬ 
eral interference in that way. Another objection to it is, my ob¬ 
servation has been that the more elections you bunch together, 



2248 


OFFICIAL PROCEEDINGS 


the greater opportunity for fraud, and the greater the fraud com¬ 
mitted. There is more opportunity for trading and trafficing. 
There is more opportunity for combinations among candidates, 
which will ultimately destroy the will of the people in the elec¬ 
tion. For these reasons, Mr. President and delegates of the Con¬ 
vention, I think that this Section as reported by the Committee 
should be adopted by the Convention. If in the future it should 
be found advisable to change the election from August to Novem¬ 
ber, the authority is conferred upon the Legislature to do it, but 
until that necessity appears, from my experience under the present 
Constitution, I am decidedly in favor of keeping the elections sep¬ 
arate. 

MR. SOLLIE—Do you think it wise to disassociate the idea 
of good watermelons in our summer elections? 

MR. CHAPMAN—Not a bit of it. We ought to have good 
watermelons and good peaches, and good everything else, at the 
time of our summer elections, and occasionally we may get a little 
importation from the northern part of the State, from the “eyeless 
tiger/’ I do not know how that may be, but sometimes it is en¬ 
joyed. I have heard of people who enjoy the elections in the sum¬ 
mer time. (Laughter.) 

As I have just said, if it is found better to change the election 
to November, we can do so. 

Insofar as holding the session quadrennially, instead of bienial- 
ly, I am decidedly in favor of that. I do not believe that we ought 
to have a meeting of the Legislature every two years as hereto¬ 
fore, and we have but to point to the action of the various Legis¬ 
latures in the accumulation of bills, and the passage of bills, to 
convince any on that it is necessary to lengthen the time, and 
shorten the session, in order to stop, as we might say, this infuri¬ 
ated folly of the Legislature in passing so many bills. If we both 
lengthen the time between the sessions of the Legislature and at 
the same time shorten the sessions, or limit the time, which an¬ 
other section of this article does, within which local bills may be 
passed, we will have some remedy against the flood of bills that 
has heretofore deluged the Legislature of this State. 

MR. SPRAGINS—I move to lay the amendment by the gen¬ 
tleman from Lee upon the table. 

THE PRESIDENT—The gentleman from Sumter has the 
floor. 

MR. CHAPMAN—For the purpose of seconding your mo¬ 
tion, and having the motion before the Convention, I yield the 
floor to the gentleman- 



CONSTITUTIONAL CONVENTION, 1901 


2249 


THE PRESIDENT—The time of the gentleman has expired. 
I he gentleman from Montgomery. 

MR. OATES—The amendment offered by the delegate from 
Lee, changing the election from August to November fully meets 
my approval. Delegates will remember that prior to the Conven¬ 
tion of 1875 was a period when there were Federal bavonets in 
Alabama and during the period of reconstruction. 

MR. CARNA1 HON—Do I understand von accept the amend¬ 
ment of the gentleman from Lee. 

MR. OATES f have no right to speak for the committee in 
accepting it; it is acceptable to me personally, and I know it is to 
several members of the committee, but a majority of the commit¬ 
tee voted as it is reported here, and the report is as the majoritv 
voted, though it was a close vote. 

Now, sir, I want to give a few reasons briefly why I am in 
favor of the amendment offered by the delegate from Lee. Prior 
to 1875 we had all of the troubles of reconstruction and bayonets, 
when Federal troops were here, but the troops had been with¬ 
drawn at that time, and there was a difference among the mem¬ 
bers of that Convention as to whether the State elections should 
be changed from November to August. Gentlemen know they all 
come off in November together prior to that. However, there was 
one good reason for the change, and it was because at that time 
there still remained upon the statute 1 books several Federal enact¬ 
ments which authorized the appointment of inspectors and watch¬ 
ers you may call them, and Federal officials to interfere in an elec¬ 
tion. In order that we might get away from them, and bedel our own 
State elections without interference from them, was the reason 
that it was changed to /August. But every one knows it is against 
economy. It is disadvantageous to the people to have two elec¬ 
tions in one year but a few months apart, it creates during the 
whole of that year a furor- 

MR. SAMFORD—What is the disadvantage? 

MR. OATES—I am telling you. If you will wait I will do it. 

1 am not going to dodge it. Men are excited more or less, and 
are taking interest in the elections, friends are candidates, first 
in the August election and then in the November election, and it 
is one continual round of electioneering and excitement during 
the whole year, when it is wholly unnecessarv. ^ ou do not need 
to separate them. You do not'need an August election on ac¬ 
count of Federal interference. Why? Because during Mr. Cleve¬ 
land’s second term, when both Houses of Congress Were Demo¬ 
cratic. the question w'as extensively debated and everv Federal 
Statute on that subject was wiped from the statute books. There 
is not one in existence now', by which the Federal government 
can interfere in any State election. It belongs entirely to the State. 



2250 


OFFICIAL PROCEEDINGS 


MR. WILLIAMS (Barbour)—In the State of New York they 
hold both the State and Federal elections upon the same day.'' That 
is a fact? 

MR. OATES—Yes. 

MR. WILLIAMS (Barbour)—It is the vote of the citv of 
New York that carries the State Democratic. And is it not a fact 
that in a national election in the city of New ^ ork many voters 
trade off a President for some petty State officer? lias not that 
been done? 

MR. OATES—I suppose it has, and have you ever known any 
election where there was not a swapping and trading in that wav . 

MR. WILLIAMS (Barbour)—No, I do not, but if the State 
election in New York was on a different day. there would he no 
opportunity' for it. 

MR. OATES—That is tor the people of New ’S ork to de¬ 
termine. I am talking about the people of Alabama. Here theie 
is not so much danger from trading. It saves much expense and 
excitement, and trouble, and there is no reason why we cannot 
hold our elections the same day' as the Federal elections are held, 
and it will not be then as it is now, where one of the things which 
puts the members of Congress from this State at a disadvantage is 
that they do not receive so many cotes, and not one-fourth of the 
voters are polled in the districts in the November election as are 
polled in the August election. The delegates from Lee and from 
Macon know that from their experience in Congress. They haw 
seen that from their own experience. Men get tired of going out 
on so many election days, and there is no good reason at this time 
why they should not all go out to the election on Tuesday after 
the first Monday in November. There is no reason on earth why 
we should have so much excitement, and so much expense, and 
then besides some other important committees have been shaping 
their work in view' of that very thing. The committee of which 
I had the honor to be chairman was divided upon it, the majoritv 
favoring August, but a large minority favoring November. I think 
it is unnecessary to consume any further time, as the Convention 
certainly understands the question, and I move the previous ques¬ 
tion on the amendment offered by the gentleman from Lee. 

MR. HEFLIN (Chambers)—I would ask the gentleman to 
withdraw that in order that some of the members of the committee 
may be heard that opposed the measure. 

MR. OATES—I do not know' how many of them want to be 
heard. I will ask the delegate from Chambers if he wishes to he 
heard. I have no objection to withdraw'ing the motion. 



CONSTITUTIONAL CONVENTION, 1901 


2251 


MR. HEFLIN (Chambers)—I would like to be heard as to 
how the majority of the committee stood on the report. 

MR. OA1 LS—If I withdraw, will you renew the motion, be¬ 
fore you take your seat? 

MR. HEFLIN (Chambers)—My purpose was before 1 sat 
down to move to table the amendment. 

MR. OAT. ES I decline to yield for any such purpose and I 
call for the previous question. 

MR. REESK I move to table the amendment ot the gentle¬ 
man from Lee. 

THE PRESIDENT — The gentleman from Montgomery 
moves the previous question upon the amendment by the gentle¬ 
man from Lee, and thereupon the gentleman from Dallas moves 
to lay upon the table the amendment offered by the gentleman 
Irom Lee. The question will be upon the motion to table the 
amendment. 


Upon a vote being taken, a division was called for and. bv a 
vote of 43 ayes and 63 noes, the motion to table was lost. 

MR. HEFLIN (Chambers)—I voted no for the purpose of 
taking the amendment up for consideration again. 

THE PRESIDENT—It is not necessary for the gentleman 
to state how he voted in order to move to take from the table. Any 
member may move to take from the table. 

MR. HEFLIN (Chambers)—I do not believe vou can move 
to reconsider a vote to table, can you? 

THE PRESIDENT — You cannot, but any gentleman may 
enter a motion to take from the table, whether he voted for or 
against the proposition. 

The question recurring upon the motion of the gentleman 
from Montgomery, the main question was ordered, and upon a 
further vote being taken, the amendment was adopted. 

MR. BROW NE — In order that the gentleman from Mont¬ 
gomery (Mr. Jones) may have considered the amendment that he 
offered to introduce, and which was ruled out of order on account 
of the fact that it was similar to the amendment offered by the 
gentleman from Mobile. I now move to take from the table the 
amendment offered by the gentleman from Mobile. 

THE PRESIDENT—It is moved that the amendment offered 
by the gentleman from Mobile which was laid upon the table, be 
taken from the table. 



2252 


OFFICIAL PROCEEDINGS 


MR. BULGER—Before that vote is taken. I would like to 
hear the amendment read. 

The amendment was read as follows: “Amending Section 3 
of the report of the Committee on Legislative Department, Strike 
out all after the section number, and insert the following: Sen¬ 
ators and Representatives shall be elected by the qualified electors 
on the first Monday in August, 1902, and every two years there¬ 
after, unless the Legislature shall change the time of holding elec¬ 
tions. The terms of the office of Senators shall be four years, 
commencing on the day after the general election, except as other¬ 
wise provided in this Constitution. Whenever a vacancy shall 
occur in either house, the Governor shall issue a writ of election 
to fill such vacancy for the remainder of the term. 

MR. BULGER—I move to lay the motion of the gentleman 
from Talladega on the table. 

THE PRESIDENT—The motion is not in order, in the 
opinion of the chair. 

MR. O'NEAL—I call for the ayes and noes on the motion 
of the gentleman from Talladega. 

The call was sustained. 


MR. REESE—I rise for the purpose of making a motion to 
indefinitely postpone the motion of the gentleman from Talladega. 

THE PRESIDENT—In the opinion of the chair, the motion 
is out of order. The question is upon the motion of the gentle¬ 
man from Talladega to take from the table the amendment offered 
by the gentleman from Mobile. The ayes and noes have been call¬ 
ed for and the call sustained. As many as favor taking from the 
table the amendment offered by the gentleman from Mobile will 
say aye, and those opposed no, as your names are called. 


Upon the call of the roll, the vote resulted as follows: 


Brooks, 

Browne, 

Byars, 

Foster, 

Grayson, 

Greer, of Perry, 
Heflin, of Chambers, 
Heflin,, of Randolph, 


Messrs. President, 
Banks, 


AYES 

Jones, of Montgomery, 
Lomax, 

Martin, 

Moody, 

O’Neal (Lauderdale), 
Rogers (Lowndes). 
Sanford, 

Selheimer, 

NOES 

Barefield, 

Bartlett, 


Sollie. 

Spears. 

Tayloe, 

Thompson. 

Watts. 

White, 

Williams (Barbour), 
TOTAL—23. 

Beddow. 

Bethune. 



CONSTITUTIONAL CONVENTION. 1901 


2253 


Blackwell, 

Hood. 

Pet t us. 

Boone, 

Howell, 

Phillips, 

Bulger, 

1 low/.e, 

Pillans, 

Burns, 

Inge, 

Pitts, 

Cardon, 

Jones, of Bibb, 

Porter, 

Carnathon, 

Jones, of Hale, 

Reese, 

Case. 

Kirk, 

Reynolds (Chilton), 

Chapman, 

Kirkland, 

Reynolds, of Henry, 

Cobb, 

Knight, 

Robinson, 

Cofer, 

Ledbetter, 

Rogers (Sumter), 

Coleman, of Greene, 

Leigh, 

Samford, 

Davis, of DeKalb, 

Lock! in, 

Searcy, 

Davis, of Etowah, 

Lowe, of Jefferson, 

Sentell, 

Dent, 

Macdonald, 

Sloan, 

deGraffenreid, 

McMillan, of Baldwin, 

Smith (Mobile), 

Duke, 

Malone, 

Smith, Morgan M. 

Eley, 

Maxwell, 

Sorrell, 

Eyster, 

Merrill, 

Spragins, 

Ferguson, 

Miller (Marengo), 

Stewart, 

Fletcher, 

Miller (Wilcox), 

Stoddard, 

Foshee, 

Murphree, 

Vaughan, 

Freeman, 

NeSmith, 

Waddell. 

Gilmore, 

Norman, 

Walker, 

G lover, 

Norwood, 

Weakley, 

Graham, of Montgomery, 

Oates, 

Whiteside, 

Greer, of Calhoun, 

Opp, 

Willet, 

1 ialey. 

O’Rear, 

Williams (Marengo), 

Handley, 

Palmer, 

Wilson (Washington), 

Harrison, 
i lodges. 

Parker (Elmore), Winn, 

Pearce. 

TOTAL—96. 

ABSENT OR NOT VOTING 

Almon, 

Grant, 

Morrisette, 

Altman, 

Henderson, 

Mulkev, 

Ashcraft, 

Hinson, 

O’Neill, of Jefferson, 

Beavers, 

Jackson, 

Parker (Cullman), 

Burnett, 

Jenkins, 

Proctor, 

Carmichael, of Colbert, 

Jones, of Wilcox, 

Renfro, 

Carmichael, of Walker, 

King, 

Sanders, 

Cornwall, 

Kyle, 

Smith, Mac. A., 

Craig, 

Long, of Butler, 

Weatherly, 

Cunningham, 

Long, of Walker, 

Williams (Elmore), 

Fitts, 

Graham, of Talladega, 

Lowe, of Lawrence, 
McMillan (Wilcox), 

Wilson (Clarke), 


By a vote of 96 noes and 23 ayes, the motion to take the 
amendment from the table was lost. 



2254 


OFFIClAL PROCEEDIN(>S 


MR. OATES—I move the previous question on the adop¬ 
tion of the section as amended. 

MR. WATTS—I hope the gentleman will allow me a mom¬ 
ent— 

There were expressions of dissent, and upon a vote being 
taken, the main question was ordered, and upon a further vote 
the section as amended was adopted. 

MR. ROGERS (Sumter)—It is now very near 1 o’clock, and 
I move that we adjourn before taking up the next section. 

MR. REESE—I desire to give notice that I voted in the af¬ 
firmative, and I make a motion to reconsider the vote on this sec¬ 
tion. 


Leaves of absence were granted to Mr. Parker (Cullman) for 
today; Mr. Sollie for this afternoon, Thursday and Friday, and 
Mr. Kirkland for this afternoon, and the Convention adjourned. 


AFTERNOON SESSION 

The Convention met pursuant to adjournment, there be¬ 
ing 125 delegates present upon the call of the roll. 

Leave of absence w*as granted to Mr. Long of Butler for to¬ 
morrow. 

MR. LOMAX — Mr. President, I move that the Article on 
Preamble and Declaration of Rights be now read a third time and 
put upon its passage. 

There being no objection, the article was read by the Clerk 
as follows: 

An ordinance adopting a Preamble and Declaration of Rights 
for the Constitution for the State of Alabama. 

Be it ordained by the people of the State of Alabama in Con¬ 
vention assembled, that the following shall be the Preamble and 
Declaration of Rights of the Constitution of this State: 

PREAMBLE 

We, the people of the State of Alabama, in order to establish 
justice, ensure domestic tranquility and secure the blessings of lib¬ 
erty to ourselves and our posterity, invoking the favor and guid¬ 
ance of Almighty God, do ordain and establish the following Con¬ 
stitution and form of government for the State of Alabama. 



CONSTITUTIONAL CONVENTION, 1901 


2255 


ARTICLE I. 

Declaration of Rights. 

That the great, general and essential principles of liberty and 
free government may be recognized and established, we declare 

1. That all men are equally free and independent; that they 
are endowed by their Creator with certain inalienable rights; that 
among these are life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness. 

2. That all political power is inherent in the people, and all 
free governments are founded on their authority and instituted 
for their benefit; and that, therefore, they have at all times an 
inalienable and indefeasible right to change their form of govern¬ 
ment in such manner as they may deem expedient. 

3. That no religion shall be established by law; that no 
preference shall be given by law to any religious sect, society, de¬ 
nomination or mode of worship; that no one shall be compelled 
by law to attend any place of worship, nor pay tithes, taxes or 
other rate for building or repairing any place of worship, or for 
maintaining any minister or ministry; that no religious tests shall 
be required as a qualification to any office or public trust under 
this State; and that the civil rights, privileges and capacities of 
any citizen shall not be in any manner, affected by this religious 
principles. 

4. That no law shall ever be passed to curtail or restrain the 
liberty of speech or of the press; and any person may speak, write 
and publish his sentiments on all subjects, being responsible for 
the abuse of that liberty. 

5. That the people shall be secure in their persons, houses, 
papers and possessions from unreasonable seizures or searches; 
and that no warrant shall issue to search any place or to seize any 
person or thing without probable cause, supported by oath or af¬ 
firmation. 

6. That in all criminal prosecutions, the accused has a right 
to be heard by himself and counsel, or either; to demand the na¬ 
ture and cause of the accusation ; to have a copy thereof; to be con¬ 
fronted by the witnesses against him ; to have compulsory process 
for obtaining witnesses in his favor; to testify in all cases, in his 
own behalf, if he elects so to do; and, in all prosecutions by in¬ 
dictment, a speedy, public trial, by an impartial jury of the county 
or district in which the offense was committed ; and that he shall 
not be compelled to give evidence against himself, nor be deprived 
of life, liberty or property, but by due process of law; but the Gen¬ 
eral Assembly may, by a general law, provide for a change of 
venue for the defendant in all prosecutions by indictment, and that 
such change of venue, on application of the defendant may be heard 



2256 


OFFICIAL PROCEEDINGS 


and determined without the personal presence of the defendant so 
applying therefor. Provided, that at the time of the application 
for the change of venue the defendant is imprisoned in jail or some 
legal place of confinement. 

7. That no person shall be accused, or arrested, or detained, 
except in cases ascertained by law, and according to the forms 
which the same has prescribed; and no person shall be punished, 
but by virtue of a law established and promulgated prior to the 
offense and legally applied. 

<S. 1 hat no person shall, for an indictable offense, be pro¬ 

ceeded against criminally, by information except in cases arising 

the militia and volunteer forces when m actual service, or when 
assembled under arms as a military organization, or, by leave of 
the court, for misfeasance, misdemeanor, extortion and oppression 
in office, otherwise than is provided in this Constitution ; Provided, 
that in cases of misdemeanor, the Oeneral Assembly, may by law 
dispense with a grand jury and authorize such prosecutions and 
proceedings before Justices of the Peace or such other inferior 
courts as, may be by law established. 

9. 1 hat no person shall, for the same offense he twice put in 
jeopardy of life or limb; but courts may, for reasons fixed by law, 
discharge juries from the consideration of any case, and no per¬ 
son shall gain any advantage bv reason of such discharge of the 
jury. 

10. 1 hat no person shall be barred from prosecuting or de¬ 
fending. before any tribunal in this State, by himself or counsel, 
any civil cause to which he is a party. 

11. That the right of trial by jury shall remain inviolate. 

12. That in all prosecutions for libel or for the publication of 
papers investigating the official conduct of officers or men in public- 
capacity, or when the matter published is proper for public infor¬ 
mation, the truth thereof may be given in evidence; and that in all 
indictments for libel, the jury shall have the right to determine the 
law and the facts under the direction of the court. 

13. That all courts shall be open ; and that every person, for 
any injury done him, in his land, goods, person or reputation shall 
have a remedy by due process of law; and right and justice shall 
be administered without sale, denial or delay. 

14. That the State of Alabama shall never be made a defend¬ 
ant in any court of law or equity. 

15. .That excessive fines shall not be imposed, nor cruel or 
unusual punishments inflicted. 



CONSTITUTIONAL CONVKNTION, 1901 


2257 


16. 'That all persons shall, before conviction, be bailable by 
sufficient securities, except for capital offences, when the proof is 
evident or the presumption great, and that excessive bail shall 
not, in any case be required. 

17. That the privilege of the writ of habeas corpus shall not 
be suspended by the authorities of this State. 

18. That treason against the State shall consist only in levy¬ 
ing war against it, or adhering to its enemies, giving them aid and 
comfort; and that no person shall be convicted of treason, except 
on the testimony of two witnesses to the same overt act. or his 
own confession in open court. 

19. That no person shall be attainted of treason by the Gen¬ 
eral Assembly; and that no conviction shall work corruption of 
blood, or forfeiture of estate. 

20. That no person shall be imprisoned for debt. 

21. That no power of suspending laws shall be exercised, ex¬ 
cept by the General Assembly. 

22. That no ex post facto law, or any law. impairing the ob¬ 
ligation of contract, or making any irrevocable or exclusive grants 
of special privileges, or immunities, shall be passed by the Gen¬ 
eral Assembly, and every grant of a franchise, privilege or im¬ 
munity shall forever remain subject to revocation, alteration or 
amendment. 

23. That the exercise of the right of eminent domain shall 
never be abridged nor so construed as to prevent the General As¬ 
sembly from taking the property and franchises of incorporated 
companies and subjecting them to public use the same as indi¬ 
viduals, but private property shall not be taken or applied for pub¬ 
lic use, unless just compensation be first made therefor; nor shall 
private property be taken for private use. or for the use of cor¬ 
porations. other than municipal, without the consent of the owner. 
Prcwided, however, that the General Assembly may, by law. 
secure to persons or corporations the right-of-way over the lands 
of other persons or corporations and by general laws provide for 
and regulate the exercise by persons and corporations of the rights 
herein reserved; but just compensation shall in all cases be first 
made to the owner; and provided, that the right of eminent domain 
shall not 1 be so construed as to allow taxation or forced subscrip¬ 
tion for the benefit of railroads or any other kind of corporation 
other than municipal or for the benefit of any individual or asso¬ 
ciation. 

24. That all navigable waters shall remain forever public 
highways free to the citizens of the State and of the United States, 
without tax, impost or toll; and that no tax. toll, impost or wharf- 



2258 


OFFICIAL PROCEEDINGS 


age shall be demanded or received from the owner of any mer¬ 
chandise or commodity for the use of the shores or any wharf 
erected on the shores, or in or over the waters of any navigable 
stream, unless the same be expressly authorized by law. 

25. That the citizens have a right, in a peaceable manner to 
assemble together for the common good, and to apply to those in¬ 
vested with the power of government for redress of grievances, or 
other purposes by petition, address or remonstrance. 

26. That every citizen has a right to bear arms in defense 
of himself and the State. 

27. That no standing army shall be kept up without the con¬ 
sent of the General Assembly, and, in that case, no appropriation 
for its support shall be made for a longer term than one year, and 
the military shall in all cases and at all times be in strict subor¬ 
dination to the civil power. 

28. That no soldier shall, in time of peace, be quartered in 
any house without the consent of the owner nor in time of war but 
in a manner to be prescribed by law. 

29. That no title of nobility or hereditary distinction, privi¬ 
lege, honor or emolument shall be granted or conferred in this 
State: and that no office shall be created, the appointment to which 
shall be for a longer time than during good behavior. 

30. That immigration shall be encouraged, emigration shall 
not be prohibited and that no citizen shall be exiled. 

31. That temporary absence from the State shall not cause 
a forfeiture of residence once obtained. 

32. That no form of slavery shall exist in this State; and 
there shall not be any involuntary servitude otherwise than for 
the punishment of crime, of which the party shall have been duly 
convicted. 

33. The privilege of suffrage shall be protected by laws regu¬ 
lating elections and prohibiting under adequate penalties, all un¬ 
due influences from power, bribery, tumult or other improper con¬ 
duct. 

34. Foreigners who are, or may hereafter become bona fide 
residents of this State, shall enjoy the same rights in respect to 
the possession, enjoyment and inheritance of property as native 
born citizens. 

35. That the sole object and only legitimate end of govern¬ 
ment is to protect the citizen in the enjoyment of life, liberty and 
property and when the government assumes other functions, it is 
usurpation and oppression. 



CONSTITUTIONAL CONVENTION, 1901 


2259 


36. In the government of this State, except in the instances 
in this Constitution hereinafter express^ directed or permitted, 
the Legislative Department shall never exercise the executive or 
judicial powers, or either of them; the executive shall never exer¬ 
cise the legislative and judicial powers, or either of them ; the ju¬ 
dicial shall never exercise the legislative or executive powers, or 
either of them ; to the end it may be a government of laws and not 
of men. 

37. That this enumeration of certain rights shall not impair 
or deny others retained by the people; and, to guard against any 
encroachments on the rights herein retained, we declare that ev¬ 
erything in this Declaration of Rights is excepted out of the Gen¬ 
eral Powers of Government and shall forever remain inviolate. 

THE PRESIDENT—The question now is on the passage of 
the article, which under the rules will be submitted to any aye 
and nay vote. As many as favor its adoption as read will say aye 
and those opposed no as your names are called. 

Upon the call of the roll, the vote resulted as follows: 

AYEvS 


Messrs. President, 

Fitts, 

Leigh, 

Banks, 

Fletcher, 

Locklin, 

Barefield, 

Fosliee, 

Lomax. 

Beddow, 

Foster. 

Long (Butler). 

i Whune, 

Freeman. 

Long (Walker), 

Blackwell, 

Gilmore, 

Lowe (Jefferson), 

Boone, 

Glover, 

Macdonald, 

Brooks, 

Grayson, 

McMillan (Baldwin), 

Bulger, 

Greer, of Calhoun. 

Malone, 

Burns, 

Greer, of Perry, 

Martin, 

Cardon, 

Haley. 

Maxwell. 

Carmichael, of Colbert, 

Handley, 

Merrill, 

Carnathon, 

Harrison, 

Miller (Marengo), 

Case, 

Heflin, of Chambers, 

Miller (Wilcox), 

Chapman, 

Heflin, of Randolph, 

Moody, 

Cofer, 

Henderson, 

Murphrce, 

Coleman, of Greene, 

Hodges, 

NeSmith, 

Cornwall, 

Hood, 

Norman, 

Davis, of DeKalb, 

1 lowell, 

Norwood, 

Davis, of Etowah, 

I fowze, 

( )ates. 

1 )ent, 

Inge. 

O'Neal (Lauderdale), 

(leGraffenreid, 

Jones, of Bibb, 

O’Neill (Jefferson), 

Duke, 

Jones, of Hale, 

<>PP. 

Kley, 

Jones of Montgomery, 

( )’Rear, 

Eyster, 

Kirk, 

Palmer, 

Espy, 

Knight, 

Pearce, 

Ferguson, 

Ledbetter, 

Pettus, 



2260 

OFFICIAL PROCEEDINGS 

Pillans, 

Selheimer, 

Waddell, 

Pitts, 

Sentell, 

Walker, 

Porter, 

Sloan, 

Watts, 

Proctor, 

Smith (Mobile), 

Weakley, 

Reese, 

Smith. Mac. A., 

Weatherly, 

Reynolds (Henry), 

Smith, Morgan M., 

White, 

Robinson, 

Sorrell, 

Whiteside, 

Rogers (Lowndes), 

Spragins, 

Williams (Barbour), 

Rogers (Sumter), 

Stewart, 

Wilson (Clarke), 

Samford, 

Stoddard, 

Wilson (Washington) 

Sanders, 

Tayloe, 

Winn. 

Sanford, 

Thompson, 


Searcy, 

Vaughan, 

TOTAL—117. 


NOES 


Byars, 

VVillet, 

TOTAL—2. 


ABSENT OR NOT VOTING 

Almon, 

Graham, of Montgomery, 

Morrisette, 

Altman, 

Graham, of Talladega, 

Mulkey, 

Ashcraft, 

Grant, 

Parker (Cullman). 

Bartlett, 

FTinson, 

Parker (Elmore), 

Beavers, 

Jackson, 

Phillips, 

Browne, 

Jenkins, 

Renfro, 

Burnett, 

Jones, of Wilcox, 

Reynolds (Chilton), 

Carmichael, 

King, 

Sollie, 

Cobb, 

Kirkland, 

Spears. 

Coleman, of Walker, 

Kyle, 

Williams (Marengo), 

Craig, 

Lowe (Lawrence), 

Williams (Elmore), 

Cunningham, 

McMillan (Wilcox), 



THE PRESIDENT-—It appears there are 116 ayes and noes 
2, and the article is adopted. The article will be referred to the 
Committee on Order Consistency and Harmony. 

MR. WHITE—Will it be printed? 

THE PRESIDENT—The rules provide that it should be 
printed and referred to the Committee on Order, Consistency and 
Harmony. 

The Convention here resumed the special order, the considera¬ 
tion of the report of the Committee on Executive Department. 

The Clerk read Section 4 as follows: 

Sec. 4.—Senator shall be at least 27 years of age and Repre¬ 
sentatives 21 years of age; they shall have been citizens and in¬ 
habitants of their respective counties or districts one year next 



2201 


CONSTITUTIONAL CONVENTION, 1901 

before their election, if such county or district shall have been so 
long established; but if not, then of the county or district from 
which the same shall have been taken; and the}' shall reside in 
t eir respective counties or districts during their terms of service. 

MR. OATES—Mr. President, that is the old section, just as 
i is in the present Constitution, and I move its adoption. 

MR. ROGERS (Lowndes)—I have a substitute to offer. 

, The clerk read the substitute as follows: “Substitute the word 
resident in line 2 for the word ‘inhabitant/ ” 

THE PRESIDENT-The question will be on the amendment 
ottered by the gentleman from Lowndes. As many as favor the 
adoption of the amendment will say aye. The ayes have it. Is the 
Convention ready for the previous question? 

MR. WATTS—I want to. know whether, in the report, these 
words are included which were in the old Constitution in the sec¬ 
ond line: They shall have been citizens and inhabitants of their 
respective counties,” is the way it reads in the print, but the wav 
it reads in the old Constitution of this State “for three vears. and 
inhabitants of their respective counties.” 

THE CLERK—It is not here. 

MR. WATTS—I would like to have time to put it in there. 

THE PRESIDENT—There is an amendment pending now 
no doubt the gentleman will have time to offer his amendment. 

MR. DUKE—I have an amendment to offer: “Amend Sec¬ 
tion 4 of Article on Legislative Department by striking out "the 
words twenty-seven’ in the first line and inserting in lieu thereof 
twenty-five.”' 

THE PRESIDENT Ihe question is on the amendment of 
the gentleman from Chambers. Is the Convention ready for the 
question? 

MR. DUKE—I dislike to offer an amendment to a section 
that a committee from this Convention has left intact, and I would 
not do it. but for the fact that I think the section is inconsistent 
with some other sections of this Constitution and ought to be 
changed. Now, the amendment which I have offered changes the 
word “twenty-seven” to “twenty-five” in the first line of the sec¬ 
tion. It makes it read that the Senators shall be twenty-five years 
of age instead of twenty-seven as it stands in the old Constitution 
Now, Mr. President, the old Constitution and all of the sections 
that we have adopted with reference to other officers do not re¬ 
quire any officer to be over twenty-five years of age except the 
Governor of the State, and I cannot see why this Constitution 



2262 


OFFICIAL PROCEEDINGS 


should require that State Senators should be twenty-seven years 
of age. Under the Constitution a man twenty-five years of age 
may be elected Secretary of State and perform the duties of that 
office. Under the Constitution, a man may be elected Auditor of 
vour State at twenty-five years of age and perform the duties of 
that office. Under the Constitution, a man may be elected Treas¬ 
urer of your State and take charge and have control of the funds 
of the State, and yet it does not require him to be over twenty- 
five years of age. According to the sections of the Constitution 
that we have thus far adopted, a Justice of the Supreme Court 
need not be over twenty-five years of age. A man may be Chief 
Justice of the Supreme Court of the State at twenty-five years of 
age: and yet, Mr. President, this committee, with its report framed 
after the old Constitution, says that a man who is elected to the 
office of Senator of this State must be twenty-seven years of age. 
Now, I cannot see why this difference, I cannot see why a man is 
to be considered competent to fill all these offices at the age of 
twenty-five years that he should be sufficiently mature to fill all 
the officers I have mentioned at twenty-five years old, and vet 
not be so mature as to fill the office of Senator of this State. 

MR. WILLET—Will the gentleman allow me to ask a ques¬ 
tion? 

THE PRESIDENT—Does the gentleman consent to be in¬ 
terrupted ? 

MR. DUKE—Yes sir. 

MR. WILLET—Does not the gentleman recognize the dif¬ 
ference between a clerical office and a representative office? 

MR. DUKE—Yes, and in reply to that I will ask him if he 
thinks the office of Chief Justice of the Supreme Court of Ala¬ 
bama is a clerical office? 

MR. WILLET—To some extent, yes. 

MR. DUKE—Well, we differ about that. Not stopping there 
according to the Federal Constitution, a man may go to Congress 
and be but 25 years of age, and yet we say if he goes to the State 
Senate he must be 27 years old. Now, Mr. Chairman, I have no 
interest in this personally, everybody here knows that I am over 
27 years of age, and I have no friend under 27 years of age that 
wants to be Senator, but I do not think this inconsistency should 
appear in this Constitution; it is unreasonable, Mr. President, to 
require it. While I say I have no friend that I know of who wants 
to fill the office of State Senator, yet in the language of the dis¬ 
tinguished and eloquent gentleman from Montgomery, Governor 
Jones , this morning in his remarks on another Section of this Ar¬ 
ticle, I say give the young men a chance, they are the hope of the 
country. 



CONSTITUTIONAL CONVENTION. 1901 


2263 


Now, Mr. President, in youth, while a man is young, is the 
time that he is qualified to perform the duties of life. You take 
for example the men that have made their impress upon the world’s 
history, and it has been when they were young men. Napoleon 
Bonaparte was at the very height of his glory when he was 25 
years of age. Caesar almost conquered the world, yet died a young 
man. Alexander had the world at his feet, and wept because he 
could find no other worlds to conquer when he was a young man. 
and I do not see, Mr. President, why it is that we should not 
make this amendment and allow a person who is 25 years of age 
to be elected to the office of Senator in this State—especially in 
view of the fact that we have other provisions that only require 
other officers to be 25 years of age, which are more important 
than the office of Senator. 

MR. OATES—I believe the amendment is to strike out “twen¬ 
ty-seven” and insert “twenty-five?” 

MR. DUKE—That is all. 

MR. OATES — Well, I have no special objection to it. It 
stands that way in the present Constitution—twenty-seven, and 
that is the only reason why we retained it that way. The Com¬ 
mittee passed the Section as they found it in the Constitution. 1 
notice, however, in the copying, either by the Clerk or the printer, 
there are some words omitted which I will ask presently to have 
reinstated. It don’t affect this question, however, of changing the 
age from 27 to 25. I hav$ no special reason to favor it one wav 
or the other. Either put it 27 or 25 as you desire. 

MR. HEFLIN (Chambers)—Do I understand the Chairman 
to say that he has no objection? 

MR. OATES—I have none. I just as leave put it at 25 as 27 
The Committee voted it 27, and for that reason it is in there. 

Mr. Boone here took the Chair. 

MR. HEFLIN—As a member of the Committee, 1 opposed 
that majority report in order to allow the young men of 25 years 
of age to come to the Senate. I see no good reason when the 
Congress of the United States allowed a member to sit in that body 
at 25, that the State Senate should require a man to be 27 vears 
of age before he could sit in a legislative body at home. 

MR. CHAPMAN—May I ask the gentleman a question? 

PRESIDENT PRO TEM—Does the gentleman yield for a 
question ? 

MR. HEFLIN—Certainly. 

MR. CHAPMAN—Do you compare a Senator in the State 
Legislature of any age with a common Congressman of any age? 



2264 


OFFICIAL PROCEEDINGS 


MR. HEFLIN—I admit the point; of order is well taken. 

MR. SAMFORD (Pike)—Will the gentleman permit a ques¬ 
tion? 

MR. HEFLIN—Certainly. 

MR. SAMFORD—How would the State of Alabama fare with 
thirty-three Senators 25 years old, and in the House 100 Repre¬ 
sentatives 21 years of age? 

MR. DUKE—Ask him how Congress would fare with all the 
Representatives only 25 years of age? 

MR. HEFLIN—I will ask the gentleman if he thinks in the 
course of human events that it would ever occur while the world 
stands, that the Senate would be composed of thirty-three Sen¬ 
ators of the age of 25 years each, and the House be composed of 
100 Representatives of the age of 21 years or between 21 and 25 
years of age? It would not occur, Mr. President, in a thousand 
generations, no such thing would ever confront the people of Ala¬ 
bama, and I want to lift my voice here along the lines suggested 
by the gentleman from Montgomery this morning and endorsed 
by my colleague from Chambers, that what Alabama needs is to 
give more encouragement to her young men. If there are those 
here who are not willing to open the gates and permit them to 
compete with them before the people I ask them to reconsider, 
to let down the bars and let those of the twenty-five year limit 
come in, and give those young men an opportunity to come into 
this body and into the other end of the Capitol and be trained 
properly to make good servants of the people of Alabama. There 
can be no objection to it, Mr. President. The gentleman from 
Chambers (Mr. Duke) my colleague, has argued that the other 
officers of State are only required to be twenty-five years of age, 
except the Governor. As I said before, a Congressman from Ala¬ 
bama is not required to be but twenty-five years of age and whv 
should we say here in the very organic structure of our law that 
a young man who stands up before his people competent in everv 
respect to represent them in the Senate, and they desire him to 
represent them, he is met with this stumbling block in the funda¬ 
mental laws of the State—you are not old enough. Mr. President, 
William Pitt was Prime Minister of England when he was twen¬ 
ty-five years of age. I trust the gentlemen do not argue that a 
man must be old before he has any sense, if so we differ on that 
proposition. We have seen a negative answer given to that con¬ 
tention by even boys of sixteen years of age. I favor, Mr. Presi¬ 
dent, putting in the amendment at twenty-five years. I have 
spoken longer than I intended, and as there is practically no op¬ 
position to the twenty-five year limit, I move the previous ques¬ 
tion. 



CONSTITUTIONAL CONVENTION. 1901 


2265 


THE PRESIDENT PRO TEM—The question is. shall the 
previous question be ordered? 

MR. WATTS—Is that on the whole section? 

THE PRESIDENT PRO TEM—No, sir; on the amendment. 

A vote being’ taken, the previous question was ordered. The 
question then recurred upon the adoption of the amendment, and 
on a division, the amendment was adopted by 73 ayes to 39 noes. 

MR. OATES—I desire to offer an amendment to supply an 
omission that has been made. 

The Clerk read the amendment as follows: “Amend by add¬ 
ing after the word ‘citizen’ in line two, the following: ‘An inhabi¬ 
tant of this State for three years.’ ” 

THE PRESIDENT PRO TEM—I will state to the gentle¬ 
man from Montgomery that an amendment has already been 
adopted offered by the gentleman from Lowndes inserting the 
word “resident” instead of “inhabitant.” 

MR. OATES—That is true, the Clerk will change that. I 
will ask the Clerk to read the amendment as it is now. 

The Clerk read as follows: “They shall have been citizens 
and residents—as amended the word residents. 

MR. OATES—I am asking about the original bill. 

THE CLERK—That is what I am reading from. 

MR. OATES—Read the balance of the Section. 

The Clerk read as follows: “Shall be citizens and inhabi¬ 
tants”—changed to “residents”—“of their respective counties and 
districts one year next before their election.” 

MR. OATES-That is not the right place. Send my amend¬ 

ment back to me. 

MR. EYSTER—I have an amendment I wish to offer. 

The clerk read the amendment as follows: “Amend Section 
4 by striking out twenty-one in the first and second lines and in¬ 
serting in lieu thereof the word twenty-five.” 

MR. PETTUS—I move to lay that amendment on the table. 

A vote being taken, the amendment was tabled. 

MR. BURNS—Are amendments in order? 

THE PRESIDENT PRO TEM—Yes. 

MR. BURNS—I have a substitute. 



2266 


OFFICIAL PROCEEDINGS 


MR. SAMFORD (Pike)—I move the adoption of this sec¬ 
tion as it stands, and on that I call for the previous question. 

THE PRESIDENT PRO TEM—The gentleman from Dal¬ 
las has an amendment. 

MR. ROGERS SUMTER—I make the point of order that it 
is against the rules to wait upon a gentleman to prepare an amend¬ 
ment. 

THE PRESIDENT PRO TEM.—The amendment has al¬ 
ready been handed to the clerk. 

The clerk read the amendment as follows: Amend—I don't 
know what; it don’t say—“shall have been a white qualified elec¬ 
tion for three years.” 

MR. SAMFORD (Pike)—I move to lay the amendment on 
the table. 

MR. BURNS—That is to keep “niggers” from being Senators. 

A vote being taken, the amendment was tabled by 50 ayes to 
38 noes on division. 

MR. DUKE—I move the adoption of the section, and upon 
that I call for the previous question. 

THE PRESIDENT—The gentleman from Montgomery (Mr. 
Oates) desired to interline two or three words that are in this sec¬ 
tion in the old Constitution and that seem to be material to the 
sense of the section, and which by inadvertance has been omitted. 
The amendment of the delegate from Montgomery was read as 
follows: 

Amend by adding after the words citizens in line 2 of the 
printed copy the following: “And residents of this State for three 
years.” 

MR. SAMFORD—I call the attention of the gentleman from 
Montgomery to the fact that if it reads that way, according to my 
conception, it will not have any sense. That is the way it appears 
to me. 

THE PRESIDENT PRO TEM—Read the section with the 
amendment in it as it would appear if the amendment is adopted. 

The clerk read as follows: Senators shall be at least 25 years 
of age and Representatives 21 years of age. They shall have been 
citizens and residents of this State for three years and residents 
of their respective counties or districts one year next before their 
election. 

MR. OATES—I do not understand that the word “inhabitant” 
has been stricken out but once. 



CONSTITUTIONAL CONVENTION, 1901 


2267 


THE CLERK—It does not appear in the report but once. 

MR. BURNS—Is an amendment in order. I want to strike 
out that residents and citizens and insert qualified electors. 

MR. OATES—I ask the Secretary to read this section with 
the insertion of this amendment. 

The Clerk then read the section as follows: “Senators shall 
be at least tw r enty-five years of age and representatives twenty- 
one years of age. They shall have been citizens and residents of 
this State for three years and residents of their respective counties 
or districts one year next before their election." That is the wav 
it will read as amended by your amendment. 

AIR. OATES—It ought to be inhabitants. 

THE CLERK—That inhabitants was stricken out. 

MR. OATES—I was inquiring whether it was stricken out 
the first or second time. 

THE CLERK—It only appears in your report in one place. 
It is left out in the first place or the second time, I don’t know' 
which. 

MR. OATES—Shall have to be citizens and resident of this 
inhabitants of their respective counties and districts. 

THE CLERK—I thought the word “inhabitants” was amend¬ 
ed by the word “residents” as amended by Mr. Rogers. 

MR. OATES—That is all right, I move the adoption of the 
section. 

(Mr. Knox here took the chair.) 

The Clerk then read amendment as follows: “Amend by add¬ 
ing after the word “citizens” in line two “and residents of this 
State three years.” 

And upon a vote being taken the amendment was adopted. 

MR. BURNS—I would like to inquire what became of the 
amendment I sent up? 

THE PRESIDENT—The Secretary will read the amendment 
offered by the gentleman from Dallas. 

The Clerk then read the amendment offered by Mr. Burns as 
follows: “Py striking out residents and citizens and insert ‘quali¬ 
fied electoi^.’ 

AIR/BURNS—I want to ask the distinguished Chariman— 

A DELEGATE—I move to lay the amendment on the table. 



2268 


OFFICIAL PROCEEDINGS 


MR. REESE I rise to a point of order. The gentleman from 
Dallas had the floor. The Chair recognized him, and a motion 
to table his amendment is out of order while the gentleman has 
the floor. It is discourteous on the part of the gentleman to make 
a motion to table his amendment. 

MR. OATES—I do not understand who was making the mo¬ 
tion to table. 

MR. BURNS—Do not the words “qualified elector” cover 
both “residents and citizens?” 

MR. OATES—It is wholly unnecessary. The section is just 
as it has been in the Constitution for twenty-five years, except 
the change in the age of the Senator and the change of the one 
word that has been made. 

„ MR- BURNS—I want to ask one question: Don’t the words 
‘qualified electors” mean as much and embrace “citizens and resi¬ 
dents?” Can he be a qualified elector without being a citizen and 
a resident? 

THE PRESIDENT—Has the gentleman from Dallas the gen¬ 
tleman from Montgomery under cross-examination? 

MR. BURNS—I want him to answer that question. 

MR. OATES—The only reply I have to that is to move to 
lav the amendment of the gentleman from Dallas on the table. 

On a vote being taken upon a division it resulted in 55 ayes 
and 39 noes and the motion to table the amendment was carried. 

MR. OATES I move the previous question upon the adop¬ 
tion of the section as amended. 

And upon a vote being taken the section as amended was 
adopted. 

Section 5 was then read as follows: 

Section 5. The legislature shall meet quadrennially, at the 
Capitol in the Senate chamber and in the hall of the House of 
Representatives (exceptdn cases of the destruction of the Capitol, 
or epidemics, when the Governor may convene them at such place 
in the State as he may deeriybest) on the day specified in this Con¬ 
stitution, or on such other dgy as may be prescribed by law; and 
shall not remain in session longer than sixty days at the first ses¬ 
sion held under this Constitution, nor longer than fiftv days at anv 
subsequent session. 

MR. WILLIAMS (Barbour)—I have an amendment to Sec¬ 
tion 5. 

The Clerk then read the amendment as follows: 



CONSTITUTIONAL CONVENTION, 1901 


2269 


To amend Section 5 by striking out the word “quadrennially” 
and inserting in place of the same the word “biennially/' 

MR. WILLIAMS (Barbour)—I have only a few words to 
submit on the amendment. It will be seen it refers only to the 
sessions of the Legislature, and not to the election of the members. 
It seems to me, sir, that four years is too long a period in which 
there will be no session of the Legislature. I care nothing about 
how long a member of the Legislature may be chosen for; but 
I do think that the Legislature ought to meet oftener than once 
in four years. I believe that the elections ought to be oftener than 
once in four years, but that is not the question now. It is a ques¬ 
tion of the matter of sessions. A legislator is the nearest man to 
his people, and when they are in session they represent the body 
of the sovereignty of the State of Alabama. We profess to be a 
progressive people, keeping up with the changes and requirements 
of the times. At least it is our wish to do so. I don’t know what 
the custom mav be in other States, nor do I care. I was born and 
reared in the State of Alabama and my familiarity with political 
policies is confined to this State. All of my information as to 
proper policies and procedure is with reference to my own State, 
ft would be an experiment to keep our Legislature silent for four 
years. We would almost forget we had a Legislature. It is too 
long a period for a bad law to run or to wait for the enactment 
of a good one. Legislatures sometimes make unwise laws, and if 
the people can’t be rid of such laws short of a period of four years, 
they will get to indulging the feeling akin to revolution and almost 
equally so will their sentiment extend when they want a new law 
which they cannot get short of such a period. We would forget 
the acquaintance of our members, sir, and they would forget the 
business of legislation if they could not meet oftener than every 
four years. What is the good of it? I take the liberty of saying 
that the best system I ever 1 saw was in my youth in the State of 
South Carolina., the Legislature met every winter and stayed in 
session only thirty days. The members are accountable to the 
people. They make their changes with the people. They get their 
directions from the people who give them their commissions. It 
is not my purpose to make a regular speech, because I do not be¬ 
lieve it would be welcomed, and I have no disposition to undertake 
it. I say it is an untried thing for the Legislature of the State of 
Alabama to sit only once in every four years. I would be an un¬ 
tried situation to the people who could hardly become familiar with 
their Representatives if they did not see them in official session 
oftener than once in every four years. It would be an untried con¬ 
dition of the affairs of the State if they could not have an examina¬ 
tion into the weak places and remedy them by fit legislation in¬ 
jected oftener than once in four years. It is too long a dearth, 
sir. There is unwise legislation perhaps at every session of the 
Legislature and at every session something is left out that ought 



im 


OFFICIAL PROCKFDINCiS 


to go in. I am not undertaking to interfere with the period h»r 
which you elect the members. Let them go to the people and coun¬ 
cil with them, and learn not only their duty but how to do it at 
least once in every two years. Without saying more 1 respect¬ 
fully insist upon the amendment. 

MR. LONG—1 offer a substitute for the original Section, and 
the amendment offered by the delegate from Barbour. 

The substitute was read as follows : 

Amend Section 5 by striking out the word “quadrennial” in 
the first line and insert “biennial.” Also by inserting in lieu of the 
word “sixty” in the third line “thirty,” and also strike out the word 
“fifty” and insert the word “twenty-five” in lieu thereof. 

MR. LONG—I shall not attempt to make a speech. That 
amendment allows the Legislature to meet every two years and 
instead of being an additional expense as it is claimed, it will be a 
saving. The committee’s report fixes the length of the first session 
at sixty days and I reduce that to thirty days. Then instead of 
fifty days as in the other part of the Section, I make it twenty-five 
days. 

MR. HARRISON—Do you think the next Legislature could 
discharge its duties under this Constitution in thirty days. 

MR. LONG (Walker)—Yes, I think they could. 

MR. FOSTER—Will the gentleman y ield to me for a ques¬ 
tion? 

MR. LONG (Walker)—If not taken out of my time I will, 
but if it is to be taken out of my time I cannot yield. 

THE PRESIDENT—It certainly will be taken out of the 
gentleman’s time. 

MR. LONG (Walker)—Then I do not yield. Under this 
Section the Governor can call the Legislature in extra session 
and the effect of having the sessions of the Legislature four years 
apart will be that that will have to be done frequently and that 
will be an additional expense. Everybody familiar with Legisla¬ 
tures know that they draw two mileages anyhow. This amend¬ 
ment of mine fixes the session of the Legislature so that it meets 
every two years and can only stay in session 25 days after the 
first Legislature following this Constitution. If the distinguished 
gentleman from Lee or the members on this floor wish the Legis¬ 
lature first in session after the adoption of this Constitution to 
sit for forty, or fifty, or sixty days, that can be left as in the section 
and I will limit the sessions thereafter to twenty-five days. I am 
perfectly willing to let the matter stand that way. 



CONSTITUTIONAL CONVENTION, 1901 


2271 


MR. HARRISON—I suggest not to strike out the sixty. 

MR. LONG (Walker)—Then let the sixty stand in the place 
of the thirty. 

THE PRESIDENT—The delegate from Walker asks unani¬ 
mous consent to strike out that portion of his amendment. Is there 
objection? The Chair hears none and it may be done. 

MR. LOWE (Jefferson)—I had risen for the purpose of in¬ 
troducing the amendment which was offered by the delegate from 
Harbour. The proposition suggested by the committee is an in¬ 
novation upon the custom which has prevailed in Alabama since 
it was admitted to the Union. It is more than that, it is a radical 
innovation, at variance with the customs of all the governments 
in the world having representative form of Government that I 
know of. Have we gotten to be afraid of the people? Have we 
gotten to be afraid to trust them to hold an election? Have the 
people become tired of electing their officers and representatives? 
Why, you propose for the first time in the history of the State 
that the immediate representatives of the people, the law-making 
power, shall be elected for four years. The theory of representa- 
tiv government is that the law-making body must be in immediate 
contact with the people, and come fresh to the Legislature from 
the body of the people. What motive can inspire this change? I 
beg of you before you tear down the old Constitution, before you 
change the old law and the old rule to ask why the change should 
be made, what good reasons can be assigned for it? Is it caprice, 
is it a fad with this Convention or is there a motive behind it? 
I would rather believe it was a mere fad than to recognize, as I 
do recognize, that there is a motive behind it. The people have a 
right to be heard in the legislative halls by their representatives 
coining fresh from the homes of the people. They say we have 
too many elections and yet the men who complain of elections 
are the men who raise their voices for education and for the bare¬ 
footed boys. What better system of education can prevail in any 
country than frequent elections and discussions of public ques¬ 
tions before the people. How many young men in America have 
gotten their fir>t inspiration from discussions upon the pubic 
stump of public matters? Why should we fear to have frequent 
elections? It does not disturb the people so much. No man has 
to go to a public discussion who does not want to go and yet we 
find the people coming to public meetings when public matters are 
to be debated and discussed. I say it is a better system of educa¬ 
tion than you can find in any ordinary system of text books. It 
tends to inspire the old men and the youth of the land. 

I am in favor of concentrating our elections. I see no reason 
why the State elections should not be held on the same clay that 
the Federal elections are held. I can see good reasons why it 



2272 


OFFICIAL PROCEEDINGS 


should have been changed when there were Federal election laws 
which would have controlled our elections if held on the same 
day; but now that those laws have been wiped from the statute 
books, I can see no reason why the elections should not be held 
on the same day. Always conferring on the Legislature the power 
to change the date of the election if the occasion should ever arise 
justifying or demanding the change. 

But I believe we can illy defend the proposition when we go 
back to the people that we have taken from them the right to 
select fresh representatives from their own midst to the Legisla¬ 
ture. 


Everybody recognizes the influences that mould legislation. 
All of us know that the special interests that seek their own ag¬ 
grandizement from the General Assembly are more influential than 
the mere desire for the public good. The great mass of the people 
have no influence here representing them except the fresh impulse 
their representatives bring here; but all the special interests are 
represented around the halls and doors and in the Capitol itself. 
And they want long terms. They say the people want to be re¬ 
lieved of the necessity of electing their representatives. Have the 
people ever said so? Has there ever been a public meeting in Ala¬ 
bama in which the people said they did not want the opportunity 
to elect their representatives every two years? In many States they 
have it every year and I think it would be better to have it every 
year in Alabama. I think it would be better to have more frequent 
elections than to go to this extreme of elections every four years. 
I shall always vote against the proposition to take from the peo¬ 
ple the right to elect representatives except once every four years. 
I think it preferable to have elections more often. They are the 
greatest inspiration to the young men of this country and whenever 
we come to believe that we cannot trust of electing their officers, 
whenever we come to believe that we cannot trust the people to 
elect their officers, then we should, as they did of old, cry for a 
King. 

MR. ROGERS (Sumter)—I rise to oppose the amendment of¬ 
fered by the gentleman from Barbour and also the substitute of¬ 
fered by the gentleman from Walker. 

It is with a great deal of regret that I stand here in opposition 
to the distinguished gentleman from Barbour, whose gray hairs 
and long years of service and whose busy life stand as a monument 
to his rectitude of character. 

But upon a grave proposition like this. I feel that every man 
should accord to his neighbor that same honesty of purpose which 
he asks to be accorded to him. 

I believe I stand here representing every class of citizens 
in the State of Alabama except perhaps the youthful legislator 



CONSTITUTIONAL CONVENTION. 1901 


2273 


and the professional politician. I believe 1 stand upon this floor 
representing the great mass of the people of the State of Alabama 
who wish to be let alone and freed from the annoyance placed upon 
them by biennial sessions of the Legislature. 

I heard this morning with one single exception the most re¬ 
markable reason given by a distinguished ex-Governor for holding 
biennial sessions. He gave as a reason in favor of that proposi¬ 
tion that the Legislature was a training school for the youth of 
the State. Is it a fact that we must turn loose upon the people 
of Alabama the young men of the State of Alabama to tamper with 
the liberties and rights of the people, because the Legislature is 
a training school? That is one of the strangest propositions I ever 
heard in my life. If that is true it would be infinitely better to in¬ 
stitute another training school for the youth to teach them the dif¬ 
ference between an amendment and a substitute, for I submit it is 
a great thing to know when the previous question should be put. 

The other remarkable reason on a par with the one assigned 
this morning by the distinguished ex-Governor was in the city 
of Tuscaloosa in 1884, when a candidate for Treasurer asked the 
people to vote for him because he used to sell watermelons from 
a wagon. These are the two remarkable reasons that I have heard 
given, and I think the)' stand unique in the history of Alabama. 

Now, Mr. President, after long and careful consideration, your 
Committee on Legislative Department have reported this ordi¬ 
nance. The first time this matter was brought up by myself in 
that committee, I could scarcely get a respectful hearing. The 
second time it was voted down by a majority of four, but upon the 
last time the committee report it almost unanimously. The rea¬ 
son for this was because it was so clear. Gentlemen speak of it 
as an innovation. Now, I am not answering the gentleman from 
Jefferson now because if the gentleman had been here this morn¬ 
ing and had been participating in the proceedings of this house, he 
would know that the question he is raising was settled on Section 
3. 


MR. LOWE—I was here this morning. 

MR. ROGERS (Sumter)—Were you here when Section 3 was 
adopted ? 

MR. LOWE (Jefferson)—I was. 

MR. ROGERS (Sumter)—Section 3 settled the question of 
elections, and that was all you addressed your remarks to, and as 
that was settled this morning, your remarks, I believe, were en¬ 
tirely out of order. 

Now, the reasons why we should have the sessions of the Leg¬ 
islature only once every four years are these. First, it will save 



2274 


OFFICIAL PROCEEDINGS 


the State of Alabama every four years more than $100,000. Gentle¬ 
men speak of this sum of money as if it were a bagatelle—mere 
pocket money. But in twenty years it amounts to a great deal 
to the people of the State of Alabama. The second reason for the 
four years’ session is that it secures certainty and fixidity of the 
law. As it is now, you can hardly know from time to time as the 
Legislature meets what the laws are. It takes such a length of 
time to get the laws printed that lawyers can hardly keep up with 
them, and the common people are unable to do it at all. We never 
know when a law is going to be changed. 

Another reason is, we can hardly find out the operations of a 
law in less than four years. A good law has to run that long be¬ 
fore the people can learn its advantages, and when we adopt this 
we will be in line with the States of Mississippi and Louisiana. 
The ordinance in the Constitution of Mississippi which is the 
pioneer State in this matter, is drawn by one of the greatest South¬ 
erners that ever lived. 

MR. BROOKS—The gentleman stated that we are in line 
with Mississippi and Louisiana. I would like for the gentleman 
to show where quadrennial sessions are held in the State of Louisi¬ 
ana. 


MR. ROGERS (Sumter)—I certainly understand that quad¬ 
rennial sessions have been held in Louisiana. 

MR. BROOKE—The Louisiana Convention of 1898 adopted 
biennial sessions of the Legislature, and biennial elections. 

MR. LONG (Walker)—You have stated that it costs a great 
deal to hold elections every two years; why is not my amendment 
cutting the sessions down to twenty-five a great saving, and what 
is your objection to it? 

MR. ROGERS (Sumter)—The objection is when you limit 
the Legislature to twenty-five days they are apt to act hastily, 
and without well considering. When they come here and know 
they only have twenty-five days within which to do their work 
they cannot properly consider it, and I object to it on that ground. 

Now so far as the motives behind this measure; the only rao- 
tice I know of is the desire to protect the interests of the people 
of Alabama. 

MR. BOONE—Is it not your experience that the mass of peo¬ 
ple throughout the State with whom you have talked on the sub¬ 
ject heartily endorse the committee’s report? 

MR. ROGERS (Sumter)—I will state without hesitation that 
nine-tenths of the people of the county of Sumter with whom I 
am as close as any man is with his constituents, want this done. 
Every man who approached me asked me for God’s sake to relieve 



CONSTITUTIONAL CONVENTION. 1901 


2275 


them from the biennial sessions of the Legislature. They said, 
“We cannot tell whether a law is a law or not. It takes nearly 
two years before it is printed and then the Legislature repeals 
it. We want certainty. We want to know that a law is going to 
run a certain length of time and we. therefore, object to biennial 
sessions of the Legislature.” 

Now, there is ample provision made whenever the interests 
of Alabama are menaced in any way; the Governor can call a 
special session. 

MR. FOSTER—Do you think the Representatives of the 
people ought to be at the will of the Governor? 

MR. ROGERS—I do not. I do not think the Legislature 
ought to meet at the will of the Governor, but when we put this 
provision in for the four years, we are representing the people and 
not the Governor of the State of Alabama. The people of the 
State of Alabama is speaking through us as to make the change. 

MR. FOSTER—I understood the gentleman to say when¬ 
ever there was a need, the Governor could call the Legislature 
into session. 

MR. ROGERS — That was the provision when it was two 
years. 

MR. FOSTER—If sessions of the Legislature at wide inter¬ 
vals are the proper thing, why not make it ten years instead of 
four? 

MR. ROGERS—It would perhaps be better if we could have 
it ten years; but we live in a great State, where changes may come 
in a time shorter than that, and in reply to the intimated sugges¬ 
tion of the gentleman, if two years is a good time to hold it. why 
not hold it all the time? 

MR. FOSTER—That is not an answer to my question at all. 

MR. ROGERS—I will allow the Convention to judge be¬ 
tween my friend and me as to whether my answer was not per¬ 
tinent. Now, I move the previous question on the amendment and 
the section. 

MR. SAMFORD—I ask that they be divided. 

THE PRESIDENT—They certainly will be divided; they 
are separate questions. Where a committee reports a section and 
an amendment is offered to the section and an amendment to that 
amendment they are separate questions and it is impossible to join 
them. The question will first be submitted on the amendment 
to the amendment and then on the amendment and then on the 
section. 



2276 


OFFICIAL PROCEEDINGS 


A vote being taken the main question was ordered. 

THE PRESIDENT — The question recurs on the amend¬ 
ment— 

MR LOWE (Jefferson)—A division of the question was de¬ 
manded. The amendment of the delegate from Walker embraces 
changes in the section and certainly there can be a division 
of that question. I ask for a reading of the amendment of the dele¬ 
gate from Walker. 

The amendment of the delegate from Walker was read as fol¬ 
lows : “Amend Section 5 by striking out the word ‘quadrennially’ 
in the first line and inserting ‘biennially’ instead, also by striking 
out the word ‘fifty’ in the sixth line and inserting twenty-five in 
lieu thereof. 

MR. LOWE (Jefferson)—I make the point of order and sub¬ 
mit that is easily susceptible of a division. 

THE PRESIDENT—The point of order is overruled. 

MR. LONG (Walker) — I would ask the Chairman of the 
Committee that if the legislature only meets every four years 
might not it happen that a United States Senator would have to 
be elected when there was no legislature in session and would not 
you be without a Senator elected by the legislature for possiblv 
two years or more. 

MR. OATES—All of those things are possible, but not likelv 
to occur. 

The yeas and nays on the amendment of the delegate from 
Walker were called for by Mr. O’Neal and the call was sustained. 

MR. LOWE (Jefferson)—I dislike to be insistent but I desire 
to demand a division of the question. The question involved in 
the amendment of the delegate from Walker is in the first place 
to strike out the word “quadrennially" and insert the word “bien¬ 
nially.” 

MR. BULGER—I rise to a point of order. 

THE PRESIDENT — The gentleman will please state the 
point of order. 

MR. BULGER—I understand the question has been ruled 
upon by the Chair to which the gentleman is now speaking and 
that is settled. 

MR. LOWE (Jefferson)—I was in hopes that the Chair had 
not understood the point of order and that thereby I should not 
need to take an appeal. The first proposition is to strike out 
“quadriennially”— 



CONSTITUTIONAL CONVENTION. 1901 


2277 


MR. FITTS—I rise to a point of order. 

THE PRESIDENT—The gentleman will state the point. 

MR. FITTS—The gentleman made his point of order and the 
Chair ruled against it and the gentleman did not appeal and the 
roll call was begun and the President had voted. 

MR. LOWE (Jefferson)—If the gentleman had been paving 
attention he would have seen— 

THE PRESIDENT—In the opinion of the Chair the point 
of order is well taken. The gentleman from Jefferson is out of or¬ 
der. 

MR. LOWE (Jefferson)—The Chair refuses to allow my ap¬ 
peal? 

THE PRESIDENT—The Chair has heard no appeal from 
the gentleman from Jefferson. If the gentleman appeals the Chair 
will submit the appeal to the house. 

MR. LOWE (Jefferson)—I want the Chair— 

THE PRESIDENT—Does the gentleman appeal? 

MR. LOWE (Jefferson)—I do appeal. 

MR. O’NEAL—We are not voting on all the amendments. 
Are we not voting onlv on the amendment of the delegate from 
Walker? 

THE PRESIDENT—Only on the amendment of the gen¬ 
tleman from Walker. The Chair has ruled on the point of order. 
The roll call had commenced, and the gentleman interrupts the 
roll call. The gentleman from Tallapoosa makes the point of 
order and the point of order is sustained. The gentleman from 
Jefferson appeals from the ruling of the Chair and the question is. 
shall the ruling of the Chair be sustained? 

MR. LOWE—I rise to a question of privilege. I hope it will 
not go out from the Chair that pending a roll call I interrupted. 1 
was on my feet demanding recognition and the Chair deliberately 
turned and recognized some other delegate. 

THE PRESIDENT—The Chair would state that the gentle¬ 
man from Jefferson is not entitled to the undivided attention of the 
Chair of this Convention. 

MR. LOWE (Jefferson)—When a gentleman arises - 

THE PRESIDENT—The gentleman from Jefferson is out of 
order and will please be seated. 

MR. LOWE—The Chair understands that T am appealing 
from the decision of the Chair. 



2278 


OFFICIAL PK< )CKi;i)I\'C.S 


THE PRESIDENT—The question is >hall the ruling of tin- 
Chair be sustained. 

A vote being taken viva voce the Chair was sustained. 

THE PRESIDENT—The question recurs upon the amend¬ 
ment of the delegate front Walker which is offered as an amend¬ 
ment to the amendment of the delegate from Barbour to the section 
as reported by the Committee. As many as favor the adoption of 
the amendment will say aye and those contrary will say no. It 
seems to the Chair— 

MR. BULGER—-The ayes and noes were called for, Mr. Presi¬ 
dent, and the call was sustained. 

THE PRESIDENT—The interruption and the appeal divert¬ 
ed the attention of the Chair and the Chair had forgotten Tin 
Clerk will call the roll. 

The result of the roll call was as follows: 


Bartlett, 

Beddow, 

Carmichael, of Coffee, 
Grayson, 

Haley, 

Total—15. 


AYES. 

1 larrison, 

Ilenderson, 
Hinson, 

Jones, of Bibb, 
Ledbetter. 


Long (Walker), 
O’Neill (Jefferson). 
Sanford, 

Waddell. 

Winn. 


Messrs. President, 
Banks, 

Barefield, 

Bethune, 

Blackwell, 

Boone, 

Brooks, 

Browne, 

Bulger, 

Byars, 

Carnathon, 

Case, 

Chapman. 

Cobb, 

Cofer, 

Coleman, of Greene, 
Cornwall, 

Davis, of DeKalb, 
Davis, of Etowah, 
Duke, 

Eley, 


NOES. 

Kyster. 

Espy. 

Ferguson, 

Fitts, 

Metchcr, 

Foshee, 

Foster. 

Freeman, 

Gilmore, 

Glover, 

Graham, of Montgomery. 
Greer, of Calhoun, 

Greer, of Perry. 

Handley, 

Heflin, of Chambers. 
Heflin, of Randolph, 

I lodges. 

Hood, 

Howell, 

Howze, 

Inge, 


Jones, of Hale, 

Jones, of Montgomery. 
Kirk, 

Knight, 

Leigh, 

I ,ock!in, 

Long (Butler), 

Lowe (Jefferson), 
McMillan (Baldwin). 
Malone, 

Martin, 

Maxwell. 

Merrill, 

Miller (Marengo), 
Miller (Wilcox), 
Moody, 

Murphree, 

XeSmith, 

Norman, 

Norwood, 

Oates, 




CONSTITUTIONAL CONVENTION, 1901 


2279 


O’Neal (Lauderdale), 

Rogers (Lowndes), 

Studdard, 

O’Rear, 

Rogers (Sumter), 

Tayloe, 

Palmer, 

Samford, 

Thompson, 

Parker (Elmore), 

Sanders, 

Vaughan, 

Pearce, 

Searcy, 

Walker, 

Pettus, 

Selheimer, 

Watts, 

Phillips, 

Sentell, 

Weakley, 

Pillans, 

Sloan, 

Weatherly, 

Pitts, 

Smith (Mobile), 

White, 

Porter, 

Smith, Morgan M., 

Whiteside, 

Proctor, 

Sorrell, 

Williams (Barbour), 

Reese, 

Spears, 

Williams (Marengo), 

Reynolds (Henry), 

Spragins, 

Wilson (Clarke), 

Robinson, 

Stewart, 

Wilson (Wash’gton), 

Total—105. 




ABSENT OR NOT VOTING. 

Alinon, 

deGraffenreid, 

McMillan (Wilcox), 

Altman, 

Graham, of Talladega, 

Morrisette, 

Ashcraft, 

Grant, 

Mulkey, 

Reavers, 

Jackson, 

opp, 

Burnett, 

Jenkins, 

Parker (Cullman), 

Ilums, 

Jones, of Wilcox, 

Renfro, 

Cardon, 

King, 

Reynolds (Chilton), 

Carmichael, of Coffee, 

Kirkland, 

Smith, Mac. A., 

Coleman, of Walker, 

Kyle, 

Sollie, 

Craig, 

Lomax, 

Willet, 

Cunningham, 

Lowe ( Lawrence), 

Williams (Elmore), 

Dent, 

Macdonald, 



So the amendment of the delegate from Walker was tabled. 

During the roll call: 

MR. CARDON—What are we voting on, Mr. President? 

THE PRESIDENT—On a motion to table the amendment 
offered by the delegate from Walker. 

MR. CARDON—Well, what is the amendment? 

THE PRESIDENT—It is changing the sessions of the legis¬ 
lature from quadrennial as reported by this Committee to biennial. 

MR. CARDON—I am in favor of that. 

THE PRESIDENT—And in changing the length of the ses¬ 
sion from fifty days as reported by the Committee to twenty-five 
days. 

MR. CARDON—I am against that. 

How does the gentleman vote? 



2280 


OFFICIAL PROCEEDINGS 


MR. CARDON— I am in t’a\or of mu* ami opposed to the 
other. I won’t vote. 


After the roll call : 

THE PRESIDENT— The question recurs on the amendment 
of the delegate from Barbour. 

The yeas and nays were demanded by Mr. O’Neal, but the 
call was not sustained. 

MR. O’NEAL—I would like to ask a verification to see 
whether the call is sustained. 

The call was then sustained, and the result of the roll call was 
as follows: 


Hanks, 

Beddow, 

Brooks, 

Bulger, 

Burns, 

Byars, 

Cardon, 

Carmichael, of Colbert, 
Case, 

Cobb, 

Duke, 

Kyster, 

Espy, 

Foshee, 

Foster, 

Grayson, 

Total—48. 


Messrs. President, 
Barefield, 

Bartlett, 

Bethune, 

Blackwell, 

Boone, 

Browne, 

Carnathon, 

Chapman, 

Cofer, 

Coleman, of Greene, 
Cornwall, 

Davis, of DeKalb, 
Davis, of Etowah, 


AYES. 

Greer, of Perry. 

Haley, 
i I and ley, 

Heflin, of Chambers. 
Heflin, of Randolph, 
Hood, 

Howell, 

Jones, of Montgomery. 
Jones, of Bibb. 

Ledbetter. 

Leigh, 

Long, of Walker, 

Lowe, of Jefferson, 
Martin, 

Moody, 

O’Neill (Jefferson), 
NOES. 

Kiev, 

Ferguson, 

Fitts, 

Fletcher, 

Freeman, 

Gilmore, 

Glover, 

Graham, of Montgomery. 
Greer, of Calhoun. 
Harrison, 

1 lenderson, 

Hinson, 

Hodges. 

Howze, 


Parker, of Elmore, 
Phillips. 

Proctor, 

Robinson, 

Rogers, of Lownde>. 
Samford, 

Sanford, 

Selheimer, 

Sollie, 

Spears, 

Thompson. 

Watts, 

Weakley, 

White, 

Williams, of Barbour, 
Winn. 


Inge, 

Jones, of Hale, 

Kirk, 

Knight, 

Locklin, 

Long, of Butler, 
McMillan (Baldwin), 
Malone, 

Maxwell, 

Merrill, 

Miller, of Marengo. 
Miller, of Wilcox, 
Murphree, 

NeSmith, 



CONSTITUTIONAL CONVENTION. 1901 


2281 


Norman, 

Reese, 

Studdard, 

Norwood, 

Reynolds (Henry), 

Tayloe, 

Oates, 

Rogers, of Sumter, 

Vaughan, 

O'Neal, of Lauderdale, 

Sanders, 

Waddell, 

°pp, 

Searcy, 

Walker, 

O’Rear, 

Sente!!, 

Weatherly, 

Palmer, 

Sloan, 

Whiteside, 

Pearce, 

Smith, of Mobile, 

Williams, of Marengo, 

Pettus, 

Smith, Morgan M.. 

Wilson, of Clarke, 

Pillans, 

Sorrell, 

Wilson, of Washington. 

Pitts,' 

Spragins, 


Porter, 

Stewart, 


Total-76. 




ABSENT OR NOT VOTING. 

Ahnon, 

Graham, of Talladega, 

McMillan, of Wilcox, 

Altman, 

Grant, 

Morrissette, 

Ashcraft, 

Jackson, 

Mulkey, 

Beavers, 

Jenkins, 

Parker, of Cullman, 

Burnett, 

Jones, of Wilcox, 

Renfro, 

Carmichael, of Coffee, 

King, 

Reynolds, of Chilton. 

Coleman, of Walker, 

Kirkland, 

Smith, Mac A., 

Craig, 

Kyle, 

Willet, 

Cunningham, 

Lomax, 

Williams, of Elmore, 

Dent, 

Lowe, of Lawrence, 


deOraffenreid, 

MacDonald, 


So the amendment was rejected. 


MR. ROGERS 

(Sumter)—I move a 

reconsideration of the 

vote and I move to lay that motion on the 

table. 

MR. O’NEAL- 

-I make the point of order that that cannot be 

done without a suspension of the rules. 


MR. ROGERS (Sumter)—Then I move a suspension of the 

rules that the reconsideration may Ire moved for now. 

MR. O’NEAL- 

-On that T call for the ayes and noes. 

The call was sustained, and the result 

of the roll call was as 

follows: 

AYES. 


Messrs. President, 

Case, 

Espy, 

Bethune, 

Cofer, 

Ferguson, 

Blackwell, 

Coleman, of Greene, 

Fitts, 

Boone, 

Cornwall, 

Fletcher. 

Browne, 

Davis, of DeKalb, 

Foshee, 

Byars, 

Davis, of Etowah. 

(fihnore. 

Carnathon, 

Kiev, 

Glover, 



2282 

Greer, of Calhoun, 
Harrison, 

Hodges, 

Howze, 

Inge, 

Jones, of Bibb, 

Tones, of Hale, 

Kirk, 

Knight, 

Leigh, 

Locklin, 

McMillan, of Baldwin, 
Malone, 

Maxwell, 

Merrill, 

Total—65. 


Ranks, 

Barefield, 

Bartlett, 

Beddow, 

Brooks, 

Bulger, 

Burns, 

Cardon, 

Carmichael, of Colbert, 
Cobb, 

Duke, 

Eyster, 

Foster, 

Freeman, 

Graham, of Montgomery, 
Grayson, 

Greer, of Perry, 

Haley, 

Heflin, of Chambers, 
Total—55. 


Almon, 

Altman, 

Ashcraft, 

Beavers, 

Burnett, 

Carmichael, of Coffee, 
Chapman, 

Coleman, of Walker, 
Craig, 


OFFICIAL PROCEEDINGS 


Miller (Marengo) 

Sanders, 

Miller (Wilcox), 

Searcy, 

Murphree, 

Sentell, 

Norman, 

Sorrell, 

Norwood, 

Spragins, 

Oates, 

Stewart, 

O’Rear. 

Stoddard, 

Palmer, 

Vaughan, 

Pearce, 

Waddell, 

Phillips, 

Walker. 

Pillans, 

Weatherly, 

Pitts, 

Whiteside, 

Porter, 

Williams (Marengo 

Reynolds, of Henry, 

Winn. 

Rogers (Sumter). 


NOES. 


Heflin, of Randolph. 

Reese, 

Henderson, 

Robinson, 

Hinson. 

Rogers (Lowndes ). 

11 ood, 

Samford, 

I lowell. 

Sanford, 

Jones, of Montgomery, 

Selheitner, 

Ledbetter, 

Smith (Mobile), 

Long, of Butler, 

Sol lie, 

Long, of Walker, 

Spears, 

Lowe, of Jefferson, 

Tayloe, 

Martin, 

Thompson, 

Moody, 

Watts, 

NeSmith, 

Wcaklev, 

O’Neal (Lauderdale), 

White, * 

O’Neill, of Jefferson, 

Williams (Barbour), 

Opp, 

Wilson (Clarke), 

Parker (Elmore), 

Wilson (Wash’gton), 

Pettus, 


Proctor, 


ABSENT OR NOT VOTING. 

Cunningham, 

King, 

Dent, 

Kirkland, 

deGraffenreid, 

Kyle, 

Graham, of Talladega, 

Lomax, 

Grant, 

Lowe, of Lawrence, 

Handley, 

Macdonald, 

Jackson, 

McMillan (Wilcox), 

Jenkins, 

Morrisette, 

Jones, of Wilcox, 

Mulkey, 



CONSTITUTIONAL CONVENTION, 1901 


2283 


Parker (Cullman), Sloan, Willet, 

Renfro, Smith, Morgan M., Williams (Elmore). 

Reynolds (Chilton), Smith, Mac. A., 

MR. WILSON (Clarke)—I rise to inquire for what purpose 
the motion to suspend has been made. 

^ HE PRESIDEN P—The motion to lay on the table the mo¬ 
tion to reconsider. 

MR. WILSON (Clarke)—What motion to reconsider. 

THE PRESIDENT—To reconsider the vote whereby the 
Convention refused to adopt the amendment of the delegate from 
Harbour. 

MR. W ILSON (Clarke)—Then under the rules that motion 
should be forthwith considered and does not go over until tomorrow 
and I direct the attention of the Chair to the last clause of Rule 
27 . That is a mere incidental question and not the main question. 

MR. W r HITE—I make the point of order that the gentleman’s 
point of order came too late. The vote has been taken and the 
result announced. 

I HE PRESIDENT—In the opinion of the Chair the point of 
order is not too late. The gentleman moved to reconsider, and 
then moved to suspend the rules, which as the gentleman calls to 
the attention of the Chair under the rule as to incidental or sub¬ 
sidiary questions was unnecessary. The motion to reconsider was 
in order. 

MR. O’NEAL (Lauderdale)—I rise to a point of order. 

MR. ROGERS (Sumter)—That was the position taken by 
the mover of this matter at first, but he yielded to the decision of 
the Chair. Now renewing my motion, I move the reconsideration 
of- 


THE PRESIDENT—The motion to reconsider is pending. 

MR. O’NEAL (Lauderdale)—I rise to a parliamentary in- 
q uiry. 

THE PRESIDENT—The gentleman from Sumter moves to 
lav the motion to reconsider upon the table. 

MR. O’Neal (Lauderdale) again sought recognition. 

THE PRESIDENT—The gentleman from Lauderdale will 
state the point of inquiry. 

MR. O’NEAL (Lauderdale)—This rule says a motion to re¬ 
consider a vote upon any incidental or subsidiary question, but I 
insist that the amendment of the gentleman from Barbour was not 



2284 


OFFICIAL PROCEEDINGS 


an incidental question, but was really the main question. It went 
to the main question. That rule only applies to incidental ques¬ 
tions, and certainly cannot mean a question of this kind, which 
goes to the merits of the controversy. The question was whether 
you changed quadrennial to biennial, and to give that construction 
to the rule- 

THE PRESIDENT—The gentleman rises to a question of 
inquiry and desires to have a ruling from, the Chair? 

MR. O’NEAL (Lauderdale)—Yes, sir; on that point. 

4 

THE PRESIDENT—The chair is of the contrary opinion. 
The question is on the motion to table the motion to reconsider. 

Upon a vote being taken, a division was called for, when the 
chair was requested to state the question. 

THE PRESIDENT—The Convention refused to adopt the 
amendment offered by the gentleman from Barbour. Thereupon 
the gentleman from Sumter moved to reconsider the vote whereby 
the Convention refused to adopt the amendment offered by the 
gentleman from Barbour, and thereupon he moved to lay that mo¬ 
tion upon the table, and as many as favor tabling the motion to 
reconsider will please rise and remain standing until counted. 

And by a vote of sixty-six ayes and forty-six noes, the motion 
to reconsider was laid on the table. 

THE PRESIDENT—The question now recurs upon the sec¬ 
tion as amended and upon that the previous question has been 
ordered. 

MR. WHITE—I rise to a point of order. 

THE PRESIDENT—The gentleman will state the point of 
order. 

MR. WHITE—That motion to table was not carried, because 
it takes a two-thirds vote. 

THE PRESIDENT—The chair will state, in the opinion of 
the chair- 

MR. WHITE—I was laboring under a misapprehension. 1 
thought it was a motion to suspend the rules. 

THE PRESIDENT—It was a motion to lay upon the table 
and a majority vote is sufficient. 

MR. JONES (Montgomery)—I rise to a parliamentary in¬ 
quiry. I called for the previous question on the two amendments, 
but the previous question, as I understand it, has never been called 
on the adoption of the section. 



CONSTITUTIONAL CONVENTION, 1901 


2285 


THE PRESIDENT—The previous question was ordered up¬ 
on the adoption of the amendments and the section. 

MR. JONES (Montgomery)—Who made the motion? 

THE PRESIDENT—The gentleman from Sumter. 

MR. JONES (Montgomery)—I hope the gentleman in charge 
of this won’t choke us off in that way. 

THE PRESIDENT—The question is not debatable, after the 
previous question has been ordered. 

MR. JONES (Montgomery)—I am not debating it. I am 
simply making a parliamentary appeal to the gentleman on the 
other side not to choke us down. 

MR. O’NEAL (Lauderdale)—I second that appeal. 

THE PRESIDENT—The delegates will please take their 
seats- 

MR. O’NEAL (Lauderdale)—I move to reconsider the vote 
by which the previous question was ordered. 

THE PRESIDENT—The question is upon the adoption of 
the amendment as amended. 

MR. JONES (Montgomery)—I move we adjourn. 

THE PRESIDENT—The motion to reconsider is not in order 
where the previous question has been ordered. If the gentleman 
will refer to the rule on reconsideration, he will find that exception. 
Rule 27 provides, “When a vote has been passed except on the 
previous question, or on motion to lay on the table, a motion for 
reconsideration may be made.” The question is upon the adoption 
of the section as amended and the previous question has been or¬ 
dered. 

Upon a vote being taken, the section was adopted. 

MR. O’NEAL (Lauderdale)—I vote aye for the purpose of 
moving a reconsideration. 

MR. JONES (Montgomery)—I voted aye, Mr. President, to 
move a reconsideration. 

MR. SOLLIE—I voted aye for the purpose of moving a re¬ 
consideration tomorrow of the vote whereby this section was 
passed. 

THE PRESIDENT—Two other gentlemen have given the 
same notice to the chair. 

MR. JONES (Montgomery)—I move we adjourn. 



2286 


OFFICIAL FROCK K DIN OS 


MR. BURNS—A point of information. 

THE PRESIDENT—The gentleman will state* the question of 
inquiry. 

MR. BURNS—I voted aye to adopt that section; can I make 
a motion to reconsider t 

THE PRESUMIN'!' -The gentleman can make his motion. 

MR. BURNS I give notice, then, perhaps I might do so. 
( Laughter). 

THE PRESIDENT---'-The question is upon the motion of the 
gentleman from Montgomery that the Convention do now adjourn. 

Upon a vote being taken, a division was called for, pending 
the announcement of the result of which leaves of absence were 
granted to Mr. Ledbetter for the 17th and 18th. Mr. Phillips for 
Wednesday and Thursday, and Mr. Henderson for Wednesday 
and 'Thursday. 

By a vote of sixty-five ayes and fifty-one noes, the Convention 
thereupon adjourned. 


CORRECTIONS. 

In proceedings of the forty-fifth day, the answer of Mr. 
Browne to the question of Mr. Gilmore as to whether he was not 
the attorney for the Columbiana people, should be as follows: 

MR. BROWNE—Yes, but an attorney without a fee, and f 
have sworn to do everything in my power to relieve my home 
county in this matter. I am the kind of an attorney for the Colum¬ 
biana people that before God in heaven I shall always be against 
the perpetration of a damnable fraud of any kind upon my native 
county, my friends and other citizens of the county that gave me 
birth. I am the attorney for Columbiana people but an attorney 
without a fee. 

Mr. Barefield, in forty-fifth day's proceedings, voted no and 
not aye as reported, upon the motion of Mr. Browne to table the 
minority report on County and County Boundaries, relating to the 
Shelby County court house controversv. 



CONSTITUTIONAL CONVENTION. 1901 


2287 


FORTY-SEVENTH DAY 


MONTGOMERY. ALA.. 

Wednesday, July 17, 1901. 

The Convention met pursuant to adjournment, was called to 
order by the President, and opened with prayer by the Rev. Mr. 
C. R. McDaniel, as follows: 

Almighty Cod, we have come in the name of Christ to give 
Thee praise for Thv tender care through the shades of the night. 
We bless Thee for the light of a new day. And as the sun scatters 
the darkness of the night, we pray that the Sun of Righteousness 
may arise with healing upon His wings and dispel all darkness 
and sin from our hearts. We beseech Thee, to set a watch over 
our lips that we speak no evil, our hearts that we think no guile, 
our hands that we do no evil deed, and our feet that we walk not 
in forbidden paths. We beseech Thee, to grant unto these, Thv 
servants. Thy heavenly blessing. The Lord bless the President of 
this Convention. We pray for our loved ones at home. We pray 
for the sick, the sad, the dying. We commend one another to 
Thy gentle protection. We commend unto Thee all men in au¬ 
thority and influential positions. We ask these blessings in the 
name and through the merits of our Lord and Saviour, Jesus Christ, 
Amen. 

Upon the call of the roll 118 delegates responded to their 
names. 

Leaves of absence were granted as follows: Mr. Carnathon, 
indefinite on account of sickness: Mr. Kyle for today; Mr. Graham 
(Montgomery) for today; Mr. Sanders (Limestone) Monday last 
and Tuesdav morning: Mr. Bethune for Thursday, Friday and 
Saturday. 

MR. CHAPMAN—I desire to have corrected the stenographic 
report of the yea and no vote on the motion of Mr. Rogers (Sumter) 
the reconsideration of the vote which had been taken. The steno¬ 
graphic report has me as absent or not voting. I was present and 
voted and the journal shows that I was present and voted. The 
stenographic report is incorrect. Mr. Rogers was occupying my 
seat and I occupying his seat, but I distinctly voted aye on that 
motion. 

THE PRESIDENT—The journal is correct. 

MR. CHAPMAN—Yes the journal is correct, but I want the 
stenographic report to be correct. 



2288 


OFFICIAL PROCKKi >IXCS 


The Committee on Journal reported that they had examined 
the journal for the forty-sixth day and found the same to be cor¬ 
rect. On motion the report of the Committee was adopted. 

MR. JONES (Montgomery)—Is a motion now in order to 
reconsider the section on which the Convention acted just before 
we adjourned on yesterday. I think it is Section 5. 

THE PRESIDENT—It would be in order at this time. 

MR. JONES- I move to reconsider the vote by which Section 
5 was passed. 

THE PRESIDENT — The gentleman from Montgomery 
moves to reconsider the action of this Convention whereby Section 
5 was adopted. I recognize the gentleman from Montgomery. 

. MR. JONES—Mr. President, I recognize that in a deliberative 
body like this there is a limit beyond which a minority should not 
press discussion, but that time comes only when there has been 
fair and reasonable opportunity for discussion. That opportunity 
has not been afforded us and some of the members on this floor 
desire to present the question again to the judgment of this Con¬ 
vention. 

What is the proposition embodied in this 5th Section? Eor 
the first time in the history of Alabama, in the eighty-one years 
of its existence, it is asserted that the people of Alabama ought 
not to be trusted through their representatives to legislate oftener 
than once in four years. Stripped of all extraneous matter, the 
issue is that the people of Alabama cannot be trusted to legislate 
through their representatives, except once in every four years. I 
am not a blind adherent to precedent; [ am not a blind worshipper 
of what other people do even under like circumstances as ours; but 
when we are asked to put this remarkable innovation in the Con¬ 
stitution, it is well to ask ourselves what does the rest of mankind 
do under like circumstances? I make bold to assert here this 
morning that there is not a civilized government, certainly not one 
whose people speak the English language, which refuses to allow 
its Legislature to meet except once in four years. Away back in 
the history of our institutions, during the time of Charles II, un¬ 
bounded indignation flooded the English nation because the king 
undertook to keep Parliament out of session for several years. They 
passed an act that the Parliament should never he prolonged longer 
than three years at a time. That is the law of England today. 
Nobody thinks of changing it. In all the American States, every 
one of them—Mississippi not excluded—they have either annual or 
biennial sessions of the Legislature. Ought we not to pause, there¬ 
fore, when we are asked for the first time in the eighty-one years 
of our history, to favor a position opposed to the practice of the 
whole civilized world. What argument can we give to the people 



e'O.NS 1 1 1 t'TlOXAI. CONVI ATION. 191)1 


22K9 


hi Alabama in support of this section, when we go out to them 
and say it is our deliberate judgment, after shearing the Legislative 
power in local matters, in its power to tax, and after fixing many 
-objects upon which they shall not legislate, I say what reason can 
we give the people after doing that, in support of our position, that 
the people are unfit to legislate more than once in four years. 

Mr. President, we have a great and a growing State, with 
diversified industries and pursuits. No man is wise enough to 
foretell what two years may bring forth. Yet we are putting in 
the Constitution which may last for half a century, that the General 
Assembly of Alabama, which in its last analysis is the closest repre¬ 
sentative of the people, shall not be in session but once in four 
\ ears to look after their fiscal affairs or to legislate upon any other 
matters which may affect the honor, prosperity and welfare of the 
State. W e have been here sixty days and it may be four months 
before we can lay down the principles which are embodied in a 
Constitution. Take the next session of the Legislature. It is true 
it is said they may sit there sixty days, but sixty days could be 
intelligently and profitably spent, and probably will be exhausted, 
if there is wise legislation in determining how you will protect 
local legislation in the matters which the Constitution says shall 
not be dealt with by special law, but which must be protected by 
general law. The subject was so complex that this Convention 
refused to go into detail, and said we commit that to the Legislature. 
What about matters of taxation? What about economic reforms? 
What about the penal system? What about labor laws? What 
about the regulation of the different businesses in this State? 

A great deal has been said about the last Legislature. Per¬ 
haps it is deserving a great deal of the criticism which was passed 
upon it, but there were many good men in it, the majority of them 
were good men. I don’t believe in the personnel there ever was a 
better Legislature. That there were some good men in it is evi¬ 
denced by the fact that we have them here in this body. Now. if 
a good Legislature like that makes such mistakes as it did, do the 
friends of this measure want the people of Alabama in like cases in 
the future to be tied and bound for four years before they can meet 
and repeal their mistakes? It is said, Mr. President, that the Gov¬ 
ernor may call the Legislature together. Two things generally 
restrain the Governor in a matter of that sort; one is that the 
people are generally opposed to special sessions, and another one 
is that generally a Governor, where there is much contrariety of 
opinion on a public question, who calls the Legislature together to 
settle it. generally settles his own fate adversely to him. That is 
the history of spe'eial legislative sessions in the States at least, and 
the Governors will not call them if possible to avoid it. I beg our 
friends on the other side to remember the other day when some of 
us had what thev considered the temerity to vote for a three-fourths 



2290 


OFFICIAL PROCEEDINGS 


verdict by a jury, they filled this hall with protestations against 
the change in what was called the “blood bought rights.” They 
spoke of Runnymede. They spoke of the habits of our people. 
They said for God's sake don’t strike down that ancient and divine 
institution. Some of them went so far even as to intimate that 
gentlemen who thought as I did, and voted as I did. had a covert 
attack on corporations. That was an unjustifiable intimation. I 
don’t think it affected the minds of anybody. If such insinuation.-, 
arose in that case, 1 ask the gentleman who urged that argument, 
if the inquiry will not thrust itself forward in whose interest is it 
that the people of Alabama are to be forbidden to legislate ottem r 
than once in four years? 

Mr. President, 1 regard this as one of the most serious ques¬ 
tions that has come before this Convention. You are going out to 
tell the people that they are not fit to be trusted with the legislative 
power as their ancestors have exercised it for eighty years in this 
State. Only the most powerful reasons will answer. You cling to 
the ancient landmarks in other things, why do you trample them 
down in this? A few words in conclusion. It pleased some of un¬ 
friends yesterday in debate to hold me up as having based my argu¬ 
ments upon this great proposition upon an auxiliary or incidental 
statement that one of the uses of frequent elections was that it 
trained our young men in the duties of citizenship. There was not 
a member on the floor of this Convention who did not realize that 
that was simply one of the incidents that I mentioned as a reason 
why we should have frequent elections. I circulate somewhat 
among our people. I see all sorts and conditions of men. I have 
not found any general, all-pervading sentiment that you must get 
rid of legislation for four years. Sometimes a gentleman comes 
along, and says this will interfere with my business, “some fool 
will be tinkering with the usuary laws, some fool will 
be tinkering with a mining law, some fool will be tinkering 
with other business matters. I don’t want the Legislature of Ala¬ 
bama to assemble again for years.” Mr. President, that does not 
come from the people as such. Men get indignant and disgusted 
sometimes, and particularly at the Legislature, and sometimes a 
man says “I wish they would never meet again in one hundred 
years.” That is not the deliberate sentiment of the people of Ala¬ 
bama. They want to have a voice in their own affairs oftener 
than once in four years. We have become a world power. Ques¬ 
tions arise which agitate the country, and in which Alabama ought 
to have a voice, and that voice ought to be the voice of the people 
of Alabama; yet if this law passes and an inscrutable Providence 
were to deprive us of the two glorious old men who now represent 
the people in the United States Senate, the people could not make 
their voices heard, it may be for years, as to their successors. That 
is referred to the Governor who may not put a man in there whom 
the people wish, or whose views on public questions might be cl if- 



CONSTITUTIONAL COXVKNTH )\. 191)1 2291 

lerent to tho.se held by a majority of the people. Let us be con¬ 
sistent then. If we are going to follow the “ancient land marks/’ 
it you are going to take the Constitution as it was except with a 
few changes, don't let us go out to the people of Alabama, with a 
declaration on the part of their representatives, that in our opinion, 
however much you limit the subjects of legislative power, that it is 
unwise and improper for the people to come into their own, hut 
once in four years. If we cannot trust the Legislature to meet 
every two years, there is no institution in Alabama that we can 
look to for the preservation of our liberties and the elevation of 
our people. Republican government is utfailure if our people are 
>o incompetent and their Legislatures so worthless that we must 
say : “I will not let you legislate but once in four years, because you 
are not fit to he trusted with power oftcncr.” 

MR. O’NKAL (Lauderdale)—I don’t feel. Mr. President, after 
the vote on yesterday, that anything l can say will change the 
opinion of this Convention, and it is only from an earnest sense 
of duty and from an earnest conviction that the minority were not 
accorded the rights which they were entitled to in this Convention 
that I rise to speak upon this provision. The distinguished gentle¬ 
man from Sumter stated on yesterday that he knew the wishes of 
the people of Alabama, and that with one voice they were demand¬ 
ing this revolutionary change in our fundamental law. He stated 
that he had come in contact with them, and knew whereof he spoke. 
Mr. President, we of the minority arc also representatives in this 
Convention, and we are vain enough to believe that we know the 
sentiments of the people we represent. I say to this Convention 
that there is no popular demand for this revolutionary procedure 
upon the part of the people of Alabama. It never was made the 
subject of discussion on the stump when the question of the calling 
of this Constitutional Convention was in issue. It ever has been 
made the topic of comment in the public press, and hereafter this 
Convention has assembled it suddenly dawns upon the minds of 
some of the members that the entire people of Alabama are clamor¬ 
ing for this change. What reasons are urged for it? Why, they 
say, the great State of Mississippi, the pioneer State only has a 
session every four years. Why the gentleman had not read the 
Constitution of Mississippi, or he could not have made such a state¬ 
ment. What does the Constitution of Mississippi say? It 
says the Legislature shall meet at the seat of government 
in regular session on the first Tuesday after the first Monday 
in January of the year 1892, and every four years thereafter, 
and in special session on the first Tuesday after the first Mon¬ 
day in January, 1894, and every four years thereafter, unless soon¬ 
er convened by the Governor. The special sessions shall not con¬ 
tinue longer than thirty days unless the Governor, deeming the 
public interests require it, shall call a sitting by proclamation in 
writing, and so on. and that at such special sessions the members 



2292 


OFFICIAL PROCEEDINGS 


shall not receive more than ten cents, etc. What does; that mean." 
It met in 1892 in general session, it met in 1894, it met in 18yo, m 
met in 1898, and every two years thereafter. It means that every 
alternate year there is no limit upon the session of the Legislature; 
it can hold for a month, six months, or twelve months, every alter¬ 
nate year, but in every alternate year the session is limited to thirtv 
days unless the Governor should deem it necessary to continue the 
session. Here is the Constitution of Louisiana, which requires 
biennial sessions, yet the people of Alabama are asked to embark 
in this new and untried experiment without a single experiment, 
without a single precedent in any State of this Union. What is the 
argument in favor of it? Why the distinguished gentleman from 
Sumter says it is expensive. Why, gentlemen of the Convention, 
that argument has no place in a body of this character, a body 
which has been characterized as the most distinguished that has 
assembled in this hall for 25 years. Are we to measure the liberties 
of the people by paltry dollars and cents? Have we become so 
sordid and mercenary that we are willing to strike down the safe¬ 
guards of liberty because it is expensive? If such an argument 
can be used with force, why not strike down your jury system 
and allow the judge to decide all the cases and save the expense? 
Why not burn down your court houses and turn over the admin¬ 
istration of criminal law to Judge Lynch, because it is inexpensive? 
Ah, Mr. President, such an argument is the argument of the count¬ 
ing house, and the banking house, and has no place in a Constitu¬ 
tional Convention. Are we to estimate the liberties of the people 
by dollars and cents? What did the great empire of England do? 
A single English citizen had been imprisoned by the King of 
Abyssinia. His release was demanded and refused, and that great 
power spent millions of dollars, organized an army and kept in 
commission her navy to save one citizen of England! Did she 
stop at the paltry and mercenary arguments that are heard here 
in debate? It costs money to have a Legislature and a Governor. 
Why not abolish the Legislature and judiciary, and have a Gov¬ 
ernor-General in Alabama—it will be less expensive. Why not 
have a Governor-General clothed with executive and judiciary 
powers and save money and break down the liberties of the people. 
Ah, Mr. President that argument can be made to strike down one 
of the great co-ordinate branches of government that has existed 
since the formation of republican institution. Ah, but they say 
that the Legislature creates unrest and discord among the people 
and disturbs business. I have heard that stated before, but Mr. 
President is it not true that those who are disturbed and who are 
uneasy are sometimes officials who have been guilty of abuses 
which they feared might be corrected; isn’t it sometimes the case 
that those who are uneasy and restless are wealthy corporations 
and individuals who have secured rights and privileges which they 
were not entitled to under the law? In whose interest then is this 



CONSTITUTIONAL CONVENTION, 1901 


2293 


proposed changer Is it in the interest of honest government, I 
ask the question? Have a meeting of the Legislature only once 
in four years and you open wide the flood gates of fraud and cor¬ 
ruption. Our Legislature is a check upon dishonest officials, it 
is a check upon dishonest government. Why Mr. President, in 
this State we have practically only one great political party. We 
have not an active, aggressive, vigilant opposition party to keep 
us the majority in check, and the result is that the only remedy 
which the people have it a just and honest Legislature, fresh from 
the body of the people to correct abuses and evils- that may exist 
in the administration of government. Your tax laws may require 
reform, are they to remain upon the hooks four years and not a 
man can touch them? Your appropriations may require change, 
may be declared unconstitutional, like the revenue law was, and 
you are without remedy and powerless. You say the Governor can 
call an extra session. How many extra sessions have been called 
in this State? Suppose you had had this four year term, this Con¬ 
vention would not be assembled here today, because over two 
years ago the Legislature was called in session and repealed the 
act calling this Convention and disregarded the will of the people. 
Two years afterwards the people rebuked them and sent a Legis¬ 
lature here that represented their wishes and called a Constitu¬ 
tional Convention, and yet if this had been the law upon the statute 
books, the people of Alabama would today be enduring all the 
evils of a corrupt and debauched suffrage without remedy for four 
vears. Mr. President, suppose the people should demand relief 
from unjust, arbitrary and discriminating rates by the great rail¬ 
road corporations of Alabama? \ou must wait four years for 
relief. That might be a pleasing—a soothing thought to these 
corporations, but I put it to you gentlemen when you go before 
the people of Alabama and tell them that you have prevented them 
from reforming abuse and evils in their laws, will they thank you 
with tears of joy and words of praise as stated by my distinguished 
friend from Sumter. 

MR. GREER (Calhoun)—Don’t you think since we have 
taken from the Legislature local legislation, that four years will be 
sufficient time in which to meet? 

MR. O'NEAL—I am glad the gentleman made that suggestion. 
We have corrected the evils of local legislation Mr. President, and 
what would be the result. The result is we have elevated the tone 
and character of the legislature, we have enabled them to direct 
their attention and thoughts to the great matters of State, we open 
wide discussion and debate upon every great proposition that ma\ 
be presented, everv question of general importance will be sub¬ 
jected to the search light of a fair and full and open discussion, 
and the result will be that we will have no hasty and improvident 
legislation in this State. Why the Parliament of Great Britain 



2294 


OFFICIAL PROCHKDIN(ivS 


meets continuously for seven years—holds for seven years, and 
legislates for an empire that girdles the world, and yet although 
the session is unlimited it passes only a few hundred general laws, 
not as many as the Legislature of Alabama enacts. The Legisla¬ 
ture of Kentucky is unlimited, as to the length of its session; the 
Legislature of Mississippi is also unlimited, and almost every State 
in the Union where the evils of local laws have been removed and 
improvident legislation prevented has no limit upon the time of 
its sessions. 

MR. BROOKS—I want to call the gentleman’s attention to 
this fact, isn't it true that in more than half the States of this 
Union the constitutions contain provisions exactly as we passed not 
long ago on the subject of local legislation, and that these States 
all have biennial sessions and biennial elections? 

MR. O'NEAL—Every one of them. I say there is not a State 
in the American Union that has tried this unwise experiment that 
we are asked to embark upon at the dictates of the majority of this 
Convention. Now what does the great English Commentator say 
upon the subject speaking about biennial sessions, Mr. Butler says: 
“For a people claiming pre-eminence in the sphere of popular gov¬ 
ernment, it seems hardly creditable that in their seeming despair of 
a cure for the chronic evils of legislation, they should be able to 
mitigate them only by making them intermittent." The Americans 
seem to reason thus: “Since a Legislature is very far gone from 
righteousness, and if its own nature inclined to do evil, the less 
chance it has of doing evil, the better. If it meets, it will pass bad 
laws. Let us therefore prevent it from meeting. They are no 
doubt right as practical men. They are consistent, as sons of the 
Puritans, in their application of the doctrine of original sin. But 
this is a rather pitiful result for self governing Democracy to have 
arrived at." Is it not a pitiful result for us, claiming to have the 
greatest and freest government on which the sun ever shone, to 
rise up here and say that we propose to strike down one of the 
great coordinate departments of government because it is evil and 
it will pass bad laws if it assembles? Why not do as this Com¬ 
mentator says. “Is there not a simpler remedy? Why all these 
efforts to deal with the various symptoms of the malady, instead 
of striking at the root of the malady itself? Why not reform the 
Legislatures, by inducing good men to enter them and keeping a 
more constant vigilant public opinion fixed upon them?" He says, 
under such a plan “Constitutional organs of government become 
constantly more discredited." 

That is the effect of this proposed legislation, it discredits and 
brings into contempt the great constitutional organs of government, 
it creates the idea that the people of Alabama have despaired of 
good government and of an honest Legislature. Because the last 
Legislature was reckless and extravagant should we in a spasm 



CONSTITUTIONAL CONVENTION. 1901 


2295 


of virtue voice the sentiments of the distinguished gentleman from 
Sumter, and declare by our organic law that the Legislature shall 
not meet oftener than once in ten years. Why, gentlemen, when 
you adopted the article on local law, you remedied the evil and 
removed the dangers of inconsiderate and hasty legislation on gen¬ 
eral subjects. If you are afraid of hasty legislation, why not adopt 
the provision which is found in the Constitutions of twenty or 
thirty other States, which says no bill appropriating public money 
shall pass except by a two-thirds vote, or by another law which 
says a bill of any character shall pass except by a majority of the 
member* elect in the Legislature. Then if you fear evil legislation, 
it you fear bad laws, put that check upon the Legislature, don’t ask 
us to strike down this great bulwark of the people, the only organ 
by which their views can he expressed. Kvils grow up in our 
convict svstem. Why, the other day 1 read an account which 
showed that in Alabama we are as barbarous as the Russians them¬ 
selves in our treatment of these poor and helpless prisoners, yet 
the legislature cannot assemble to correct these evils, the Oovernor 
is powerless, we must wait four years, and the only argument that 
has been offered is that it is expensive. It is expensive to have a 
Supreme Court. I know an old country Justice of the Peace who 
said it was a great mistake to have a Supreme Court, that the 
Legislature of Alabama ought to abolish the Supreme Court and 
Circuit Court and let the Justice Court in each beat administer the 
law without appeal and save all the money of the courts and juries 
to the people, and the argument which has been made here is on no 
higher plane. 

I have no doubt, Mr. President, that the distinguished gentle¬ 
man from Sumter who seems to be leading this movement, is 
actuated by the highest and most patriotic motives. I have the 
greatest confidence in his ability, in his conservatism and in his 
devotion to the interests of our people; but I think he has got a 
fad in his head. He is asking us to do what no other civilized 
country, as the distinguished gentleman from Montgomery tells 
vou, has done. The only argument which I have heard in favor 
of it was the simple one of dollars and cents. A percentuni argu¬ 
ment. Are we never going to rise above it, bonds, dollars and 
cents? As I heard the distinguished gentleman from Montgomery 
say the other day it seems to be all you could hear here in this 
convention. I believe in economy and I believe in saving moncv 
to the people, but I do not believe in that economy which would 
drag us to strike down and destroy one of the great coordinate 
branches of our government; and I tell you in my opinion, gentle¬ 
men of the Convention, when you go before the people of Alabama 
with this provision in your fundamental laws you will create a 
storm of opposition which will not down at your bidding. It may 
be pleasing to the vested interests, it may be pleasing to organized 
capital, and it may prevent the people from reaching and checking 



2296 


OFFICIAL PROCEEDINGS 


the rapacity and greed of corporations, but I tell you it will not be 
received with favor, with tears of joy and rejoicing by the horny 
handed masses of this great commonwealth. 

THE PRESIDENT—The gentleman from Sumter. 

MR. SANFORD (Montgomery)—I am very glad I have an 
opportunity— 

THE PRESIDENT—The gentleman is out of order. 

MR. SANFORD—I want to ask a question, and I do it from 
self-respect. When I suggested to you that I wished to be recog¬ 
nized— 

THE PRESIDENT—The gentleman is out of order and will 
please be seated. 

MR. SAMFORD—You asked me if it was to speak on the 
four years system and I said no. 

THE PRESIDENT—The gentleman is out of order. The 
Chair will ask the gentleman to discontinue interrupting the Con¬ 
vention. 

MR. ROGERS (Sumter)—Mr. Chairman and gentlemen of 
this Convention. Insinuations made by the gentleman from Lau¬ 
derdale that this movement was made in the interest of organized 
capital probably emanates from a mind that would be governed 
by such motives as those- 

MR. OATES—Will the gentleman permit an interruption? 

MR. ROGERS (Sumter)—Certainly, sir, with the greatest of 
pleasure. 

MR. OATES—I want to state there seems to be a misunder¬ 
standing; there were controversies in the committee, and it is not 
improper to relate, over this identical question and it was decided 
at one time one way the delegate from Jefferson, Mr. Lowe, leading 
in favor of biennial sessions. Mr. Rogers on the contrary at a sub¬ 
sequent meeting took the floor when the question was discussed 
and it was then decided as it has been reported here. There was 
no question as to any foreign matter brought in there at all except 
as to what would be the wisest and most expedient. 

THE PRESIDENT—-For what purpose does the gentleman 
rise ? 

MR. OATES—I merely interrupted him because I saw there 
there was a misunderstanding about what was really involved in 
this. 

MR. ROGERS (Sumter)—The gentleman makes the point 
that our committee at a full meeting—with one or two members 



C ONSTII UriONAL CONVENTION, 1901 2397 

Ch^irma^makes. ^ art,C,e favora,)1 >’- That >s the point the 

county ?hat a fe purely ^fcuIturaT°The 0f P t ° Ucy \ 1 re P res f nt a 

that (tapc thm.wri ' a " ricultural - there is but one line of railroad 
this floo - th- t 't' ° Ur < ? ou ! lt y anc ^ therefore when men charge upon 
o neth?n J f 'V* 1 * ,nterest ° f or e anized capital, they charge 

\fr PresM^ f t W1 !i C 1 tht i y are £ ross . 1 - v ignorant. It is also fortunate. 
{ t „ dn ^ en ^ em en of this Convention, that I am opposed 

n th* e f ♦ ( T e \ ( ; ' v ^ oni 1S a fading’ attorney for a great railroad 

in the State of Alabama. It is seldom that I ever appear in the 
defense of the barefoot boy or the horny-handed son of toil. I 
think a man is not better for being a farmer, he is no better for 
leing a merchant. but I hold that a man is entitled to considera¬ 
tion, not because of the vocation in which he makes his living, but 
because he is a man. I hold that a man can be as upright, just 
as honorable and just as true to his constituents as the representa- 
ti\ e of a railroad a> lie could as the follower of a mule. I hold 
that it is the man that gives dignity to the vocation and not the 
\ ocation that gives dignity to the man. I am here as I said upon 
yesterday representing the wishes of all classes of people in the 
State of Alabama, I do sincerely believe, except it be the patrons 
of the embryo legislators and the professional politicians. Gen¬ 
tlemen who will get up on this floor and advocate that the Legis¬ 
lature of the State of Alabama is a great place to train the young 
men to take part in the government of this State are not the proper 
sort to influence Legislatures about the policy of the government 
of the State of Alabama and a man who looks upon the Legislature 
of the State of Alabama as being merely a training school in which 
the young gladiators can come out and paw the air and saw the 
ears of the people in their utterances as to the principles of govern¬ 
ment. knows too little about it to be asking the people to follow 
him in a movement of this kind. This gentleman speaks about 
consistency. He was one of the men who advocated the three- 
fourths jury rule. That was a departure, sir, from all the pre¬ 
cedents laid down in movements along that line and he gets up 
this morning and opposes this because it is an innovation. You 
can use that argument against any reform movement. The Jews 
used that argument against Christ and His doctrine, that it was a 
change and it was an innovation and the divine words of the Man 
of Gallilee when He expounded law to the fishermen on the shores 
of Gallilee, if this policy had been adopted would have been dead 
ashes upon the lips of the people. Now, Mr. President, we may 
go further back than this and say when Eve suggested to Adam 
after their downfall that you make clothing out of fig leaves he 
would say, “No, madam, this is an innovation,” and we would be 
today naked savages hunting snakes for our dinner. That is no 
argument against a reform movement. I am speaking here in the 



2298 


OFFICIAL PROCEEDINGS 


interest of the horny-handed sons of toil. They are the men who 
are not able to be here as representatives upon the floor of the 
Legislature to put through pet measures. There never has been 
a lobby here represented by the farmers of the State of Alabama 
and knowing this the horny-handed sons of toil of the State of 
Alabama ask us not to give the Legislature too much power to 
interfere with their business. 

MR. WHITE—Will the gentleman permit an interruption? 

MR. ROGERS (Sumter)—With the greatest of pleasure. 

MR. WHITE—If that is correct we ought never to have an¬ 
other Legislature. 

MR. ROGERS (Sumter) The suggestion made comes from 
a mind that is unable to grasp the first rudiments of legislation 
Suppose I were to say to a doctor, “I don’t want you to give mv 
child a whole bottle of quinine.” Would he be fool enough to 
think that I objected to his giving my child the right sort of a 
dose ? 

Mr. President and gentlemen of this Convention, I believe the 
minds of the delegates upon this floor are made up. I believe that 
no man would allow himself to come here representing any con- 
stituent in the State of Alabama whose mind could be changed 
one way or the other by the winds of doctrines which may be put 
upon this floor by one advocate upon one side or the other I 
believe the great bulk of the members on this floor have minds 
sufficient to grasp and analyze and pass upon any question intelli¬ 
gently without being urged on by anybody on this floor. 

In the interest of the expedition of business, we come here 
one day and pass a section and the next day we come back here 
and reconsider it. This sort of thing ought to stop. We ought to 
go ahead with the business. We ought to go ahead and try and 
expedite the business here. The people of the State of Alabama 
are restless at our delay and therefore I say to you that when a 
vote is had as largely as was had on yesterday in favor or against a 
measure, we ought to frown down upon a proposition to reconsider 
because it takes up the time of this Convention. 

One further argument, gentlemen of the Convention, and I 
am done. The gentleman here upon my right, the distinguished 
ex-Governor of the State of Alabama who is such a pleader here 
for consistency, comes and introduces an ordinance in here de¬ 
parting from all the systems which have been in the State of Ala¬ 
bama which permits an officer elected by the people of the county 
to be suspended by the Governor pending an impeachment, yet he 
comes in and says we cannot trust the Governor to do what is fair 
and right in calling the Legislature. Where is that sort of con¬ 
sistency? This same gentleman comes and says here, biennial 



CONSTITUTIONAL CONVENTION, 1901 229 9 

Missions of the Legislature ought to he permitted so that the people 
, e ear( r r< ? m ’ ^ as conie here and advocated upon this floor 
f l01 \ ° c V\ e l ^ overnor ^ or ^ our y ears * In the name of God, 

i epeop e of Alabama ought to be heard on any proposition, they 

oug i o >e heaid on that proposition as to who is going to repre¬ 
sent them in their executive chair. We elect our Supreme Court 
Judges .or four years, and we propose to elect them for eight years, 
which think would he a good thing because men who sit upon 
}'*** e * a * e< positions should he removed from popular prejudice. 
I hey should he lifted above all considerations and he able to pass 
upon these things like it was said of Job of old. when he sat in the 
market place; righteousness clothed him and justice was his robe 
and mantle.” We are for trusting the people of the State of Ala¬ 
bamai, and the gentlemen who advocate this other doctrine seem 
to think that the people of the State of Alabama have not got minds 
enough to know what they want for a period of four years. That 
is the argument. They say that the people of the State of Ala¬ 
bama are like the inhabitants of these little South American Re¬ 
publics down here, that they absolutely want to undo the things 
every two years that they have done two years before. I don’t be¬ 
lieve that way about the people of the State of Alabama. I 
know the people of the State of Alabama know their minds; and I 
know the people of the State of Alabama want this thing done in 
the interest of the stability of the law. It is barely fourteen months 
before we shall reconvene in the General Assembly, and yet the 
laws of the last General Assembly have not been printed and given 
to the public. In the name of God, how is a man like me who has 
never had the misfortune to be educated as a lawyer, going to find 
out the laws of the State of Alabama? I move to table the motion 
to reconsider made by the gentleman from Montgomery. 

MR. SANFORD (Montgomery)—It is to suspend the power 
of the State of Alabama for four years. 

THE PRESIDENT—The motion is to lav on the table. 

4 

MR. HEFLIN (Chambers)—I call for the ayes and noes. 

The call was sustained by a requisite number rising, and the 
roll call resulted as follows. 

AYES. 

Messrs. President, Coleman, of Greene, Glover, 

Barefield, Craig, Graham, of Talladega. 

Bethune, Davis, of DeKalb, Greer, of Calhoun, 

Blackwell, Eley, Hodges, 

Boone, Espy, Pillans, 

Browne, Ferguson, Howze, 

Burnett, Fitts, Inge, 

Case, Fletcher, Jones, of Hale, 

Chapman, Gilmore, Jones, of Wilcox. 



2300 


OFFICIAL PROCEEDINGS 


Kirk, 

Kirkland, 

Locklin, 

Macdonald, 

McMillan, of Baldwin, 
McMillan (Wilcox), 
Malone, 

Maxwell, 

Miller (Marengo), 
Miller (Wilcox), 

M urphree, 

NeSmith, 

Norman, 

Norwood, 

Total—67. 

1 kinks, 

Bartlett. 

Beddow, 

Brooks, 

Bulger. 

Burns, 

1 Kars, 

Cardon, 

Carmichael, of Colbert, 
Cobb, 

Davis, of Etowah, 
Duke. 

Foshee. 

Foster. 

Freeman. 

(irayson. 

I laley. 

II and ley, 

f larrison, 

Total—55. 

Almon. 

Altman, 

Ashcraft. 

Beavers, 

Carmichael, of Coffee, 
Carnathon, 

Cofer, 

Coleman, of Walker, 

Cornwall, 

Cunningham, 

Dent, 


Oates, 

O’Rear, 

Pearce, 

Pettus, 

Pitts, 

Porter, 

Renfro, 

Reynolds (Chilton), 
Rogers (Sumter), 
Sanders, 

Searcy, 

Sentell, 

Sloan, 

Smith, Mac. A.. 

NOES. 

Heflin, of Chambers, 
Heflin, of Randolph, 
Hinson, 

Hood, 

(fowell, 

Jackson, 

Jones, of Bibb, 

Jones, of Montgomery, 
Knight, 

Leigh, 

Lomax, 

Long, of Walker, 
Lowe, of Jefferson, 
Martin, 

Moody, 

O'Neal (Lauderdale). 
O’Neill, of Jefferson, 
Opp, 

Palmer, 


Smith, Morgan M„ 
Sorrell, 

Spragins, 

Stewart, 

Stoddard. 

Tayloe, 

Vaughan. 

Waddell, 

Walker, 

Weatherly, 

Whiteside, 

Williams (Marengo), 


Parker (Elmore), 
Proctor, 

Robinson, 

Rogers (Lowndes), 
Sanford, 

Selhcimer, 

Smith (Mobile), 
Sollie, 

Spears, 

Thompson, 

Watts, 

Weakley. 

Willet, 

Williams (Barbour), 
Wilson (Clarke), 
Wilson (Wash’gton), 
Winn, 


ABSENT OR NOT VOTING. 
deGraffcnreid, h 

Kvster. ^ 

Graham, of Montgomery, .\ 
(* rant, ^ 

Greer, of Perry, I 

Henderson, I 

Jenkins, 1 

King, 1 

Kyle, S 

Ledbetter, ^ 

Long, of Butler, ^ 


Lowe, of Lawrence, 
Merrill, 

Morrisette, 

Mulkey, 

Parker (Cullman), 
Phillips, 

Reese, 

Reynolds, of Henry. 
Samford, 

White, 

Williams (Elmore). 



CONSTITUTIONAL CONVENTION, 1901 2301 

the motion to table the motion to reconsider was lost. 

During* the roll call:— 

MR. OATES—I am paired with the delegate from Butler, 
Mr. Long; and if he were present he would vote no and I would 
vote aye. 

MR. SAM LORD—I am paired with some gentleman on that 
proposition, blit I have forgotten who it is, and I therefore ask to 
be allowed not to vote at all. 

MR. SANFORD (Montgomery)—As I am against the sus¬ 
pension of the legislative power of the people for four years, T 
'hall vote no. 

After tile roll call:— 

MR. WHITK—I want to announce that I was paired with 
mv colleague from Jefferson, Mr. Cornwell, who would have voted 
aye and I no. I overlooked it at the time the roll was called. 

MR. OATES—I am informed that I was mistaken in regard 
to the way the delegate from Butler would vote if he wore present : 
that he would vote the same way that I have voted, aye. 

THE PRESIDENT—The Secretary will call the roll of dele¬ 
gates. 

MR. SANFORD (Montgomery)—As under the rules I was 
not permitted to argue this question—to be allowed to put in the 
stenographic report what I would have said if I had been given an 
< ipportunity- 

MR. ROGERS (Sumter)—I move that permission be given 
him to print his remarks in the stenographic report. 

Upon a vote being taken, permission was granted. 

MR. BKDDOW—I rise to a question of personal privilege. 
In The Montgomery Advertiser this morning it is reported that 
1 appealed from a decision of the President of this Convention. 
Among other things, it says President Knox ruled that the point 
of order was not well taken, and Mr. Beddow appealed from the 
decision of the chair. I desire to say that at no time during the 
session of this Convention have I appealed from the ruling of the 
President. That so far as I am concerned, the relations between 
myself and the President have been most pleasant, so much so that 
I have always been willing to sustain the President in his ruling. 
When the Committee on Schedule. Printing and Incidental Ex¬ 
penses made a report on a resolution that I had introduced and the 
passage of which I had at heart, because it came from those who 
elected and sent me to this Convention and was sustained by 25,- 
000 voters of the State of Alabama and that resolution was placed 



2.502 


OFFICIAL I'ROCKK1 >IW. S 


upon the calendar but my motion that the resolution be taken up 
and put upon its passage was ignored. 1 acquiesced in that ruling 
of the President, but on yesterday, while the gentleman from 
Chambers (Judge Robinson) was in the Chair, a committee made 
a report. In order to sustain the President 1 raised the point of 
order that that should take the same course that my resolution had 
taken and in overruling the point of order the ruling of the Presi¬ 
dent was reversed. My intention in making the point of order was 
to sustain the ruling of the President of this Convention and 1 de¬ 
sire to ask that the Montgomery Advertiser to do me the courtesy 
of saying I did not appeal from the President of the Convention. 

THE PRESIDENT—The stenographer will note the gentle¬ 
man’s statement. 

Mr. Blackwell yielded his turn to Mr. Williams of Marengo. 

Resolution No. 249, by Mr. Williams of Marengo. 

Be it resolved, that, on motions to reconsider, twenty minutes 
and no more, shall be allowed to each side for speech-making, and 
thereupon a vote shall be taken. 

Referred to Committee on Rules. 

The Clerk then read the following resolution: 

Resolution No. 250, by Mr. Burns: 

Resolved, That no delegate shall, at the close of his remarks or 
speech make a motion to lay on the table, or call for the previous 
question. 

Referred to Committee on Rules. 

The Clerk will call the roll of standing Committees. 

The roll of the Committees was called and when the Commit¬ 
tee on Schedule. Printing and Incidental Expenses was reached 
Mr. Heflin of Randolph, called up the report of that Committee 
which had heretofore been placed on the calendar. 

The report was read as follows: 

Report of the Committee on Schedule. Printing and Incidental 
Expenses. 

Mr. President: 

The Committee on Schedule, Printing and Incidental Expenses 
have instructed me to make the following partial report, viz: 

The Committee has audited the accounts hereto attached and 
find that the State of Alabama is indebted to the Brown Print¬ 
ing Co., of Montgomery, Alabama, in the sum of $176.90. 



CONSTITUTIONAL CONVENTION, 1901 


2303 


We find that the said State is indebted to J. W. Terry, of 
Montgomery, Alabama, for the use of a typewriter from May 24th 
to June 24th, in the sum of $5. 

We find that the said State is indebted to Ed C. Fowler Co., 
of Montgomery, Alabama, in the sum of $8.60. 

We find that the said State is indebted to J. W. Terry, of 
Montgomery, Alabama, in the sum of $16 for services rendered 
Rules Committee up to May 27th, 1901. 

We find that the said State is indebted to W. W. Haygood, of 
Montgomery, Alabama, in the sum of $1.25. 

We find that the said State is indebted to Miss Eunice Rich¬ 
ards for typewriting done for the Committee on Preamble and 
I >edaration of Rights, in the sum of $7.50. 

We find that the said State is indebted to Marshall & Bruce 
Co., of Nashville, Tennessee, in the sum of $48.25. 

We find that said State is indebted to Ed. C. Fowler Co., of 
Montgomery. Alabama, in the sum of $4.75. 

We find that the said State is indebted to Jos. E. Longstreet. 
in the sum of $8 for services rendered to the Committee on Suf¬ 
frage and Elections, in making fifty-four copies of the Report of 
said Committee. 

We find that said State is indebted to Miss Georgia Connelly 
in the sum of $6 for stenographic work done for Committee on 
Suffrage and Elections. 

All of the above amounts are for printing done, for articles 
furnished State of Alabama for use of Constitutional Convention, 
and for services rendered to Committees of said Convention and 
all of the above amounts are itemized as shown by bills hereto 
attached. Total amount, $282.25, and we recommend the payment 
of the same. All of which is respectfully submitted. 

Jno. T. Heflin, Chairman. 

Committee on Schedule, Printing and Incidental Expenses. 

MR. HEFLIN (Randolph)—I now move that the report of 
the Committee on Schedule, Printing and Incidental Expenses be 
adopted and that the President of this Convention be authorized 
to draw his warrant on the State Treasurer in favor of the parties 
named in said report for the amount due them. 

Upon a vote being taken the report was adopted. 

MR. SMITH (Mobile)—I desire to ask unanimous consent to 
make the report of the Judiciary Committee. 



2304 


OFFICIAL PROCEEDINGS 


The consent was given and the report of the Judiciary Com¬ 
mittee and the various minority reports were read as follows: 

REPORT OF THE COMMITTEE ON JUDICIARY 

The Committee on Judiciary has carefully considered and dis¬ 
cussed all of the provisions of Article VI, of the Constitution of 
1875 relating to the Judicial Department of the State, together with 
the several ordinances relating to that department, and instructs 
me to report to the Convention and recommend the adoption of 
the subjoined Article. 

No radical departure has been made from the judicial system 
of the State as established by the Constitution of 1875, but the 
Article has been so written as to give more elasticity to the judi¬ 
cial system of the State, so as to enable the Legislature to extend 
or modify the system, from time to time, as may be necessary to 
meet the needs of the State as its wealth and population increase, 
and to make a more economic and systematic arrangement of the 
system. 

The Article reported does not change the jurisdiction of the 
Supreme Court, nor create any other court of final resort, but 
makes it possible for the Legisature to create an Inferior Appel¬ 
late Court, to relieve the Supreme Court of any excess of labor 
that may be placed upon it, should the increasing litigation of the 
State hereafter require it. 

The common law and chancery jurisdictions as separate and 
distinct systems are retained, and no change whatever is made in 
the practice under these separate and distinct systems; but the 
Legislature is authorized to confer both jurisdictions upon the 
Circuit or Chancery Courts or upon such inferior courts as the 
Legislature may from time to time create, so as to enable the Leg¬ 
islature, if it shall become necessary for the convenience of busi¬ 
ness, to provide for the holding of courts more frequently in the 
various counties of the State, with but little, if any, additional ex¬ 
pense to the State. 

With the same view, the limitations upon the number of the 
circuit and chancery divisions into which the State is divided have 
been removed, and, in lieu thereof, it has been provided that no 
circuit or chancery division shall contain less than three counties, 
unless there be embraced therein a county having a population 
exceeding 20,000 and taxable property exceeding $3,500,000 in 
value, and that such counties need not be included in any circuit 
or chancery division unless the value of its taxable property or its 
population shall be reduced below such limits. In the opinion of 
the Committee it is probable that many of such counties will he 
able to maintain inferior courts with a common law and equity 
jurisdiction, and the purpose of the Committee is to enable the 



CONSTITUTIONAL CONVKNTION, 1901 


2305 


Legislature to give to such counties separate courts to attend to 
their business, when the litigation of such counties will justify ft, 
and make such inferior courts take the place of both the Circuit 
and Chancery Courts in the counties in which they shall be es¬ 
tablished. 

The system of Probate Courts and their jurisdiction is left 
wholly unchanged; but it is provided that whenever any court 
having equity powers has taken jurisdiction of the settlement 
of any estate, such court shall have the power to do all things 
necessary for the settlement of such estate, including the appoint¬ 
ment and removal of administrators, executors, guardians and 
trustees, and including action upon the resignation of either of 
them. 

The Article reported makes no change in the office or juris¬ 
diction of Justices of the Peace, but provides that the Legislature 
may create Inferior courts, with the jurisdiction of a Justice of 
the Peace, for any precinct or precincts lying within or partly 
within any incorporated town or city having a population of more 
than 2,500 inhabitants, to supersede and take the place of all Jus¬ 
tices of the Peace in such precincts, whenever such course may 
be deemed by the General Assembly to be wise, and further pro- 
vides that the Governor except where otherwise provided by the 
General Assembly, shall have power to appoint one Notary Public 
with the jurisdiction of a Justice of the Peace in each precinct in 
which the election of Justices of the Peace shall be authorized. 

The Article as rewritten makes no change in the terms of of¬ 
fice of Chancellors, Circuit Judges and Judges of Probate, but pro¬ 
vides that, in case of a vacancy in the office, the Governor shall 
fill such vacancy by appointment, and that such appointee shall 
hold office until the next general election held at least six months 
after the vacancy occurs, and until a successor is elected and quali¬ 
fied, and, further, that whenever any new circuit or chancery di¬ 
vision is created, the Judges or Chancellor thereof shall he elected 
at the next election for representatives to the General Assembly, 
for a term to expire at the next general election for Judges and 
Chancellors, provided that if such new circuit or chancery divi¬ 
sion is created more than six months before the next election of 
Representatives to the General Assembly, the Governor shall ap¬ 
point some one as Judge or Chancellor, as the case may be, to hold 
office until such election. 

The Article as reported allows the General Assembly to pro¬ 
vide the method of election or appointment of the judges of such 
inferior courts as may be created. 

The Article reported provides for the election of Chief Jus¬ 
tices and Associate Justices of the Supreme Court at the time and 
place fixed by law for the election of members of the House of 



2306 


OFFICIAL PROCEEDINGS 


Representatives of the Congress of the United States until the 
General Assembly shall, by law, change the time for holding such 
election; it provides that the term of the Chief Justice who shall 
be elected in 1904 shall be six years, and that two of the Associate 
Justices to be elected in 1904 shall hold office until 1906, and that 
the remaining two Associate Justices elected in 1904 shall hold 
office until 1908. and that the Associate Justices elected in 1904 
shall draw or cast lots among themselves to determine which of 
them shall hold office for the terms ending, respectively, in 1906 
and 1908, and that the successors of the Chief Justice and Associate 
Justices elected in 1904, and all Chief Justices and Associate Jus¬ 
tices thereafter elected, shall hold office for a term of six years, 
and that in the event of an increase or reduction in the number 
of Associate Justices of the Supreme Court, the General Assembly 
shall provide, as nearly as may be, for the election each second 
year of one-third of the number of such Justices. 

Solicitors are made elective by the people of the several ter¬ 
ritorial subdivisions of the State in which they are to serve. 

In all other material respects the provisions of the Constitu¬ 
tion of 1875 remain unchanged. 

A majority of the Committee have voted in favor of each Sec¬ 
tion of the Article as reported, but several members of the Com¬ 
mittee did not give their assent to certain of such sections, nor 
do they hold themselves bound to support, in the Convention, 
each of the sections that have been reported by the Committee: 
several of them have prepared minority reports applying to one 
or more of the sections reported by the Committee, which are here¬ 
with presented to the Convention. 

Gregory L. Smith. 

Chairman of Judiciary Committee. 


JUDICIAL DEPARTMENT 

Section 1. The judicial powers of the State shall be vested 
in the Senate, sitting as a court of impeachment, a Supreme Court, 
Circuit Courts, Chancery Courts, Courts of Probate, such courts 
of law and equity inferior to the Supreme Court, and to consist 
of not more than five members, as the General Assembly from 
time to time may establish, and such persons as may be by law 
invested with powers of a judicial nature; but no court of general 
jurisdiction, at law or in equity, or both, shall hereafter be estab¬ 
lished in and for any one county having a population of less than 
twenty thousand or property assessed for taxation at a less valua¬ 
tion than three millions five hundred thousand dollars. 



CONSTITUTIONAL CONVENTION, 1901 


2307 


Sec. 2. Except in cases otherwise directed in this Constitu¬ 
tion, the Supreme Court shall have appellate jurisdiction only, 
which shall he co-extensive with the State, under such restric¬ 
tions and regulations, not repugnant to this Constitution, as may 
from time to time be prescribed by law, except where jurisdiction 
over appeals is vested in some inferior court, and made final there¬ 
in ; provided, that the Supreme Court shall have power to issue 
writs of injunction, habeas corpus, quo warranto, and such other 
remedial and original writs as may be necessary to give it a gen¬ 
eral superintendence and control of inferior jurisdictions. 

Sec. 3. The Supreme Court shall be held at the seat of gov¬ 
ernment, but if that shall become dangerous from any cause, it may 
adjourn to another place. 

Sec. 4. Except as otherwise authorized in this Article, the 
State shall be divided into convenient circuits. For each Circuit 
there shall be chosen a Judge, who shall, for one year next pre¬ 
ceding his election and during his continuance in office, reside in 
the circuit for which he is elected. 

Sec. 5. The Circuit Court shall have original jurisdiction in 
all matters civil and criminal within the State not otherwise ex¬ 
cepted in this Constitution; but in civil cases, other than suits for 
libel, slander, assault and batter and ejectment, it shall have juris¬ 
diction only where the matter or sum in controversy exceeds fifty 
dollars. 

Sec. 6. A Circuit Court, or a court having the jurisdiction 
of the Circuit Court, shall be held in each county in the State at 
least twice in every years, and the Judges of the several courts 
mentioned in this section may hold court for each other when they 
deem it expedient, and shall do so when directed by law. The 
Judges of the several courts mentioned in this section shall have 
power to issue writs of injunction, returnable in the Courts of 
Chancery, or courts having the jurisdiction of Courts of Chan¬ 
cery. 

Sec. 7. The General Assembly shall ha vc power to establish a 
court or courts of Chancery, with original and appellate jurisdic¬ 
tion, except as otherwise authorized in this Article. The State 
shall be divided by the General Assembly into convenient chancery 
divisions; each division shall be divided into districts, and for each 
division there shall be a Chancellor, who shall have resided for 
one year next preceding his election or appointment, and, at the 
time of his election or appointment and during his continuance in 
office, in the division for which he shall be elected or appointed. 

Sec. 8. A Chancery Court, or a court having the jurisdiction 
of the Chancery Court, shall be held in each district, at a place 
to be fixed by law, at least twice in each year, and the Chancellors 
may hold court for each other when they deem it necessary. 



2306 


OFFICIAL PROCEEDINGS 


Sec. 9. Any county having a population exceeding twenty 
thousand, according to the next preceding Federal census, and 
also taxable property exceeding three million five hundred thou¬ 
sand dollars in value, according to the next preceding assessment 
of property for State and county taxation, need not be included 
in any circuit or chancery division; but if the value of its taxable 
property shall be reduced below that limit or if its population shall 
be reduced below that number, the General Assembly shall include 
such county in a circuit and chancery division or either, embracing 
more than one county. 

No circuit or chancery division shall contain less than three 
counties, unless there be embraced therein a county having a popu¬ 
lation exceeding twenty thousand and taxable property exceeding 
three million five hundred thousand dollars. The General As¬ 
sembly may confer upon the Circuit Court or the Chancery Court 
the jurisdiction of both of said courts. In counties having two 
or more courts of record, the General Assembly may provide for 
the consolidation of all or any of such courts of record, except the 
Probate Court, with or without separate divisions, and an appro¬ 
priate number of judges for the transaction of the business of such 
consolidated court. 

Sec. 10. The General Assembly shall have power to estab¬ 
lish in each county within the State a Court of Probate, with gen¬ 
eral jurisdiction to grant letters testamentary and of administra¬ 
tion, and of orphans’ business; provided, that whenever any court 
having equity powers has taken jurisdiction of the settlement of 
any estate it shall have power to do all things necessary for the 
settlement of such estate, including the appointment and removal 
of administrators, executors, guardians and trustees, and including 
action upon the resignation of either of them. 

Sec. 1. The Justices of the Supreme Court, Chancellors, and 
the Judges of the Circuit Courts, and other courts of record, ex¬ 
cept Probate Courts, shall, at stated times receive for their services 
a compensation which shall not be diminished during their official 
term; they shall receive no fees or perquisites, nor hold any office 
(except judicial offices) of profit or trust under this State or the 
United States, or any other power, during the term for which they 
have been elected. 

Sec. 12. The Supreme Court shall consist of one Chief Justice 
and such number of Associate Justices as may be prescribed bv 
law. 


Sec. 13. The Chief Justice and Associate Justices of the Su¬ 
preme Court, Judges of the Circuit Courts, Probate Courts and 
Chancellors, shall be elected by the qualified electors of the State, 
circuits, counties and chancery divisions for which such courts may 



CONSTITUTIONAL CONVENTION. 1901 


2309 


be established, at such times as may be prescribed by law, except 
as herein otherwise provided. 

Sec. 14. The Judges of such inferior courts of law and equity 
as may be by law established, shall be elected or appointed in such 
inode as the General Assembly may prescribe. 

Sec. 15. Chancellors and Judges of all courts of record, shall 
have been citizens of the United States and of this State for five 
years next preceding their election or appointment, and shall be 
not less than twenty-five years of age, and, except Judges of Pro¬ 
bate Courts, shall be learned in the law. 

Sec. 16. Except as otherwise provided in this article, the 
Chief Justice and Associate Justices of the Supreme Court, Circuit 
Judges, Chancellors and Judges of Probate, shall hold office for 
the term of six years and until their successors are elected or ap¬ 
pointed and qualified; and the right of such Judges and Chancel¬ 
lors to hold their offices for the full term hereby prescribed shall 
not be affected by any change hereafter made by law in any cir¬ 
cuit, division, or county, in the mode or time of election. 

Sec. 17. The Chief Justice and Associate Justices of the Su¬ 
preme Court shall be chosen at an election held at the time and 
places fixed by law for the election of members of the House of 
Representatives of the Congress of the United States, until the 
General Assembly shall, by law, change the time of holding such 
election. The term of office of the Chief Justice who shall be 
elected in the year 1904 shall be as provided in the last preceding 
section. The successors of two of the Associate Justices elected in 

1904, shall be elected in the year 1906. and the successors of the 
other two Associate Justices elected in 1904. shall be elected in the 
year 1908. The Associate Justices of said court elected in the 
vear 1904 shall draw or cast lots among themselves to determine 
which of them shall hold office for the terms ending, respectively, 
in the years 1906 and 1908, and until their respective successors 
are elected or appointed and qualified. The result of such de¬ 
termination shall be certified to the Governor, by such Associate 
Justices, or a majority of them prior to the first day of January. 

1905, and such certificates shall be entered upon the minutes of 
the court. In the event of the failure of said Associate Justices to 
make and certify such determination, the Governor shall desig¬ 
nate the terms for which they shall respectively hold office, as 
above provided, and shall issue his proclamation accordingly. In 
the event of an increase or reduction by law of the number of As¬ 
sociate Justices of the Supreme Court, the General Assembly shall, 
as nearly as may be, provide for the election, each second year, 
of one-third of the members of said court. 

Sec. 18. All judicial officers within their respective jurisdic¬ 
tion shall, by virtue of their offices, be conservators of the peace. 



2310 


OFFICIAL rkoCKFDIW.S 


Sec. 19. Vacancies in the oft ice of any of the judges who hold 
office by election, or chancellors of this State shall be filled by 
appointment by the Governor; such appointee shall hold his of- 
fice until the next general election held at least six months after 
the vacancy occurs, and until his successor is elected and qualified ; 
the successor chosen at such election shall hold office for the un¬ 
expired term and until his successor is elected and qualified. 

Sec. 20. Whenever any new circuit or chancery division, j- 
created, the judge or chancellor therefor shall be elected at the next 
election for representatives to the General A-semblv for a term to 
expire at the next general election for judges and chancellors; pro¬ 
vided that, if said new circuit or chancery division is created more 
than six months before the next election of representatives to the 
General Assembly, the Governor shall appoint some one as judge 
or chancellor, as the case may be. to hold the office until such elec¬ 
tion. 


Sec. 21. If in any case, civil or criminal, pending in any circuit 
court, chancery court, or either of them in this State, the presiding 
judge or chancellor shall, for any legal cause, be incompetent to 
try, hear or render judgment in such case, the parties, or their at¬ 
torneys of record, if it be a civil case or the solicitor or prosecuting 
officer, and the defendant or defendants, if it be a criminal case, 
may agree upon some disinterested person, practicing in the court 
and learned in the law, to act as special judge or chancellor to sit 
as a court, and to hear, decide and render judgment in the same 
manner and to the same effect as a chancellor or as a judge of the 
circuit court, or if a court having the jurisdiction of a circuit and 
chancery court, or either, sitting as a court might do in such case. 
If the case be a civil one and the parties or their attorneys of record 
do not agree, or if it be a criminal one and the prosecuting officer 
and the defendant or defendants do not agree upon a special judge 
or chancellor, or if either party in a civil cause is not represented 
in court, the register in chancerv or the clerk of such circuit or 
other court in which said cause is pending, shall appoint a special 
judge or chancellor, who shall preside, try, and render judgment 
as in this section provided. The General Assembly inav prescribe 
other methods for supplying special judges in such cases. 


, ^ ec , 2 . 2 r C / eneraI Assc,nhl - V sh < l11 Have power to provide 

for the holding of chancery and circuit courts, and for the holding 
of courts having the jurisdiction of circuit and chancerv courts, 
or either of them, when the chancellors or judges thereof fail to 
attend regular terms. 


Sec. 23. No judge of any court 
practice law in any of the courts of 
States. 


ot .record in this State, shall 
this State, or of the United 



CONSTITUTIONAL CONVENTION, 1901 


2311 


11 ^ eC ’ ^ e &' ster; j 111 chancery shall be appointed by the chan¬ 
ce ors of the respective divisions, and shall have been at least 
twelve months before their appointment, and shall be at the time 
of their appointment and during- their continuance in office, resi- 

< V nt -°^ ^ le ^ ,strict f° r which they are appointed. Thev 

shall hold office for the term for which the chancellor making such 
appointment was elected or appointed. Such registers shall re¬ 
ceive as compensation for their services only such fees and com¬ 
missions as may be specifically prescribed bv law, which fees shall 
be uniform throughout the State. 

i J? eC ' T ^' c,erlc °f the Supreme Court shall be appointed 

by the Judges thereof, and shall hold office for the term of six 
vears, and the clerks of such inferior courts as may be established 
by law shall be elected in such manner as the General Assembly 
may provide. 

Sec. 26. Clerks of the circuit court shall he elected by the 
qualified electors in each county for the term of six vears, and 
may, when appointed by the chancellor, also fill the office of reg¬ 
ister in chancery. Vacancies in such office of clerk shall be filled 
by the Governor for the unexpired term. 

Sec. 27. The clerk of the Supreme Court and registers in 
chancery may be removed from office by the Justices of the Su¬ 
preme Court, and by the chancellors, respectively, for cause, to be 
entered at length upon the minutes of the court. 

Sec. 28. A solicitor for each judicial circuit, or other terri¬ 
torial subdivision prescribed by the General Assembly, shall be 
elected by the qualified electors of such circuit or other territorial 
subdivision, who shall be learned in the law, and who shall, at the 
time of his election, and during his continuance in office, reside 
in the circuit or other territorial subdivision, for which he is elect¬ 
ed, and whose term of office shall be for four years; provided, that 
this Article shall not operate to abridge the term of any solicitor 
now in office; and. provided, further, that the solicitors elected 
in the year 1904 shall hold office for six years and until their suc¬ 
cessors are elected and qualified. 

Sec. 29. In each precinct not lying within, or partly within, 
any city or incorporated town of more than twenty-five hundred 
inhabitants, there shall be elected, by the qualified electors of such 
precinct not exceeding two justices of the peace and one constable. 
Where one or more precincts lie within, or partly within, a city 
or incorporated town having more than twenty-five hundred in¬ 
habitants, the General Assembly may provide by law for the elec¬ 
tion of not more than two justices of the peace and one constable, 
for each of such precincts, or an inferior court for such precinct 
or precincts, in lieu of all justices of the peace therein. Justices 
of the peace, and the inferior courts herein provided for, shall 



2312 


OITUTAl. I*K< >C’KU >1 X* S 


have jurisdiction in all civil caso where the amount in controversy 
does not exceed one hundred dollars, except in cases of libel, slan¬ 
der, assault and battery and ejectment. 1 lie General Asseinblv 
may provide by law what fees may be charged by Justices of the 
Peace and Constables, which fees shall be uniform throughout the 
State. The right of appeal from any judgment of a Justice of the 
Peace, or from anv inferior court authorized by this section, w ith¬ 
out the prepayment of costs, and also in tin* term of office of such 
Justices, and of the Judges of such inferior courts, and of notaries 
public, shall be provided for by law. Tin* Governor mav appoint 
notaries public without the powers of a Justice of the Peace, and 
may, except where otherwise provided b\ an act of the General 
Assembly, appoint not more than one notary public with all of 
the powers and jurisdiction of a Justice of the Peace for each pre¬ 
cinct in which the (‘lection of Justices of the Peace shall be au¬ 
thorized. 

Sec. 30. The Attorney General shall be elected by the quali¬ 
fied electors of the State at the same time and places of election of 
members of the General Assembly, whose term of office shall be 
for four years and until his successor is elected and qualified. After 
his election, he shall reside at the seat of government, shall be the 
law officer of the State, and shall perform such duties as may be 
required of him by law. 

Sec. 31. The style of all process shall be “The State of Ala¬ 
bama and all prosecutions shall be carried on in the name and 
bv the authority of the same, and '-hall conclude “Against the 
Peace and Dignity of the State.“ 

MINORITY RKPORTS 


Mr. President: 

The undersigned members „f the Committee on Judiciary do 

"fnnT?7 Ur fVY Y m . aJOnty r T rt >u far a ' * rcfers to Sections 
Of Sf ?n 11 he l- rep ° rt< A a,ul thl: -v recommend the adoption 
of the following sections hen >aid Sections 25 and V re¬ 
spectively: 

Sec ;.?. 5 ‘ V 1C ^ lerk ot tilc Supreme Court shall be elected bv 
the qualified electors of the State for a term of six years \nv 

vacancy in the office of such Clerk fill a i ^ •* 

i w ^ c A 1 ,K by appointment 

Qerk shad nnt iS® £ Upren, . e Col,rt for unexpired term. Said 

P office receL In V e of the term of the Clerk now 

compensation other tha USC a Y te ' S ’ COSts P er( |uisites of office or 

by which 




CONSTITUTIONAL CONVENTION, 1901 


2313 


Sec. 2. Registers in Chancery may be removed from office 
by the Chancellors, respectively, for cause, to be entered at length 
upon the minutes of the court. 


R. W. Walker, 

O. R. Hood. 

J. M. Jones, 

W. H. Tayloe. 

John A. Davis, 

William C. Fitts, 

John T. Ashcraft, 

Norville R Leigh, Jr.. 

E. W. Coleman, 

J. T. Kirk. 

MINORITY REPORT JUDICIARY COMMITTEE 

The undersigned member of the committee differs from the 
majority as to Section 29 of said report and would suggest the 
following change in the last paragraph of the section : 

“Strike out the word ‘except’ and strike out the word ‘other¬ 
wise’ in the last paragraph of Section 29. 

J. McLean Jones. 

Mr. President. 

The undersigned member of the Committee on Judiciary does 
not concur in the report of the majority of the committee in 
recommending the adoption of Sections 2 and 9 of said report. 

I object to the adoption of Section 2 of said report for the 
reason it empowers the General Assembly to create an inter¬ 
mediate Court of Appeal, which in my judgment is unwise. The 
object of the majority of the committee is to furnish relief to the 
Supreme Court. The relief needed can be furnished when neces¬ 
sary by increasing the number of Associate Justices. I object to 
the creation of said court for the further reason there will be ir¬ 
reconcilable conflict in the decisions of this and the Supreme 
Court which would render the law uncertain on many questions 
to the great annoyance of the people. The expense of sustaining 
the court will, in my' judgment, cost the State about $15,000 per 
annum. The addition of two Associate Justices to the Supreme 
Court will not cost more than half of that amount. I therefore 
offer as a substitute for Section 2 the following: 

Sec. 2. Except in cases otherwise directed in this Constitu¬ 
tion, the Supreme Court shall have appellate jurisdiction only, 
which shall be co-extensive with the State, under such restric- 



2314 


OFFICIAL PKOCLKI M NC*S 


tions and regulations not repugnant to thi> Constitution as mav 
from time to time be prescribed by law; provided, the Supreme 
Court shall have power to issue writs of injunction, habeas cor¬ 
pus, quo warranto and such other remedial and original writs as 
may be necessary to give it a general superintendence and con¬ 
trol of inferior jurisdiction. 

[ object to the adoption of Section a^ reported In the com¬ 
mittee : 

First, this section provides for the establishment ot too mam 
Circuit Courts and courts with circuit and chancer) iurisdictiim. 
Under the report of the committee, the General Assembly is au¬ 
thorized to establish at the cost of the State, a court in nineteen 
counties with Circuit and Chancery Court jurisdiction, which with 
the 13 Circuit Courts and five Chancery Court> as now exists will 
make 37 courts to do the work that is now being done by 13 Cir¬ 
cuit Judges and 5 Chancellors. 1 further object to Section c > as 
reported by the committee for the reason it authorizes the General 
Assembly to abolish the Court of Chancery. The system of sep¬ 
arate Chancery Courts has been too long a part of the judicial 
system of this State to be abolished. I therefore offer as a .substi¬ 
tute for Section V as reported by the Committee the billowing: 

Sec. 9. Any county having a population exceeding 30,000 ac¬ 
cording to the next preceding Federal census, and also taxable* 
property exceeding $7,000,000 in value according to the next pre- 
ceeding assessment of property for State and county taxation need 
not be included in any circuit or chancery division, hut if the value 
of the taxable property shall he reduced below that limit, or its 
population shall be reduced below that number in either of which 
events the General Assembly shall include such county in a cir¬ 
cuit or chancery division or either, embracing more than one coun¬ 
ty. No circuit or chancery division shall contain less than three 
counties, unless there be embraced therein a countv having a popu¬ 
lation exceeding 30,000, and taxable property exceeding $7,000,000. 
f he counties of this State not having a population of $30,000 and 
taxable property of $7,000,000 or more shall be divided into conven¬ 
ient circuits by the General Assembly at its tirst session after the 
adoption of this Constitution, and when so divided the number 
of circuits shall not be increased except bv a vote of two-thirds ot 
the General Assembly. 

J. T. Kirk. 


Mr. President: 

We. the undersigned members of the Judiciary Committee, be- 
levmg that biennial elections should be dispensed with, and that 
only one election in every four years should be held for the selec- 



CONSTITUTIONAL CONVKNTION. 1901 


231? 


tion of State and county officers, do not concur in the report of the 
Committee as to Sections 16, 17 and 26. 

1 herefore, we move as a substitute for Section 16 the follow¬ 
ing - : 

Sec. 16. Except as otherwise provided in this Article, the 
Chief Justice and Associate Justices of the Supreme Court shall 
hold office for the term of eight years, and until their successors 
are elected and qualified. Circuit Judges, Chancellors and Judges 
of Probate shall hold office for a term of four years, except as 
otherwise provided in this Article, and until their successors are 
elected or appointed and qualified; Provided, that this Section 
shall not operate to abridge the term of any Justice of the Supreme 
Court, Judge, Chancellor or Judge of Probate now in office; and 
provided, further, that the Justices of the Supreme Court, Judges, 
Chancellors and Judges of Probate elected in 1904, shall hold of¬ 
fice for the term of six years, and until their successors are elected 
and qualified. 

We move as a substitute for Section 17 the following: 

Sec. 17. The Chief Justice and Associate Justice of the Su¬ 
preme Court shall he chosen at an election held for the election 
of members of the Legislature in the year 1910. The term of the 
office of the Chief Justice who shall he elected in 1910 shall he as 
prescribed in the preceding Section. As nearly as possible, one- 
half of the Associate Justices elected in 1910 shall hold office for 
the term of four years and until their successors are elected and 
qualified ; and the remainder for the term of eight years, and until 
their successors are elected and qualified. The Associate Justices 
elected in 1910 shall determine by lot among themselves which of 
them shall hold office for the term ending 1914 and 1918, respec¬ 
tively, the result when so determined to he certified to the Gov¬ 
ernor by such Associate Justices or a majority of them, and also 
to be entered upon the minutes of the Court. In the event of the 
failure of such Associate Justices to make and certify such de¬ 
termination, the Governor shall designate the term for which 
they shall hold office respectively, as above provided, and shall 
issue his proclamation accordingly. 

We move to amend as a substitute for Section 26 the follow¬ 

ing 

Sec. 26. A Clerk of the Circuit Court shall be elected hv the 
qualified electors in each county for the term of four years, and 
may, when appointed by Chancellor, also hold the office of Regis¬ 
ter in Chancery. Vacancies in such office of Clerk shall be filled 
by appointment by the Governor. But nothing in this Section 
shall operate to abridge the term of any clerk now in office; and 



2316 


OFFICIAL PROCEEDINGS 


clerks elected in the year 1904 shall hold office for the term of six 
years, and until their successors are elected and qualified. 

C. C. NeSmith, 

Wm. C. Fitts, 

J. B. Duke. 


Mr. President: 

The undersigned, a minority of the Judiciary Committee, do 
not concur in the report of the Committee as to the manner of 
electing Solicitors by a vote of the people. For reasons that will 
be made manifest in argument on the floor of the Convention, we, 
the minority of said Committee, submit the following ordinance 
in lieu of the report of the Committee: 

Be it ordained, etc. : 

Sec. 28. A Solicitor for each Judicial Circuit or other terri¬ 
torial subdivision prescribed by the Legislature shall be elected 
by joint ballot of the Legislature, who shall, at the time of his 
election, and during his continuance in office, reside in the circuit 
oi other territorial subdivision, for which he L elected, and whose 
term of office shall be for four years; and who shall be paid a 
salary to be fixed b\ T law, and which shall not be increased or di¬ 
minished during the term for which he is elected: Provided, that 
nothing in this Article shall operate to abridge the term or emolu¬ 
ments of any Solicitor now in office. 


Respectfully submitted. 

Robert J. Lowe, 

J. B. Duke, 

[no. T. Heflin, 

Wn\. H. Samford, 

Ldward A. Graham, 

J. T. Kirk, 

Chas. W. Ferguson. 
MINORITY REPORT 

AS t didary I ° nS 16 aml ]/ 01 the ^ c P ort of the Committee on Ju- 
Mr. President: 

The undersigned a minority of the Committee on Judiciary, 
respecttuily differ with the majority of the Committee as to Sec¬ 
tion.', 16 and 17 of the report of said committee. 



CONSTITUTIONAL CONVENTION, 1901 


2317 


The policy of this Convention seems to be that elections in 
this State shall occur every four years. This is indicated by the 
adoption of the report of the Committee on Executive Department, 
fixing the term of all State officers at four years, and also by the 
report of the Committee on Legislation. If the terms of the Judges 
of the several courts shall be fixed at six years, this will neces¬ 
sitate occasionally an election for Judges when no other offices 
are to be elected. The substitute proposed by the undersigned 
will obviate this and bring the election of Judges at the time when 
other officers will be elected. Our substitutes propose that all the 
Judges of Probate, Judges of Circuit Courts, Chancellors and Jus¬ 
tices of the Supreme Court, shall be elected in the year 1904 for 
a term of six years, and that thereafter the terms of Judges of the 
Probate Court shall be four years, and the terms of Justices of the 
Supreme Court, Judges of the Circuit Courts and Chancellors 
shall be eight years. Our proposition also is that not more than 
one-half of the Justices of the Supreme Court shall be elected at 
one time. We think this last proposition will tend to increase 
the efficiency of said court. If our substitutes are adopted, there 
will be no necessity for an election for Judges and Chancellors at 
any other time than that fixed for the election of other officers. 
The term of Judges of the Probate Courts is reduced after 1910 
to four years, and the terms of the other Judges and Chancellors 
increased to eight years after 1910. We do not deem it to the in¬ 
terest of the State that the term of Judges of the Circuit Court 
and Chancellors shall be reduced to four years, and as it seems 
impracticable to let said terms remain at six years, we deem it the 
better policy to fix the terms of those Judges and Chancellors at 
eight years. We believe that a better Judge can be found for an 
eight-year than a four-year term. 

We, therefore, beg leave to submit herewith a substitute for 
each of said Sections 16 and 17. The substitute for Section 16 is 
as follows: 

Section 16. In the year 1904 Judges of the Probate Courts, 
Judges of the Circuit Courts and Chancellors, shall be elected by 
the qualified electors of the respective counties, circuits and chan¬ 
cery divisions for a term of six years and until their successors 
are elected and qualified In the year 1910. and every four years 
thereafter, Judges of the Probate Courts shall be elected by the 
qualified electors of the respective counties for a term of four 
years, and until their successors are elected and qualified. In the 
year 1910 and every eight years thereafter. Judges of the Circuit 
Courts and Chancellors shall be elected by the qualified electors 
for the respective circuits and chancery divisions for a term of 
eight years, and until their successors are elected and qualified. 
The right of such Judges and Chancellors to hold their offices for 
the full term hereby prescribed, shall not be affected by any change 



2318 


Ol'TICIAl, PROCKHI)lM'S 


hereafter made by law in any circuit, division or county in the 
mode or time of election. 

The substitute for Section 17 is as follows: 

Section 17. In the year 1904, the Chief Justice and Associate 
Justices of the Supreme Court shall be elected by the qualified 
electors of the State for a term of six years and until their suc¬ 
cessors are elected and qualified. In the year 1910, and every 
eight years thereafter, the Chief Justice shall be elected by the 
qualified electors of the State for a term of eight years, and until 
his successor is elected and qualified. Two of the Associate Jus¬ 
tices elected in 1910 shall hold their offices for the term of four 
years, and two for the term of eight years, and until their succes¬ 
sors are elected and qualified, and in the year 1914, and every four 
years thereafter, two of such Associate Justices shall be elected 
by the qualified electors of the State for a term of eight years, and 
until their successors are elected and qualified. The Associate 
Justices of said court elected in the year 1910, shall draw or cast 
lots among themselves to determine which of them shall hold of¬ 
fice for the terms ending, respectively, in the years 1914 and 1918, 
and until their successors are elected and qualified, the result of 
said determination to be certified to the Governor by such Asso¬ 
ciate Justices or a majority of them prior to the first day of Janu¬ 
ary, 1911, and also to be entered upon the minutes of the court. 
In the event of the failure of said Associate Justices to make and 
certify such determination, the Governor shall designate which 
of said Associate Justices shall go out of office in 1914 and 1918, 
respectively, and issue his proclamation accordingly. In the event 
of the increase or reduction by law of the number of Associate Jus¬ 
tices of the Supreme Court, the General Assembly shall, as nearly 
as may be, provide for the election every four years of one-half 
of the whole number of Justices, including the Chief Justice of 
said Court, for a term of eight years. 

Respectfully submitted. 

Thos. H. Watts, 

Norville R. Leigh, Jr.. 
Edward A. Graham, 

J. McLean Jones, 

Wra. H. Sam ford. 

H. Pillans, 

MR. SMI IH I move that the reports of the majority and 
of the minority as well, together with the Articles, be printed and 
that the Article be made a special order of business after the 
special orders already designated. 

A vote being taken the motion was carried. 



2310 


CONSTITUTIONAL CONVENTION, 1901 

in jirntke^o^^m^f * want to make a personal statement 
Se reuon of ,h. r JO "' S . of Wil «“- °" Saturday last when 
w ,.~ nn anH U ? Committee on State and County Boundaries 

the S constitution a f ^ considerin ST the proposition to reduce 

square miles T1‘T\° “ U " t ' es froni 600 square miles to 500 

C lones Tf L u ,°? ked ! he fact that 1 was Paired with Gen. R. 

reduction T !l f ! ha< f beei \ here he wou,d have voted against anv 

mav be made t C make th ,’ S statemcnt that General Jones 
may be made to appear properly. 

will P f R ? TEM — The next order of business 

ment h tonsK,erat,on of the Report on the Legislative Depart- 


Section 6 was read as follows: 

Sec. 6 The pay of members of the Legislature shall be $4 

LT/T 3nd ° CCntS Per mile in £° in £ to and returning from the 
seat of government, to be computed by the nearest usual route 


w?’ JES 1 rise to ask unanimous consent to insert a 
word that seems to have been omitted. It is the word “the” be¬ 
tween pay of” and “members.” It should read “The pay of the 
members, etc. 


Bv consent the word was inserted. 

MR. MURPHREE—I have an amendment. 

The amendment was read as follows: 

Amend Section 6 by striking out the word “ten” and inserting 
the word five, and add at the end of the Section: “The mem- 
hers using free railroad passes shall not be entitled to anv mile¬ 
age from the State.” 


MR. MURPHREE—I have no objections if the members de- 
>ire to vote separately on these two propositions. The first is to 
strike out ten and inseit five for the mileage of members of 
the Legislature. It seems clear to me that the members of that 
body should not be allowed to charge 10 cents per mile, when they 
only have to pay 3 cents. That is more than three times what it 
costs and I cannot see the justice of it. Of course, where they 
have passes in their pockets they ought not to require the State 
to pay them 10 cents per mile. 

It does not seem to me that it is necessary to make any speech 
in advocacy of either of these two amendments, it seems to me they 
speak for themselves. 

So far as I am concerned I would like to have a record of the 
vote upon these two propositions but if others do not want it I 
shall not insist on it. 



2320 


OFFICIAL PROCEEDINGS 


MR. OATES—T rise for the purpose of stating the views the 
Committee had in regard to this matter. It is reported in the 
exact words in which it appears in the present Constitution. The 
question was discussed in the Committee and in the opinion of 
some $4 per diem was not enough. In the opinion of others the 
mileage of 10 cents was too much. So we thought upon an av¬ 
erage it was about right, and we let it remain as it is and that is 
the only reason I know of that it should remain as it is. 

The statement of the delegate from Pike is quite true that 
10 cents is three times as much as it costs the members to travel. 
The only reason that was permitted to remain was because of 
the fact that I have suggested. 

A friend asks the question suppose they would lay over on 
the way? That is never taken into consideration in allowing the 
mileage. 

As to the latter part of the proposition, if a member has a 
pass and it does not cost him anything to come to the Legislature, 
of course, he should not collect mileage from the State. But I 
have no right to presume that such is or would he the case, that 
any member would travel upon a pass and then collect mileage. 

MR. BROOKS—I move for a division of the question so that 
the question of taking a vote on the first part of the amendment 
can he passed on separately from the last part. 

MR. deGRAF FKNREID—I am opposed to members of the 
General Assembly using passes, but I am going to move to lav 
the amendment on the table and then a division can be called for 

MR. REESE I would ask the gentleman to withdraw that 
so that I can offer a substitute for this amendment. 

MR. deGRAFFENREID—I will withdraw it if the House per¬ 
mits me. 

The motion to table was permitted to be withdrawn and the 
amendment substitute of the delegate from Dallas was read as 
follows: 

\ men< ^ str iking out the word “ten" and insert the word 

five. 

MR. REESE i hat amendment onlv relates to the first part 
of the amendment of the delegate from Pike. When we dispose 
°t! n S other matter can then be brought directly before 

the Convention as to whether a legislator can receive pav for mile¬ 
age when he has not paid his fare. 

MR. deGRAFFENREID I move to lay the amendment to 
the amendment on the table, and the whole business. 



CONSTITUTIONAL CONVENTION, 1901 


2321 


MR. BROOKS—I call for a division of the question. 

MR. SPEARS—Upon that division of the question I call for 
the ayes and noes. 

MR. OATES—The division calls for a separation of the propo¬ 
rtion striking out ten and substituting five, and the other is as 
to the pass proposition. 

THE PRESIDENT PRO TEM—The Chair is of the opinion 
that the present parliamentary status of the question is not divis- 
able. And the question is on the motion of the delegate from Hale 
to table. 

There was no objection and the motion to table was with¬ 
drawn. 

MR. O'NEAL—Now 1 move to lay the substitute of the gen¬ 
tleman from Dallas on the table. 

A vote being taken the motion to table was carried. 

MR. NESMITH—I now move to lay the amendment of the 
delegate from Pike on the table. 

MR. OATES—If the delegate withdraws that 1 will move 
for a division. 

MR. NESMITH—Under the rules that cannot be divided. 

THE PRESIDENT PRO TEM—The Chair is of the opinio® 
that the question involved in the amendment offered by the gen¬ 
tleman from Pike is divisible. 

MR. BROOKS—I made the motion first for a division of the 
question, but I wish to say that the Convention in laying upon 
the table the substitute of the gentleman from Dallas relieves the 
Houses from the necessity of having any division of the question 
as that strikes the first proposition out. 

MR. PETTUS—T rise to a point of order. A motion to table 
is not debatable. 

MR. OATES—I do not understand that there is any motion to 
table now pending. 

THE PRESIDENT PRO TEM—Then the question now is 
upon the adoption of the amendment of the delegate from Pike. 

MR. deGRAFFENREID —And on that I call for the previous 
question. 

MR. WADDELL—I offer an amendment. 

MR REESE—I rise to a point of order; there is a motion to 
table and no amendment can be offered at this time, and I call 



2322 


OFFICIAL PROCEEDINGS 


for the ayes and noes. I desire to have the house put on record 
as to whether they are going- to pay legislators mileage when thev 
have passes. 

. THJi PRESIDENT. PRO TEM — The motion to table was 
withdrawn. 

MR. NESMITH—I made the motion to table and never with¬ 
drew it. 

THE PRESIDENT PRO TEM—The chair understood the 
gentleman had withdrawn his motion to table. 

MR. NESMITH—I had not. 

MR. WADDELL—I believe I have the floor. 1 offered an 
amendment and never yielded the floor. 

MR. SAMFORD (Pike)—I rise to a point of order that the 
gentleman was not entitled to the floor; that a motion to table 
was pending. 

THE PRESIDENT PRO TEM—The point is well taken and 
the motion is to table the amendment of the delegate from Pike. 

tion MR ' deGRAFFENR EID-I call for a division of the ques- 


ere SIDEN 1 PRO TEM—In the opinion of the chair, 
the amendment offered by the gentleman from Pike is divisible, 
and the question is. shall the question be divided? 

MR REESE If it is capable of division, that is a matter of 
right and does not have to be submitted to the house On the 
last proposition embraced in the amendment. I demand the ave« 
and noes. 

t , ™ E PRESIDENT PRO TEM—It is the opinion of the chair 
that the question is capable of division, and the first part will first 
be put to the Convention, and the call of the gentleman from Dal¬ 
las is a little premature at this time. The first part of the amend- 
ment is to strike out ten and insert five, and the question is on 
that part of the amendment. 


MR. PILLANS—I understood the question to 


tion to table. 


be on the mo- 


1 M ?’ EROWNE “7° n that the gentleman from Montgomerv 

demands the yeas and nays. 

MR. OATES No, sir; I didn’t do any such a thing. 

THE PRESIDENT PRO TEM—The question is on the mo¬ 
tion to table the first part of the amendment. 



CONSTITUTIOXAI, CONVENTION'. 1%1 




A Note being taken the first part of the amendment was tabled. 

MR. REESE On the motion to table the latter part of the 
amendment, I demand the ayes and noes. 

1 he latter part of the amendment was read as follows: “Add 
at the end of the sections the words, ‘The members using free 
railroad passes shall not be entitled to anv mileage from the 
State.* *’ 

MR. WHITE—I have a substitute for that. 

THE PRESIDENT PRO TEM—The gentleman is out of 
order at this time. The pending motion is to lay on the table the 
part of the amendment just read, and on that the ayes and noes 
have been demanded. Is the call sustained? 

The call was sustained. 


MR. GREER—Would that apply to newspaper men whose 
passes are paid for by advertisement? 

MR. O'NEAL—I would like to have the whole section read, 
including the amendment. 

This was done, ami the roll call then had, resulted as follows: 


I lanks. 

Barefield, 

Browne, 

Bulger, 

I W ars, 

Cardon, 

Carmichael, of Colbert, 
Case, 

Chapman, 

Coleman, of Greene, 
Craig, 

I )avis, of DeKalb, 
Davis, of Etowah, 

1 hike, 

Foshce, 

Foster, 


Beddow, 

Bethune, 

Blackwell, 

Brooks, 

Burnett, 


AYES 

Gilmore, 

Greer, of Calhoun, 
Greer, of Perry, 
Harrison, 

Heflin, of Chambers, 
Heflin, of Randolph, 
Howell, 

Inge, 

Kirkland, 

Maxwell, 

XcSmith, 

Oates, 

O’Rear, 

Pearce, 

Pitts, 

Proctor, 

NOES 

Burns. 

Cobb, 

Cofer, 

deGraffenreid, 

Eley, 


Reynolds (Henry), 
Rogers, of Sumter, 
Searcy, 

Sentell, 

Sloan, 

Sorrell, 

Stewart, 

Studdard, 

Vaughan, 

Waddell, 

Weatherly. 

Willet, 

Williams, of Marengo, 
Wilson, of Washington. 


TOTAL—46 


Espy, 

Fletcher, 

Freeman, 

Glover* 

Graham, of Talladega, 



2324 


OFFICIAL PROCEEDINGS 


Grayson, 

Haley, 

I landley, 

II inson, 

1 food, 

1 lowze, 

Jackson, 

Junes, of Bibb, 

Jones, of Hale, 

Jones, of Montgomery, 
Jones, of Wilcox, 

Kirk, 

Knight, 

Leigh. 

Locklin, 

Lomax, 

Long, of Walker, 

Lowe, of Jefferson, 
MacDonald, 

McMillan (Baldwin), 


McMillan, of Wilcox, 
Malone, 

Martin, 

Merrill, 

Miller, of Marengo, 
Miller, of Wilcox, 
Moody, 

Murphree, 

Norman, 

Norwood. 

O’Neal, of Lauderdale, 
O’Neill (Jefferson), 
Opp, 

Palmer, 

Parker, of Klmore. 
Pettus, 

Pillans, 

Reese. 

Reynolds, of Chilton. 
Robinson, 


Rogers, of Lowndes. 
Samford, 

Sanders, 

Sanford, 

Smith, of Mobile, 
Smith, Mac A., 
Smith. Morgan M . 
Sollie, 

Spear >. 

Spragins, 

Tayl< >e, 

Thomps< >ii. 

Walker. 

Watts, 

Wcable'.. 

White. 

Whiteside, 

W illiams, of Barbour. 
Wilson, of Clarke, 
Winn. 

TOTAL—75 


ABSENT OR NOT VOTING 


Messrs. President, 

Dent. 

Long, of Butler, 
Lowe, of Lawrence, 

Almon, 

Kyster, 

Altman, 

Ferguson, 

Morrissette, 

Ashcraft, 

Fitts, 

Mul key. 

Bartlett, 

Graham. «>f Montgomery. 

Parker, of Cullman, 

Beavers, 

Grant, 

Phillips 

Boone, 

Henderson, 

Porter, 

Carmichael, of Coffee, 

1 lodges, 

Renfro, 

Carnathon, 

Jenkins, 

Setheimcr, 

Coleman, of Walker, 
Cornwall, 

Cunningham, 

King, 

Kyle, 

Ledbetter. 

Williams, of Klmore 


By a vote of 46 ayes and 75 noes. the motion to table was lost. 

MR. WHITE—I have an amendment. 

The amendment was read as follows: "Amend Section 6. as 
amended by—” 

MR. WADDELL—I rise to a point of order. Section 6 has 
not been amended. 

THE PRESIDENT PRC) TEM—In the opinion of the Chair 
the (point of order made by the gentleman from Russell is well 
taken. The section has not been amended. 

MR. WHITE—I offer it then as a substitute. 




C ON ST 1 'I' UT i O y A1« CO N V K N T ION. 1901 


222 5 


MR. OATES- For the .section or the amendment r 

MR. WHITE As a substitute for the pending; amendment. 


The substitute was read as follows: “Substitute for amend¬ 
ment to Section 6, by striking out all of said section after the word 
provided* and insert the following: 'That the members ol the leg¬ 
islature shall not accept free transportation from any common 
carrier, during his term of office. Any member receiving, or using 
any such free transportation, shall be guilty of a misdemeanor and 
shall forfeit his office. 


THE PRESIDENT PRO TEMThe question is upon tin* 
adoption of the substitute offered by tlu* gentleman trom lellei- 
Min to the amendment ottered by the gentleman trom Pike. 


MR. WHITE The amendment offered by the gentleman 
from Pike a< 1 understand it. dot's not meet the difticulu . it P 
good as far as it goes, but it does not go far enough and 1 would 
like to have the amendment offered by the gentleman trom 1 ike 
read in connection with my remarks. 

The amendment of the gentleman from Pike was read as lol- 
lows: “The member using free railroad passes shall not be en¬ 
titled to am mileage Irom the State. 


MR W HITE -Merck prohibiting a member in that wav. 
will not accomplish anything Transportation is very much more- 
valuable than the mileage. The effect of that would be -mnplx to 
deprive the member from accepting mileage trom the State, amt 
yet he mav have annual passes in Ins pocket that will be woit t 
hundreds of dollars to him. Now my amendment contemplates 
that he shall draw his mileage from the State as he ought to do. 
The State ought to pav its members mileage and they <>'ight to u 
paid enough to cover that mileage. 1 am not opposed to ten cent, 
a mile, because I do not believe m stmting a member of h kfi s- 
1 ature .along that line, but 1 am opposed to a membei of the h^is 
lature drawing his mileage from the State and accepting trom the 
<m-at line- of transportation tree passes during his membei >hip. 
You talk about the evils that have been mfheted upon th i- e ounti \ . 
•md I tell you sir. in mv humble judgment there is nothing_ >" 
1, the interests of the people of the State as the use oi .ree 
transportation bv members of the legislature. What right have 
7 sir or anv o'ther member of the legislature, to accept trom 
a "reat corporation free transportation for myselt during the turn- 
a real c | . nt > '1'liev tell us that it is not a bribe. 

tha . t | think'theV are > right. ft is not intended, or it is not accepted 
' l ”‘, , • t u Ht scnse hut does not our common experience and 

at eaS ’ ,1, (m v ation along those lines lead us to conclude mat 

™ r ,rr"! to" undue influence over members whether 
1,1 intended or not? ft is net a question of .Mention, but it 



23 26 


OFFICIAL PROCEEDINGS 


is a question of what the effect of it is, and I say the effect of it 
is this, that you cannot, while members of the legislature carrying 
free transportation in your pockets, obtain for the people the re¬ 
dress that they are entitled to from such members. Is it right to 
provide a remedy for this thing? The great State of New York 
says it is right and places it in her Constitution. Other great 
States of the Union have declared it was right. The Constitution 
of Alabama today says it is right that free transportation should 
not be granted, and yet, in the. face and in the teeth of that Con¬ 
stitution which they have sworn to observe, we know that it is 
granted and accepted. 

MR. SMITH (Mobile)—You have spoken a good many times 
of the members accepting transportation. I desire to ask if the 
gentleman ever heard of transportation being tendered to a mem¬ 
ber without first being asked for? 

MR. WHITE—Yes, sir, I have. I have had it tendered to me. 
and I had the great pleasure of saying that I would not accept it. 

MR. SMITH—I didn’t know it. I have been connected with 
railroads for about twentv-four years, and I have never heard of 
it. 


MR. WHITE—And it was about twenty-four years ago when 
the offer was made to me. 

MR. Smith (Mobile)—Oh, yes. 

MR. WHITE—But that is sticking in the bark. Whether 
it is offered first and accepted, or whether it is requested, is not 
the question. The question is the getting of it. That is the ma¬ 
terial question. They receive it and it is immaterial to us whether 
it is tendered or whether it is solicited by the member. That is 
a matter that does not concern us. What we want to do is to sav 
that you shall not accept it. You shall not use it, and when we 
have done that, then there will be no offer of free transportation 
on the one hand or solicitation of it on the other. 

MR. REYNOLDS (Chilton)—The only thing it would do 
would be a forfeiture of office? 

MR. WHITE—No, sir; I say it is a misdemeanor. My amend¬ 
ment not only makes it a forfeiture of his office, but it makes him 
guilty of a misdemeanor that he may be punished, and if any mem¬ 
ber desires to make it stronger than that, I have no objection, but 
I believe, Mr. President, that this provision in our Constitution 
and in life, something that is self-executing, something that will 
make the member guilty of a misdemeanor, and bring upon him 
the forfeiture of his office and the consequent disgrace, will be a 
substantial benefit to the people of Alabama. W r e are told now 
that the legislature only meets once in four years. Then the peo- 



2327 


CONSTITUTIONAL CONVENTION, 1901 


pie can onl) once in four years ask their representatives for relief 
from any grinding monopoly, or any extortion that mav he per- 
petrated upon them by the great lines of transportation.' and cer¬ 
tainly if they can be heard only once in four years to speak through 
their representatives, these representatives ought to be free to act, 
for the benefit and in the interest of the people and not in the in- 
terest of the corporations which are bestowing favors upon them. 
I believe it is right to the corporations and I think the suggestion 
of the gentleman from Mobile has a great deal of force in it. 1 
have no doubt that lines of transportation are solicited by the mem¬ 
bers of the legislature for these accommodations, and for these 
passes, and they cannot afford, Mr. President, to denv them, and 
I think the suggestion of the gentleman from Mobile carries with 
it a great deal of force. I have no doubt that the railroads them¬ 
selves the lines of transportation, would be delighted if the mem¬ 
bers of the legislature could not solicit them, and 1 am sure the 
gentleman from Mobile feels exactly that way. 


MR. COLIiMAN (Greene)—Mr. President and delegates of 
the Convention, upon the vote to lay the amendment offered by 
the delegate from Pike upon the table, 1 with others voted aye. 
Many others voted no. Now that amendment by implication au¬ 
thorizes the issuance of free pases to representatives. That was 
the reason why we voted to lay it upon the table, and not because 
we were in favor of free passes at all. Now the substitute offered 
by the gentleman from Jefferson it seems to me is inopportune at 
this time. Adopt the section as reported by the Committee and 
when we reach the article on railroads or common carriers, then 
you may amend by making it a misdemeanor, or other offense, not 
only for representatives, but for every person who occupies an 
official position in the State of Alabama to accept a pass. Is there 
any more reason that a representative should he guilty of a mis¬ 
demeanor. or should forfeit his office, then a judge or any other 
official? The proper way is. at the proper time, to provide such 
an amendment to the Constitution as will forever prevent the 
transportation of officials upon free passes. If you accept this 
amendment you are bound to provide by another amendment here¬ 
after for the other officers of the State. Let it all come up in the 
proper place. 

MR. ROGERS (Sumter)—For information could not these 
officers be added in right now, in this substitute 

MR. COLEMAN (Greene)—It does not come up properly 
now. I will be found supporting the proposition of the gentleman 
at the proper time, but it seems to me that by his amendment he 
necessitates further legislation to make ft applicable to other of¬ 
ficers. 

The President here resumed the chair. 



2328 


OFFICIAL PROCEKDIN( »S 


MR. WHITE—Will the gentleman allow a word. 'This i> 
certainly a great evil in your judgment? 

MR. COLEMAN (Greene)—Well, I said that I would support 
your amendment. 

MR. WHITE—Why not then correct this evil? We may not 
he able to correct the other, and then if we do correct the other, 
why not then let the Committee on Harmony and Consistency 
arrange the whole thing. 

MR. COLEMAN (Greene)—I do not think the Committee on 
Harmony and Arrangement have any such powers as have been 
arrogated by the members of the Committee, or are supposed to 
belong to them. The Committee cannot change any ordinance, 
or edict of this Convention. It can only correct those things which 
are not in harmony or which may not be properly expressed, as 
to dates, etc. 

MR. CHAPMAN—I would like to ask the gentleman a ques¬ 
tion. If the passing of this amendment as it is now would not 
he legalizing the issuance of free passes to members of the legis¬ 
lature, by recognizing that they could secure free passes. 

MR. COLEMAN (Greene)—That is the effect of the amend¬ 
ment of the gentleman from Pike. 

MR. CHAPMAN—That is what I speak of. 

MR. COLEMAN (Greene)—And that is the reason why we 
voted to lay it upon the table, because we did not want to be put 
in the attitude of justifying the system of riding on free passes. 
The substitute offered by the gentleman from Jefferson if adopted 
of course would relieve it of that objection, but it seems to me 
that the proper time is when we reach as it was in the old Consti¬ 
tution, the duties of carriers, and then make the Constitution self- 
(Jxecuting, and applicable to all of the officers of the State, not 
onl}' to the members of the legislature hut to the judges on the 
bench as well. 

MR. SMITH (Mobile)—I do not rise in defense of the pass 
system, but I rise upon the question of the practicability of the 
gentleman’s idea. This is not the first effort that has been made 
in any State of the Union to limit the use of passes, and I expect 
that the result of it will he found to he what the result has been 
in some of our sister States. The amendment which the gentle¬ 
man offers would of course affect the eligibility of persons holding 
and using railroad passes. There are a number of people in the 
State connected with newspapers who have passes from Railroads 
upon grounds wholly disassociated from any legislative matter. 
There are a large number of attorneys throughout the State who 
represent railroads in various portions of Alabama as local attor- 





( < n 'I K |\ \] COWKNTIDX, 1901 

iH-ys, who receive passes as a part of their compensation. I'll is. 
'iiostitute would exclude those classes. 

MR. \\.11.1 1 I>,If tlie gentleman will allow a question, is not 
lliat pass of tin 4 attorney a pass for which lie ha> to work, or per¬ 
form service, and it is not free at all, is it? 

MR. SM1111 Well, ] do not know. You mav not consider 
it tree, but I do not know whether the Supreme Court of the State* 
would follow your judgment in the matter. I am inclined to think 
that it would not. 

MR. HANKS Could not the attorney for a railroad company, 
if he was elected to a position in the legislature, or any other of¬ 
fice in the State, pay his own way as an officer or legislator? 

MR. SMITH (Mobile)--Undoubtedly lie could, upon the as¬ 
sumption that for the great privilege of serving the State he would 
make that sacrifice. So far as 1 am concerned, 1 am now filling the 
first office I lia\e ever held, and if 1 remain in my right mind, and 
there is no very great overwhelming pressure brought upon me. 

I have filled the la<t office 1 will ever fill in the State of Alabama 
or elsewhere. 

I hold in mv hand my pass hook as district attorney of the 
Louisville and Nashville Railroad, and the passes in this hook are 
numbered consecutively from the day of its date down to the day 
that I went into politics. Two days before I went into politics I 
ceased issuing railroad passes and there has not been an entrv in 
that book since two days before I went into politics down to the 
present time. So I have no great desire to use that privilege in a 
political way. 

1 hold the position of district attorney for the Louisville and 
Nashville 4 Railroad Company in the State of Mississippi, from 
which 1 believe mv friend from Jefferson originally hailed. Those 
people have worked a great reform. They not only put it into 
their Constitution, that no officeholder or legislator of any kind 
or description shall use or ride on a pass, hut they have passed 
penal statutes for it, and f will say to you. gentlemen, when 1 first 
went into the office of district attorney for M ississippi, the worry 
of my life was the vain effort to obey the laws of the State of Mis¬ 
sissippi. I found that if T insisted upon obeying the law 1 was 
going to he almost ostracised in that State, it they did not actually 
tear up the railroad track. 1 know of no State in the Union, where 
officers of the State absolutely demand and require a pas> as 
they do in that great State, where they are prohibited both in tlu* 
Constitution and in the statute. The clerks of the courts, the 
judges and the sheriffs, the Federal Judges and Federal marshals 
and the Federal clerk always require passes on every railroad that 
enters the state, and it is directly under just such a constitutional 




2330 


OFFICIAL PROCEEDINGS 


provision as you propose now, and so far as the influence of the 
railroad is concerned it is greatly magnified when they demand and 
accept those favors which are unlawful. As long as it is lawful, 
the officer can be independent of the railroad, but when they de¬ 
mand it, (and as I said to the gentlemen I have never heard of a 
pass being issued except under pressure direct or indirect. They 
arei very much more sensitive to influences than when it is given 
to them without that pressure and demand, and without its being 
unlawful. If I believed it would accomplish the purpose, if I be¬ 
lieved that it would stop the issuance of passes, that it would de¬ 
stroy this improper influence, I would be in favor of it, but even 
if you enforce it to the letter, it would not do any good. If a 
man who goes to the Legislature and wants a pass he is going to 
have it. He may pay his transportation to Montgomery, and he 
may pay his transportation back to see his friends and family. He 
may not use the transportation then, but gentlemen of the Con¬ 
vention, when the General Assembly adjourns if he has been a 
good friend to the railroad, and the law is turned loose on him, he 
is going to ask that railroad to show its gratitude by giving him 
a pass, after he has ceased to be an officer of the State of Alabama, 
and in gratitude it will be given. So I do not believe that the 
amendment will accomplish the purpose intended, and that is to 
destroy the influence of railroads with members of the Legisla¬ 
ture. If you can devise any plan which would prevent the use of 
passes to secure improper influence with legislators, I would gladly 
join you in it, but I do not care to join in a mere matter of grandi¬ 
loquence, a mere pretense of purity, which will not reach the evil 
for which it is designed. 

MR. PILLANS — I desire to ask my distinguished friend 
whether a member of the Legislature ceases to be a State officer 
and a member of the Legislature on the day of the adjournment 
of a session of the General Assembly. 

MR. SMITH (Mobile)—I think not, but I do not think one 
or two years can cancel our obligations to those who have be¬ 
friended us. 

MR. PILLANS—Next, whether his experience as a railroad 
man is that railroads are very prompt to issue a pass to a man after 
he ceases to be public officer? 

MR. SMI1PI (Mobile)—Through my office, yes. No pass 
has ever been issued unless it was for past favors and no pass for 
such iavor has ever been refused. 

MR. WATTS—I am heartily in favor of this amendment. I 
want to go further even than the amendment of the gentleman from 
Jefferson, and if I could get his consent, and the consent of this 
Convention, I would like to offer a substitute, which he has in his 



^ < >NS J J J UTJONA], ro.WKNTJOX, 191)1 


23M 


hands, and which covers the whole question, so that we may test 
,t once and for all, and have it applied to every one. 

MR. WHITE I will ask unanimous consent of the House to 
otter this as a substitute for my amendment. 

! * RKSIDKN ] 1 he gentleman asks unanimous consent 

to withdraw the substitute offered by him and in lieu thereof to 
ofter the substitute suggested bv the gentleman from Montgomery. 
Is there objection? 


there being no objection, the substitute was read as follows: 

Any person who, while holding’ office in this State, or in 
any city or county thereof, including members of the General As¬ 
sembly, solicits or accepts for himself or another, or uses, any free 
transportation, or transportation at a less rate than is open to the 
public generally, issued or granted by any corporation, or any 
officer thereof, shall be guilty of a misdemeanor and upon con¬ 
viction of such offense forfeit his office.” 


MR. LONG (Walker)—I will ask the gentleman from Mont¬ 
gomery if he will not accept an amendment, providing that no 
person in this State shall ever use a railroad pass? 

MR. WATTS—No, because I do not think that the public 
interests are likely to be affected in that way. 

MR. LONG (Walker)—If a public man, not an official, were 
to accept a pass, would it not influence that man hereafter if he 
became an official? 

MR. WATTS—Rut the object of this is that it shall not in¬ 
fluence the man while he is in office. 

MR. JONES (Montgomery)—I will ask the gentleman if he 
cannot accept this amendment, as I am in hearty sympathy with 
liis amendment: “Provided, that this Section will not apply to any 
person who at the time of his election was an officer, employe, or 
attorney of such common carrier?” 

MR. WATTS—I have no objection to that. 

MR. FOSTER—I object to it. 

MR. JONES (Montgomery)—If that substitute is the only 
thing before the House I offer this as an amendment. 

THE PRESIDENT—The gentleman from Montgomery (Mr. 
Watts) has the floor, and offers a substitute to the amendment, 
which reaches the limit of parliamentary procedure. 

MR WATTS—We had in the Constitution of 1875, and it has 
been the law of this State ever since, a provision that free tickets 
or passes should not be given to, or accepted by public officers, but 




2332 


OFFICIAL PROCEEDINGS 


it has had no effect whatever. What I want to see done, if it is 
possible, is to break up this system of giving and accepting passes, 
not as to individuals, but as to public officers. 

Whenever a man is elected to an office in Alabama, his ser¬ 
vices are due to the people of the State, and it is a doctrine laid 
down in Holy Writ that a man cannot serve two masters. Robert 
Burns, Scotland’s famous poet, touched the question when he said: 

“But, ah, mankind is unco weak. 

And little to be trusted, 

When self the wavering balance shakes 
’Tis rarely right adjusted.” 

The man who comes into the legislative halls with a pass in 
his pocket, or a man who sits upon the bench with a pass in his 
pocket is bound, in the nature of things, to lean to the corporation 
which has furnished him that accommodation. It is not right that 
a man should pass upon a question between the State of Alabama 
and one of its citizens, whether it be a corporation or not, and 
should be unduly influenced in the vote which he may give, by 
the fact that he has been put under obligation to a corporation or 
to an individual. A member should no more accept free transpor¬ 
tation from a corporation than he should receive any other bribe 
which may be offered to him. We have provisions in this Consti¬ 
tution against the offering of any influence to affect the vote or 
action of any member of the Legislature or any officer, but we 
want to go further than that. That seems to have had no effect. 
I have been traveling upon railroad trains in this State, and I have 
seen judges and chancellors pull railroad passes out of their pock¬ 
ets and hand them to the conductors. I have seen members of this 
Convention do it. I do not pretend to be any more virtuous than 
anybody else. I have used passes many and many a time, but 1 
never have used one when an officer, and this proposition of mine 
goes to a man’s accepting these favors when he is an officer. When 
he ceases to be an officer, if the corporation feels like making him 
a donation of a pass, or any other gratuity, that is with them. The 
object of this substitute is to prevent that gratuity from being 
given in the first instance to influence his conduct. You may say 
it is not given for that purpose. Then what is the purpose for which 
it is given? Do you find corporations handing around their passes 
to the ordinary common citizens? Do you not find them handing 
the passes to men who are in official position, or who have the 
right to speak or to act in reference to matters which concern 
them? Why are they given, if they are not given for the purpose 
of influencing the judgment or action of parties to whom they are 
presented? They may give as many as they please to people after 
they have filled their terms of office, and after they have become 



2333 


L'0\ ST IT UTIONAI, CONVENTION 


1901 


t'if>n a that *the"ntimh 1 t ^* n find - gentlemen of the Conven- 

I will i?uar in*ee thp W - C ^ V be * ssued w iH be materially less, 
msses vea fiv.- ti assert,on tbat there are not less than a thousand 
.f one year f thoUsa . n . d ’ ,asses »«ued ’» this State in the course 
{ A, .Hf, ,’ f "T COU,d ^ et the truth of it. Ought that to be? 

.ween t m J "’"fu UP ° n tHe bench ’ and wh « »S to decide be- 

u<cn mj rights and those of the corporation to be influenced in 

us ecision >\ the fact that he has in his pocket the right to travel 
" lurcvn ' be pleases upon the lines of that corporation? Should a 
mi in h i o t (• Legislature who comes here to vote on matters 
u>jKttmg t u interests of the State of Alabama, have a pass in his 
jhk i t, so as to influence his vote in favor of the corporation where 
their interests may conflict? T am not against corporations. They 
an* tor the good of the State, but I am against any influence, no 
matter whence it may come, either of the Legislature or the Bench. 


MR. LONG (AYalker)—I did not intend to say anything upon 
tins question, but it seems they are carrying it to such an extent 
u< to apply to every person in the State of Alabama. I suggested 
that amendment, but the gentleman from Montgomery would not 
accept it. \Ve are told it will apply to officers, and those who per- 
iorm ofticial acts. Why if a railroad gives a man an annual pass 
now, a otizen of this State, it might have an influence on him ten 
years from now, and, therefore, he should be forever debarred from 
holding office in the State of Alabama. The only exception, in my 
judgment, that should be made, is that of members of this Consti¬ 
tutional Convention, who should be excepted from the provisions of 
the act. I believe that an amendment like this should be adopted 
and if the Convention will vote down the other I shall offer it: 
“Amend Section 6 by adding the following: ‘Hereafter every per¬ 
son who shall submit to the ignomy of being elected to the Legis¬ 
lature in this State, shall immediately after election he sentenced 
by the Supreme Court, and lnmg by the neck until dead; provided, 
that this shall not apply to the members of the Constitutional Con¬ 
vention.'’ ” 


Now. 1 was as much opposed to railroad passed as anybody. 
I do not think I have ever had my share of them. T have never 
had these big annuals like most of the big guns travel all over the 
State with. 1 wish I did have them. But we have got to the point 
of other people, and we have got to have passes occasionally or we 
wi 11 ha vc to walk. I think if a mail should run a hack in Mont¬ 
gomery, he should have a right to give me a ride in that hack if 
he wants to. I think he should also have a right to charge me for 
it. and if I am such, a little puppy as to he influenced by the pass. 
I should not he entitled to a seat in the Legislature, as low down 
thing as it is. If you are going to make it apply to officials, let us 
make it apply to everything in the State of Alabama, including 
railroad attornevs. Presidents of railroads, and evervboelv else. 



2M 4 


OFFICIAL PROCKKDIN('-S 


Apply it to everybody. Why do you except any? In my opinion, 
the richer a man the more able he is to pay for his ticket, the more 
passes he gets. We should also provide an amendment that no¬ 
body should have a private car to ride through this State. I know 
a distinguished citizen of the State of Alabama who never rides on 
a free pass, but he usually asks for a private car when he wishes 
to go anywhere. I do not see any amendment in here to prevent 
private cars. I think members of the Legislature should only be 
allowed in the smoker with the niggers. I don’t think they should 
he even allowed to go in the Pullman. 1 think they should be 
strictly barred from going into the dining car, because it costs a 
dollar a meal to go there, and a member of the Legislature is not 
supposed to have a dollar, and if he gets so poor that he cannot sup¬ 
port himself, he is subject to a bribe, and, therefore, you should 
limit his expenses down here, so that the corporations won't buy 
him up with money considerations. I hope the amendment will 
not pass, gentlemen. I did vote for, and am perfectly willing to 
have the amendment offered by the gentleman from Pike adopted, 
to forfeit a man’s office if he rides on a railroad pass. I think that 
is going far enough. If not, apply it to everybody, and hang the 
officials giving the passes; hang the man for getting or asking for 
them. The only exception that I want is that members of thL 
Constitutional Convention shall not be amenable to this act. 

MR. OATES—I am fully aware of the object of the delegate 
from Pike, and the delegates from Jefferson and Montgomery in 
the amendments they have offered, are striving for the same thing, 
and I am not at all disposed to criticize it. I know their motives 
are good, and they are doing it to correct what is considered an 
evil. If it exists, it is indeed an evil, but it seems to me that the 
substitute and the amendment now pending are not in 1 lie proper 
place. They are not germane to this section, as it only provides 
for the mileage and per diem of the members of the Legislature. 

We all know there is another part of the Constitution, and an¬ 
other section, which will come before this Convention, where these 
amendments will be much more appropriate, but I will not move to 
table, but will for the previous question on the section and the 
pending amendments. 

MR. JONES (Montgomery)—Will the gentleman allow me 
five minutes? 

MR. WHITE—Somebody has the right to close the debate. 

I offered the amendment and I believe I have the right to close and 
] yield to the gentleman from Montgomery. 

THE PRESIDENT—The question is on the motion of the 
gentleman from Montgomery (Mr. Oates) for the previous ques¬ 
tion on the pending amendments and the section reported by the 
committee. 



CONSTITUTIONAL CONVENTION, 1901 


2335 


Upon a vote being taken the main question was ordered. 

MR. OATES—Now, Mr. President, the delegate from Jeffer¬ 
son claiming the right to conclude after the previous question was 
ordered on his amendment yields to my colleague from Mont¬ 
gomery. 

THE PRESIDENT—The right to conclude is with the gentle¬ 
man from Montgomery as the chairman of the committee. 

MR. OATES—Well I yield to the gentleman from Mont¬ 
gomery. 

MR. JONES (Montgomery)—I am in hearty sympathy with 
the purpose of this substitute. I do not speak here for any railroad, 
nr in any other capacity except as a plain representative of the 
people. The trouble about putting this question off is that we may 
not get to it hereafter. If we put it in now, and we come to a more 
appropriate place, and pass something that applies to everybody, 
why, then we can take it out here. There will be no trouble about 
that. 


My experience has been, and I have had a great deal of ex¬ 
perience. that the railroads as a rule are more sinned against than 
sinning. I do not think that the men who take these passes, take 
them as bribes, but a bad habit has grown up. Members say others 
receive them and they should, too, and the railroads are afraid to 
reftise. I have known a Judge with a pass in his pocket, who was 
so afraid that some one would think he was influenced, that he 
would rule against me, when in his normal condition he would 
have probably ruled otherwise. On the other hand I have argued 
cases before Judges that I believed before my God were deciding 
against me in favor of a corporation because they had received its 
favors. 

Now if this Constitutional Convention cannot put a self execut¬ 
ing provision in the Constitution that will stop this evil we had 
better adjourn at once. We can stop it. It has been stopped in 
the State of New York. It has been stopped in Kentucky, and it 
has been stopped in Louisiana, and it has been stopped everywhere 
they have made a real bona fide effort to do it. 

I desire to get in an amendment regarding cases which I do 
not believe comes within the evil, where the man was an officer 
or employee at the time of his election, but it seems members don’t 
want that, and I am willing to take the substitute just as it is. The 
evil is a great scandal as it is. It will be a great step in aid of 
official purity, and will elevate our people, if we take decided steps 
now to punish a breach of the Constitution which has been a re¬ 
proach to our good name for twenty-five years past. 



2336 


OFFICIAL PROCEEDINGS 


THE PRESIDENT—The question is on the adoption of the 
substitute of the gentleman from Montgomery, which was accepted 
by the gentleman from Jefferson, by unanimous consent of the 
Convention. 

MR. WHITE—I call for the ayes and noes. 

The call was sustained, and a reading of the substitute, amend¬ 
ment and section called for. The same was read. 

MR. SAMFORD—l rise to a point of inquiry. 

MR. BURNS—I rise to a point of privilege. 

The clock struck one. 

MR. SAMFORD—The original section reads with reference 
to the pay of members of the Legislature, and then the gentleman 
from Pike, Mr. Murphree, offers an amendment to that, and the 
gentleman from Jefferson offers a substitute to that. 

MR. WADDELL—I rise to a point of order. This Conven¬ 
tion is now adjourned. 

MR. WHITE—I move that the Convention remain in session 
until the vote is taken. 

THE PRESIDENT—The gentleman from Pike has the floor: 
the delegates will please be in order. 

MR. SAMFORD (Pike)—I would like to know if the substi¬ 
tute of the gentleman from Jefferson in case of its adoption does 
away with the amendment offered by the gentleman from Pike..'' 

THE PRESIDENT—If adopted as a substitute it would take 
the place of that amendment. 

MR. WHITE—I move that this Convention remain in session 
until after the vote is taken. 

MR. JONES (Montgomery)—I make the point of order that 
we cannot adjourn when a vote is about to be taken. The previous 
question has been ordered. The Chair decided against me that 
way yesterday. 

THE PRESIDENT—The Chair will rule upon the point of 
order. A motion to adjourn is not in order while a vote is being 
taken, but if the hour of adjournment arrives, as it has today, 
pending the discussion of the question, the Convention will stand 
adjourned, and it does stand adjourned under the rules until 3 .30 
o’clock this afternoon. 

The Convention thereupon adjourned. 



CONSTITUTIONAL CONVKNTIOX. 1901 


2.137 


AFTERNOON SESSION 

The Convention was called to order by the President and the 
roll being called showed the presence of 114 delegates. 

Indefinite leave of absence was granted Mr. C.ilmore on ac¬ 
count of sickness. Leave of absence was granted Mr. Ashcraft 
for Wednesday and Thursday. 

MR. HINSON—Mr. President, I desire to make a motion to 
suspend the rules for the purpose of moving to reconsider the vote 
whereby the previous question was ordered upon the substitute 
and the amendment to Section 6 for the purpose of offering an 
amendment which reads as follows: 

“To amend Section 6, Article -. by striking out the word 

'four' where it occurs in the first line and inserting the word ‘six. 

MR. REESE—I rise to a point of order. 

THE PRESIDENT—The question is not debatable. It strikes 
out $4.00 a day and inserts $6.00. 

MR. HINSON—I move to strike out four and insert six. 

THE PRESIDENT—The question will be first on the motion 
to suspend the rules. 

And a vote being taken on a division, resulted in 43 ayes and 
48 noes. and the motion to suspend the rules was lost. 

THE PRESIDENT—The question will recur on the substi¬ 
tute offered by the gentleman from Jefferson to the amendment 
offered by the gentleman from Pike to the section as reported by 
the Committee on Legislative Department, and the yeas and navs 
have been demanded. 

And the call was sustained. 

The substitute was read again. 

Result of the roll call was as follows: 

AYES. 


Hanks, 

(ilover. 

Locklin, 

Beddow, 

Graham, of Talladega, 

Howe (Jefferson), 

Boone, 

Handley, 

McMillan (Baldwin). 

Brooks, 

1 food, 

Malone, 

Cobb, 

Jackson, 

Merrill, 

deGraffenreid, 

Jones, of Bibb, 

Miller (Marengo), 

Duke, 

Jones, of Hale, 

Miller (Wilcox), 

Espy, 

Jones, of Montgomery, 

Moody, 

Fitts, 

Kirk, 

Murphree, 

Fletcher, 

Heigh, 

X orwood. 



2338 


O F FICIA L P R OC K F.1 > I NT. S 


Oates, 

Sanders, 

Spragins, 

O’Neal (Lauderdale), 

Sanford, 

Stewart, 

Parker (Elmore), 

Selheimer, 

Vaughan, 

Pettus, 

Smith, Mac. A., 

Walker, 

Pillans, 

Smith, Morgan M., 

Watts, 

Pitts, 

Sollie, 

White. 

Robinson, 

Spears, 

Winn. 

Total—51. 

NOES. 


Messrs. President, 

(f ray son, 

()’Kear, 

Barefield, 

(ireer. of Calhoun, 

Palmer, 

Bartlett, 

< ireer, of Perry, 

Parker (Cullman). 

Blackwell, 

Haley, 

Pearce, 

Browne, 

Harrison, 

Porter, 

Bulger, 

1 fof 1 in, of Chambers, 

Proctor, 

Burnett, 

i ieflin, of Randolph, 

Reese. 

Burns, 

1 finson, 

Reynolds ( f 1 enry ). 

Byars, 

1 lodges, 

Searcy. 

Cardon, 

Howell. 

Sentell. 

Carmichael, of Colbert. 

Howze. 

Sloan. 

Case, 

Inge, 

Smith ( Mobile ), 

Chapman, 

Jones, of Wilcox. 

Sorrell, 

Cofer, 

Kirkland, 

Stoddard. 

Coleman, of Greene, 

Knight, 

Thompson, 

Cornwall, 

Long (Walker), 

Waddell, 

Craig, 

Macdonald. 

Weakley, 

Davis, of DeKalb, 

McMillan (Wilcox ), 

Weatherly. 

Davis, of Etowah, 

Martin, 

Whiteside, 

Eley, 

Maxwell, 

Willet. 

Kyster, 

XeSmith, 

Williams (Barbour ). 

Foshee, 

Norman, 

Williams (Elmore), 

Foster, 

O'Neill (Jefferson), 

Wilson (Clarke), 

Gilmore, 

Opp, 

Wilson (Washgton) 

Total—72. 




ABSENT OR NOT VOTING. 

Almon, 

Freeman, 

Morrisette, 

Altman, 

Graham, of Montgomery, 

Mulkey, 

Ashcraft, 

Grant, 

Phillips, 

Beavers, 

Henderson, 

Renfro, 

Bethune, 

Jenkins, 

Reynolds (Chilton), 

Carmichael, of Coffee, 

King, 

Rogers (Lowndes). 

Carnathon, 

Kyle, 

Rogers ( Sumter), 

Coleman, of Walker, 

Ledbetter, 

Samford, 

Cunningham, 

Lomax, 

Tayloe. 

Dent, 

Long (Butler), 

Williams (Marengo) 

Ferguson, 

Lowe (Lawrence), 




CONSTITUTIONAL CONVKNTION. 1901 


2339 


During the roll call :— 

MR. BURNS -I rise to a point ol information. 

TH1\ PRESI1 )KNT—The gentleman will >tale the point of 
inquiry. 

MR. BURNS—I want to know whether, under the substitute 
or that amendment, if I could buy a thousand-mile ticket for ten 
cents, would that be an offense? 

'1H1\ PRKS1DKNT—-The chair is not an expert on that de¬ 
partment of railroad management. 

MR. HEFLIN (Chambers)—I was not in when the amend¬ 
ment was read. I understand it includes all city officers and the 
military of the State. It is too far-reaching, and I therefore vote 
no. 


MR. LOMAX—On this question I am paired with the gentle¬ 
man from Lawrence, Mr. Almon. If he were present, I am in¬ 
formed, he would vote no and I would vote aye. 

MR. ROGERS (Sumter)—I am paired with Mr. Williams 
from Marengo. If he were present, he would vote no and I would 
vote aye. 

MR. WHITE—I move to reconsider the vote whereby the 
previous question was called on this measure with a view of offer¬ 
ing this amendment. 

THE PRESIDENT—The motion to reconsider is not in order 
after the previous question has been ordered. 

MR. WHITE—I desire to call the attention of the chair to 
the fact that a motion to reconsider is always in order, except 
under the rules where the main question has been passed upon, 
and then it is postponed until the next day, but where a subsidiary 
question is disposed of, a motion to reconsider is in order at any 
time. 

THE PRESIDENT—I will refer to the rules. “When a vote 
has passed, except on the previous question, or on motion to lay 
on the table, or to take from the table, it shall be in order for 
any delegate who voted with the majority to move a reconsidera¬ 
tion thereof on the same day, or within the morning session of 
the succeeding day, and such motion, if made on the same day, 
shall be considered immediately after the approval of the journal 
on the day succeeding that on which it is made; but if first moved 
on such succeeding day, it shall be forthwith considered; and when 
a motion for reconsideration is decided that decision shall not be 
twice reconsidered. A motion to reconsider a vote upon any inci¬ 
dental or subsidiary question, shall not remove the main subject 



2340 


OFFICIAL PROCEEDINGS 


under consideration from the house, but shall be considered at the 
time when it is made." 

The rule the gentleman refers to relates to the time for the 
consideration of the motion to reconsider, but the question goes 
back of that, that a motion is not in order to reconsider a vote 
whereby the previous question had been ordered, because in the 
first instance when a vote has passed, except on the previous ques¬ 
tion, a motion may be made to reconsider. No vote to reconsider 
can be made under the rules where the previous question has been 
ordered. 

MR. WHITE—I move a suspension of the rules in order that 
that motion may be made. I desire to introduce an amendment 
which simply covers members of the Legislature. 

MR. LONG (Walker)—I rise to a point of order. The gentle¬ 
man didn't vote with the majority. He got up to change his vote, 
but didn't do it. 

MR. WHITE—That was not the question. We were voting 
on the amendment. I did vote with the minortiy on that amend¬ 
ment, but I voted with the majority when the previous question 
was ordered. 

THE PRESIDENT—It seems to the Chair that the gentleman 
is in order to make the motion. 

MR. WHITE—Now I call for the ayes and noes on that. 

THE PRESIDENT—It is moved to suspend the rules for 
the purpose of reconsidering the action whereby the previous ques¬ 
tion was ordered. The ayes and noes are called for, is the call sus¬ 
tained ? 

MR. HINSON—I rise to a question of information. Is the 
motion to reconsider the vote whereby the previous question was 
ordered upon both the amendment and the section? 

MR. deGRAFFENREID—Yes, sir. 

MR. O’NEAL—It opens the whole section for amendment. 

The call for the ayes and noes was sustained and the result 
of the roll call was as follows : 


AYES. 


Banks, 

Cobb, 

Fletcher, 

Bartlett, 

Coleman, of Greene, 

Foster, 

Beddow, 

deGraffenreid, 

Glover, 

Boone, 

Duke, 

Graham, of Talladega. 

Brooks, 

Kley, 

Grayson, 

Bums, 

Espy, 

Handley, 

Chapman, 

Fitts, 

Hinson, 



CONSTITUTIONAL CONVENTION. 1901 


2341 


Hodges, 

Hood, 
f Iowze, 

Jackson, 

Jones, of Bibb, 

Jones, of Hale, 

Jones, of Montgomery 
Kirk, 

Leigh, 

Locklin, 

Lomax, 

Malone, 

Martin, 

Merrill, 

Miller (Marengo), 
Total—65. 


Messrs. President, 

Ba refield, 

Blackwell, 

Browne, 

Bulger, 

Burnett, 

Byars, 

Cardon, 

Carmichael, of Colbert, 
Case, 

Cofer, 

Cornwall, 

Craig, 

Davis, of DeKalb, 
Davis, of Etowah, 
Kyster, 

Foshee, 

Gilmore, 

Greer, of Calhoun, 
Greer, of Perry, 

Total—59. 


Miller (Wilcox), 
Moody, 

Murphree, 

Norman, 

Norwood, 

Oates, 

O’Nael (Lauderdale), 
°PP. 

Parker (Elmore). 
Pettus, 

Pillans, 

Pitts, 

Robinson, 

Samford, 

Sanders, 


NOES. 

I faley, 

Harrison, 

Heflin, of Chambers, 
Heflin, of Randolph, 

1 lowell, 

Inge, 

Jones, of Wilcox, 
Knight, 

Long (Walker). 
Macdonald, 

McMillan (Baldwin), 
McMillan (Wilcox), 
Maxwell, 

NeSmith, 

O’Neill (Jefferson), 
O’Rear, 

Palmer, 

Parker (Cullman), 
Pearce. 

Porter, 


Sanford, 

Searcy, 

Selheimer, 

Smith, Mac. A., 
Smith, Morgan M., 
Sollic, 

Spears, 

Spragins, 

Vaughan, 

V\ r alkcr, 

Watts, 

White, 

Whiteside, 

Winn, 


Proctor, 

Reese, 

Reynolds (Henry), 
Rogers (Lowndes). 
Sentell, 

Sloan, 

Smith (Mobile), 
Sorrell, 

Stewart, 

vStuddard, 

Thompson, 

Waddell, 

Weakley, 

Weatherly, 

Willet, 

Williams (Barbour). 
Williams (Elmore), 
Wilson (Clarke), 
Wilson (Wash’gton), 


Almon, 

Altman, 

Ashcraft, 

Beavers, 

Bethune, 

Carmichael, of Coffee, 
Carnathon, 


ABSENT OR NOT VOTING. 


Coleman, of Walker, 
Cunningham, 

Dent, 

Ferguson, 

Freeman, 

Graham, of Montgomery, 
Grant, 


1 lender son, 
Jenkins, 

King, 

Kirkland, 

Kyle, 

Ledbetter, 

Long (Butler), 



2342 


OFF I Cl A L P ROC FK I) 1X (S 


Lowe (Lawrence). 
Lowe (Jefferson), 
Morrissette, 
Mulkey, 


Phillips, 

Renfro, 

Reynolds (Chihon ). 
Rogers (Sumter), 


Ta\ loe, 

Williams { Mareng«» >, 


(During roll call.) 

MR. ROGERS (Sumter)—I am paired with the gentleman 
from Marengo, Mr. Williams. 

MR. PETTUS—l rise to a question of inquiry. This is a 
motion to suspend the rules. I make the point of order that the 
motion to suspend the rules under Rule 27 on page 11 is not neces¬ 
sary to suspend the rules to move to reconsider the previous ques- 
toin because the previous question is a subsidiary question and 
under Rule 27 a motion to reconsider a vote upon any incidental 
or subsidiary question shall not remove the main subject under 
consideration at the time when it is made. 1 will read to the Chair 
from “Robert’s Rules of Order” on page 24 which gives a list of the 
subsidiary questions: 

“Lay on the table. 

“The previous question. 

"Postpone to a certain day.” 

I make the point of order that it is not necessary to suspend 
the rules. Under the rules of the Convention, a question comes up 
at once for reconsideration. I don’t think the amendment would 
be a subsidiary or incidental question. The list, as found in Rob¬ 
ert’s Rules of order are to lay on the table, the previous question, 
postpone to a certain day, amend or postpone indefinitely. 

THE PRESIDEN T—The gentleman makes the same point of 
order or rose to a question of inquiry—raises the same point raised 
by the gentleman from Jefferson. The rule there relates to the 
time when a motion to reconsider shall be considered by the house. 
The gentleman is correct about that. If it relates to the main 
question the motion to reconsider shall be considered on the fol¬ 
lowing day. If it relates to a subsidiary question is shall be forth¬ 
with considered. The rule distinctly provides that no motion to re¬ 
consider is in order where the previous question has been ordered, 
under our rules. If the gentleman will refer to the rules, he will 
see that a motion to reconsider where the previous question has 
been ordered is expressly excepted from the motion to reconsider 
and without a suspension of the rules that motion is not in order. 
Rule 27 provides when a vote has passed, a motion may be made 
to reconsider except on the previous question or on motion to lav 
on the table. 


MR. BROOKS—If the President will look at that again, he 
will see that it means a reconsideration of a vote refusing the 



CONSTITUTIONAL CONVENTION. 1901 


2343 


previous question but not after the previous question has been 
called for. When a vote has passed, except on the previous ques- 
tion, you can move to reconsider the vote by which the previous 
question was called. 

THE PRESIDENT—The previous question in this case has 
been ordered; and the rule expressly provides that a motion to 
reconsider a vote by which the previous question was ordered is not 
in order without a suspension of the rules, and the Chair overrules 
the point of order. 

And upon a vote being - taken resulting in 65 ayes and 69 noes, 
the motion to suspend the rules was lost. 

THE PRESIDENT—The question recurs on the amendment 
otfered by the gentleman from Pike. 

MR. O’NEAL—Ts a motion to lay the entire section on the 
table in order? 

THE PRESIDENT—No, sir. 

Why not? 

THE PRESIDENT—Because the previous question has been 
ordered. 

And upon a vote being taken resulting in 46 noes and 58 noes, 
the amendment was lost. 

MR. O’NEAL—I call for the ayes and noes. 

The call was not sustained. 

MR. deGRAFFENREID—I rise to a point of inquiry. When 
we adjourned today for dinner, we were about to have a roll call for 
taking a vote I think. That is my recollection, and I don’t know 
but what we are now entitled to an aye and no vote by virtue of a 
former action of the House. 

THE PRESIDENT—The Chair overrul es the point. 

And upon a vote being taken, the section as reported bv the 
committee was adopted. 

Section 7 was then read as follows: 

Sec. 7. The legislature shall consist of not more than thirty- 
three Senators, and not more than one hundred members of the 
House of Representatives; to be apportioned among the several 
districts as prescribed in this Constitution; provided, that upon 
the creation of any new county, it shall be entitled to one Repre¬ 
sentative in addition to the number above named. 

MR. OATES—I discover on reading that section that there is 
a mistake, there has been an omission which was not intended. It 



2344 


OFFICIAL P ROCE K l) 1N('. S 


reads “To be apportioned among the several districts as prescribed 
in this Constitution. It should read “To be apportioned among the 
several districts and counties as prescribed in this Constitution." 

There was no objection and the words "and counties” were in¬ 
serted in the place indicated. 

MR. PITTS—-I offer an amendment. 

Amend Section 7 of the ordinance reported by the Committee 
on Legislative Department by striking out the words 33 in tin- 
first line of the seventh section and inserting in lieu thereof "35" 
and strike out the words “one hundred" in the second line and 
insert in lieu thereof “one hundred and five.” 

MR. PITTS—The purpose of this amendment is to make this 
section correspond with the ordinance reported by the majority of 
the Committee on Representation. That Committee has fixed tin- 
number of representatives at 105 and the number of Senators at 
35 and this amendment is simply for the purpose of making tin- 
two correspond. I desire to submit some reasons which prompted 
the majority of the Committee on Representation to fix the number 
of representatives at 105 and the number of senators at 35. The 
Committee first agreed to fix the representation upon population 
and then it first agreed to fix the number of representatives at 100 
and senators at 33 as provided in this section. 1 desire to say. Mr. 
President, that the Committee labored as faithfully and as honestlv 
as men could labor. Of course there was no trouble to apportion 
the representatives among the counties because that was a mere 
matter of arithmetic but the Committee discovered a grave injus¬ 
tice would be done a great number of the counties if the representa¬ 
tion was left at 100 and the senators at 33. 

I will give you some statistics to show you the injustice of it. 
In the first place two counties would lose a representative, Lauder¬ 
dale and Russell not on account of decrease of population, but 
simply because some other county had increased more rapidlv in 
population. But that did not influence the Committee. But they 
discovered that if the presentatives were left at 100, eight counties, 
namely, Lauderdale. Russell, Elmore. Etowah. Butler, Greene, Pick- 
ends and Walker, with a population of 206.609 would be entitled t<> 
eight representatives alone and the counties of Bullock, Clarke. 
Hale, Lee, Morgan, Perry, Pike and Tallapoosa with only 242,021 
inhabitants would be entitled to sixteen representatives, in other 
words with only a difference of about 35,000 inhabitants they would 
be entitled to twice the number of representatives that the first 
eight named counties have. They also discovered if the number of 
representatives remained at 100 that the counties of Butler, Etowah, 
Elmore, Greene, Lauderdale, Russell, Pickens and Walker, although 
they had much more property than these other counties would yet 
be entitled to only half of the representatives the other eight conn- 



2345 


CONSTITUTIONAL CONVKNTIOX. 1901 


The y discover that these eight counties would only have 

w5,,u r u PreS Q nta -V CS with a P°Pu^tion of 206,000 and Jefferson 
would have 8 with only 142,000. They discovered further, if the 

lSa Se f atl ° n , 1S , I ,xc<1 at 100 that Clarke County, with 27,790 in- 
abitants, would be entitled to two. while Ktowah with 27,390 a 
difference of about 429, would only be entitled to one. They fur¬ 
ther discovered if the representation is kept at 100 that Russell 
County, with a population of 27,083 would be entitled to one repre¬ 
sentative and Lauderdale with 27,361 would be entitled to one 
representative and tbe county above it with onlv a difference of 
less than five hundred would be entitled to two. 


i Tu hC o fUrther <lisco . vered if the representation is fixed at 100 
'.yy ® Senators remained at 33 as by the minoritv report, that 
btowah, with a population greater than either Lauderdale or Rus¬ 
sell vyould be entitled to one representative and these counties 
would be entitled to two. They also discovered that if the minor¬ 
ity report is adopted that fixes the representation as it has been 
that the senatorial district of Barbour with a population less than 
that of Henry would remain as it is, and Henry, Geneva and Dale. 

with over twice the population, would compose one Senatorial Dis¬ 
trict. 


Now, Mr. President, with all these facts in view, without go¬ 
ing into detail the committee decided tlicv would ask the Conven¬ 
tion to fix the representatives at 105 and that in doing that, no 
great injustice would be done to any countv. but one, namely 
Greene and the representative from Greene, in his magnanimity 
said that is all right. We will raise no objection about it.” T 
want to say further that these five representatives will go to the 
white counties. Something has been said about the black belt 
getting a majority. I want to say that everyone will go to white 
counties. Jefferson will get one, Butler will' get one. Elmore will 
get one, Etowah one and Walker one. There are no objections 
raised by the representatives of the black belt counties. They had 
no objections, but thought an injustice would be done if it was 
not fixed at 105. 


Now as to what we find if the Senatorial districts remain at 
33. We find it utterly impossible to give satisfaction. Some large 
counties are so situated that you cannot join anv small county 
with them, because there is none there, and you could not take one 
of the adjoining counties, because it would make the population 
too big, but by fixing the Senators at 35 we believe entire satis¬ 
faction will be given. Only one will be neglected, but the repre¬ 
sentatives from the district are more than willing to have it that 
way. So we think it is right and proper and eminently just that the 
representatives shall be fixed at 105 and the Senators at 35. 



2346 


OFFICIAL PROCEEDINGS 


Something- will be said about this body of 105 being unwieldly. 
With a body of 155 in this Convention, I submit that the quorum 
and order has been pre-eminently preserved, and I believe it can 
be preserved with 105. 

As to the increased pay, there are only five representatives 
and two Senators, and with quadrennial sessions, we don't believe 
the plan recommended by us and which is set forth in this amend¬ 
ment, will give entire satisfaction. 

MR. GRAYSON—The minority of the Committee on Repre¬ 
sentation was of the opinion that it was the duty of this Consti¬ 
tutional Convention to fix the basis of representation and it was a 
legislative duty devolving on the next Legislature to fix the appor¬ 
tionment, and that minority were of the impression that the time 
honored rule of 100 Representatives and thirty-three Senators 
should be adhered to. We see no good reason for any change. 
This number of Representatives and Senators has obtained for 
half a century. More than that would be unwieldly, and once open 
the door for an increase of Senators and Representatives and at 
every census there will be a demand for an increase, until we shall 
have a House absolutely unwieldly and a Senate nearly so. 

As to the remarks of the gentleman from Dallas to the effect 
that it has become necessary to increase the Representatives in 
order to equalize some counties that had not as much representa¬ 
tion and had a greater population than other counties, they have 
gone on and made a mistake as to two other counties. Take a basis 
of representation of 100 or 105; the difference is small, relatively, 
and upon a basis of 100 representatives with a population of 1,828.- 
600 there would be an average of 18,286 to each representative. 
Taking that as a basis, we find that the county of Walker has one 
representative with a fraction of 6,876 over. Butler has one with 
a fraction of 7,475 over. Elmore has one with a fraction of 7,813 
over. 

MR. LONG (Walker)—I rise to a point of order. The gentle¬ 
man is not confining his remarks to the subject before the house. 
It is not a question of where the representatives should go. We 
are fixing the number. The gentleman is making an argument 
against the county of Elmore and it is not proper at this time. 

THE PRESIDENT—The chair is of the opinion that the gen¬ 
tleman is within the reasonable limits of discussion. 

MR. GRAYSON—I see the gentleman is a little sore. 

MR. LONG (Walker)—Will the gentleman yield for a ques¬ 
tion? 

MR. GRAYSON—Not until I get through. The county of 
Etowah has a fraction of 9,075 over one. Madison has a fraction 



2347 


CONSTITUTIONAL CONVENTION. 1901 

of 7,338. Mobile a fraction of 7,882. Now. as I went on to explain 
* ore ’ there were two counties that had two representatives with 
,l sllla . P°P u l a tion than two other counties with a little greater 
population, and. in order to equalize that and see that no injustice 
Miould be done, they propose to increase* the number of representa¬ 
tives so that no injustice would be done those counties and. in 
curing one injustice, they propose by the report of that committee, 
to do another act of injustice by giving two counties with smaller 
iractions over an extra representative over countic> that have a 
greater fraction. The county of Mobile has 7.882 fraction over 
and Walker County has 6,876 and Klmore 7.812. and the Countv 
ot Madison has /,338, fraction over and above the regular ratio, 
being nearly 1,000 more than the County of Walker. 

1 he minority of the Committee was of the impression from 
ihe outset that it would be wiser on the part of the Convention, 
to wake up no more snakes than we have already* waked up and 
no more than we can kill. When we go before the people of Ala¬ 
bama making changes, especially in the senatorial districts, taking 
counties from one district and adding to another there will be 
dissatisfaction that will militate greatly against the adoption of this 
C onstitution, the great desideratum of which is the reform of the 
mi tfrage question, and I claim it is wrong on the part of this Con¬ 
vention to inject anything into the Constitution that is needless, 
to injlist anything that can he deferred to the legislature so that 
when the vote is taken on the adoption of the Constitution we will 
have nothing hut the main question for which we were sent here 
for, for the people to vote upon. 

MR. LONG (Walker)—Did you not state to the Committee 
on Representation that you would vote for the increase if thev 
gave Madison County another representative? 

MR. GRAYSON—And I will vote for it yet. 1 expect when 
the report of that Committee comes up to move to add Madison 
and Mobile. 

MR. PITTS—Don't Mobile and Madison have a Senator each 
and is not Walker put in a senatorial district with two other coun¬ 
ties and so as to the matter of senators have not those two coun¬ 
ties three times as many senators as the county of Walker? 

MR. GRAYSON—Senators and representatives are two dif¬ 
ferent things, and they are altogether upon different bases. If that 
is your theory here is Talladega County with 36.000 while Jefferson 
has 130,000 and they each have one Senator. 

MR. BA R K P11 \ L1)—How m an y i nhabitants has M ad ison 
County ? 

MR. GRAYSON- 43,700. 



2348 


OFFICIAL PROCEEDINGS 


MR. BAREFIELD—How many representatives? 

MR. GRAYSON—Two. 

MR. BAREFIELD—How many Senators: 

MR. GRAYSON—One. I have just said the basis of Senator 
and representatives is altogether different. If you go on that basi> 
the County of Jefferson would he entitled to twenty representa¬ 
tives, Mobile would be entitled to two or three more. Montgomery 
would be entitled to one more, but I maintain that the ba>is for 
senators is fixed on a different plan and it has been a custom here¬ 
tofore that no county should have more than one senator. It i> 
fixed upon a separate and distinct basis and you have no right to 
add fractions. 

MR. GRAHAM (Talladega)—I desire to correct the gentle¬ 
man. He stated that Talladega had only 32,000 inhabitants. The 
number is 36,000, just a little short of Madison. 

MR. GRAYSON—[ may have gotten the counties a little 
mixed, but the counties of Talladega, Wilcox and Calhoun which 
they propose to give separate senators are away down in the thir¬ 
ties and Madison has nearly 44,000. 1 am not arguing about Madi¬ 

son County, but arguing chiefly upon the ground that it is the duty 
of the Convention to vote down all these amendments and fix it 
at 100 representatives and 33 senators and refer the apportionment 
to the next legislature. 

MR. LONG (Walker)-—l appreciate the position of the dis¬ 
tinguished Chairman of the Committee on Representation. Al¬ 
though I am not a member of that Committee, I was a member 
during the last House of Representatives of the Committee on Ap¬ 
portionment, and we labored for several days trying to adjust this 
matter of representation based upon 100 in the House and 33 in 
the Senate and we were unable to make an apportionment with 
anything like equity. 

If there is anything in the world 1 like, it is consistency. The 
gentleman from Madison, who has just addressed you, voted for 
the increase and was ready to do it again, but won’t do it simply 
because Madison County won’t get one and the poor little Countv 
of Walker will. 

MR. GRAYSON—Will the gentleman allow me to interrupt 
him? 

THE PRESIDENT—Does the gentleman yield? 

MR. LONG (Walker)—No, sir; I shall have to pay back his 
discourtesy. Now Madison County has 43,000 and Walker Counts 
has between twenty-five and twenty-six thousand. The county of 
Madison pays taxes on seven million dollars of property and mv 



CONSTITUTIONAL CONVENTION, 1901 


2349 


county pays on over $6,000,000. Madison County has three repre¬ 
sentatives and my county one, and they are scheming to keep us 
from getting one more and for them to have four. They should 
have 100,000 inhabitants and pay taxes on $24,000,000 to have four 
times our representation. 

It Js true, we don’t base representation on wealth, but the 
great State of Alabama is nothing more than a stock company 
and the shareholders in the company are the sixtv-six counties and 
those shareholders should be entitled to the gifts of the State as 
much as possible in proportion to the amount of taxes they pay 
towards the support of the corporation, the State of Alabama. 

Why, Mr. President, it is all out of order at this time, according 
to my notion, but when the report of the Committee on Represen¬ 
tation comes before this house, if I can't convince any fairminded 
man, any man who has any honesty of purpose, that my county is 
entitled to another representative I don’t want it. 

The matter has been carefully examined and with only 100 
representatives and 33 senators it cannot possibly he arranged with¬ 
out doing injustice to some of the counties. 

Now the Count)- of Walker is a white county. It has a white 
population of four times the white population of the County of 
Bullock, seven times the white population of Greene, five times the 
white population of Hale, four and a half times the white popula¬ 
tion of Lowndes and one and a quarter the white population of 
the great County of Montgomery, four times the white population 
of cither Perry, Russell or Sumter, also four times the white popu- 
lation of the great County of Wilcox. We are not asking that this 
should be done but we are asking justice for all the counties in 
Alabama and that cannot be given unless this increase of five 
representatives and two senators is given. Unless we allow this it 
cannot be changed until another Constitution. You have fixed the 
sessions of the legislature at four years and the expense of these 
additional seven members will be trifling. 

Now I move the previous question on the amendment and the 
section as reported. 

MR. OATES—Is it not passing strange that these members 
of the Committee on Representation get up and take this section 
away from the Committee on the Legislative Department. 

MR. LONG (Walker)—You have a right to close the debate. 

MR. OATES—But there are other members of the Legislative 
Department who have a right to be heard on this matter. 

MR. HINSON—I want to ask the gentleman from Walker 
to withdraw that motion for the previous question. I think the 



2350 


OFFICIAL PROCEEDINGS 


gentleman will agree that the report of the Committee on Repre¬ 
sentation is entitled to some consideration on this floor- 

THE PRESIDENT—The genlteman is not in order. Debate 
is out of order after a motion for the previous question. 

MR. HINSON—I am not debating it. I am satisfied the gen¬ 
tleman will agree with me that this Convention ought not to ab¬ 
solutely ignore the report of the Committee on Representation bv 
adopting this section. 

THE PRESIDENT—The gentleman will be in order. 

MR. HINSON—Will the gentleman withdraw that motion for 
the previous question? 

THE PRESIDENT—The gentleman will take his seat. 

MR. LONG (Walker)—I do not want to cut off any amend¬ 
ments and I am willing for the Convention to debate it for three 
years and I withdraw the provision. 

MR. GRAYSON—I rise to a question of personal privilege. 
The gentleman from Walker declines to answer a question and I 
want to correct a statement that he made. He made the statement 
that I had voted for the majority report of the Committee on 
Representation. Where the gentleman got that information I don’t 
know. I never cast such a vote. 

MR. LONG—I understood the gentleman voted for the in¬ 
crease. If I have been misinformed, I regret it. 

MR. JONES (Montgomery)—(To Mr. Oates, who had been 
recognized.) Will the gentleman from Montgomery allow me to 
send up an amendment. 

MR. OATES—Yes. 

The amendment was read as follows: Amend Section 7 bv 
adding at the end thereof the follow ing words: No member of the 
Legislature shall ask. receive, accept or use for himself or for the 
benefit of another any free pass on any ticket sold at a discount 
other than as sold to the public generally. Any member of the 
Legislature violating the provisions of this section is guilty of a 
misdemeanor and on conviction shall be fined $250 and forfeit his 
office. 

THE PRESIDENT—The amendment is not in order. 

MR. JONES—Why. 

THE PRESIDENT—There is an amendment pending. 

MR. JONES There can be two amendments. 

THE PRESIDENT—No. 



CONSTITUTIONAL CONVENTION, 1901 


2351 


MR. JONES—Then I offer it as an amendment to the amend¬ 
ment. 

MR. OA 1 ES—I will ask my colleague to withhold it, It is 
not germane. 

MR. JONES—I will withdraw it as I got the floor by the 
courtesy of the gentleman. 

MR. OATES—As soon as this section was read the delegate 
from Dallas jumped up, got his amendment in with reference to 
the number of Senators and Representatives. Now it is strictly 
within the jurisdiction of the Committee on Legislative Depart¬ 
ment to report the number of Senators and Representatives and 
it is the province and duty of the Committee on Representation 
when that question is settled to apportion the number which the 
Convention fixes upon for counties and districts, but the Committee 
on Representation jumps in here with a controversy between them¬ 
selves about the number. 

Speaking for the Committee on Legislative Department, this 
matter was fixed by the committee and they were of the opinion 
that we should retain the number we have now, 33 Senators and 
100 Representatives. There is no minority report on that. 

Whatever may have been the figuring of the Committee on 
Representation in reference to the apportionment, they have not 
been in harmony with each other and knowing that I have gone 
through the apportionment to see what could be done and to see 
whether the present number would do any wrong to the State. 

The apportionment accepts the universal rule that every county 
shall have a representative and the apportionment in respect to any 
additional representatives and Senators is purely arbitrary. As a 
rule we take the population as a basis and approximate as near as 
we can so as to do the least injustice to any part of the State. 

In going over these matters I have found that it is perfectly 
practicable to redistrict the State into 33 Senatorial districts with¬ 
out doing any gross injustice to any part of the State. I will sav 
personally I have no interest in it at all except to do my duty. I 
notice in their apportionment they begin with the northern part 
of the State. I begin in the south, making Mobile with 62,740 as 


the First Senatorial District. 

2. Washington, Baldwin, Escambia, Covington ..... ---50,994 

3. Clarke, Monroe -- -- ---..51,456 

4. Butler, Conecuh, Crenshaw . .. -62,963 

5. Coffee, Pike ____----------50,144 

6. Henry Geneva ----.55,243 

7. Barbour, Dale--- --___56,341 

8. Bullock, Macon -----55,070 












OH'ICIAL PROCKKDINC.S 


2352 

9. Lee, Russell 

10. Montgomery 

11. Lowndes, Autauga 

12. Dallas. 

13. Marengo, Choctaw 

14. Wilcox . 

15. Pickens, Sumter 

16. Hale. Greene 

17. Perry, Bibb 

18. Tuscaloosa. Fayette 

19. Lamar, Marion. Franklin 

20. Colbert, Lauderdale 

21. Limestone, Lawrence. Winston 

22. Madison . 

23. Morgan, Marshall 

24. Jackson, DeKalb 

25. St. Clair, Blount 

26. Jefferson 

27. Cullman, Walker . 

28. Calhoun, Cleburne 

29. Cherokee. Etowah 

30. Talladega, Clay .- 

31. Shelby, Chilton, Coosa 

32. Elmore, Tallapoosa ... 

33. Randolph, Chambers . 

Now, as to the representatives. It is easy enough to appor¬ 
tion 100 representatives and is it not important to retain the same 
number you have now when no injustice will be done to any part 
of the State. It does not matter particularly if a county has but 
one representative. I am sure the county of W alker with the dele¬ 
gate who represents it on this floor will never suffer. A county 
with one representative may be better represented than one with 
two. It is only a question of numbers, and we take as a basis 
because we cannot get a better one. the population. I find, in 
looking over the counties, that the proposition of this Committee 
on Representation gives some counties an additional representative 
that have less population than others which are left with one repre¬ 
sentative. It is an easy matter for any one to see those who will 
look at it. I do not think it adds anything to the excellency of the 
law, nor do I think it detracts at all from the rights of the people 
whether a county has two or one representative. All of the repre¬ 
sentatives should be looking after the interests of the whole people. 
As between the two. I think it would be wiser to reduce the number 


-58,909 
72,047 
53,566 
54,657 
56,451 
35,651 
57,112 
55,293 
50,281 
50.260 
47.089 
47,900 
52,065 
43,702 
52,109 
54,061) 
42,544 
140,420 
43,011 
48,080 
48,457 
. 52,872 
55,950 
55,771 
44.933 











CONSTITUTIONAl. CONV l-.NTK >N. 1W1 


235.1 


of representatives rather than increase them, f think it would 
result in good to the State to do it, hut the committee for which 1 
have the honor to speak, thought it was better to retain the present 
number and so reported. 

MR. MALONE---I move the prev ious question on the amend¬ 
ment. 

A vote being taken, the previous question was ordered, and a 
further vote being taken, the amendment was adopted. 

The amendment offered by Mr. Jones, and which was declared 
out of order by the President, was again offered and again read. 

MR. JONES (Montgomery)—On that 1 call for the previous 
question, and [ ask for an aye and no vote. 

MR. HEFLIN (Chambers)—I think that is not germane to 
the section, and I make the further point of order that this amend¬ 
ment is on the same line as the amendment offered by the gentle¬ 
man from Jefferson. 

THE PRESIDENT—The amendment offered by the gentle¬ 
man from Montgomery seems to be similar to the amendment of¬ 
fered by the gentleman from Jefferson, although the chair is not 
prepared to say it is the identical amendment, and it seems to the 
chair it would be in order. It is for the convention to say whether 
they will fasten it on this section. 

MR. BULGER—It seems to me that the amendment offered 
by the delegate from Jefferson includes this amendment, and if it 
does, this has been once voted on and is out of order. 

MR. JONES—This is not the identical proposition, but if it 
w ere, the gentlemen would not be right in their contention. They 
confuse in their minds the effect of laying an amendment on the 
table and of indefinitely postponing, is res adjudicata and prevents 
you from bringing up that matter again, but when a matter is laid 
on the table you can bring up the matter at any time. T insist this 
is germane. 

THE PRESIDENT—Is your amendment different from the 
amendment of the delegate from Jefferson? 

MR. JONES—Yes; his amendment embraced two or three 
hundred other officers, and this amendment only includes the mem¬ 
bers of the General Assembly. 

MR. BULGER—I will ask if members of the Legislature were 
not included in the other amendment. 

MR. JONES—I expect they were, and every other officer in 
the State. 



2354 


OFFICIAL PROCEEDINGS 


MR. BULGER—If they were, I suggest this is the same sub¬ 
ject. 

MR. REESE—I make the point of order that the chair has 
ruled that the amendment is in order. 

THE PRESIDENT—It seems to the chair that if a proposi¬ 
tion is presented and rejected by the Convention which is a broad 
proposition, it would be in order to present the proposition in a 
narrower form. 

MR. WALKER—I call for the ayes and noes on this proposi¬ 
tion. 


MR. BULGER—I move to lay the amendment on the table. 

MR. O’NEAL—On that I call for the ayes and noes. 

The call was sustained and the original section as amended 
and the amendment of the delegate from Montgomery were read. 

MR. JACKSON—Has the President decided this amendment 
is germane to the section? 

THE PRESIDENT—The chair is in doubt on that point, but 
has given the benefit of the doubt in favor of the amendment. The 
question is on the motion to table the amendment offered by the 
gentleman from Montgomery. 

The result of the roll call was as follows: 

AYES. 


Messrs. President, 

Greer, of Calhoun, 

O’Rear. 

Barefield, 

Greer, of Perry. 

Parker (Cullman), 

Bartlett, 

Haley, 

Pearce, 

Blackwell, 

Harrison, 

Pitts, 

Browne, 

Heflin, of Chambers, 

Porter, 

Bulger, 

Heflin, of Randolph, 

Proctor, 

Burnett, 

Hinson, 

Reynolds, of Henry, 

Byars, 

Hodges, 

Rogers ( Lowndes), 

Cardon, 

fnge, 

Searcy, 

Carmichael, of Colbert, 

Jackson, 

Sente!!, 

Carnathon, 

Jones, of Wilcox, 

Sloan, 

Cofer, 

Kirkland, 

Smith (Mobile), 

Coleman, of Greene, 

Knight, 

Sorrell, 

Cornwall, 

Long, of Walker, 

Stewart, 

Craig, 

Macdonald, 

Stoddard, 

Davis, of DeKalb, 

McMillan (Wilcox), 

Thompson, 

Davis, of Etowah, 

Miller (Marengo), 

Waddell, 

Eyster, 

NeSmith, 

Weakley, 

Ferguson, 

O’Neill, of Jefferson, 

Weatherly, 

Foshee, 

Opp, 

Whiteside, 



2355 


CONSTITUTIONAL CONVENTION. 1901 


Willet, 

Williams (Barbour), 
Total—65. 


Williams (Elmore), 
Wilson (Clarke), 


W ilson ( Wash’gton), 


Banks, 

Beddow, 

Boone, 

B rooks, 

Burns, 

Cobb, 

deGraffenreid, 

Duke. 

I*: ley. 

Espy, 

Kitts. 

Kletcher. 

I r reeman, 

Glover, 

Ciraham, of Talladega, 
Grayson, 

Handley, 

Hood, 

11 owze, 

Jones, of Bibb, 

Total—58. 


NOES. 

Jones, of Hale, 

Jones, of Montgomery, 
Kirk, 

Eeigh, 

Locklin, 

Lomax, 

McMillan, of Baldwin, 
Malone, 

Martin, 

Maxwell, 

Merrill, 

Miller (Wilcox), 
Moody, 

Murphree, 

Norman, 

Norwood, 

Oates, 

O'Neal (Lauderdale). 
Palmer, 

Parker (Elmore). 


Pettus. 

Pillans, 

Reese, 

Robinson, 

Samford, 

Sanders. 

Sanford, 

Selheimer, 

Smith, Mac. A., 
Smith, Morgan M 
Sol lie, 

Spears, 

Spragins, 

Vaughan, 

Walker, 

Watts, 

White, 

Winn. 


ABSENT OR NOT VOTING. 


A1 mon, 

Altman, 

Ashcraft, 

Beavers, 

Bethune, 

Carmichael, of Coffee, 
Case, 

Cunningham, 
Coleman, of Walker, 
Dent, 


AYE. 

Rogers (Sumter) with 
Jenkins with 


Foster, 

Gilmore, 

Graham, of Montgomery. 
Grant, 

Henderson. 

Howell, 

King, 

Kyle. 

Ledbetter, 

Long, of Butler, 

PAIRED. 


Lowe, of Jefferson, 
Lowe, of Lawrence. 
Morrissette, 

Mulkey, 

Phillips, 

Renfro, 

Reynolds (Chilton). 
Tayloe. 


NOE. 

\\ illiams (Marengo) 
Chapman. 


Dm-ing the roll call Mr. Heflin of Chambers endeavored to 
explain his vote, but the house drowned his explanation with ob¬ 
jections. 



2356 


OFFICIAL PROCEEDINGS 


By a vote of 65 ayes and 58 noes the amendment was laid 
upon the table. 

THE PRESIDENT—The question recurs upon the section 
as amended. 

MR. OATES—I demand the previous question upon the sec¬ 
tion as amended. 

MR. BURNS—I have an amendment. 

THE PRESIDENT—Does the gentleman yield to the gentle¬ 
man from Dallas? 

MR. OATES—I must respectfully decline to yield for any 
further amendments. 

Upon a vote being taken the main question was ordered, and 
upon a further vote the section as amended was adopted. 

Section 8 was read as follows: 

Sec. 8. The Senate at the beginning of each regular session, 
and at such other times as may be necessary, shall elect one of its 
members President thereof, to preside over the deliberations in the 
absence of the Lieutenant-Governor, and the House of Reprsenta- 
tives at the beginning of each regular session and at such other 
time as may be necessary, shall elect one of its members as Speaker; 
and the President of the Senate and the Speaker of the House of 
Representatives shall hold their offices respectively until their suc¬ 
cessors are elected and qualified. In case of temporary disability 
of either of said presiding officers, the House to which he belongs 
many elect one of its members to preside over that House and to 
perform all the duties of such officer under disability during the 
continuance of the same; and such temporary officer, while per¬ 
forming duty as such shall receive only the same compensation 
to which the permanent officer is entitled by law. Each House 
shall choose its own officers and shall judge of the election returns 
and qualifications of its members. 

MR. OATES—The amendments proposed by the Committee 
to this section as it stands, were to meet the supposed trouble re¬ 
sulting from the death of the Speaker or the disability for any 
cause of the Speaker or the presiding officer of the Senate. Nothing 
else. It simply confers the powers distinctively upon each House 
so that no question may be made thereafter upon the legality of its 
proceedings in passing laws. I move the previous question upon 
the adoption of the section. 

MR. WILSON (Washington) here took the chair. 

MR. REESE—I rise to ask the privilege of offering an amend¬ 
ment. 



2357 


CONSTITUTIONAL CONVENTION, 1901 

THE PRESIDENT PRO TEM—The gentleman from Dallas 
js out of order. The question is shall the main question he now 

put. 

Upon a vote being taken a division being called for, by a vote 
of 62 ayes and 8 noes, the main question was ordered. Upon a 
further vote being taken the section was adopted. 

Section 9 was read as follows: 

Sec. 9. A majority of each House shall constitute a quorum 
to do business; but a smaller number may adjourn from day to dav 
and may compel the attendance of absent members, in such man¬ 
ner and under such penalties as each House may provide. 

MR. OATES—There is no change. That is the same as the 
present Constitution and move its adoption. 

Upon a vote being taken the section was adopted. 

Section 10 was read as follows: 

Sec. 10. Each House shall have power to determine the rule 
of its proceedings, and to punish its members or other persons for 
contempt or disorderly behavior in its presence; to enforce obe¬ 
dience to its process; to protect its members against violence, or 
offers of bribe or corrupt solicitation ; and with the concurrence of 
two-thirds of either House to expel a member, but not a second 
time for the same offense; and shall have all the powers necessary 
for the legislature of a free State. 

MR. OATES—The only change that has been made in this 
section is in substituting the word “offense” in the fifth line in 
place of the word “cause.” 

Upon a vote being taken the section was adopted. 

Section 11 was read as follows: 

Sec. 11. A member of either House expelled for corruption 
shall not thereafter be eligible to either House, and punishment 
for contempt or disorderly behavior shall not bar an indictment for 
the same offense. 

MR. OATES—That is the same as in the present Constitu¬ 
tion, and I move its adoption. 

Upon a vote being taken the Section was adopted. 

Section 12 was read as follows: 

Sec 12. Each House shall keep a Journal of its proceedings, 
and cause the same to be published immediately after its adjourn¬ 
ment, excepting such parts as, in its judgment, may require secrecy; 
and the yeas and nays of the members of either House on an} 



2358 


OFFICIAL PROCEEDINGS 


question shall, at the desire of one-tenth of the members present, 
be entered on the Journal. Any member of either House shall have 
liberty to dissent from or protest against any Act or Resolution 
which he may think injurious to the public, or an individual, and 
have the reasons for his dissent entered on the Journal. 

MR. SANFORD (Montgomery)—I offer an amendment to 
that Section. 

The amendment was read as follows: 

Amend Section 12 by adding the words, "but the journals of 
the Senate and House of Representatives shall not be held by the 
courts to import absolute verity, but their truthfulness may be 
inquired into like any other statement in a court of justice.” 

MR. CHAPMAN—I move to lay the amendment on the table. 

MR. SANFORD—Mr. President, I have the floor. 

THE PRESIDENT PRO TEM—The gentleman from Mont¬ 
gomery has the floor. 

MR. SANFORD (Montgomery)—Mr. President, I offer that 
amendment because, according to the statement made by a distin¬ 
guished member of this Convention, many laws were passed during 
the last seven months that did not comply with the requirements 
of the Constitution. The laws were not read at length as the 
present Constitution requires. The roll of the member of each 
House was not called, according to the demands of the present 
Constitution, and the journals recited that bills were read three 
times, and that the rolls were properly called, and every prerequisite 
of a valid law was complied with, and yet it was a fact well known 
to many members of the Legislature that it stated an absolute 
untruth. I saw it myself upon one occasion where a bill was in¬ 
troduced containing upwards of twenty-five thousand words. The 
Constitution required that on the day or night of its passage it 
should be read at length. The whole bill w'as completed, with 
twenty odd amendments, in less than half an hour, when the very 
reading of the bill, if read at the rate of 100 words to the minute, 
w r ould have required four hours, and when I complained to the 
Journal Clerk or to the Clerk of the House that it was not read, 
he replied that I could not go behind the Journal. I am aware of 
the decisions of the Supreme Court in this State, and in other 
States with regard to this point, but as was said with great power 
and earnestness by the gentleman from Crenshaw in arguing a 
case a few days ago, it impressed me then, that for the purpose of 
avoiding such a rushing through of legislation, such an amend¬ 
ment as I have offered should be passed by this Convention. 

The truth is that while is was said that the Convention 
should be held to eliminate' the negro from politics, and to purify 


2359 


CONSTITUTIONAL CONVENTION, 1901 

the suffrage, I voted to hold this Convention also in order that 
the Legislature might be compelled by some process to obey the 
Constitution of this State. Under the present system, the manner 
of enacting laws is infinitely worse than the negro suffrage, for it 
affects every man in the State of Alabama. It is vastly important 
that there should be some change in this technical rule that the 
courts cannot go behind the Journal. Our courts have gone fur- 
tliei than other courts and have held that while there may be 
positive iequirements in the Constitution that certain things must 
he done by the Legislature, it is presumed that they were done 
unless the Journal sets forth they were not done, always presum- 
ing upon the infallibility of the Legislature, its good faith, and its 
fidelity, when the history of Alabama and the history of all legis¬ 
lation shows that it is a very violent presumption. T hope that this 
amendment will be adopted by the Convention. It is absolutely 
necessary, first, that the hills should he read, and that I think is 
already provided tor by the Committee on the Legislative Depart¬ 
ment. It was a fact well known as you all heard the gentleman 
from Crenshaw say a few days ago, that laws were passed in the 
House when there were not more than a dozen members present, 
and* yet the Journal will show that the bill was read three times, 
and the roll was called, and I suspect that certain names were put 
down. Men have denied that they voted upon certain bills, and 
yet they were put down and mentioned as having voted for them. 
These are facts known by all men who attended upon the Legisla¬ 
ture. Another man said to me, I heard fifty-six bills pass, not one 
of which was read, and no roll was properly called. Another gen¬ 
tleman, when I complained of it to Senators, and said to him, in 
the other House they are passing bills without even reading them, 
and sir, they are doing the same thing here in the Senate, and yet 
the Journals of each House will show that the bills were properlv 
read and that the rolls were properly called, and that every pre¬ 
requisite was complied with that the Constitution demanded should 
be observed in the enactment of laws, and that is the character of 
some of the legislation that happened in the last ten months, and 
it is to protest and prevent a repetition of such instances that 1 
have introduced this amendment. 

The President resumed the chair. 

MR. OATES*—The complaint made by the gentleman from 
Montgomery and his amendment directed to it, so far as these 
defects can he remedied, they are remedied in this article further 
on, and I now renew' the motion made by the delegate from Sumter 
a moment ago to table- 

Mr. Knight sought recognition. 

MR. OATES—For the purpose of allowing the gentleman 
from Hale to make a statement I withdraw the motion. 



2360 


OFFICIAL PROCEEDINGS 


MR. KNIGHT—I feel called upon, as a member of the last 
Legislature, to contradict the statement made by the gentleman 
from Montgomery. I was a member of and a regular attendant 
upon the last House, and never saw in the whole session of the 
Legislature a bill passed when it was not thought there was a 
quorum present. If there was not a quorum present it had not 
been discovered. 

MR. SANFORD (Montgomery)—I said that Mr. Sentell made 
the statement. The gentleman from Crenshaw made the statement 
that bills were passed here when there were not more than a dozen 
members upon the floor. 

MR. KNIGHT—Well, sir, I dispute it most emphatically. 

MR. SANFORD—He said that in a speech here last Mon¬ 
day. 

MR. KNIGHT—I most emphatically dispute it, and say that 
it was not the case. 

MR. SANFORD (Montgomery)—If it a question between 
you, sir, and the gentleman from Crenshaw. 

Upon a vote being taken the motion to table the amendment 
was carried. 

MR. FREEMAN—I offer an amendment. 

The amendment was read as follows: Amend Section 12 by 
striking out in the second line of said section, after the word “ad¬ 
journment,” down to and including the word “secrecy” in the 
third line. 

MR. GREER (Calhoun)—I move to lay the amendment on 
the table. 

Upon a vote being taken the motion to table prevailed, and 
upon a further vote the section was adopted. 

Section 13 was read as follows: 

Sec. 13. Members of the Legislature shall in all cases except 
treason, felony, violation of their oath of office, and breach of the 
peace, be privileged from arrest during their attendance at the 
session of their respective Houses, and in going to and returning 
from the same, and for any speech or debate in either House they 
shall not be questioned in any other place. 

MR. OATES—That is the same as in the present Constitution. 

Upon a vote being taken the section was adopted. 

Section 14 was read as follows: 



CONSTITUTIONAL CONVKNTION, 1001 


2361 


Sec. 14. The doors of each House shall he opened except on 
such occasions as, in the opinion of the house, may require secrecy, 
hut no person shall he admitted to the floor of either House while 
the same is in session except members of the Legislature, the 
officers and employes of the two Houses, the Governor and his 
secretaries, representatives of the press, and such other persons to 
whom either House by unanimous vote may extend the privilege 
of its floor. 


MR. HEFLIN (Randolph)—1 desire to offer an amendment. 
The amendment was read as follows: 


Amend Section 14 by striking out the word “unanimous” in 
the fifth line and insert in lieu thereof the words “and majority.” 


MR. HEFLIN (Randolph)—If this Section is adopted as re¬ 
ported by the Committee, one member of the House of Represen¬ 
tatives might thwart the will of 104 members, and one member of 
the Senate might thwart the will of thirty-four, and I insist, Mr. 
President, it is undemocratic, and believing in the doctrine that a 
majority should rule, on all question. I hope that this amendment 
will be adopted. 


MR. OATES—The delegate's doctrine is wholly inapplicable 
and his amendment wholly unnecessary, and I think it can he seen. 
The emendation of this Section from the way it stood before, is 
simply to clothe each House of the Legislature with the power 
easily* to protect itself from the encroachment of outsiders. Now. 
sir, under the rules enforced heretofore, men have had a_ delicacy 
of feeling about excluding persons who intrude, and I say it regret¬ 
fully, but I have seen men in among the Representatives and Sena¬ 
tors taking seats among them and buttonholing them to get them 
to vote for some job or a scheme which they may feel an interest m. 
This is for the protection of the members of each House, and tin- 
amendment looks to a mere majority vote to turn in anybody and 
everybody Why, sir, in the future I presume we will not all con¬ 
tinue to be practically of one political party. 1 ake the case where 
parties are pretty equally divided, one party of course will pre¬ 
dominate over the other, and that party could vote unanimously 
together every time and admit to the privileges of the floor all that 
they saw proper, who would he their own party associates and 
exclude everybody else. Unless it be by a unanimous vote, to 
extend to any one the honor and privileges of the floor they should 
not have it It is quite an honor to any one. and it is extended 
usually only to distinguished personages men who have made a 
record^ after long and patient service Otherwise bodies of this 
kind do not hurry to extend the privileges to every one hut if a 
motion be made to admit to the privileges of the floor any person 
who is worthy of it. it would be the rarest of occurrences that one 



2362 


OFFICIAL PROCEEDINGS 


might look for that any member of either House will get up and 
object to it. 

MR. HEFLIN (Randolph)—I would like to ask the gentle¬ 
man if one member of either House on account of political preju¬ 
dice or for any other reason, could not deny the President of the 
United States or one of our own Senators, or any other distin¬ 
guished gentleman, the privileges of the floor? 

MR. OATES—I do not think that any one would have the 
cheek to do that. 

MR. HEFLIN (Randolph)—But answer the question. Could 
they do it? 

MR. OATES—Oh, they could, but I do not wish to make any 
exceptions. The Committee did not see proper to do it. We knew 
we had it from unmistakable authority that each House had been 
invaded and it was the habit to admit every one and any one who 
saw fit to come in, and mix among the members. Why. sir, a 
member should be exempt from that kind of solicitation. We have 
in the present Constitution one or two sections against corrupt so¬ 
licitation, and many times there is too much solicitation, too much 
anxiety upon the part of those who come into the legislative halls, 
and if we only knew it there is corruption connected with it. It 
is not easily proven, however. Each body ought to be able to 
protect itself from these intrusions. In fact talk about its being a 
Democratic principal, no man has a right upon the floor of either 
House, when that House is in session, unless he be invited there. 
Exceptions have been made in favor of the representatives of the 
press, the Governor and his secretaries, and the officers and mem¬ 
bers of each House, and that is going far enough. Why, sir, you go 
to the Congress of the United States. There outsiders are not 
tolerated to come in on the floor. There is a gallery for them. 
Thev can go look down, just as they may here, and witness the 
proceedings. It is too altogether democratic if it may be called 
such. The practice of people rushing as heretofore, into the lobby, 
is wrong, and| men who have served in this hall and in the other 
house know that the most frequent cause of disturbance is from 
outsiders in the lobby, carrying on a conversation that interferes 
with proper deliberation. My friend, the delegate from Randolph, 
is mistaken. He is carrying his democracy a little too far in this 
connection. I know his democracy usually is first-class and no one 
has more respect for the opinions of the delegate than I have, but 
in this case- 

MR. HEFLIN (Randolph)—I w'ould like to ask the gentle¬ 
man if my Democracy is not always first class? 

MR. OATES—I have always found it such. I now' move to 
lay the amendment on the table. 



CONSTITUTIONAL CONVENTION. 1901 


2363 


MR. HEFLIN (Randolph)—On that I call for the ayes and 
noes. 

The call was not sustained. 

THE PRESIDENT—The question is on the motion to table 
the amendment offered by the gentleman from Randolph. 

Upon a vote being taken, a division was called for, and by a 
vote of sixty ayes and thirty-two noes, the motion to table pre¬ 
vailed. 

MR. PKTTUS—I desire to offer an amendment. 

MR OATES—I move the previous question on the section. 

MR. PETTUS—T ask the gentleman to yield for an amend¬ 
ment. 

MR. OATES—My friend was a member of the committee and 
had ample opportunity to amend. 

Upon a vote being taken, the main question was ordered, 
and upon a further vote, the section was adopted. 

Section 15 was read as follows: 


Sec. 15. Neither House shall, without consent of the other, 
adjourn for more than three days, nor to any other place than that 
in which they may be sitting. 

MR. OATES—That is the same as in the present Constitu¬ 
tion. 

Upon a vote being taken, the section was adopted. 

Section 16 was read as follows: 

Sec. 16. No Senator or Representative shall during the term 
for which he shall during the term for which he shall have been 
elected, he appointed to any office of profit under this State, which 
shall have been created, or the emoluments of which have been 
increased during such term except such offices as may be filled 
by election by the people. 

MR. O’NEAL—I have an amendment I desire to offer. 


The amendment was read as follows: 

“Amend Section 16 by striking out all of said section which 
follows the word State in the second line. 


MR O’NEAL—The amendment would leave the section to 
read as follows: “No Senator or Representative shall during the 
£m for which he shall have been elected, be appointed to any of- 
fice of profit under this State. 



2364 


OFFICIAL PROCEEDINGS 


It simply prohibits a member of the Legislature from being 
appointed to any office, whether it is created by the Legislature 
or not, while he is a member. 

THE PRESIDEN T The same question was presented oil 
the report of the Committee on Executive Department. 

MR. OATES—It was, Mr. President. I will say that the only 
changes made in this, and the only difference at all from the way 
it stands in the present Constitution, is so as to make the language 
more easily understood, not requiring any effort to fully compre¬ 
hend it. As it reads here, it is quite plain. If a gentleman is a 
member of the House or Senate, and some Circuit Judge should 
die, the Governor could, if the authority were vested in him, ap¬ 
point that member of the Legislature for the unexpired term That 
is an office not created by the Legislature during the term of such 
member, or the emoluments of which have been increased during 
his term. The member has had no connection with it no more 
than any other citizen of the State. 

i i PRESIDENT—The chair will invite the attention of the 

delegate from Montgomery to the amendment offered by the gen- 
tleman from Lauderdale and inquire if it is not the same propo¬ 
sition that was passed upon and decided by this Convention when 
the report of the Committee on Executive Department was under 
consideration. 


MR. OATES—I think it is substantially the same and I think 
it is subject to a point of order, for the reason that it was consid¬ 
ered and voted down. 

, . J I ?- 1 C ?’ N ? AL (Lauderdale)—I have not the book with me. 
but it is laid down in Roberts’ Parliamentary Law that the same 
amendment can be offered to different sections. It is clearly laid 
down in that work. 

THE PRESIDENT And the Convention could be required 
stitution? P ° n tHe SamC proposition on ever -v Section of the Con- 


book^^ ^ (Lauderdale)—It could on the authority of that 


THE PRESIDENT—In the opinion of the Chair, after the 
Convention deliberately considers a proposition and votes upon it. 
that question ought to be considered as concluded unless there is 
a motion for its reconsideration. The Chair, however, will say to 


the gentleman 


MR. deGRAFFENRElD I want to be heard one moment 
upon that point of order. 

THE PRESIDENT Certainly. The Chair will be glad to 
hear the gentleman. 



CONSTITUTIONAL CONVENTION. 1901 2365 

dcGRAFFENRElH- t. 

taken by the gentleman from T ,f ee j m i S t0 me tbat tbe P os *tion 
instance, only‘s a few1 » the correct one. For 

amendment which was offered S toT Con X e ” tl0 ” tabled the 

issuance of free passes by raikolds tT'^ 1 W ‘ tH ref f ence to the 

vention upon an inquiry y that he wa« ^ stated to the Con ' 

amendment was germane to the ^f d xV bt a T S t0 whether that 

that there are nu mlwrs of this Con N T 1 happen t0 knOW 

t ♦* ' Oi this Convention who voted tn lav that 

* 

C-.nvtmtion. ' That is no * the point now before the 

ihe clnir^toth^ 1 ^-N^klD But I want to see if I can not bring 
Ik Chair to the consideration of the question that is before the 

Convention. It is possible that the Convention has voted down 

\rticle rnC hm 1U ‘ ndnH “ nt ' °i ffered t0 S ° me other Section of som c other 
A .V^ e ’ but son ? e members may have been actuated in so voting 
without expressing themselves upon the idea, that the amendment 
a> ottered to that Section was not germane to the subject, when 
m fact they favored the proposition itself. So it seems, if that be 
true the same amendment might be offered to different sections, 
and for that reason it seems to me that the point made by the gen- 
t Ionian from Lauderdale is unanswerable. 

MR. Hlvb UN ( Chambers)—I move to lay amendment on the 
table. 


THE, PkhSIDFA'T—In the opinion of the Chair where the 
same proposition is offered, it is not in order, otherwise this same 
amendment could be offered to every Section as we proceed. The 
C hair did rule a while ago that the amendment was proper, and 
overruled the point of order, but the Chair, upon reflection, is of 
the opinion that he ruled erroneously at that time, for the reason, 
as suggested bv the gentleman who made the point of order, that 
the identical proposition was included in the proposition offered 
by the gentleman from Jefferson, and the proper way for the gen¬ 
tleman from Montgomery to have presented that question was on 
a motion to strike out. and he lost his right when he omitted to 
make his motion to strike out so as to present his question on the 
resolution offered by the gentleman from Jefferson. But the 
Chair did rule, it now thinks, improperly, that the Convention was 
entitled to vote upon that amendment. The Convention did vote 
upon it, but here is the identical proposition which was presented 
on the report the other day. No point is made against it that it is 
not germane. That is not the point at all. The question is shall 
the Convention be forced to vote upon it a second time without a 
reconsideration. Tn the opinion of the Chair the amendment is 
not in order. 



2366 


OFFICIAL PROCEEDINGS 


The clock struck 6. 

MR. HEFLIN (Chambers) — A point of order. Under the 
rules, this Convention stands adjourned. 

Leaves of absence were granted to Mr. Sanders for Monday 
and Tuesday. Mr. Bethune for Thursday, Friday and Saturday, 
and Mr. Bartlett for Thursday, Friday and Saturday. 

And thereupon the Convention adjourned. 


FORTY-EIGHTH DAY 

MONTGOMERY, ALA.. 
Thursday, July, 18, 1901. 

The Convention met pursuant to adjournment, was called to 
order by the President, and opened with prayer by the Rev. C. P>. 
McDaniel as follows: 

Almighty God, we beseech Thee to grant unto these Thy ser¬ 
vants, set apart to the office and work of this State, Thy richest 
blessings, that faithfully fulfilling their course, at the last day each 
one may receive a crown of righteousness laid up by the Lord, the 
righteous Judge. We pray for our loved ones who are not pres¬ 
ent with us. Be with all in authority, with all rulers, Governors, 
Judges, Magistrates, and persons in authority, with all who direct 
our thinking and lead our sentiments, and grant unto every man 
the assurance that his work is blest from on High. Assist us. O 
Lord, in all our doings, with Thy most gracious favor, and fur¬ 
ther us with Thy continued help that in all our works begun, con¬ 
tinued and ended in Thee, we may glorify Thy holy name, and 
finally by Thy mercy, obtain everlasting life, through Jesus Christ, 
our Lord. Amen. 

Upon the call of the roll 106 delegates responded to their 
names. 

MR. WILLIAMS (Marengo)—The stenographic report in 
the record of two of the votes show Mr. Rogers (Sumter) and my¬ 
self as absent or not voting, when as a matter of fact we were 
paired. The record of the third vote of the afternoon session 
shows the pair properly at the end of it, and it strikes me the pair 
should be shown as in the third record of the vote, and not have 
us absent and not voting when as a matter of fact we were paired, 
which means a vote. 

THE PRESIDENT—The stenographer is requested to note 
the pair. 



CONSTITUTIONAL CONVENTION. 1901 


2367 


MR. O NEAL At the proper time I desire to be heard fur¬ 
ther on the point of order raised yesterday, and some authorities 
which I desire to present to the Chair to call his attention to the 
difference between the section as reported by the Legislative Com¬ 
mittee and the section on which the Convention has already acted 
on Executive Department—they are entirely different in their 
language and meaning in some respects. Will the Chair hear me 
now ? 

1 HE PRESIDENT—If the gentleman will send up the au¬ 
thorities that he has the Chair will examine them. 

MR. SENTELL—I rise to a point of personal privilege. 

THE PRESIDENT—The gentleman will state the point of 
personal privilege. 

MR. SENTELL—Judging from the controversy on the floor 
ot the Convention on yesterday in which some remarks I had made 
were referred to, I think the remarks I made were misunderstood 
by some gentlemen. All that I have to say in regard to the acts 
of the Legislature I said on last Monday in the discussion of the 
question regarding the Shelby County Court House. By referring 
to those remarks it will be found that I said that local bills often 
passed at night sessions when not more than two dozen members 
were on the floor taking part. I want it understood that I did not 
make those remarks in regard to the general acts and working of 
the Legislature at all, because when general bills were under dis¬ 
cussion they were always read in full, and the roll always called 
slowly, so that every man could vote and be recorded. It was 
only at night sessions when the calendar was very heavy we pass¬ 
ed over the work so rapidly this was resorted to, and it was really 
necessary in order to get through with the calendar. What I wish 
to state is that even at these night sessions a quorum was always 
recorded at the beginning of the session, then the members retired 
to the cloak room, some to the library and some even left the 
Capitol, and those local bills were continued to be passed unless 
the question of no quorum was raised, and not more than two 
dozen members were often present on the floor. Of course, if the 
question of no quorum had been raised the members would have 
been hunted up. The statement made by the gentleman from 
Montgomery was that I stated that no roll call was called, and no 
bill read. By reference to my remarks on Monday it will be seen 
what I did say. 

MR. COLEMAN (Greene) — I desire to make a statement 
with reference to the remark of the Chairman of the Committee on 
County Boundaries on yesterday. I do not wish the people that 
I represent to be misled, nor do I wish to be credited with more 
magnimity than I deserve. Greene county is so situated it has 
less population than any of the adjacent counties, and could not 



2368 


OFFICIAL PROCEEDINGS 


be placed more advantageously Senatorially, and upon examina¬ 
tion I find that to increase the representation of Greene county 
would be to visit upon some other county a greater injury than 
that which we have sustained. Therefore I did not object to the 
apportionment made by the chairman. 

The Committee on Journal reported that they had examined 
the journal for the forty-seventh day and found the same to be 
correct. On motion the report of the committee was adopted. 

MR. SMITH (Mobile)—I am instructed by the Rules Com¬ 
mittee to report a resolution favorably. 

The Clerk read the resolution as follows: 

Resolved, That each delegate may speak ten minutes, and no 
longer, upon any motion to reconsider the action of the Conven¬ 
tion upon any matter upon which it has acted. 

MR. SMITH—I move the adoption of the resolution. 

A vote being taken, the resolution was adopted. 

The next order of business was the call of the roll for the in¬ 
troduction of ordinances, resolutions, etc. 

MR. CORNWALL—Mr. President, I have an ordinance I de¬ 
sire to introduce. 

The clerk read the ordinance as follows: 

Ordinance 420 by Mr. Cornwall: 

Whereas, the people have at all times the right of local self-govern¬ 
ment a principle which forms one of the most treasured tenets of the Demo¬ 
cratic party, and whereas, the object of the establishment of all local gov¬ 
ernmental units, such as counties, municipalities, precincts or beats and 
special school districts, is the benefit and welfare of the people within the 
particular local area, and whereas this convention has the power and authori¬ 
ty to create and establish counties and to fix and arrange county boundaries 
wherever the necessities become apparent and 

Whereas, there is a great and pressing need for the establishment of a 
new county in the lower portion of the present county of Jefferson, and 

Whereas, all conditions as to population, property valuations, diversity of 
pursuits and area, exist in the proposed county, the contiguous counties be¬ 
ing left with all of the requirements for counties under the law, and 

Whereas, in the formation of said proposed new county dupe and fitting 
honor could be done the memory of George S. Houston, the great leader 
of the State Democracy in conferring his name thereon, now, therefore, 

Be it ordained by the State of Alabama in Convention Assembled: 



CONSTITUTIONAL CONVENTION. 1901 


2369 


!• That there is hereby created and established a new county to be 
called and known by the name of “Houston,” to have all of the rights and 
privileges of counties in this State, with the following described boundaries, 
viz: Beginning at the intersection of the south line of Township 18, south; 
Range 2, west, and the west bank of the Cahaba River, running thence west 
to the range line between Ranges 2 and 3, west; thence north two miles on 
said range line; thence north two miles on said range line to the southwest 
corner of Section 19. Township 18, south, Range 2, west; thence west five 
miles to the southwest corner of Section 20, Township 18, south, Range 3, 
west; thence north one mile to the northeast corner of Section 19, Town¬ 
ship 18, south, Range 3, west; thence west one mile to the northeast corner 
of said Section 19; thence north one mile to the northwest corner of Sec¬ 
tion 18, Township 18, south, range 3. west; thence west three miles to the 
southwest corner of Section 10, Township 18, south, Range 4, west; thence 
north two miles to the township line between Townships 17 and 18 south, 
Range 4, west, and at the northwest corner of Section 3, Township 18, 
Range 4, west; thence west three miles to the range line between Ranges 4 
and 5 west, and at the southwest corner of Section 31, Township 17, south, 
Range 4, west; thence north on said range line three miles to the northeast 
corner of Section 24, Township 17, south, range 5, west, thence west to 
the east bank of Locust Fork of the Black Warrior River; thence in a 
southwesterly direction, following the meanderings of said Locust Fork of 
the Black Warrier River and of the Black Warrior River to the intersection 
of Black Warrior River with the township line between Townships 18 and 
19, south, range 8, west; thence east to the northeast corner of Section 5, 
Township 19, south, range 7, west; thence south two miles to the southwest 
corner of Section 9, Township 19, south, range 7, west; thence east two miles 
to the northeast corner of Section IS, Township 19, south, range 7, west, 
thence south two miles to the southwest corner of Section 23, Township 19, 
south, Range 7, west; thence east two mites to the range line between Ranges 
7 and 6 and at the southwest corner of Section 19, Township 19, south, Range 
(., west; thence south two miles to the southwest corner of Section 31, Town¬ 
ship 19, south. Range 6, west; thence east two miles to the northeast corner 
of Section 5, Township 20, south, Range 6, west; thence south two miles to 
the southwest corner of Section 9, township 20, south, Range 6, west; thence 
east two miles to the northeast corner of Section 16, Township 20, south. 
Range 6, west; thence south two miles to the southwest corner of Section 23, 
Township 20, south, Range 6, west; thence east two miles to the range line 
between Ranges 5 and 6 west, and at the southwest corner of Section 19, 
Township 20, south. Range 5, west; thence south on said range line be¬ 
tween Ranges 5 and 6, four miles to the southwest corner of Section 7, 
Township 21, south, range 5, west; thence east seven miles to the south¬ 
east corner of Section 7, Township 21, Range 4, west; thence north to the 
present boundary line between Jefferson and Shelby Counties, thence in a 
northeasterly direction following the present boundary lines between Jeffer¬ 
son and Shelby Counties to the place of beginning, and containing 445 1-4 

square miles. 



2370 


OFFICIAL PROCEEDINGS 


Sec. 2. The county seat of the new county of Houston shall be the city 
of Bessemer. 

Sec. 3. That Jacob Kimball, Dr. J. B. Viles, J. V. Huey, Chambers Mr* 
Adory, Dr. M. C. Ragsdall and H. W. Crook be and the same are hereby 
appointed a Board of Commissioners for the performance of the duties and 
exercise of the powers hereinafter enjoined and conferred upon them; a ma¬ 
jority of said board may act and may fill all vacancies therein. 

Sec. 4. That said Board of Commissioners are hereby empowered and 
directed to divide said county into election precincts, to the best convenience 
of the people, and to designate the place of voting therein, as soon as prac¬ 
ticable, and to give notice of the boundaries of said precincts and place of 
voting therein by publication in some newspaper published in said county, 
for at least twenty days previous to the election hereinafter provided for. 
That said Board shall hold an election for the election of county officers on 
Tuesday the fourth day of February, 1902, in said county by giving at least 
thirty days notice thereof, by advertisement in some newspaper published in 
said county. That said commissioners are empowered to appoint three (3) 
inspectors and one returning officer for each election precinct in said county 
to hold said election, who shall be governed in their duties by the laws regu¬ 
lating elections in this vState. That said returning officers shall make their 
returns to said Board of Commissioners, at Bessemer, Alabama, within three 
days after said election; that the said Board of Commissioners after duly 
counting the votes shall make certified returns thereof to the Governor of 
Alabama within ten days after the day of election; that within ten days 
thereafter, the Governor, Secretary of State and Auditor shall count the 
votes and the Governor shall issue commissions to those persons who shall 
have received the highest number of votes as county officers. 

Sec. 5. That the county officers to be elected at said election shall be one 
(1) probate judge, one (1) circuit clerk, one (1) sheriff, one 1) tax assessor, 
one (1) tax collector, one (1) treasurer, one (1) county superintendent of 
education, one (1) coroner and four (4) county commissioners, who shall 
hold their respective officers until the next general election for State and 
county officers and until their successors arc elected and qualified. 

Sec. 6. That until the next apportionment of representatives, the said 
county of Houston shall be entitled to one representative, which representa¬ 
tive shall be taken from Jefferson County’s number. 

Sec. 7. That the County of Houston be and is hereby attached to the 
Ninth Congressional District and Eighteenth Senatorial District, and shall 
form part and parcel of the Tenth Judicial Circuit and the Northwestern 
Chancery Division until otherwise provided by law, and that the present 
city court of Bessemer shall have and exercise all the jurisdiction and power, 
within and over the entire county of Houston, which now are or may here¬ 
after be by law conferred on the several Circuit and Chancery Courts of the 
State, and that the Justices of the Peace and Notaries Public, and Notaries 
Public, ex officio Justices of the Peace, and Constables located in said terri¬ 
tory embraced in the limits of Houston county shall continue in office until 



2371 


CONST1TUT10NA 1 , CONVINTI()X, 1 vo 1 


their suceesscjr.s shall have been appointed and qualified; provided, however, 
idt from and after the tune this ordinance goes into effect they shall be 
in thdr ° ffiCial Capadty> dUty a " d — to'said‘ limits 


Sec^8. That from and after the first day of March, 1902, all suits pend- 
ing in the courts of the counties of which the defendant resides in that por¬ 
tion of the county now established as the county of Houston, and all in¬ 
dictments pending the counties of Jefferson and Tuscaloosa and Bibb, 
ere t ic o ense was committed in territory of said county now established 
.i> t e county of Houston, shall be transferred to the calendar courts of the 
>ai< county of Houston; and all records, commissiones and other papers !>e- 
onging to any of the suits or indictments, together with all legal indict¬ 
ments thereto appertaining, shall be transferred to the clerk of the court of 
the said county of Houston. 


Sec. 9.—That the Governor be and he is hereby empowered to appoint 
a commission of five persons, one of whom shall be a resident of each of the 
counties of Jefferson, Tuscaloosa, Bibb, and two residents of the new county 
of Houston, which said commission shall divide and apportion between the 
counties herein provided for the present lawful bona fide indebtedness of the 
old counties hereinbefore mentioned, having regard for public buildings and 
other permanent improvements remaining j n the old counties. 

Sec. 10.—That the compensation of each of the commissioners in this 
ordinance mentioned in sections 3 and 8 shall be $5 per day for each day 
actually employed, to be paid out of the treasury of the new county. 

Mk. () -\LAL (Lauderdale)—I want a correction made in 
the stenographic report of yesterday, some words have been 
omitted in my argument. I have corrected the inaccuracies and 
will hand them to the stenographer. 

MR. DAVIS (Etowah)—I have a resolution I wish to offer. 

The Clerk read the resolution as follows; 

Resolution No. 251, by Mr. Davis of Etowah: 

Whereas, This Convention has just received an invitation to 
move its place of deliberation to Bellevue Hotel on Lookout Moun¬ 
tain, overlooking Gadsden. Ala., where the temperature never goes 
above 85 degrees Fahrenheit, and with ample room to accommo¬ 
date all the members and employees of this Convention and 

Whereas, This Convention has recentlv experienced a tem¬ 
perature of 105 degrees in the hall of the House of Representa- 
tives : 


Therefore, Be it resolved, That after Saturday, the 20th day 
of July, this Convention do adjourn to meet on Monday the 22d 
day of July, at said Bellevue Hotel, there to continue its delib- 
erations. 



2372 


OFFICIAL PROCEEDINGS 


Referred to Committee on Judiciary, 

THE PRESIDENT—To what committee would the gentle¬ 
man like to have that referred? 

Several delegates suggested the Judiciary Committee. 

THE PRESIDENT—It will be referred to the Judiciary Com¬ 
mittee. 

MR. HOWELL (Cleburne)—I have a resolution I desire to 
offer. 

The Clerk read the resolution as follows : 

Resolution No. 252, by Mr. Howell: 

Whereas, It is always becoming in anv people to give expres¬ 
sions of gratitude to the Giver of all Good'. 

f i??*. 14 ther f for f e resolved, That we for ourselves and in behalf 
of all the people of the State, whom we represent, that our sincere 
and devout thanks are offered up to the benign Giver of everv 
blessing for the welcome and copious showers of rain which are 
tailing all over the State, that there will be “bread for the eater 
and seed for the sower.” 

THE PRESIDENT—To what committee would the gentle¬ 
man like to have that resolution referred? 

MR. HOWELL—I move to suspend the rules that it mav lie- 
placed upon its immediate passage. 

A vote being taken, the rules were suspended. 

THE PRESIDENT—The question recurs on the resolution 
of the gentleman from Cleburne. 

j-.. COWELL—We, as a Christian people, recognize the 

Divine Hand in all the events of this life. We are taught in His 
word, which is the religious textbook, that everything good and 

£ r ^ C r eS ? 0n ; , the Fat , her , °! . Li,e ' <•““ it is bit meet and 
ght that we should not only feel in our hearts a sense of gratitude 
for spiritual blessings, but for the temporal blessings of life as 
well, and it has occurred to me that it would be becoming in this 
Convention, as the representatives of a great Christian people to 
give expression in our own behalf and in behalf of our people! of 
our gratitude to Him from Whom all these blessings cometh Our 
people for days and weeks have been nervous and anxious that 
there might come rain to give bread to the eater and seed to the 
sower, and, therefore. I move the adoption of this resolution. 

A vote being taken, the resolution was unanimously adopted. 



CONSTITUTIONAL CONVENTION. 1901 237.1 

MR. SANFORD (Montgomery)—I desire to introduce an 
ordinance. 

The clerk read the ordinance as follows: 

Ordinance No. 421, by Mr. Sanford: 

Be it ordained by the people of Alabama in convention as¬ 
sembled, That when two or more corporations shall hereafter con¬ 
duct their business or employment, or any part of the same, in 
combination, or jointly, through the same agent, or through dif¬ 
ferent agencies or citizens, in the performance of, or in conse¬ 
quence of any agreement, or combination, or understanding be¬ 
tween such corporations, that they will jointly or mutually share 
in the advantage, benefit or profit, or in the loss to them, or any 
of them, that may incur in their business or employment, or in 
any part thereof, the holders of stock in any of such corporations 
shall thereupon and thereafter be liable, as co-partners, for all ex¬ 
isting and future debts, obligations, liabilities of each and all of 
such corporations, to any other persons or corporations, or to the 
State of Alabama; and for all fines and emercements lawfully im¬ 
posed upon such corporations; provided, that such joint agree¬ 
ments may be authorized by special acts of the Legislature, in 
which the same are clearly and fully set forth in their terms, stipu¬ 
lations and provision. 

MR. SANFORD (Montgomery)—I ask that that ordinance be 
referred to the Committee on Legislative Department. 

THE PRESIDENT—It seems to the chair that the matters 
it deals with should properly he referred to the Committee on Cor¬ 
porations. 

MR. SANFORD (Montgomery)—But I ask that it be referred 
to the Committee on Legislative Department. 

THE PRESIDENT—In deference to the request of the gen¬ 
tleman from Montgomery, the ordinance will he referred to the 
Committee on Legislative Department. 

MR. BROWNE—The Committee on Taxation instructs me 
to report the following. 

The clerk read the report as follows: 

Mr. President: 

The Committee on Taxation instructs me to report the follow¬ 
ing proviso to Section 10 of Article XI, viz.: 

Provided, This section shall not apply to the cities of Shef¬ 
field and Tuscumbia. 

And the following additional section to said Article viz.: 



2374 


OFFICIAL PROCEEDINGS 


Section 11. The Legislature may levy a tax of not more than 
two and one-half per centum (2 1-2) on every one hundred ($100) 
dollars of the value of all estate, real, personal and mixed, money, 
public and private securities of every kind passing from any per¬ 
son who may die, seized and possessed thereof, being in this State 
or any part of estate, money or securities, or interest therein trans¬ 
ferred by the interstate laws of this State, or by will, deed, grant, 
bargain, sale or gift, made or intended to take effect in possession 
after the death of the grantor, devisor or donor to any person or 
persons, bodies politic or corporate, in trust or otherwise, other 
than to or for the use of the father, mother, husband, wife, broth¬ 
ers, sisters, children or lineal descendants of the grantor, devisor, 
donor or intestate. 

And recommend the adoption of the same. 

Respectfully submitted, 

Cecil Browne, 

Chairman Committee on Taxation. 

MR. BROWNE—I move that the report be laid upon the 
table and printed and be taken up in connection with the report of 
the Committee on Taxation. 

THE PRESIDENT—The ordinance amending the report will 
lie upon the table and be printed. 

THE PRESIDENT—The next order of business will be the 
special order. Consideration of the report of the Committee on 
Legislative Department. 

MR. JONES (Montgomery)—I rise to a question of the priv¬ 
ileges of the Convention. 

THE PRESIDENT—The gentleman from Montgomery will 
state his question of privilege. 

MR. JONES (Montgomery)—On yesterday during the de¬ 
bate on the free pass amendment, I am told by members of the 
Convention that gentlemen who were not entitled to the privi¬ 
leges of the floor were here lobbying, and I therefore ask that the 
door keeper be instructed to enforce the rules of this Convention 
as to the admission of persons to this floor. 

THE PRESIDENT—The door-keeper will be so instructed. 

MR. O NEAL On yesterday I offered an amendment which 
the Chair ruled out of order on the ground the Convention had 
already acted on the same proposition when the report of the 
Committee on Executive Department was under consideration. I 
desire to call the attention of the Chair to the proposition which 
was under consideration. In the report of the Executive Depart- 



CONSTITUTIONAL CONVENTION, 1901 


2375 


ment, Section 20, are the following words: “The Governor shall 
not appoint any member of the General Assembly during the term 
for which he shall have been elected to any office/' That was a 
prohibition on the Governor to appoint any member of the General 
Assembly, whether it was an office of profit or trust or not. Un¬ 
der that prohibition, he could not appoint a member of the legis¬ 
lature to an office of honor.. Now, the provision in Section 16 is: 
“No Senator or Representative shall, during the term for which he 
shall have been elected, be appointed to any office of profit under 
this State.” Now. if we concede that the Chair is correct in his 
ruling on the point of order, to which I beg to dissent, that the 
House cannot act twice on the same amendment, I submit respect¬ 
fully to the Chair that this is an entirely new proposition. The 
House declined to accept the amendment, declined to adopt this 
provision because it was far reaching in its effects and prevented 
the Governor appointing a member of the General Assembly to 
a small office of honor in this State—the office of notary public, 
or commissioner to represent the State at some industrial exposi¬ 
tion, or any position of honor— 

MR. HARRISON — I rise to state that gentlemen in this 
neighborhood do not hear a word that the gentleman is saying. 

MR. WADDELL—I rise to a point of parliamentary inquiry. 

THE PRESIDENT—State the point of parliamentary inquiry. 

MR. WADDELL—The question before the House? We can¬ 
not hear. 

THE PRESIDENT—The gentleman is applying for a re¬ 
hearing. 

MR. O’NEAL—Appealing for a re-hearing from the Chair. 

MR. BOONE—Will the re-hearing take the usual course? 

THE PRESIDENT—In all probability. 

MR. O’NEAL—Now, the Chair on yesterday, as I state, held 
the amendment I offered was identical with the amendment or 
proposition which this House had voted down when the report 
of the Committee on Executive Department was under considera¬ 
tion. The Section in the report of the Executive Department, on 
which this Convention has acted, was in the following language: 
The Governor shall not appoint any member of the General As¬ 
sembly during the term for which he shall have been elected to any 
office— 

MR. BULGER—I rise to a point of order. 

THE PRESIDENT—The gentleman will state the point of 
order. 



2376 


OFFICIAL PROCKKD1NC.S 


MR. BULGER — There is no pending question before the 
House. There is no motion under which the gentleman can make a 
speech or argument. 

MR. O’NEAL—Does the gentleman say I have no right to 
call the attention of the Chair to the facts in reference to a propo¬ 
sition before the House? The Chair on yesterday ruled two 
amendments were identical, and the Chair did not have the two 
articles at the time, and I know if the Chair was mistaken, he would 
correct himself. The Chair did not have the benefit of the two 
amendments, and I want to call the attention of the Chair to the 
fact that the amendments are entirely different. 

MR. BULGER—I insist on the point of order, there is noth¬ 
ing before the House. The gentleman has made no motion, nor 
does he rise to a question of personal privilege to allow him to 
take up the time of this Convention in a speech this morning. 

THE PRESIDENT—The Chair would be pleased to hear the 
gentleman from Lauderdale, the Chair is always glad to hear him. 
but it seems to the Chair that the point of order is well taken. 
There is nothing before the Convention. 

MR. O’NEAL—My amendment is before the Convention, Mr. 
President, and I ask the ruling of the Chair on that proposition. 

THE PRESIDENT—The Chair does not understand that the 
gentleman has re-offered the amendment. 

MR. O’NEAL—I offer the amendment now. I desire to sav 
that at the time the hour of adjournment struct before I had an 
opportunity of making reply to the statement of the Chair. I 
thought certainly I would have the privilege this morning. 

MR. OATES—It is entirely discretionary with the Chair to 
hear a member under the circumstances, and no member by a point 
of order can take him off the floor, it is discretionary with the 
Chair to hear the gentleman or not. 

THE PRESIDENT—I he Chair will hear the gentleman in 
view of the suggestion of the gentleman from Montgomery, it 
seems reasonable. As the matter is important, the Chair will hear 
the gentleman briefly. 

MR. O NEAL I just wish to say these are not similar propo¬ 
sitions. The proposition we acted upon when the report of the 
Committee on Executive Department was under consideration was 
whether the Governor could appoint a member of the Legislature 
to any office whether of profit or not. Now, my amendment says 
the Governor shall not appoint a member of the Legislature to an 
office of profit under this State—an entirely different proposition. 

I say that parliamentary practice lays down the proposition on the 



2377 


CONSTITUTIONAL CONVENTION. 1901 

subject of amendments: an amendment may be in any of the fol- 
owing forms, to add or insert certain words or paragraphs and if 
ns tails, it does not preclude any other amendment than the 
identical one that has been rejected. I say it is not the identical 
amendment. To add, or strike out certain words, and insert 
certain others, and if lost it does not preclude a motion to strike 
out the same words and insert different words." Now, the other 
objection which I make to the ruling of the Chair, on the point 
ot order is that it is a matter for the Convention and not for the 
S "air. the rule as laid down in Cushing’s Manual is that “the 
inconsistency or incompatibility of a proposed amendment with 
one which has already been adopted is a fit ground for its rejec- 
non by the Assembly, but not for the suppression of it by the pre¬ 
siding officer, as against order.” That proposition is also laid 
down in Jefferson’s Manual, and I submit that when this ques¬ 
tion was before the Convention when the Article submitted by the 
Committee on Executive Department was considered, many mem¬ 
bers said that they favored the proposition but it is a question that 
properly should be considered when the report of the Committee 
on Legislative Department is under consideration, and they there¬ 
to n: voted against it at that time. 

On yesterday when the question with regard to passes was 
under consideration, a number of gentlemen said they would vote 
against it because that matter ought to be acted upon when the 
Committee on Corporations reports. Now, if the Chair is sustain¬ 
ed, the ruling of the Chair be the law, then the question of rail¬ 
road passes is taken entirely out of this Convention, because when 
offered again the objection can be made that it is out of order be¬ 
cause acted upon once before by the House. I care nothing about 
the amendment particularly, but I think the precedent is wrong. 

THE PRESIDENT -—The policy of issuing railroad passes? 

MR. O’NEAL—No. sir. I say the effect of the ruling of the 
President would be to take from the House the power to consider 
any amendment to any Article when in the opinion of the Chair 
had already been acted upon, and therefore respectfully urge that 
the Chair reconsider its ruling on that question because it is too 
far-reaching. 

I HE PR ESI DEN J With reference to the suggestion made 
by the gentleman, and the argument submitted, the Chair is al¬ 
ways glad to be assisted by delegates, and will always appreciate 
any argument or suggestion from delegates on the floor to aid the 
Chair in reaching a correct conclusion on questions of parliamen¬ 
tary law. Now. with reference to whether the amendment offered 
when the report of the Committee on Executive Department was 
considered was germane or not, the Chair will say that that ques¬ 
tion is decided when it arises. If a point of order is made against 



2378 


OFFICIAL PROCEEDINGS 


it, it is ruled to be germane or not—-and when it is decided it is 
germane it is res adjudicata, that it is germane when it is consid¬ 
ered. So far as this particular proposition is concerned, the report 
was brought in by the Committee on Executive Department, and 
the distinguished Chairman of the Committee on Legislative De¬ 
partment called attention to the fact that a similar clause was in 
the report to be brought in by the Committee of which he was 
the Chairman, but that he saw no objection to its being considered 
at that time, and it was considered and fully discussed. Possibh 
a day or two days of the time of this Convention was consumed 
in a full and elaborate discussion and consideration of that (jura¬ 
tion. Now, the proposition is to bring that identical question 
again before the Convention. The delegate from Lauderdale 

seeks to distinguish it bv saying that the original proposition cov¬ 
ered all offices, and his covers offices of profit. Well, all offices 
certainly include offices of profit, and if he desired to present it in 
a more restricted form, he should have offered an amendment to 
the proposition while it was being considered by the Convention, 
but his proposition was considered and is concluded by the action 
of the Convention at that time. Mr. Cushing does sav with ref¬ 
erence to consistency or inconsistency of amendments, that this 
ought to be determined by the Convention and not by the Chair. 
Lilt this is not a question of consistency, between two amend¬ 
ments. or whether the amendment now offered is in conflict with 
the amendment formerly considered by the Convention. The ques¬ 
tion is whether this Convention shall be called upon to take up 
and consider the identical proposition, in terms or in substance. 
tha.t was formerly considered. The inconsistency or incompati¬ 
bility of a proposed amendment which has already been adopted 
is a fit ground for rejection by the Assembly, but not for suppres¬ 
sion by the presiding officer. Now, the same authority that lavs 
this proposition down, and I say this is not such a case, lays down 
this othei rule, that whatever is agreed to bv the assembly on 
a vote either adopting or rejecting a proposed amendment cannot 
afterwards be altered or amended.' M And again: “That whatever 
L disagreed to by the Assembly on a vote cannot he afterwards 
moved again. This rule is the converse of the proceeding* The 
Chair will overrule the point of order. The fact that this is broimlii 
m by a separate committee would be the same as if brought in bv 
un_v delegate it would stand on the same ground. 

MR. HOWZE—I have an amendment that I desire to offer. 

MR. JONES I would like to make a parliamentary inquiry. 

I HE PRESIDENT The gentleman from Jefferson has the 
floor. 

The Clerk read the amendment as follows: 



2379 


CONSTITUTIONAL CONVKNTION, 1901 

Amend by inserting- in Section 16 after the word “State” in 
u second line the words “filled by appointment or.” 

1 he Secretary here read Section 16 as follows: 

. J6. No Senator or Representative shall during the term 

or which he shall have been elected, be appointed to any office 
<>t profit under this State, which shall have been created, or the 
< ino uments of which shall have been increased during such term, 
except such offices as may be filled by election by the people. 

MR. HOWZlv riie object of the amendment is to insert into 
t its section the prohibition against the appointment of any Repre¬ 
sentative or Senator to an office filled by appointment as well as 
offices which have been created or the emoluments of which have 
been increased during such term. It is merelv adding offices fill¬ 
ed by appointment, such for instance as Railroad Commissioners 
and Convict Inspectors. I think they should be included in the 
class of offices to which Senators and Representatives mav not be 
appointed by the Governor. 

MR. THOMPSON (Bibb)—I rise to a point of order, that 
the amendment is not in order. It is a part of the same proposi- 
tion that has been before* the House before. That was included 
within a section that has been defeated by the Convention in con¬ 
sideration of the report of the Committee on Legislative Depart¬ 
ment. It is an attempt to bring up a part of the same matter that 
has heretofore been passed upon ; and it is not in order to brill" it 
up. 

MR. HOWZF,—On that point the gentleman. I think, is mis¬ 
taken. 

THE PRESIDENT—The Chair would like to hear the gen¬ 
tleman from Jeffwrson on that point. 

MR. HOWZF,—I have this to say. I was looking for that ob¬ 
jection to be made; and I was really hopeful that the President of 
the Convention would change his ruling upon that point. My idea 
in regard to it is while it may be the amendment I offer, was in 
spirit included in the amendment offered to the report of the Com¬ 
mittee on Executive Department. 1 do not think I am precluded 
from offering it here, because each article proposed to this Consti¬ 
tution is separate and independent. Each one is entirely separate 
and distinct from the other, and does not become linked together 
until this Constitution is completed and the Committee on Har¬ 
mony reports it is adopted as a whole. Further, any proposition 
which is germane to any section in any one of these articles, may 
be offered as an amendment although it may have been considered 
under some other article. The amendment offered in the Execu¬ 
tive Department was germane and it was acted upon but the action 
of this Convention it seems to me cannot possibly affect any 



2380 


OFFICIAL PROCEEDINGS 


amendment offered to an other article or section where it is ger¬ 
mane. It seems to me that the only question for the Convention 
or the President to determine when each article is up for consid¬ 
eration is whether any proposition by way of an amendment is 
germane to any article or any section in that article. If that is 
true, if that is germane, why then this is the proper place and it 
is proper for this Convention to consider it. The only question 
would be it seems to me is whether or not the proposition I offer¬ 
ed—this amendment I offered, is germane to this section. It is 
entirely distinct and independent of the section to the article of the 
Executive Department which this Convention ought to consider, if 
it is germane, that is as long as there is any connection, this Con¬ 
vention is bound to consider it, and the fact that it was consider¬ 
ed in connection with any other section or any other article cannot 
have any influence upon that amendment when offered. It is for 
that reason I make these remarks. I wanted to give my views to the 
President before he ruled on the other question. I don’t care to 
take up the further time of the Convention. I think the proposi¬ 
tion one of great importance. It is a different one from the one 
considered in the report of the Executive Department. It was not 
in fact the question then considered, and I offer it because I think 
it of great importance and should be incorporated in the Consti¬ 
tution. I was not in favor of the broad proposition which was at¬ 
tempted to be passed in the report of the Executive Department 
by which it was sought to have the legislators excluded from all 
offices of every character. They should be excluded in order that 
we might have a government free from bias or prejudice. 

MR. SAMEORD (Pike)—When the question w'a s up before 
I was in favor of a similar provision ; but it seems to me after we 
have thoroughly gone into a matter, thoroughly discussed it, thor¬ 
oughly considered it. that it is unnecessary for us to take up the 
time of this Convention in the further consideration of a useless 
thing when we are not only getting along slowly in the formation 
of a Constitution, but are being criticized by the people who sent 
us here; and for that very thing I therefore move to lay the amend¬ 
ment on the table. 

MR. BULGER—I rise to a point of order. This question 
should not be put to a vote of this Convention because this amend¬ 
ment is out of order; and because the Chair has twice decided it on 
this very question. 

THE PRESIDENT—The point of order is well taken. 

MR. JONES (Montgomery)—Would the Chair hear a mem¬ 
ber on the correctness of a ruling that has been made? 

THE PRESIDENT—The Chair will hear the gentleman from 
Montgomery. The Chair has been rather liberal on this question. 



2381 


CONSTITUTIONAL CONVENTION, 1901 


from L° m ! what irre ff ular : but the Chair will hear the gentleman 
- c nu* J>° mer y an< ^ W *H then rule upon the question and so far 
d C air is concerned will consider it as concluded. 


i • JONES (Montgomery)—Owing to its effect on future 
legislation, a motion to lay on the table decides nothing. It can¬ 
not be adopted. It has a very different effect from a vote to pass 
u1 ?. a ni °tion to indefinitely postpone. That may be called res 
adjudicata A motion to lay on the table has no more effect, to 
use a legal illustration, than a continuance of a case would have 
as being res adjudicata. I submit to the Chair, therefore, what¬ 
ever may be the ruling, where a vote is passed to indefinitely post¬ 
pone a question, the same effect cannot and does not arise when 
a temporary disposition is made by a vote to lay on the table. It 
occurs to me, therefore, that the Chair has not given that fact any 
prominence in the ruling heretofore made on that question. 


THE PRESIDENT—Suppose for instance this Section 16 is 
now under consideration, and the gentleman offers his amendment, 
the gentleman from Jefferson; and the Convention lays his amend¬ 
ment upon the table and the next section of this article is read, and 
he offers this same amendment to the next Section. And the point 
of order is made against it. The reply of the gentleman from 
Montgomery and those who maintain that position, would be that 
is offering a different section? That does not make any difference 
if it is the same proposition? Now suppose in a matter whether 
we should have a Lieutenant Governor—that question was up; and 
suppose the Convention had rejected it, that proposition could not 
be added again when each section came up, the members get up and 
offer amendments to each section of the article of the Committee 
on Executive Department that we would have a Lieutenant Gov¬ 
ernor, then by adding a provision for a Lieutenant Governor. It 
would be simply calling upon the Convention to consider over and 
over again the same proposition. 


MR. ROGERS (Sumter)—I rise to ask a question. 

THE PRESIDENT—The Chair thinks he has heard enough 
discussion on this subject. 


MR. ROGERS—I want to ask the Chair if it is not the opinion 
of the Chair when a gentleman wishes to go into these matters that 
the proper motion to be made is to rescind the action of the Con¬ 
vention before they will do it. 

THE PRESIDENT—Certainly. That was brought up in the 
matter of the sheriffs, where the Convention had decided on a pro¬ 
vision for the impeachment, the suspension of a sheriff pending 
impeachment proceedings. The Chair ruled that an independent 
ordinance could be introduced and one was introduced. Any mem¬ 
ber dissatisfied with any provision in the Constitution may intro- 



2382 


OFKICIAI, PROCEEDINT.S 


duce an ordinance to repeal that provision or rescind it. This 
Convention cannot be obstructed in its business by having the 
same proposition presented to it over and over again. As Cushing 
says, "Whatever is agreed to by the House, either adopting or re¬ 
jecting a proposed amendment, cannot be afterwards altered or 
amended.” Further on he provides the Convention may rescind 
its action by regular proceedings. Then he says. “Whatever is dis¬ 
agreed to by the assembly, cannot be afterwards moved again.” 

MR. SANFORD (Montgomery)—Suppose the amendment is 
made in different language. 

THE PRESIDENT — Whether it is made in different lan¬ 
guage or not, if it is substantially the same proposition it cannot 
be gone over. The Secretary will read the amendment. The 
Chair will rule that the amendment is not in order. 

MR. PETTUS—I move the adoption of the section and on 
that I call for the previous question. 

And upon a vote being taken the main question was ordered 
and the section was adopted. 

The Clerk then read Section 17 as follows: 

Sec. 17. No person hereafter convicted of embezzlement of the 
public money, bribery, perjury or other infamous crime, shall be 
eligible to the legislature, or capable of holding any office of trust 
or profit in this State. 

MR. OATES—That is the same as in the present Constitution. 

The Chair here recognized Mr. Watts of Montgomery. 

MR. WATTS—I have an amendment to Section 17. 

The Clerk then read the amendment as follows: “By adding 
thereto the following words, no negro shall be permitted to hold 
office in this State.” 

THE PRESIDENT—The question is upon the adoption of the 
amendment offered by the gentleman from Montgomery. 

MR. WATTS — That amendment of mine is an important 
question in this Convention, the constitutional law. I want to re¬ 
quest the permission of this Convention for their indulgence for 
about a half an hour to discuss it. 

THE PRESIDENT—The question is shall the time be ex¬ 
tended to the gentleman from Montgomery not to exceed thirty 
minutes. 

There being no objection, the chair announced that the time 
asked for was granted. 



CONSTITUTIONAL CONVENTION. 1901 


238J 


MR. HOWZE—Doesn’t it require a suspension of the rules 
and wouldn’t a suspension of the rules require a two-thirds vote? 

MR. FITTS—I rise to a point of order. The chair has al¬ 
ready announced that permission has been granted. 

THE PRESIDENT—In the opinion of the chair, it would re¬ 
quire a suspension of the rules. 

MR. HOWZE—It would certainly require a suspension of the 
rules in order to put that through, and before it be done, it must be 
ascertained by a two-thirds vote. 

THE PRESIDENT—It seems to the chair that the point is 
well taken. 

MR. BLACKWELL—I move a suspension of the rules. 

MR. LOMAX—Permit me to call the attention of the chair 
to the fact that it has been the practice in this Convention since 
this ten-minute rule has been adopted, that when a gentleman’s 
time has expired, a motion is made to extend his time, and such 
motion was adopted without a suspension of the rules. It has been 
repeatedly done, and I suggest that the President is sufficient for 
a ruling of the chair, without more, especially in view of the late 
time at which the point of order is made. 

THE PRESIDENT — In all these cases, the point of order 
was not made, and the chair does not feel authorized to raise points 
of order, especially wherever it interrupts privileges of members. 
I think where a point of order is distinctly made, it seems to the 
chair that he is without power to disregard it. 

MR. DUKE—I made the point of order that the point of order 
made by the gentleman from Jefferson comes too late. The chair 
had already announced its decision on the vote, and the gentleman 
had gone forward to make his speech. 

MR. LOMAX—The presumption was after the chair had an¬ 
nounced its decision, that the rules had been suspended in accord¬ 
ance with the law. 

If a motion had been submitted to suspend the rules and the 
chair had announced the result, although a sufficient vote had not 
been had to sustain it, it seems it would come too late. No ques¬ 
tion has been submitted to the Convention at all about whether 
the rules will be suspended or not. 

MR. PETTUS—I suggest in addition to the point of order 
the presumption was that the motion was behind any motion to 
extend the time. The motion was to suspend the rules and ex¬ 
tend the time and there was no call for a division of the question. 

THE PRESIDENT—The chair is in some doubt about it. 



2384 


OFFICIAL PROCEEDINGS 


MR. MERRILL—I move that the rules be suspended for the 
purpose of extending the gentleman’s time. 

THE PRESIDENT—Upon a further consideration, the chair 
will decide that the point of order made by the gentleman from 
Jefferson was not in time in view of the practice that we have 
indulged in of extending the time without specially submitting the 
question of suspending the rules of the Convention. 

MR. WATTS—I regret exceedingly that l should have to ask 
from this Convention the extension of time which I have requested. 
But this proposition which I have offered to the Convention was 
first submitted to our attention by Senator Morgan, as one of a con¬ 
stitutional nature, and cannot be discussed in the limited time or¬ 
dinarily given to members. I desire to urge consideration by this 
Convention and the adoption of that amendment. We are here 
to do what we legally can to insure the reign of the white man in 
Alabama. This amendment is a pronounced step in that direction. 
It provides that no negro shall hold office in this State. If the 
Convention will bear with me—will be kind enough not to inter¬ 
rupt me with questions—I will undertake to show, not only that 
this proposition is within the Constitution of the United States, 
but that as a matter of policy, it ought to be adopted. This negro 
question is a troublesome one. It isj not only hard to solve now. 
but it has continued to be difficult of solution for many years. For 
more than a century, the negro has been the subject of legislation. 
Whether that legislation has been by the people or by the Con¬ 
gress of the United States, by the States of the South or by those 
of New England, that legislation, at least until a few years before 
the war between the States, has been almost uniformly adverse 
to the negro race. As early as 1705 Massachusetts was legislating 
against the negro. In 1774, Massachusetts, and in 1822 Rhode Is¬ 
land, prohibited the inter-marriage of the races. New Hampshire 
provided that her militia should consist of free white citizens while 
Connecticut made it a penal offense to establish a negro school. 
When the Declaration of Independence was drafted and those 
words used which are so often quoted, “all me are created equal,” 
there was no thought of the negro and he was not included in 
them. When the preamble to the Federal Constitution was writ¬ 
ten, the negro was not included in “we, the people,” whose rights 
were there declared. I assert it without the fear of successful con¬ 
tradiction, that in the inception of this Government, and for nearly 
one hundred years afterwards it was never contemplated that the 
negro should be a citizen of the United States or of any State, and 
until 1848 he had no civil or political rights throughout this broad 
land of ours, except in the States of New York, North Carolina 
and Maine. It will thus be seen that the desire of the white race 
to treat the negro as an inferior did not originate in the South. 



'"NSl-m- tionat. convi.ntiox 


1901 


2.WS 


I nion was formed the^esoect'K'^ qtl sub i ect ■ When the Federal 
ernment certain rights which C ^ tatei> to the Federal Gov- 

Constitution of the Unhed itt arC s P ec,f,e(I a " d '*><1 down in the 
ments have ceded other rights - huf^h SI " C ? then J? y sun dry amend- 
ceded to the Federal Go5c ’ 1 the nfifllts which have not been 

ah of their origh aTtm^ tv "Tfh*" StiI1 , h * Id by the States in 
U. S.. and Maxwell ?? Tin inf™ ° f Walkcr vs - Sanvinet. 
House cases, 16th Wallace it ,W ^t- V aiu * ' n tke Slaughter 
amendments to the Federal p S d ' s .* In< : t,y held that the first eight 
reference to the ritrhts nf th onst,tut,on when enacted had no 
amendments has m ! fl^T raCe; . that neither of these 
and that each of them hnH % ° exercise of State sovereignty, 
powers of Confess. 'Tit^»"Tlf, *° ,he ««"*« of the 

S“cu < re t d he himTom V d- "*"? ?" d 'he Vs.h 

SE y >„» •& fa 7 S °! ' b h ; as tit 

l nion. If then Alabama cannot put into her Constitution a nro- 
luhition against the negro’s holding office, it must be by reason of 
or on account of some amendment to the Federal Constitution 
adopted since 1856. T take it that it will not be claimed that this 

r»b Vy ,r . 0hlb,te<1 by , any t ainendme nt to the Constitution of the 
l nitcd States except the 14th Amendment. The question then 
ior discussion is. does the 14th Amendment prohibit it ? To an 
swer that question, it is necessary to analyze the language of the 
14th Amendment and to consider the various decisions rendered 
since its enactment. The first clause is: “All persons born or nat¬ 
uralized in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction there- 

^side ” ° f tHe Un ' ted StatCS and ° f the State wherein they 

Mark you, gentlemen there are two kinds of citizens spoken 
of here: Citizens of the United States and citizens of a State and 
their rights are different. You will recognize that there are many 
citizens of the United States who are not citizens of any State* and 
there are millions of citizens of the United States who are not 
citizens of Alabama. The rights and privileges of citizens of the 
United States are established by the Federal Constitution and bv 
the laws enacted by Congress. The rights of citizens of Alabama 
are established by its Constitution and bv its laws. The rights of 



2386 


OFFICIAL PROCEEDINGS 


citizens of the United States are under the control of Congress. 
The rights of citizens of Alabama are to be governed by its laws. 

Now, take the next subdivision of the 14th Amendment: “No 
State shall make or enforce any law which shall abridge the privi¬ 
leges or immunities of citizens of the United States.” 

The absence of reference to citizens of the States in this clause, 
whereas in the previous clause both kinds of citizens are spoken 
of, shows that the framers of the 14th Amendment had some pur¬ 
pose in the language used and that purpose, it seems to me, was 
to say to the States that wherever a privilege or an immunity is 
granted by the Federal Constitution or its amendments, that is a 
privilege and immunity of the citizens of the United States. But 
wherever the State acts, it is a privilege or immunity conferred 
by the State and this clause does not say, mark you, that the priv ¬ 
ileges and immunities of citizens of the State shall not be abridged, 
but only those of the citizens of the United States. Therefore, a 
State has a right to make any law it pleases for the government 
of its citizens and for the administration of its affairs, with this 
exception only, that where it. affects life, liberty or property, the 
law must apply with equal force to all; and where it affects the 
suffrage, there must be no discrimination on account of race, color 
or previous condition. Therefore, a State has a right to say 
whether a jury in its own courts shall consist of twelve or less 
men; whether verdicts shall be unanimous and whether there shall 
be any jury at all. It has the right to prohibit the intermarriage 
of the races. It has the right to provide for the separation of the 
races upon railway trains, in schools and in public places. It can 
prohibit or permit women to practice law. It can give women the 
right to vote. Further, the State can give to a white woman, if it 
chooses, the right to vote and prohibit it to the negro woman, for 
the reason that the 15th Amendment simply protects the negro 
male from discrimination in the exercise of the right of suffrage. 
The State can go further. It can establish in one of the Congres¬ 
sional districts a set of qualifications for suffrage, and in each and 
every one of the other Congressional districts it can establish an 
entirely different set of qualifications for suffrage. That is clearly 
maintained by the authorities. The only limitation, as I said be¬ 
fore, is that these qualification must apply to all alike in each one 
of these different districts. 

Now, I read again the other part of this 14th Amendment. 
“Nor shall any State deprive any person of life, liberty or prop¬ 
erty without due process of law; nor deny any person within its 
jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws/' 

A singular thing occurs right there: You will notice that in the 
first two clauses, we have been speaking about citizens. This 
clause commences to speak about persons. It says “Nor shall any 



23H7 


(.'< ).\ T ST IT L'TJ OX A I. CO -V VI • N T1 <) X. IW1 

(Tv'neKnn V a, 3 ^. ^ erh ° n °f W e » liberty or property” and that ev- 
t?.n P ^h, i shal * ha T e( l ual Protection of the laws. That clause 
•li'iPirf.n *,? n ° 0,1 y cor P ora tions, but also includes women and 
'' r ‘V h V ot , onl - v includes citizens but it includes anybody 

«ver> where who has property within the State. Mark you, an- 
o tr thing. Win e the first clause says protection of life, liberty 
or property shall be given to every person, the second clause says 
the equal protection of the laws shall be given only to those who 
.ire wi in t e jurisdiction of the State. Mark you, again, the lan¬ 
guage is not its laws, but the laws, thereby showing that the in¬ 
tention was to make the State give to its citizens and to the people 
within its jurisdiction the protection of any and every law which 
affects life, liberty or property. Now, it is often said that the 15th 
Amendment g,ves the right to vote. That statement is untrue. 

. e amendment does not give any man the right to vote. It 
simply secures the negro from discrimination in granting the right 
. t0 y° te - deci(led ' n the cases of Cruickshank and Reese 

both in 92 U. S., and in that of Harris, 106 U. S.. that the right to 
vote comes from the State and not from the United States and 
that it is not an attribute of national citizenship. The only ex¬ 
ception to it is decided in the Yarbrough case, 110 U. S., and in 
the case of Wyley v. Sinkler, 180 U. S.. where it is held that in an 
election for members of Congress the right to vote for Congress- 
men comes from the United States because the Federal Constitu¬ 
tion gives such people the right to vote for Congressmen as each 
State gives the right to vote for members of its Legislature. It 
was decided in Bradwell v. Illinois, 16 Wall, decided by the same 
Justice Miller who decided the Slaughter House cases, in Minor v. 
dappersett and in Blacker v. McPherson. 146 L. S., that the right 
to vote is not one of the privileges and immunities of citizens of 
the United States granted by the 14th Amendment. Why, we 
all recognize that women, and children are in a certain sense citi¬ 
zens of Alabama and citizens of the United States, yet who would 
contend on this floor, or any where else, that the State of Ala¬ 
bama was bound to give women and children the right to hold 
office? What, then, is the meaning of privileges and immunities? 
What did the framers of the 14th Amendment mean when they 
used that language? It was decided in the Civil Rights case, 109 
U. S., that the term did not include civil rights. It was decided 
in the Slaughter House cases 16 Wall., that it meant equal justice 
in the courts.: It was held again in Strander v. W. Virginia. 
Rives v. Virginia, both in 100 U. S., in Neal v. Delaware, 103 U. S. 
Bush v. Kentucky, 107 U. S., and in Gibson v. Mississippi, 162 U. 
S.. that it is unlawful to limit jury duty to one race because it was 
said it was unfair to submit the property rights of one race entirely 
to the determination of the other. In several of these cases ex¬ 
pressions are used, which at first glance and without due consid¬ 
eration, might seem to combat the position I take. If you will read 



2388 


OFFICIAL PROCEEDINGS 


these decisions and carefully consider them, you will find that the 
Supreme Court of the United States, in no single instance was talk¬ 
ing about anything except civil rights except where they were 
discussing the right to vote; and when they were discussing tin- 
right to vote, they spoke of it as a political and not as a civil right. 
Now, then, not one of these decisions, except some that I am going 
to make reference to now, have any reference what ever to tin- 
right to hold office. Let me call attention here to another thing. 
You will find these same words, privileges and immunities in Sec¬ 
tion 2, Article IV, of the Federal Constitution. They were, there¬ 
fore, in the Federal Constitution eighty years before the 14th 
amendment was adopted. As far back as 1797 these words received 
judicial interpretation by the Supreme Court of Maryland. This 
was done in the vase of Campbell vs. Morris, 3 Harris and Mc¬ 
Henry. Seventy-five years afterwards that case was followed bv 
the Supreme Court of California in the case of Van Valhenberg 
v. Brown, 43 Cal., and later in Lyons v. Cunningham, 66 Cal.; and 
the same principle is held both in Blank v. Pausch. 113 Illinois, 
and Laurent v. Kansas, 1 Kansas. I call attention to the principle 
decided there which has ever since been maintained and never tie- 
parted from by the State Courts, by the Federal Courts, or by the 
Supreme Court of the United States that suffrage and office are 
political rights and as I will show you a State has a right to dis¬ 
pose of its offices as it pleases. In the case of ex parte Virginia. 
100 U. S., Justice Field delivered a strong dissenting opinion in 
which he coincided with the preceding decision in each one of these 
cases I have mentioned and in which he held that the right to vote 
and to hold office were political and not civil rights; that the 14th 
amendment was intended to protect civil rights only and that each 
State had the right to prescribe the qualifications of its officers, 
and but for the 15th amendment it would have the right to regu¬ 
late who should cast ballots. He decided in there, and it has been 
decided by numerous decisions, that but for the 15th amendment, 
the State could preclude the negro from voting. In spite of the 
15th amendment we can prevent him from holding office in this 
good State. In the case of Boyd v. Nebraska, 143 U. S., and in the 
case of Wilson v. North Carolina 169 U. S.. and in the famous case 
of Taylor v. Beckham; 178 U. S., the case which almost overturn¬ 
ed Kentucky, it was distinctly and emphaticallv decided by the 
Supreme Court of the United States that a State has the right to 
prescribe the qualifications of its officers. The same thing was in 
substance decided in the case of Blacker v. McPherson, 146 U. S.. 
where the people of Michigan undertook to elect their electors by- 
districts and the Supreme Court of the United States upheld the 
law on the ground that it was a State office, and that the State 
of Michigan had the right to regulate it. Now, Mr. President, so 
much for the law on this question. What about the policy? I 
have heard it said that we ought not to put this in the Constitu- 



2389 


CONSTITUTIONAL CONVENTION. 1901 

tion. Why not? I hat we ought not to put it here because it 
snows too plainly that our purpose is to keep the negro out of 
Alabama politics. Now, Mr. President, how much plainer do we 
want it. Isn t every letter and every line of the report of the 
Committee on Suffrage to that effect? Haven’t we said to the 
people of Alabama upon the hustings that this is what this Con¬ 
vention is for? Are not the people waiting to hear how we are 
gomg to provide for disfranchising the negro? Our purpose is 
plain. It is not denied by any man upon the floor of this Conven¬ 
tion or in this State. You must remember that the State of Ala¬ 
bama never adopted the 15th amendment. It was forced upon us 
by the other States in the Union. The negro was forced upon us 
us he was forced upon other Southern States. W^e have the right, 
then, to make our protest against it in such manner as the law al- 
lows us and we have undoubtedly the right, as my distinguished 
friend, the Chairman of the Committee on Suffrage will tell you. 
under the law, to deprive the negro of holding office in Alabama. 
Mr. President, I have heard it said at various times in the Com¬ 
mittees and upon the floor of this Convention, that the putting in 
or the leaving out of some provision would endanger the ratifica¬ 
tion by the people of the instrument we shall frame. I do not know 
as to the truth of falsity of these fears but I think I know what the 
people of the Black Belt will say as to this and what the people of 
the other parts of Alabama will say to a provision which excludes 
the negro from holding office. Put this amendment into your Con¬ 
stitution, go with it to the people, and argue it before them. It 
will matter little as to what else we may put in there. Every city 
and town will be aroused with interest and enthusiasm; everv 
hillside and valley will be ablaze. The white men of Alabama 
of all ages and the youth who casts his first vote, whether thev 
live in a city or on a farm; whether they live in the Black Belt, 
the Wire Crass or the hill counties will hasten to the polls and bv 
their ballots will say to this Convention, well done. 

MR. SOLLIE—Mr. President and gentlemen of the Conven¬ 
tion: I regret that this important question has made its way into 
the Convention by way of amendment, for the reason that the 
question involved is so momentous that delegates can scarcely 
discuss it within the ten minutes allowed. Yet I shall seek to sav 
what I have to say within the ten minutes. I am glad indeed that 
the gentleman who has preceded me, the gentleman from Mont¬ 
gomery, has done into the details of the various decisions which 
have been rendered, bearing upon the legal phase of the proposi¬ 
tion. After careful consideration and study of the question. I 
agree with him that if this Convention wishes to do so, as a matter 
of law, a valid constitutional provision may be made by which 
the negro may be precluded from the privilege of holding office in 
Alabama. I can do no more than to go briefly into an agreement 
with the gentleman upon the propositions of law which he has 



2390 


OFFICIAL PROCEEDINGS 


cited, without attempting to take up the cases one by one. 1 wish, 
however, to make somewhat clearer than he has done some of the 
distinctions and demarkations—lines upon some of these ques¬ 
tions. That provision contained in the Fourteenth Amendment of 
equal privileges and immunities was in the Articles of Confedera¬ 
tion. It received consideration and its meaning was known to the 
courts and the laws of the nation long before any of the amend¬ 
ments to the present Constitution, or at least before the Fourteenth 
or Fifteenth Amendments were made. It has been fixed by the de¬ 
cisions as securing simply the civil rights of citizens. The Four¬ 
teenth Amendment has no bearing whatever upon this provision. 
Nor has the Fifteenth Amendment. True, the rights to hold office 
is a political right, and the right to vote is a political right, but 
they are separate political rights, and they belong to different 
classes of political rights. They contemplate different things; they 
contemplate different privileges. They are different in meaning. 
Why, Mr. President, when this identical question was before the 
Congress of the United States, when the Fifteenth Amendment 
was being passed upon, this question was argued—the question 
whether the broad term political rights covering all parts of the 
political rights of the citizen, should go into that amendment, or 
whether it should be restricted and limited to the single proposi¬ 
tion of the right to vote, was then argued. Numerous statesmen 
spoke, upon the question, and it was finally agreed upon that the 
right of suffrage alone should be protected. 

Mr. President, showing that our record is consistent and in 
harmony with the result of that discussion, our court, in the case 
of Kentz against the City of Mobile, 120 Ala., where the question 
came up as to whether a man should be required to be learned in 
the law to be an officer in the city of Mobile, held the act to be un¬ 
constitutional in the provision which required him to be learned 
in the law, not because it was obnoxious to the Fifteenth Amend¬ 
ment, but because it was obnoxious to Section 2 of Article I of the 
Constitution of this State. By some strange notion of the Con¬ 
vention of 1875, that provision was enacted. It does seem that 
some of the constitutional provisions of that instrument must have 
been made more or less under duress of the Fourteenth and Fif¬ 
teenth Amendments; yet. although neither of the amendments re¬ 
quired that there should be put into our Constitution a clause pro¬ 
tecting all the political rights of the citizens and giving them to 
every man, it was done, with the exception that the right to hold 
certain offices was confined to persons learned in the law; and 
inasmuch as the office created in Mobile was not within the con¬ 
stitutional inhibition, or rather constitutional requirement, that the 
officer should be learned in law, a provision requiring such was 
stricken down by our court as being unconstitutional, and because 
of our own Constitution, and not because of the Fifteenth amend¬ 
ment in the United States Constitution. So, then, our own court 



CONSTITUTIONAL CONVENTION, 1901 


2391 


passing upon that question has followed up the discussion and the 
conclusion reached in Congress and has followed up the true and 
sensible meaning of the Fifteenth amendment, holding that the 
right to hold office is protected in Alabama alone by our own Con¬ 
stitution. 

Now this Convention has stricken out the words ‘‘political 
rights'' in our Constitution. Then we come back to the proposi¬ 
tion offered here, and insist that one of the two political rights, the 
right to vote is protected by the 15th Amendment, and the other, 
the right to hold office, is not. I hold with others that we are not 
bound upon the present question by the 15th Amendment; that 
nothing else but the 14th and 15th Amendment could by -any 
stretch of the imagination even touch upon the question, and the 
decisions of the State courts and the Federal courts have so clearly 
shown that the 14th amendment does not bear upon it, that we can 
pass from that amendment and limit our investigation to the 15th 
Amendment alone, and that the 15th Amendment is specifically 
pointing out the right to vote, or the suffrage right, according to 
the old rule of construction that the specifically naming of one in 
a series of matters standing in equal situation in an enactment, is 
an exclusion of the others. Then I say, Mr. President, that if this 
Convention sees proper to do so, without going further into de¬ 
tails and arguments, in my humble judgment, the Convention has 
the power to pass this ordinance. 

Then, passing from the legal aspect of the case, is it policy to 
do so. It has gone throughout the length and breadth of the State 
of Alabama that the chief aim and object of this Convention is to 
reform the suffrage of this State. If there is one thing which may 
more infurate the people of a community, may have a more vex¬ 
ing effect than any other, it is to see the prospect of their local 
affairs or of their district affairs, or of their State affairs, pass¬ 
ing into the hands of negro officials. If we are in Alabama to have 
that peace and quietude which is best for both races, I say that 
it is best that the negroes do not hold our offices, but that the 
white men hold them. The day may come when the negro has 
gone so far in the arts of civilization that it will be proper and 
right that we reconvene ourselves in a Constitutional Convention, 
and extend to him new rights, but until that day comes, and we 
know not when it will come—it is problematical, it is wrapped in 
the great bosom of the future, and we cannot say when it will 
come, the better and safe plan is to act upon the conditions which 
now exist, and which will exist most probably for years to come, 
and say to the negro, it is best for you, and for us all, that we cur¬ 
tail you of this right to hold office in the State of Alabama. Be¬ 
cause with the negro in local offices, and the white men in Ala¬ 
bama appearing before the negro official, always means to stir 
anew the old feelings of prejudice which cannot be restrained, but 



2392 


OFFICIAL PROCEEDINGS 


which if the negro keeps his place and continues to make the 
progress which he has made in times past, may become a thing of 
the past. The negro will remain here, and some of them must 
vote in Alabama, and so long as that is true, there is a possibility 
and even a probability that they may hold office. The probability 
becomes stronger than in the past, because we have been sent here 
by a people who have carrier their elections confessedly against 
the popular will of the section where the negro is in majority, as 
long as they have wished to do so, and have sent us here for the 
purpose of making laws under which we may purify the ballot box. 
and by which we may declare the results of elections as they are. 
and that being true, there is more probability of the negro holding 
office in the immediate future than there has been in the immedi¬ 
ate past, unless the right is taken from him. 

MR. COLKMAN (Greene) — The question now before the 
Convention has been precipitated upon us somewhat, and I am sure 
that delegates here who are not members of the Committee on 
Suffrage, have not had time sufficiently to consider the question 
now being discussed. In the main, the first gentleman who ad¬ 
dressed you, stated the law as we understand it to be in regard 
to the authority of the State to exclude the negro from holding 
office, but so far as he asserted that the State of Alabama had the 
authority to enfranchise the white women and disfranchise the 
negro woman, we are unanimously opposed to his conclusion. Now 
the fourteenth article reads as follows: “All persons,” and I stop 
here to say that “persons” include females as well as males, “all 
persons born or naturalized in the United States, and subject to 
the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States, and of 
the States where they reside.” Now, there is a constitutional 
declaration in the 14th Amendment “that all persons born or nat¬ 
uralized as citizens of the United States, are citizens of the State 
in which they reside.” Here is the 15th Amendment: “The right 
of citizens”—who are citizens, “all persons born in the United 
States and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the 
United States and of the State where they reside.” Therefore “the 
right of all citizens of the United States,” which includes men and 
women, for they are persons, “shall not be abridged or denied by 
any State on account of race, color or previous condition of servi¬ 
tude.’ It does seem to me that if anything could be plain, it is 
plainly here declared that you cannot enfranchise white women 
and disfranchise the negro women. Nothing could be clearer. 
Nothing could be more simply expressed, and for that reason we do 
not consider the proposition of the distinguished Senator to whom 
the gentleman has referred as stating a correct exposition of the 
law. 


Now so far as the negro may be disqualified bv the State from 
holding office I take it that the latest exposition'of the Supreme 



CONSTITUTIONAL CONVKNTIOX, \<K)\ 




Court of the United States in the case of Taylor and Baker* which 
expressly declares that offices in a State are not included within 
the words privileges and immunities, and for that reason the court 
held that it had no jurisdiction of the case and dismissed it. That 
decision was rendered by a divided court of five to four. Follow¬ 
ing the decisions of the Supreme Court as we have, and consid¬ 
ering the conclusions to which they have come recently, especiallv 
in the Puerto Rico and Philippine cases, it is exceedingly doubt¬ 
ful where the Supreme Court will land when this question comes 
up in a political aspect from the South. I am free to say that un¬ 
der the latest exposition, the case that 1 have referred to, by a di¬ 
vided court of five to four, the State has absolute authority over 
the question of whom shall hold office in the State. The real 
question is one of expedience under all the circumstances. These 
questions were discussed time and again by the Committee on 
Suffrage and Flections, and it was our conclusion that inasmuch 
as we expected to eliminate the ignorant and incompetent voter 
from the exercise of suffrage, there would be no danger in this 
State, and we thought it the better policy as well as more con¬ 
sistent with our prosperity that we leave it untouched, but, Mr. 
President, inasmuch as it is before the Convention, and it is a mat¬ 
ter of supreme importance, I move that the resolution be printed, 
and put upon the table, and that further discussion be postponed 
until we have time to discuss it more at length. 


The President here resumed the chair. 


MR. COLEMAN (Greene)—I would like to have it made a 
special order. I move that the amendment be printed and laid 
upon the table, to be taken up for further discussion hereafter 
and that we now proceed with the regular order of business. 


The gentleman from Dallas (Mr. Burns) was recognized. 

MR. BURNS—I know the motion is not debatable, but I have 
a substitute that I wanted to get in, but I was a little slow. 


THE PRESIDENT-—Has the gentleman from Greene any ob¬ 
jection. 

MR. COLEMAN—I have no authority in the matter, but have 
no objection to its being offered. 

MR. BURNS—I ask to offer the amendment as a substitute. 


The substitute was read as follows: “And no person who is 
not a white qualified voter shall hold any office under the State. 

THK PRESIDENT — The motion of the gentleman from 
Greene is that the amendment and the substitute he upon the table 
to be printed, and taken up for consideration at the pleasure of the 

Convention. 



2394 


OFFICIAL PROCEEDINGS 


MR. WATTS—This is an amendment to this Section 17. Are 
we going on and pass the section without paying any attention to 
the amendment, or what are we going to do with it? 

MR. OATES—I was going to remark that there are other 
places in the Constitution where this would come in much more 
appropriately for consideration, than here, and hence I am in favor 
of laying it on the table to be taken up for consideration later. 

Upon a vote being taken a division was called for, and by a 
vote of 74 ayes and 21 noes the amendment was laid upon the 
table, with the substitute, to be taken up at the pleasure of the 
Convention. 

MR. WHITE—I have an amendment to Section 17. 

Section 17 was read: Thereupon the amendment was read as 
follows: Amend by striking out the word “hereafter” in line one. 

MR. WHITE—The necessity for this amendment is apparent. 
There is no reason why a person who has been heretofore convict¬ 
ed of embezzlement of the public money, or any other infamous 
crime should be entitled to hold office or to be a member of the 
legislature, and I suppose the Committee will probably accept it. 

MR. OATES—This is the old section, copied from the pres¬ 
ent constitution, but I have no objection in the world to the gen¬ 
tleman’s amendment, and have no idea that the Committee has 
any. As far as I am concerned I am willing to accept it. 

Upon a vote being taken the amendment was adopted, and 
upon a further vote the section as amended was adopted. 

Section 18 was read as follows: 

Sec. 18. No law shall be passed except by bill, and no bill 
shall be so altered or amended on its passage through either 
House as to change its original purpose. 

MR. OATES—That is the provision in the present Constitu¬ 
tion and I move its adoption. 

Upon a vote being taken the section was adopted. 

Section 19 was read as follows : 

Sec. 19. No bill shall become a law until it shall have been 
referred to a standing committee of each House, acted upon by 
the committees in session, and returned therefrom which fact shall 
affirmatively appear upon the journal of each House. 

MR. OATES—This is amended so as to prevent such prac¬ 
tices as have been shown to exist in some cases. For instance I 
heard evidence here about a bill being passed around in open ses- 



C< >N ST IT U TI () N AI. CO \ V KNTK) X 


19(11 


2.195 


sum. from out* member of a committee to another, and they were 

,'eouire n f " T ' U ‘ lr,r names on th <* '>ack. and this section now 

*** reference;to a standing committee. Another practice has 
been engaged in. of referring a local bill simply to the delegation 
from he county, and it is passed upon In them. We have no 
such tiling as county sovereignty in this State, 'flic State itself is 
the sovereign. 1 his section also provides that the fact that it is 
referred to a standing- committee and passed upon in session by the 
Committee of each House must affirmatively appear upon the 
journal. ] move its adoption. 

Ml\. BR()\\ Nl\ I do not know whether the section reported 
is correctly printed, but it reads “by committees in session." I 
would suggest that it should read “acted upon by such Committee 
in session, so that it may be acted upon bv the Committee to 
which it is referred. 


MR. OATHS- 

spoken of. 


-There are the Committees of each House 


.MR. BROW Nh,— I know of one instance where it was referred 
to one Committee and reported hack by another. 

MR. OATHS—There cannot be any mistake the way it reads 
here, and I move the adoption of the section as reported. 

MR. COBB—I will offer that amendment, because it is in har¬ 
mony with what precedes. 

MR. BROWNE—I offer an amendment, which the Clerk will 
read. 

The amendment was read by the Clerk as follows: “Strike out 
the word ‘Committees’ and insert the words. ‘such Committee in 
each House.’ ” 


MR. WALKER—As you have it there, the amendment would 
make it read “such Committee of each House in session.” 

MR. BROWNE—Such committee in session of each House. 

MR. COBB—Such committee seems to me to be sufficient. 

MR. BROWNE—I think it is right as written, “standing Com¬ 
mittee of each House, acted upon by such Committee in session.” 

I only desire to state that in the Shelby County case, the bill 
was referred, as the journal will show, to one Committee, and that 
it was reported back by another and different committee, and that 
question is before the Supreme Court, not yet having been de¬ 
cided. Certainly it will obviate the attempt to do such a thing in 
the future. 

The amendment was again read: “Strike out ‘the committees’ 
and insert ‘such committee in each House.’” 



23% 


OFFICIAL PROCEEDINGS 


MR. OATES—That is a change of language, and if the gen¬ 
tlemen think it is more expressive, all right, I have no objection to 
it. I think it is clear like it is. 

MR. COBB—I move to strike out the word “each” in the 
amendment. 

A reading being called for the section as amended was read: 
“Sec. 19. No bill shall become a law until it shall have been re¬ 
ferred to a standing committee of each House, acted upon by such 
committee in session, and returned therefrom, which fact shall 
affirmatively appear upon the journal of each House. 

Upon a vote being taken the amendment to the amendment, 
and the amendment were adopted, and thereupon the section, as 
amended, was adopted. 

Section 20 was read as follows: 

Sec. 20. Every bill shall be read on three different days in 
each House, and no bill shall become a law unless on its final pas¬ 
sage it be read at length and the vote taken by yeas and nays, the 
names of the members voting for and against the same be entered 
on the journal, and a majority of each House be recorded thereon 
as voting in its favor, except as otherwise provided in this Consti¬ 
tution. 

MR. HARRISON—I have an amendment. 

The amendment was read as follows: 

Amend Section 20 by inserting between the words of and each 
where they occur on the fourth line of said Section, the words 
“those elected to.” 

MR. HARRISON—The effect of this amendment is to require 
a majority of the members elected to each House to vote in favor 
of a bill before it becomes a law. Under the Section as reported 
by the Committee, and as has been the case in Alabama under the 
present Constitution, with a Senate composed of thirty-three men. 
seventeen constituting a quorum, nine Senators can pass a law, 
and it has often been done. With the House of Representatives 
of 100, fifty-one being a majority, twenty-six members of the House 
could pass a law. I submit that this will be one of the safeguards 
in the direction which the Convention has undertaken to put into 
operation. I do think, especially when we have confined the Legis¬ 
lature to the consideration of general laws, and when they are re¬ 
quired as by articles already adopted, to provide by a system of 
general laws all relief heretofore given by special and local laws, 
that they should be carefully considered, and I insist that this pro¬ 
vision will see that they are more carefully considered, because it 
will require a greater number of members or Senators to vote for 



CONSTITUTIONAL CONVENTION. 1901 


2397 


>uch measures. Further, Mr. President, I insist it will give that 
care and attention that ought to be given to the legislation, and it 
will give more stability to the laws enacted. I do not think it is 
right that any law should be passed upon the vote of merely nine 
Senators, or twenty-six members of the House of Representatives. 

1 ennessee and a number of other States have adopted this rule and 
my information is that in every one of them it has worked well. 

I offered an ordinance to this effect, which was referred to the 
Committee. Not being a member of the Committee, I do not know 
what the position of the Committee was with reference to it, but 
in my judgment it is one of the most important safeguards that 
we can place in this Constitution, and I desire to bring it to the 
consideration of delegates of this Convention. 

MR. MACDONALD—Would not the amendment you suggest 
require a unanimous vote if there was only a quorum of members 
present. 

MR. HARRISON—It would require fiftv-one Representatives 
to vote for the passage of a law, and require seventeen Senators if 
they were only there, and the rest absent, I think, Mr. President, 
it ought to be unanimous. A majority of a legislative body should 
be required to vote for the passage of any law and I think it will 
prevent hasty legislation, and that it is not asking too much that 
a majority of those elected by the people for the purpose of legis¬ 
lating should at least attend before bills are enacted into law. 

MR. FITTS—Would not it have the effect of making Senators 
and Representatives more diligent in attending in order that they 
might be there? 

MR. HARRISON—I think it would, and that is the reason 
I propose it. The result of it would be that we would have a better 
attendance upon the sessions of the Legislature. 

MR. SANFORD—I offer an amendment. 

MR. BKDDOW—I desire to ask the gentleman from Lee a 
question. 

THE PRESIDENT—The Chair will suggest to the gentleman 
from Montgomery that there is an amendment pending, and to be 
in order it should be offered as an amendment to the amendment. 

MR. SANFORD—It is hardly an amendment to the amend¬ 
ment. It is on a different subject, and I will wait. 

MR. BEDDOW—In case an important measure is pending 
before the Senate and House could not a few filibusterers prevent 
the passage of the law sometimes? 

MR. HARRISON—We have already adopted a provision that 
Oves the House the power to enforce the attendance of members. 



2398 


OFFICIAL PROCEEDINGS 


MR. SANFORD—It is sometimes very difficult to do that, is 
it not? 

MR. HARRISON—I think not. 

MR. OATES—The delegate from Lee stated he introduced an 
ordinance upon this subject, and was before the Committee and 
discussed it, but a majority of the Committee thought it best to 
report this system as it stood. The gentleman will see that this 
is precisely the language of Section 21. Here is numbered 20. 
Twenty-one of the present Constitution. The delegate from Lee 
conferred with me about it, and I was very willing that he should 
offer the amendment which he has offered because it is an impor¬ 
tant matter to be considered, and not speaking for the Committee, 
but individually I am in favor of the proposition as it is reported. 
Individually I am in favor of the amendment offered by the dele¬ 
gate from Lee, for the reasons which have been stated by him. 
Now sir, if there be any member of the Legislative Committee 
who desires to be heard in opposition to the amendment, I would 
be glad for them to be recognized and heard. 

MR. O’NEAL—I desire to offer an amendment to the amend¬ 
ment. 

MR. WHITE—This amendment it seems to me to be a great 
departure from our long legislative precedent- 

MR. OATES—If the gentleman will allow me. 

MR. WHITE—Yes, sir. 

MR. OATES—One thing I wish to add to my remarks. I do 
not know which side the gentleman takes, but the delegate from 
Lee has had long experience in the Legislature, and in fact he is 
now a Senator, and has brought to my attention more forcibly the 
objection which he mentioned to this Section as it is, and being in 
favor of the amendment that he offered. 

MR. WHITE—I am speaking for the people rather than for 
the members of the Senate. As was suggested by the gentleman 
from Jefferson in his inquiry to the gentleman from Lee, about 
persons who wanted to defeat bills absenting themselves, to pre¬ 
vent the passage of a measure. So that would work both ways. It 
might stimulate those who wanted to pass a measure to assemble, 
while it might on the other hand stimulate those who wanted to 
defeat a measure to remain away. Now suppose that either House, 
or branch of the Legislature, was nearly equally divided between 
two political parties. Then the political party upon whom the re¬ 
sponsibility for the legislation rested, having a bare majority, if 
one member should be sick, or absent, the minorit 3 ' could defeat 
the will of the majority, though that party be held responsible for 
the legislation having the majority in that body. 



CONSTITUTIONAL CONVENTION. 1901 


2.199 


MR. LONG (Walker)—Seventeen constitutes a quorum in the 
benate. Could not nine men indefinitely postpone a bill, which 
means its death, whereas, it would take a majority of the Senate, 
seventeen members, to pass it? Could not nine men kill it by in¬ 
definite postponement, whereas it would take seventeen to pass the 
nill, and would not that apply to the House as well? 

MR. WHITE That seems to be a very strong objection to 
the measure, as suggested by the gentleman from Walker. Less 
than a majority might defeat a bill, while it would take a majority 
ot the uhole House to enact a law. In other words, nine members 
. the ^ enat e might indefinitely postpone a bill and thereby defeat 
\V whe f cas It: 'voulcl take seventeen or more to pass the measure. 
.Now, the complaint that nine Senators may enact a law is a com¬ 
plaint showing the necessity of increased representation. If there 
is an evil in that, then the evil is further behind us than the point 
that we are discussing. We need more representation in Alabama 
n there is anything in the objection, or anything in the suggestion 
that nine men in the Senate can pass a law. In other words, if 
that objection is well taken, then we need increased representation 
in the Senate, for as long as we have the representation which we 
now have, and which we have already decided to have in the future, 
it is right and proper that a majority of that body, or of either body, 
should have the right to enact legislation, and that the will of that 
maiority might not be defeated by the minority of another party 
in the body. Therefore, I am opposed to the amendment. In other 
words, it is an innovation as I first said, and without some strong 
reason, we ought not to make that innovation. 

MR. HEFLIN (Randolph)—If the amendment offered by the 
gentleman from Lee should prevail, would not a quorum be power¬ 
less to pass a bill if there was one dissenting vote? 

MR. WHITE—Why, of course, a bare quorum with one dis¬ 
senting vote could defeat any bill. 

THE PRESIDENT Does the gentleman make any motion 
with reference to the amendment? 

MR. WHITE I do not wish to cut off debate. I regard this 
as a very important measure. 

MR. BULGER—It has been well said that this is a departure 
and an innovation on the practice and custom of the law-making 
power of this State, since the organization of the government of the 
State. Now. there are two or three reasons, in my humble judg¬ 
ment, why this amendment should not be adopted. It is not un- 
trequently the case that there are twenty-five members of the 
House of Representatives who are absent from a session; that 
would leave in session seventy-five members. 



2400 


OFFICIAL PROCEEDINGS 


MR. O’NEAL—If the gentleman will permit a question: You 
say that this is an innovation upon the practice which has pre¬ 
vailed in this State. Was not the question of quadrennial sessions 
of the Legislature, which we adopted yesterday an innovation. and 
didn’t you vote for that innovation? 

MR. BULGER—Yes, I think so; and. therefore, I favored 
biennial sessions. Now, as I was stating when interrupted if 
there are seventy-five members present 

MR. HARRISON—Wasn’t it an innovation upon the customs 
of the State, when, thirty-five provisions were stipulated prohibit¬ 
ing local legislation. 

MR. BULGER—Yes, I think so. 

MR. HARRISON—You voted against that, too. 

MR. BULGER—I think so; I was in favor of local legislation 
by the Legislature and not by the Commissioners’ Courts, and I 
have yet no reason to regret how I voted. 

Now, if seventy-five members only are present, which frequent¬ 
ly occurs in the Legislature, it will require fifty-one members to 
pass a bill. It will only require thirty-eight members to defeat a 
bill. That practice ought not to prevail in any Assembly, whether 
it is of the importance of a legislative assembly or not. It should 
require in the Legislature as many votes to defeat a bill as it re¬ 
quires to pass a bill. If this amendment is adopted, that will not 
be the case. Before any important bill can become a law in this 
State, when there are only seventy-five members present, the oppo¬ 
sition can raise twenty-five votes and defeat the bill, because we all 
know that a motion to indefinitely postpone a bill amounts to de¬ 
feating the measure, and it would require fifty-one votes to pass 
the bill; therefore I move to lay the motion on the table. 

Upon a vote being taken, a division was called for and by a 
vote of fifty-six ayes and thirty-five noes, the motion to table was 
carried. 

MR. SANFORD (Montgomery)—I offer an amendment. 

The amendment was read as follows: ’‘Amend Section 20 by 
inserting in the second line of said section after the words ‘at 
length,’ the following, ‘which fact shall be entered on the journal.’ ” 

MR. SANFORD—I make that amendment simply because the 
Constitution under which we now live contains pretty much the 
same words, but sometimes bills are read by merely reading the 
title, and it appears as if they were read three times. By entering 
this fact on the journal it will show that it was read at length, and 
that is the reason I offer the amendment. 



2401 


CONSTITUTIONAL CONVENTION, 1901 

MR. OA 1 ES I do not see the necessity for the amendment, 
and, therefore, I think that the section as reported by the com¬ 
mittee ought to pass. I cannot see that there is any necessity for 
the amendment offered 1))' my colleague, and, therefore, I move 
to table it. 

L pon a Note being taken, a division was called for, and by a 
\ote of fift\-five ayes and twenty-one noes, the amendment was 
tabled. 

MR. L(>N(j (Walker)—] have an amendment. 

1 he amendment was read as follows : “Amend Section 20 in 
the fourth line by striking out the words ‘in its favor/ " 

MR. U)N(» (Walker)—]f my amendment was adopted, it 
would read as follows: “Every bill shall be read on three different 
days in each house, and no bill shall become a law unless, on its 
final passage, it be read at length, and the vote be taken by yeas 
and nays, the names of the members voting for and against the 
same be entered on the journal, and a majority of each house be 
recorded thereon as voting except as otherwise provided in this 
Constitution/’ 

It is lixed to provide that a majority of the House can pass a 
bill like it has always done, and I think it is a safeguard to legis¬ 
lation. It prevents a minority from defeating legislation, and it is 
right on the line of the amendment which was offered by the gen¬ 
tleman from Lee, and it has been discussed on this floor, and I 
think the gentlemen understand it. I think it is a very necessary 
amendment and that it should be adopted. 

MR. OATES—I don’t see the necessity for the amendment. If 
I did, I would make no objection to it, but I think it is right as it 
is. for a majority of each House to be recorded as voting in its 
favor, and otherwise it cannot pass, and, therefore, those words 
have an office and effect, and I move to table the amendment. 

Upon a vote being taken, the motion to table was carried, and 
upon a further vote, the section was adopted. 

Section 21 was read as follows: 

Sec. 21. No amendment to bills shall be adopted except by a 
majority of the House wherein the same is offered, nor unless the 
amendment with the name of those voting for and against the same 
shall be entered at length on the journal of the House in which the 
same is adopted, and no amendment to bills by one House shall be 
concurred in by the other unless by a vote taken by yeas and nays, 
and the names of the members voting for and against the same be 
recorded at length on the journal; and no report of a committee 
of conference shall be adopted in either House, except upon a vote 



2402 


OFFICIAL PROCEEDINGS 


being taken by yeas and nays, and entered on the journal, as here- 
m provided for the adoption of amendments. 

MR. OATES I move the previous question on the adoption 
of the section. 


MR. WATTS—I want to know whether in the fifth line of that 
section the words “of a majority” appear. The words “of a ma¬ 
jority are in the old Constitution. 


The section was again read. 

MR. OATES—I wish to say the emendation of the old section 
was very carefully considered, not onlv once hut twice by the 
Committee and it is reported here just as it was adopted bv the 
Committee, and hence I move the previous question on its adoption. 
1 think it is perfectly clear. 

The main question was ordered anti upon a further vote the 
section was adopted. 

Section 22 was read as follows: 

Sec. 22. The legislature shall pass general laws under which 
local and private interests shall he provided and protected. 

MR. OATES—That has already been adopted, and incorpor¬ 
ated into the article on Local Legislation, and for that reason 1 
ask unanimous consent that it he stricken out here. 

There being no objection the section was stricken out. 

Section 23 was read as follows: 

Sec. 23. The legislature shall have no power to authorize 
lotteries or gift enterprises for any purpose, and shall pass laws to 
prohibit the sale of lottery or gift enterprise tickets, or tickets in 
any scheme in the nature of a lottery in this State: and all acts, 
or parts of acts heretofore passed by the legislature of this State 
authorizing a lottery or lotteries and all acts amendatory thereof 
or supplemental thereto, are hereby avoided. 

MR. OATES 1 hat is the same as in the present Constitution, 
and 1 move its adoption. 

Upon a vote being taken the section was adopted. 

Section 24 was read as follows: 


Sec. 24. The presiding officer of each House shall, in the 
presence of the House over which he presides, sign all bills and 
joint resolutions passed by the legislature, after the same shall 
have been publicly read at length, immediately before the signing 
and the fact of reading and signing shall be entered upon the jour¬ 
nal; but the reading at length may be dispensed with by a two- 



CONSTITUTIONAL CONVENTION, 1901 


2403 


thirds vote of a quorum present, which fact shall also be entered 
on the journal. 

MR. OATES—The change made in that from the correspond¬ 
ing section in the present Constitution is it was only necessary 
heretofore for the presiding officer to read the title before signing, 
and this requires the reading of the enactment at length before the 
signing, but the reading at length may be dispensed with by a two- 
thirds vote of the quorum present, which fact shall be entered on 
the journal. In some cases it may be desired where a bill is of 
very great length and the House is satisfied it is all right, and it 
would consume a great deal of time to read it, to dispense with the 
reading, and by a two-thirds vote they can so dispense with the 
reading of it at length. 

MR. HOWELL—I would like that rule, but would it not in 
case the motion was made to suspend the rule, obviate the necessity 
of reading the bill by its caption. 

MR. OATES—Of course it would have to be read by its cap¬ 
tion, it is only the reading at length that may be dispensed with 
by the two-thirds vote of the members present. 

MR. HOWELL—It would not require the reading of the cap¬ 
tion would it? 

MR. OATES—It would be necessary to read that to know 
what he has in hand. That is unavoidable. 

An amendment by Mr. deGraffenreid was read as follows: 
Amend by striking out from section 24 all after the word “journal” 
in the fourth line. 

MR. deGRAFFENREID—I do not care to discuss that amend¬ 
ment, except that I want to call the attention of the House to the 
fact that it strikes from it the provision that two-thirds of the 
House may dispense with the reading of the bill at length when it 
is to be signed by the presiding officer of the House. It has always 
been done heretofore, and then, under the requirement that we have 
had heretofore, this House knows that frauds have been perpetrated 
upon the General Assembly, and as we have already declared by 
our action that the journals of each House shall be presumed to be 
absolutely true. I think that everything that can be done by this 
Convention, to prevent a fraud being perpetrated upon the house 
should be done, and for that reason I offer the amendment, and 
move the previous question. 

MR. OATES—Don't move the previous question. 

MR. deGRAFFENREID—You have the right to close the 
debate. 



2404 


OFFICIAL PROCEEDINGS 


MR. SAMFORD (Pike)—I hope the gentleman won't move 
the previous question. I want to offer a substitute. I offer the 
clause in the old Constitution as a substitute. 

The motion for the previous question was withdrawn. 

MR. SAMFORD (Pike)—I desire to say that I do not see how 
the Committee could have given a careful consideration to this 
section, and reported the section which they have. Every one 
who is at all familiar with legislation, knows that there are a great 
many bills which pass the legislature, and if the Speaker of the 
House and President of the Senate were required to read every 
bill at length before it was signed publicly in the presence of both 
Houses, that it would take up almost as much time as would be 
consumed in the passage of bills, and it is entirely unnecessary. 

MR. MACDONALD—Don't you think it would be an addi¬ 
tional safeguard as to the correct engrossing of the bills. The 
third reading is on the engrossment of the bill, and has there not 
very frequently been a mistake made in the engrossment of bills. 

MR. SAMFORD (Pike)—In reply to that I will say that it 
might serve as an additional safeguard to require that everv bill 
should be read by every member in each House publicly, and that 
would be an additional safeguard as to the engrossment of a bill. 
The law provides that it shall be read at length in both Houses, 
three separate and distinct times. The law provides that the Gov¬ 
ernor shall read it, and if you want to place any more safeguards 
around it, why there ought to be a provision that it could be taken 
out of the House and read by special committee on engrossment 
or something of that kind. If these bills are read at length by re¬ 
quirement of the Constitution, in each House where they are passed. 
I submit to this Convention, it will take up entirely too much of 
the time of the General Assembly, or Legislature, as we now call 
it, and time that seems to me is unwarranted, when we take into 
consideration the fact that the only intention of the Constitution 
makers of 1875, when they required the bills to be read by their 
titles, was to call especial attention of the members of each House 
to the signing of the bill, and what was in the bills that were being 
signed. 

MR. WHITE—This contemplates that the bill itself shall be 
signed by the presiding officer does it not? 

MR. SAMFORD (Pike)—Yes sir. 

MR. WHITE—Then I will ask you if a bill up to that time 
had been under another wrapper, if it would be possible, when it 
was read at length before the House to conceal its contents any 
longer and the identity of the bill itself. 



CONSTITUTIONAL CONVENTION, 1901 


2405 


MR, SAMOFRD (Pike)—I hope the gentleman from Jeffer¬ 
son will not measure all future legislation in this State by the 
frauds that were committed with reference to the removal of the 
Court House of Shelby County, and I hope that all members of 
future Legislatures in this State will not be measured by that 
standard, 

MR. BULGER—I will ask the gentleman if the Speaker is 
required to read the bill at length, whether it would make it anv 
more sure that he would detect what wrapper it had been under 
after the bill had been engrossed? 

MR. SAMKORD—It occurs to me that the question of the 
gentleman from Jefferson, and the question of the gentleman from 
Tallapoosa are not germane to this matter at all, but in view of the 
question of the gentleman frorh Jefferson, the question of the 
gentleman from Tallapoosa is very pertinent, and answers the ques¬ 
tion of the gentleman from Jefferson. 

Now, Mr. President, I do not care to detain this Convention 
on this proposition. I desire merely to call the attention of the 
Convention to the immense amount of time that would be taken 
up in the reading of these bills at length, by both the Speaker of 
the House and the President of the Senate, and it occurs to me that 
this time would be uselessly consumed. They say there is a pro¬ 
vision in here which says that by a two-thirds vote of the members 
this reading can be dispensed with. The very first thing that would 
be done, and the way this thing would work in actual practice, 
whenever bills were placed upon the Speaker’s desk, or upon the 
desk of the President of the Senate, some member would get up 
and say, “Mr. President, I move that the reading of the bill be dis¬ 
pensed with,” and a two-thirds vote would immediately be record¬ 
ed in favor of the motion, because that is a very burdensome part 
of legislative duties, and the bills would be signed, and not even 
their titles read. 

MR. CUNNINGHAM (Jefferson)—I desire to ask the gentle¬ 
man from Pike if the signature of the presiding officer is not in¬ 
tended as a guarantee that the bill as signed by him is the bill 
that passed upon its third reading. 

MR. SAMFORD—That is true. Yes. 

MR. CUNNINGHAM-—Then I desire to ask the gentleman, 
under the present Constitution, is it not practically a farce? 

MR. SAMFORD—In answer to the gentleman from Jefferson. 
I say it is not a farce unless the members of the different Houses 
employ clerks and stenographers who are not worthy to be trusted. 

MR. CUNNINGHAM—Would not a motion by a Senator or 
Representative to dispense with the reading at length of the en¬ 
grossed bill, or of the bill that had passed, exonerate the presiding 



2406 


OFFICIAL PK< >CKKPI.W.S 


officer from any responsibility that he might otherwise incur for 
an error in the bill? 

MR. SAM FORD—In practice the presiding officer, as every 
one knows, is not required to read the bill at length, and therefore 
no further responsibility attaches to him than to see that it has the 
ear-marks of authenticity, and when he has complied with that part 
of his duties, he has complied with everything the law imposes 
upon him, and all that the people expect of him. 

MR. SANFORD (Montgomery) - -Allow me to suggest to you 
that the present Constitution requires it to he read at length on the 
day of its passage. 

MR. deCi RA FFFXRK11) I desire to ask the gentleman a 
question. 

THE PRESIDENT—Does the gentleman from Pike yield. 

MR. SAMFORD (’Pike)—-I have only a minute nr two, and 
would do so with pleasure if I thought 1 could convince the gentle¬ 
man by answering his question. 

Another proposition i>, that the Constitution requires, as sug¬ 
gested by the gentleman from Montgomery, that a bill shall he read 
at length a third time after its engrossment, and in the presence of 
the Senate and of the House of Representatives, and it occurs to 
me there are enough safeguards thrown around it, so that if the 
officers who have been selected by the two houses of the (ieneral 
Assembly do their honest duty there can he no possible opportunity 
for fraud, or for error creeping into it. 

AIK. MACDONALD It occurs to me that the Legislature 
could not be better engaged, and could not use the time for which 
the State of Alabama pays them more advantageously, than by 
devoting this additional time to seeing whether the engrossing 
clerks have engrossed the hills. 

The gentleman from Pike says that we ought not to look for¬ 
ward to the future and judge it by the past, hut that we ought to 
consider that the last Legislature or the last few Legislatures were 
exceptions. \\ ell, I don t know that we have anything to base an 
opinion upon in that respect, and I do not know that we can get 
any better predicate for prophecies as to what will occur in the 
Future than our experience as to what has occurred in the past. 
Engrossing clerks have practically been the law-making power of 
this State for twenty years. I have had some little experience 
about these things and know whereof I speak, r know of instances 
where amendments have been passed hv the Senate to hills adopted 
by the House and yet the Engrossing Clerk in the plentitude of 
er 'y' s om ’ h as seen fit to leave out a number of such amendments, 
anr e peop e ha\e been absolutely powerless so the courts have 



CONSTITUTIONAL CONVENTION. 1W1 


2407 


decided, because we cannot bring these amendments before the 
courts of the State. We cannot show they have been adopted. We 
cannot impugn the Journal, nor impeach it in any way, but the 
Engrossing Clerk having copied off the bill as she understood it, 
and the bill having been read in the House and signed by the Speak¬ 
er of the House, it became the law, and could not be questioned, 
although in point of fact it was not the law adopted by the two 
Houses of the General Assembly. 

MR. (1 e G RAFF! \ N k 1C 11)—W e have already passed on this 
matter in the article on Local Legislation by an ordinance which 
almost prohibits local legislation in the State, have we not? 

MR. MACDONALD---Yes, sir. 

MR. deGiUAEFENREI I )■----And the General Assembly in the 
future will have plenty of time, will they not, to have these matters 
read, that they have acted upon? 

MR. MACDONALD—Exactly so, sir. The suggestion of the 
gentleman is eminently pertinent and proper; they will have plenty 
of time. It seems that safeguards in the engrossment of hills have 
not been sufficient in the past. It seems that in the past that 
whatever the engrossing clerk desired to interpolate into the bill 
for any motive she might have—I mean he or she, and should not 
use the feminine pronoun in this respect, but it seems to me that 
the Legislature should not only ascertain that the laws are proper 
ones before they are passed, blit they should see that they are 
passed in the proper manner. It seems to me that this section 
should he adopted as reported by the committee because it care¬ 
fully safeguards this whole matter. 

MR. PETTUS—I have an amendment to the delegate who 
proposed the substitute and I would ask unanimous consent to have 
it added to that amendment. 

There being no objection made, the amendment was read as 
follows : “Amend bv adding at the end of the substitute offered 
by Mr. Samford of Pike the words “provided that on the request 
of any member the bill shall be read publicly at length before 
signing.” 

MR. PETTUS—I move the previous question upon the adop¬ 
tion of the substitute of the gentleman from Pike. 

MR. HARRISON—I appeal to the gentleman to withdraw 
that for one moment. 

MR. PETTUS—If the gentleman from Lee will renew it. 

MR. HARRISON—I will. There are several propositions here 
and as the choice of the propositions presented, I will support this 
substitute, but I desire to call the attention of the Convention to 



2408 


OFFICIAL PK<>CKFl)lNC.S 


what I conceive to be a bad prov ision in either of the alternatives 
which are offered. Prior to the adoption of the Constitution of 1875, 
the presiding officers of each House were called upon as now to sign 
these bills. They took them to their offices, read them, or had them 
read to them, and they took the responsibility for their contents. It 
was incumbent upon the officers to see that these bills were the bills 
that had passed the Houses. They had an opportunity to do so, 
and when these bills were pre-ented to the (lovernor. lie knew 
that the President of the Senate and Speaker of the House had 
both examined them and passed upon them and that they were 
correct. After the adoption of this Constitution, and I appeal to 
gentlemen here who have had legislative experience if it is not a 
fact that it was utterly impossible for the presiding officer to know 
what was in the bills. There comes along a pile of bills, perhaps 
six' or eight inches deep, or I have seen them a foot or two deep, 
and the presiding officer says, "The President <>f the Senate will 
now sign these bills as read by their caption”— 

MR. WHITE—I want to ask if the artic le we have passed 
against local legislation there will he so much time taken up in the 
signing of bills? 


MR. HARRISON—I hope not. Perhaps there will not he so 
many bills, but I will answer that I do not believe under the change 
in our Constitution, that any Legislature can assemble here and 
comply with the mandates and provisions contained in this Consti¬ 
tution, at its first session in sixty days, and if vou hamper them in 
this way, and pio\ide in effect that everv hill shall he read four 
times instead of three they cannot possibly get through, and I in¬ 
sist, Mr. President, that there is no sense in it. You might as well 
say that they shall be read five times, or >ix times, and fix it so 
that the Legislature can never have anv time to do anvthing. I 
think three times is enough, and 1 believe. Mr. President thaf you 
will have sufficient safeguards to see that hills are what they pur- 
port to be if you will require the presiding officers to sign these 
bills after having carefully read and examined the same ' I would 
rather risk the presiding officer of either House, and would rather 
put the duty upon him, when the House is not in session, to take 
these bills and examine them, and see that thev are correct, and 
then there would be a responsibility upon this officer which would 
guarantee their correctness, then, at least one man will have exa.n- 
' n l th ™' * aPPeal to every man who has witnessed legislation 
under the old Constitution, that there is not a member who pays 
any attention to the reading, and there is no opportunity given to 
the presiding officer to examine them, but the bills are brought 
down from the enrolling and engrossing rooms, handed to him 
when the house is in session, and simply read by the caption, and 

th. P K-n eS e S,gn wu here without an >' opportunity to examine 
the, bill, or to see whether it is properly engrossed or enrolled or 



CONSTITUTIONAL CONVENTION, 1901 


2409 


not. I simply want him to have this opportunity. I believe that 
this is one of the false steps which were made in 1875. The inten¬ 
tion was good but in its practical operations it has accomplished 
no good whatever. I would much rather that we go back to the 
old plan, and I cannot conceive any delegate will insist, as my 
friend from Jefferson does, to not only handicap the Legislature, 
and to curb them hand and foot, but also undertake to buck and 
gag them, and say that they shall not do anything. I think we 
would have a better system and that it would be a guarantee to 
us to have it placed in the Constitution that the presiding officer 
shall be required to carefully read and examine the bills before he 
attaches his signature thereto, than to provide for this matter either 
under the old Constitution or the section now proposed. If I am 
forced to make a selection between the two, I will support the sub¬ 
stitute. It will take less time, they will be rapidly read, if read at 
all, or as has been suggested here, ninety-nine times out of a hun¬ 
dred it will be only that much time consumed. We know how 
many of the members of this Convention pay any attention to the 
second and third reading of ordinances. Many of you have been 
in the Legislature, and you pay no attention to it on earth. The 
Legislature will not do it, and it is useless to put this sort of a pro¬ 
vision in the Constitution, which practice for years has demonstrat¬ 
ed serves no good purpose. It means a mere consumption of time, 
and prevents the legislature devoting itself to the business for 
which it is assembled. Therefore I am opposed to the whole propo¬ 
sition, but as the lesser of the two evils I will vote for the substi¬ 
tute. I am requested, and promised to move the previous question. 

MR. PETTUS—I wanted to ask the gentleman from Lee if 
under the present Constitution the subject matter of a bill is not 
required to be stated concisely in the caption of the bill. 

MR. HARRISON—Always; and that is the provision in the 
present Constitution. 

MR. CUNNINGHAM—Will the gentleman yield for a ques¬ 
tion? 

THE PRESIDENT—The gentleman's time has expired, and 
he moves a previous question on the section and amendment. 

Upon a vote being taken, the main question was ordered. Up¬ 
on a further vote upon the adoption of the substitute offered by 
the gentleman from Pike, a division was called for, and by a vote 
of twenty-nine ayes and sixty-one noes, the substitute was lost. 

MR. HARRISON—I now offer an amendment. 

THE PRESIDENT—The previous question has been ordered. 

MR. HARRISON—Only on the substitute. 

MR. deGRAFFENREID—There is an amendment pending. 



2410 


OFFICIAL PKOCKF.niNC.S 


MR. O’NEAL—There i> an anu-iwlment pending which ha- 
not been disposed of. 

THE PRESIDENT Dor- the “entleman utter a >ub-tituu* 
to the amendment? 


MR. HARRISON—Yes, sir. 

The substitute was read a- follow-: “Amend Seetnm 2 \ |,v 
striking out all alter the word ’>hair on the fu>t line of -aid suction 
and inserting in lieu thereof the following: ‘Sign all bill- and joint 
resolutions passed by the Lcgi daturc after having fir-t earefuliv 
read and examined the same/ ” 

MR. HARRIS! )N — Rea<l the -eetion a- amended. 

The section as amended was read as follow- : "Tin* 
officer of each House shall sign all bill- ami joint re-<dution- pa--i*o 
by the Legislature, after having fir-t earefuliv read and examined 
the same/’ etc. 


MR. LSP\ I move to table the amendment offered I>\ the 
gentleman from Lee. 

Upon a vote being taken, a division wa> called tor. and l,v 

vote of sixty-one ayes and twenty-two in.es. the motion to table 
prevailed. 

of tl/ IR ’ PE lTLS ~! n . ,0VC lh - C ,,rovi(U,s 'I'K'-tion oil the adoption 
ot the amendment and the section as reported. 

on th hC mam C|Ucstio ” was ordered, and upon a vote being taken 
the amendment ottered by the Ueiuleman from Hale’ and a 
division was called tor, and by a vote of tweutv-nine aves and 
seventy-four noes, the amendment was lost. The question rccurriim 

ZTX tS t,0n aS rCP ° rted - UP °" ‘ taken the section 

Section 25 was read as follows: 

ami ^a!n'oVlhe Ifc’S I!"',a' 1 ’d'’ 1 ' T ' ' >- 

l>»-vn,c„, shall he ma<l,! 1™, 'S s" n ' 
way authorized to any nerson o T c„t . ,l . 11 - or * >e ,n am 

pioyc elected or appointed in pursuanct of la^"^ 1 ‘”’' 

MR. OATES—I move the adoption of the section. 

Upon a vote being taken, the section was adopted. 

MR. SAM FORD (Pike)-—It is within ^ t . 

journing time, and I have a report here m V) m ' nntcs ot a(i ' 
Engrossment, and I ask unanimous cons/t to hAl/ 0111 // 16 '' ?" 
the report and let it lie over. 1 to 1)e alIowe <* to make 



CONSTITUTIONAL CONVKNTION, 1901 


2411 


1 he report was read as follows: 

Mr. President, your Committee on Engrossment haxe exam¬ 
ined the following* articles and find the same to he correctly en¬ 
grossed : Local Legislation, State and County Boundaries, Ranks 
and Ranking. 


Respectfully submit ted, 

W. H. Sanford. 

Chairman. 

MR. SAM FORD—Under the rules, f think it will lie over. 

MR. O’NEAL—I move that immediately after adjournment, 
we take up those three reports and pass them or that we do so in 
the morning. 

TMK PRESIDENT—The regular order is the consideration 
of the report of the Committee on Legislative Department. 

MR. SAM FORD (Pike)—I simply ask that it lie over under 
the rule. 

MR. O’NKAL—We can take that up in the morning. 

TJTK PRESIDENT—It can be done by unanimous consent, 
or by a suspension of the rules. 

Thereupon the Convention adjourned until 3:30 o'clock. 


AFTERNOON SESSION 

'Flic Convention was called to order by the President, and the 
roll being called showed the presence of eighty-three delegates. 

Indefinite leave of absence was granted Mr. Case on account 
of sickness in his family; indefinite leave was also granted to Mr. 
Norwood of Lowndes, on account of sickness; leave of absense for 
today and until 12 o'clock tomorrow for Mr. Dent; indefinite leave 
of absence granted to Mr. Miller of Marengo on account of sickness 
in his family; leave of absence for today to Mr. Weatherlv on 
account of sickness: to Mr. Tayloe for yesterday. 

MR. P1LLANS—Learning that the Hon. Mr. Bankhead is in 
town, a distinguished Representative. 1 wish to offer a resolution 
tendering him the privileges of the floor. 

THE PRESIDENT—The gentleman from Mobile asks unani¬ 
mous consent to introduce a resolution. The chair hears no ob¬ 
jection. The secretary will read the resolution. 

The secretary read the resolution as follows: 



2412 


OFFICIAL PROCEEDINGS 


Resolution 204: “Resolved, That the privileges of the floor 
of this Convention be and are extended to the Hon. J. H. Bank- 
head.” 

A vote being taken, the rules were suspended, and a further 
vote being taken, the resolution was unanimously adopted. 

THE PRESIDENT—The special order for this evening is the 
consideration of the report of the Committee on Legislative De¬ 
partment. The secretary will read the next section. 

The secretary read Section 26, as follows: 

Sec. 26. The Legislature shall have no power to grant, or to 
authorize or require any county or municipal authority to grant, 
nor shall any county or municipal authority have power to grant 
any extra compensation, fee, or allowance to any public officer, 
servant or employe, agent or contractor, after services shall have 
been rendered or contract made: nor shall any officer of the State 
bind the State to the payment of any sum of money but bv au¬ 
thority of law. 

MR. OATES—This section is changed to a considerable ex¬ 
tent by the committee. It is intended to prevent the Legislature 
not only to deny to it power to grant or to authorize or require 
any county or municipal authority to grant, and the denial to any 
such municipal authority to grant any extra compensation, fee, or 
allowance to any public officer, servant or employe, agent or con¬ 
tractor, after services shall have been rendered or contract made. 
The latter part: “Nor shall any officer of the State bind the State 
to the payment of any sum of money but by authority of law” is 
old. It was not deemed proper for the Legislature to pass a law 
touching any particular locality. 

MR. COBB May I ask the gentleman a question? 

THE PRESIDENT—Does the gentleman yield? 

MR. OA1 ES When I have finished my sentence. So as to 
allow any county or municipality to authorize or to require the 
payment of money, supplementary, for instance, to the amount 
agreed to be paid in the contract, or to supplement the salary of 
any State officer, and this is intended merely to deny that power 
so that every one, whether an officer or a contractor, must stand 
upon the contract made and the amount of the salary or reward. 

MR. COBB—I desire to ask my friend if that would interfere 
with the present law of allowing the sheriffs and clerks additional 
compensation. You know from time to time they are allowed 
certain additional compensation to their fees, ex officio allowances. 

MR. OATES—You mean by country authority? 

MR. COBB—By county authority. 



CONSTITUTIONAL CONVENTION, 1901 


2413 


MR. OATES—No; not for services rendered; it is only af¬ 
fecting- contracts already made, or where some salaried officers, 
I don t think it would affect that power at all, for if it were found 
by the County Commissioners that the sheriff of the county had 
performed extra services in any way, it would be competent for 
them to pass an order compensating him from the treasury for it. 

MR. SAMFORD (Pike)—May I ask the gentleman a question. 

THE PRESIDENT—Does the gentleman yield for a ques¬ 
tion? 

MR. OATES—Certainly. 

MR. SAMFORD—I just have one illustration in my mind 
with reference to it. I remember on one occasion where the so¬ 
licitor of a Circuit was disqualified from the prosecution of a mur¬ 
der case by reason of his relationship. The court, of necessity, 
had to appoint an attorney to represent the State in the prosecu¬ 
tion. Would this forbid making compensation for such services 
as that? 

MR. OATES—No; that is an original undertaking. It is to 
prevent the increase of the pay or allowance to an officer beyond 
his salary or to allow a man more in a contract than he makes for 
his services performed to the State or county than he contracts for. 
It does not prevent original undertakings, like unto the question 
propounded by the delegate from Pike. 

MR. HOWZE—I would ask whether there is in the section 
any provision against allowing the Legislature to increase or de¬ 
crease the fees and compensation of officers during the term of 
office? 

MR. OATES—There is nothing in it with respect to that 
*trictly. By reading the section, the delegate will discover the 
entire scope of it. There is no case, I think to which it could be 
made to apply that is not expressed in it. For instance: “The 
Legislature shall have no power to grant, or to authorize or require 
any county or municipal authority to grant, nor shall any county 
or municipal authority have power to grant any extra compensa¬ 
tion. fee or allowance, to any public officer, servant, or employe, 
agent or contractor, after services shall have been rendered, or 
contract made.” 

MR. HOWZE—That ought to be in this section or some other 
section. 

MR. OATES—I don’t think this restricts it as supposed. It 
prevents abuses, however, that have been practiced, I am informed, 
in some of the counties—possibly in the county of my friend from 
Jefferson. Mr. President, I move the adoption of the section. 



2414 


OFFICIAL PROCEEDINGS 


MR. COBB—I wish to offer an amendment. I wish to call 
the attention of my friend and of the Convention to the fact. 

THE PRESIDENT Will the gentleman send up the amend¬ 
ment? 

MR. COBB—It has not been prepared, and I will speak while 
it is being fixed up. I want to call attention to the fact that under 
this provision, it seems to me, that the Courts of Countv Commis¬ 
sioners or the Boards of Revenue in the different counties would 
be cut off from allowing to certain officers—the Sheriff and the 
Clerk, for example—ex officio compensation for the rendition of 
certain services, not provided for in their fee bill. This is a regular 
custom. Our County Commissioners allow Boards of Revenue 
every year allow, the Sheriff so many dollars to the Clerk so many 
dollars, in addition to the compensation they have received by way 
of fees to perform certain duties, the performances of which are 
not provided for in the fee bill. 

MR. JONES (Wilcox)—I wish to offer an amendment. 

The secretary read the amendment as follows: “Amend Sec¬ 
tion 26 by adding at the end thereof the following: ‘Provided, noth¬ 
ing herein contained shall prohibit the County Board of Revenue 
or Commissioners’ Court from granting to county officers such 
compensation as may be authorized by law.’ ’’ 

MR. COBB Either one of these amendments will do. It is 
only to provide against the possibilitv of cutting these officers off 
from their ex officio compensation that this amendment is offered 
Phey have to perform duties for which thev ought to be paid, and 
for which there is no provision in the fee bill, but there is a’pro- 
vision in the general law. allowing the Boards of County Commis¬ 
sioners and Boards of Revenue to pass upon these questions, and 
to allow them compensation ex officio not exceeding a certain 
amount. 

MR. OATES—Mr. President, I think that the amendment is 
not quite to the point which the gentleman is aiming at. 

THE PRESIDENT—The gentleman from Wilcox has offered 
an amendment to the amendment. 

The amendment was read as follows: “Providing, this section 
shall not apply to allowances made by Commissioners’ Courts to 
county officers for ex officio services.” 

MR. COBB—I will accept that. 

MR. OATES—Allowance is made for ex officio services I 
have no objection to that. I am willing to accept it I think 
Boards of Revenue include “County Commissioners or Boards of 
Revenue.” 



2415 


CONSTITUTIONAL CONVENTION. 1901 


i^° ar ^ S .^ evenue s ” I will accept the 
,-r . - j ! withdraw the first amendment and accept that 

ottered by the gentleman. 

MR. OA J 1\S - I will accept it for the committee, if there be 
no objection. 

1 HI, i RhSIDhN 1 The gentleman asks unanimous consent 
to accept the amendment offered by the gentleman from Wilcox. 
Is there objecton? The chair hears none. 

Mk < ) \ I 1\S—-I move the the previous (piestion on the adop- 
tion of the section as amended. 


MR. H< )\\ XF- -Let me get this amendment in: “Amend by 
in>erting after the word ‘made’ in the fifth line, the words ‘nor to 
increase or decrease the fees or compensation of such officers dur¬ 
ing their term of office/ ” 


1 Hl% PRESIDENT—The question is upon the amendment 
offered by the gentleman from Jefferson. Are you ready for the 
question.' As many as favor the adoption will say aye, and those 
opposed no. The ayes have it. The question now is on the adop¬ 
tion of the section as amended. On a vote the section as amended 
was adopted. 

r ] HE PRESIDENT—The Secretary will read Section 27. 

MR. OATES—Some of the delegates think Section 26 was 
not adopted. 

THE PRESIDENT-—The Chair put the question and it was 
adopted. 

MR. WADDELL—The gentleman from Wilcox offered an 
amendment and the gentleman from Jefferson offered an amend¬ 
ment to the amendment. 


THE PRESIDENT—The Chair will state for the information 
of the delegate from Russell that the Chairman of the Committee 
asked unanimous consent of the Convention to accept the amend¬ 
ment. No objection was made, and it was accepted by unanimous 
consent. The Chair submitted to the Convention the question of 
the adoption of the amendment offered by the gentleman from 
Jefferson, and submitted the question of the adoption of the section 
as amended. 

MR. deORAFFENRElD—I ask unanimous consent to be 
allowed to send up a short ordinance, in order that it may be re¬ 
ferred to the proper committee. 

THE PRESIDENT—The gentleman asks leave to send up 
a short ordinance. 



2416 OFFICIAL PROCEEDINGS 

The Clerk read the ordinance as follows: 

Ordinance No. 422, by Mr. deGraffenreid: 

An ordinance to repeal Sections 8 and 9 of the Article hereto¬ 
fore adopted bv this Convention on the subject of the Hanks and 
Banking. 

Be it ordained by the people of Alabama in Convention as¬ 
sembled, That Sections 8 and 9 of the Article heretofore adopted 
by this Convention on the subject of Banks and Banking be and 
the same are hereby repealed. 

MR. deGRAFFENREID—And that it be referred to the Com¬ 
mittee on Amending the Constitution and Miscellaneous Provi¬ 
sions. 

THE PRESIDENT—In the opinion of the Chair the ordin¬ 
ance should be referred to the Committee oil Hanks and Hanking. 
The Chair will submit the question of reference to the Convention 
if so desired. 

MR. deGRAFFENREID—I ask that it be sent to that Com¬ 
mittee, because the Committee on Ranks and Hanking has alreadv 
reported on this matter. 

THE PRESIDENT—In the opinion of the Chair, after a Com¬ 
mittee has examined a question, and has submitted a report con¬ 
trary to the ordinance proposed, it would not be proper to submit 
it to another committee. 

MR. FLETCHER—The idea of the Chair is correct, the ques¬ 
tion has been heard by this Convention, both as an original propo¬ 
sition and then on the motion to reconsider, and it seems to me 
that if the Convention attempts to undo what it has done in this 
matter, our work has been useless and it strikes me that this 
comes directly in line with the duties of the committee on Ranks 
and Banking, and that it would be rather discourteous to refer it 
to some other Committee. 

THE PRESIDENT—I will read rule 47. 

The President read Rule 47 and stated the motion of the gen¬ 
tleman from Hale, that the ordinance be referred to the Committee 
on Amending the Constitution and Miscellaneous Provisions. A 
vote being taken the motion was lost and the ordinance was referred 
to the Committee on Hanks and Banking. 

The Secretary then read Section 27 as follows: 

Sec. 27. During any regular session of the legislature the 
aggregate appropriations made shall not exceed in amount the in¬ 
come from the revenues of the State for the current fiscal year, 
as estimated by the Governor and Auditor. 


2417 


CONS i I TLTIONAL CONVENTION, 1901 

MR. PM TUS I have an amendment to offer. 

JPhe Secretary read the amendment as follows: Amend Sec- 
turn 27 by striking out the words “for the current fiscal year” and 
inserting in lieu thereof “for the last four preceding fiscal years.” 

MR. 1 l'.T I LS It seems to me that there is an apparent am¬ 
biguity—it might be construed, or might not. I submit if that 
<. onstruction be put upon it, the legislature would be limited in 
appropriations not to exceed the income for the year in which it 
is sitting, and as it is to be held every four years it seems to me 
it ought to have the right to appropriate the income for four years. 

MR. OA PKS I rise for the purpose of moving an amendment 
by inserting the word “annual” between the words “aggregate” 
and "appropriations,” in the first line. 

MR. PET ftS—It reads then ‘‘aggregate annual appropria¬ 
tion?” 


MR. OATES—Yes. 

MR. PETTUS—I will accept that. 

THE PRESIDENT—The gentleman from Limestone asks 
unanimous consent to accept the amendment offered by the gen¬ 
tleman from Montgomery. The Chair hears no objection. 

MR. OATES—This section is entirely new, and at the time it 
was adopted, the Committee did not know, could not know until 
afterwards, that four year sessions of the legislature would be 
adopted, and hence they could not construct it so as to allow for 
that. My friend, the delegate from Sumter (Mr. Chapman) was 
the author of the ordinance from which this was largely taken, 
and I propose to yield the floor to him. 

MR. CHAPMAN—The only question that I desire to ask the 
distinguished gentleman from Montgomery is whether or not the 
treasurer was not included in “as estimated by the Governor and 
Auditor.” It is not in the copy that I have here. 

THE PRESIDENT—Does the gentleman from Limestone 
withdraw his amendment? 

MR. PETTUS—On looking at it further I do not think the 
suggestion of the gentleman from Montgomery will answer the 
purpose and it will not clear up the ambiguity. I have asked 
unanimous consent to accept it, but I don’t think it meets the 
difficulty. I will withdraw it, however, and let some one else offer 
an amendmnet that will clear it up. 

THE PRESIDENT —Does the gentleman from Montgomery 
offer the word “annual as an amendment ? 



2418 


01-'KICIAI, l 1 ROCKFI'lXT.S 


MR. OATES—Yes. sir. 

THE PRESIDENT—The gentleman from Montgomery asks 
unanimous consent to insert the word “annual’ between the words 
“aggregate” and “appropriation” in the first line. 

MR. OATES—I did not understand the suggestion of the gen¬ 
tleman from Sumter just now. 

MR. CHAPMAN—“Treasurer” is left off. 

MR. OATES—Because the statute does not require the 
Treasurer to make any statement to the (Governor at all. 

MR. PETTUS—Don’t you think it would be better to strike 
out the word “aggregate” and let it read “annual” appropriations, 
that means annual aggregate appropriations limited to one year’s 
income. 

MR. OATES—I have no objection, that won’t impair the sense, 
the word “appropriations” being plural embraces all. 

MR. WILLIAMS (Marengo)—I would like to ask the gentle¬ 
man from Montgomery a question. 

THE PRESIDENT—Does the gentleman from Montgomery 
yield to the gentleman from Marengo? 

MR. OATES—I have no objections, but I don't yield the 
floor. 

MR. WILLIAMS—You intend the estimate for the four vcars 
shall be based on the succeeding year, or say for 1903 shall be 
based on 1904 and 1904 on the succeeding year? 

MR. OATES—The statute now makes it the duty of the Au¬ 
ditor to report to the Governor his estimate of the annual income 
for the two succeeding years, and the Governor has in his com¬ 
munication with the legislature 1o inform him of those years, and 
if it be one year, two or four years, whatever number of years, you 
cannot tell exactly, because you do not know what time the legis¬ 
lature will meet and it is to be presumed in four years. There is no 
other construction other than the estimates should be made up to 
the beginning of the legislature. 

MR. CHAPMAN Mr. President, the suggestion made in this 
section of the report was made in order to limit the appropriation 
of the legislature, in order that the legislature might not, in its 
extravagance, appropriate sums largely beyond the estimated in¬ 
come of the State during the current fiscal year. I don’t know, 
Mr. President, that there has been in either' the Constitution or 
the laws any authority or power to limit the legislature in its ap¬ 
propriation. Now, this section was introduced by me with the 
concurrence of my colleagues, in order to limit the appropriation 



INSTITUTIONAL COX VKNTK )X\ 1901 


2419 


in the aggregate during any regular session of the legislature to 
whatever amount might he estimated would be the income of the 
State as estimated be the (lovernor, the Auditor and the Treasurer. 

! lie>e thiee gentlemen know more, or should know more, and it 
^ to lie presumed that they do know more of the income of the 
State than any other three persons in the State and the Legislature 
° u tfht not to be allowed to go beyond the estimated income of the 
St at i' for the Year. Now, whether it is one vear, two, three or four 
years, according to the terms of the Legislature—hut whatever it 
is this section as it now reads: “During any regular session,” and 
i will call the attention of the Convention to the fact that it does 
not limit the* appropriation of any special session of the Legisla¬ 
ture that mav he called by the (lovernor under the authority given 
in this Constitution. “During any regular session of the Legisla¬ 
ture. the aggregate appropriations made shall not exceed in amount 
the income from the revenues of the State for the current fiscal 
year, ;t^ estimated by the (lovernor and Auditor.” 

MR. OATHS—The Treasurer is not charged by statute with 
that. He has nothing to do with it. 

MR. CHAPMAN—That is true, hut my recollection is that 
in tin* committee, the section was passed to include the Treasurer 
because he was the one most interested in the finances of the 
State. 

MR. OATHS That was discussed, hut not adopted, because 
the statute did not require him to make any estimate. 

MR. CHAPMAN—Well, possibly not, Mr. President, and gen¬ 
tlemen, the Legislature of Alabama ought not to be permitted to 
go beyond the estimate of the Governor and of the Auditor as to 
the income of the State during the fiscal year for w hich they make 
that estimate*, whether it he one, two, three or four years. In this 
wav. the Legislature will certainly he restrained within the ability 
of the* State to pay its obligations. There is an amendment here 
which lias been suggested, to amend Section 27 of the report of the 
Committee on Legislative Department by inserting after the word 
“year” in the third line, the words “for which such appropriations 
are made.” I am not in accord, Mr. President, with that amend¬ 
ment, because if it is limited to that—“for which such appropria¬ 
tions:^ made” it might entirely destroy the purposes of the sec- 
lion. 

MR. RKKSK—Will you allow me to ask a question. 

THE PRKSTDKNT—Does the gentleman yield? 

M R. Cl IA PM AN—Certainly. 

MR RKKSK_I will ask the gentleman if the insertion after 

the word “made" in the first line of Section 27 of the words “for 



2420 


OFFICIAL PROCEEDINGS 


any one year” during* any regular session of the Legislature, the 
aggregate appropriations for “any one year” shall not exceed, and 
so forth. Will not that cover the objection? 

MR. CHAPMAN—I am inclined to think that would cover it. 
The only purpose I had in making this proposition was that at no 
regular session of the Legislature should it be authorized to go 
beyond the estimated receipts of the State of Alabama for anv 
particular year. Those receipts, as estimated by the (iovernor and 
Auditor as it is here. 

MR. HARRISON—With the gentleman’s permission I desire 
to ask him if it would not be covered by simply striking out the 
words “for the current fiscal year,” without those words in it would 
not that cover your view? 

MR. CHAPMAN—With due respect to the gentleman from 
Lee, I do not think that would meet it. My idea in making the 
suggestion was that during each and every year there would be an 
estimate made by the Governor, the Auditor and Treasurer as to 
how far the Legislature could go in making its appropriation, gen¬ 
eral and specific upon the treasury, and that it should not go bevond 
the estimated receipts of the State. 

MR. HARRISON—If you had the general terms not to exceed 
the amount of income of the revenues of the State, that would he 
either by the year or in any other way. 

MR. CHAPMAN—That might be too broad. The only pur¬ 
pose in the world, Mr. President and gentlemen of the Convention, 
was to limit the power of the Legislature to go beyond the income 
of the State, whatever that may be, whether great or small, no mat¬ 
ter what it is, so that there will not he any appropriations made 
beyond what the State can pay. That was the only purpose. 

MR. COLEMAN (Greene)—I offer an amendment, Mr. Presi¬ 
dent. 

THE PRESIDRN F—Ihe Chair had recognized the gentle¬ 
man from Wilcox. 

JONES (Wilcox) I will ask the gentleman from Sumter 
if he will accept this amendment: “During anv regular session of 
the Legislature, the appropriations for each four years before the 
next meeting of the Legislature shall not exceed in amount the in¬ 
come from the revenues of the State for each of said years respec¬ 
tively, as estimated by the Governor and Auditor. 

MR. COLEMAN (Greene) That covers the amendment that 
I was prepared to offer. 

MR. OATES—I will accept that. 

MR. CHAPMAN—I have no objection in the world. 



CONSTITUTIONAL CONVENTION, 1901 


2421 


MR. MERRILL—I move to lay the section and all the amend* 
ments on the table. 

A vote beinjj taken, the motion to table was lost. 

MR. WHITE—It does seem to me that this section confers 
very extensive powers upon tlie Auditor and Governor, and takes 
away very important powers from the legislature. In other words 
they cannot make an appropriation that does not meet with the 
views of the Governor and Auditor combined. If there should be 
an unfriendly Auditor to some great interest of the State, by re¬ 
ducing his estimate he can absolutely hold the legislature of the 
State in his hand, and so could the Governor. Then, in addition to 
that, if the legislature should desire to rebuild the Capitol and issue 
bonds, they could not make an appropriation for that purpose, be¬ 
cause it would exceed necessarily, the income which the Auditor 
and Governor would make as an estimate for the current vear, or 
any year. It would tie the legislature absolutely, leaving them 
powerless in the hands of the Governor and the .Auditor. Eor one. 

1 would rather risk the legislature of the State, I would rather 
risk their patriotism, l would rather risk their regard for the people 
of the* State, and the welfare of the State, than risk either one or 
both ot these oflicers, and I think it would be a very unwise and a 
very dangerous power to be given them and taken away from the 
legislative branch of the government. 

MR. JONES (Montgomery)—Anything that comes from my 
friend from Sumter, who is so careful and conscientious, is deserv¬ 
ing of careful consideration and 1 regret exceedingly that 1 feel 
impelled to oppose this section in toto. 'The language is “the 
legislature* shall not appropriate any money beyond the current 
revenues as estimated by the Governor and Auditor." Now, leav¬ 
ing aside for the moment other objections, these estimates, es¬ 
pecially when the legislature meets only once in four years, are 
largely conjectural, it would depend upon the sanguineness of the 
two men. They might say property is increasing in value, going- 
up 10 per cent in Alabama, and you can safely spend so and so, 
or they might be pessimists and take the opposite view, and in 
either event greatly err as to the amount of receipts. Now, the 
Governor already has veto power, and it seems to me that we are 
unwisely trammeling the legislature. There is one other objection 
to it. If this is a good principle, the legislature ought not to appro¬ 
priate more money at a special session than a regular session, and 
while I sympathize with the motive that induced this section, it 
seems to me that the Convention ought to vote it down. It is 
utterly impracticable to accomplish the purpose it is intended to 
subserve. 

MR, OATES—I do not think that the objections made either 
by the delegate from Jefferson nor by my colleague from Mont* 



2422 


OFFICIAL PROCEEDINGS 


gomery are sound. Now the statutes, as we find them, as they 
now exist, require the Auditor to make his estimates, the amount 
of income and expenditures and make report to the Governor, and 
the Governor is required to give that information, or whatever his 
opinion may be based upon it or otherwise, upon those subjects to 
the legislature. Now, it is not such idle speculation. I think these 
officers could not, of course, estimate with that accuracy for four 
years that they can for two years or one year, but it is perfectly 
safe, and if their estimates of the amount of income are less than 
they prove to be, does not injure the State or anybody. Most like¬ 
ly, it will be because these careful painstaking officers are not apt 
to be seized with a fit of enthusiasm as to the vast amount of in¬ 
come and exceed it greatly. They are usually conservative, and 
estimate under what they think will be the probably income rather 
than above it. There is no such thing as putting the legislature 
in the power of the Governor and Auditor at all. It doesn’t increase 
their power over the legislature in the slightest—not a particle. 
The law now requires of those officers to make these estimates, 
it is only a difference in the length of time, so far as their work 
goes, and the question of the payment of interest on bonds is not 
involved. Why, the section of this Convention, which directs ap¬ 
propriations, includes an appropriation every time for the payment 
of interest on bonds. That has to be made out of the revenues 
along with such other expenditures as are found necessary and 
there is nothing dangerous in it at all. It is merely a safeguard 
against excessive appropriations. 

MR. LONG (Walker)—Suppose the Auditor and Governor 
should take issue as to the amount of income? 

MR. OATES—Well, the Governor holds the rank there. 

MR. LONG—Therefore, you leave it to one man, and not to 
the Legislature? 

MR. OATES—Not at all. It is easy to suppose a case when¬ 
ever a gentleman wishes to make an argument, but it doesn’t follow 
at all. I remember in one instance I differed with the Auditor a 
little and made my estimate a little lower than his. My motive 
was to be extraordinarily conservative and to be sure to be right. 
The Auditor though was a conservative man and his information 
was more extensive and more minute than mine. The duties of 
that office are such that he has every opportunity that an officer 
can have to know the probable income each and every year and 
the probable amount of expenditure. Now, sir, in the last Legis¬ 
lature, composed in the main of most excellent gentlemen and 
many that are very able men—did make so far as reported in the 
papers, for I have never examined otherwise—excessive appropria¬ 
tion in the aggregate, more than the amount of revenue probably 
would justify. That is what was stated, and to such an extent 



CONSTITUTIONAL CONVENTION, 1901 


2423 


that it necessitated a hill which my friend, the delegate from Lee, 
who sits in niv rear, being a Senator, constructed and introduced 
and it passed the Senate and House, to cut down the aggregate 
appropriations, and keep within the ability of the treasury to meet 
them. Now, sir, that was not because that Legislature was com¬ 
posed of inferior men, not at all. It was the most natural conse¬ 
quence that you ever find in the Legislature. The preceding Gov¬ 
ernor, it seems, had exerted his energies to accumulate all the 
money possible in the treasury and he had succeeded in getting a 
large amount of it with an increased amount of taxation, and there 
was a vast amount of money in the treasury, supposed to be much 
more than was needed, much more than would meet the ordinary 
wants of the State. Wherever that has occurred in the history of 
our government. State and Federal, wherever you pile up money 
in the treasury, the Legislative body that succeeds, that comes in 
next after that is understood—I don’t care how good the personnel 
of it is-—they always go in for making large appropriations, numer¬ 
ous appropriations. Why, sir, that has been the case in the Federal 
government. Whenever you want to find a vast amount of appro¬ 
priations made by the Congress of the United States, you will al¬ 
ways find it, when it is supposed there is an excess of revenues, 
surplus revenues in the treasury, more than the government needs, 
and to that I attribute the enthusiasm of the Legislature in making 
the appropriations in the aggregate probably a little too large. 
Now. this is a proper precaution. It is a proper limitation because 
these officers, the Auditor and Governor, are charged, it is their 
statutory dutv, the Auditor to inform the Governor and the Gov¬ 
ernor to inform the Legislature of the probable necessities and the 
amount of income necessary to meet it, or the amount of income 
with which they will have to deal in order to meet the necessities. 
Now, sir. it gives them no more power. Those officers are in the 
attitude where thev can give that information to the Legislature 
when no member of it has it or can have it. because he has not the 
opportunitv to get it. That is all of it. There is nothing in this 
that is at all dangerous. 1 think it is a very good provision, and 
the substitute offered by the delegate, General Jones, covers it com¬ 
pletely, and it is accepted and I do not see any room for speculation 
and I move the previous question upon the report of the committee 
and the amendment. 


MR PRTTUS—Please withdraw that for a moment. I desire 
to offer an amendment, which will not limit the Legislature to the 
specific vear for which the appropriation is made, but will prevent 
one Legislature from anticipating revenues of the other Legislature, 
and wdl give them authority to distribute the funds for the four 

years as they see fit. 

MR. OATES—Allow the Legislature to anticipate or pro¬ 
hibit? 



2424 


OFFICIAL PROCEEDINGS 


MR. PETTUS—To prohibit, I mean to say. I will ask the 
gentleman to withdraw his motion and allow the Clerk to read the 
amendment. 

MR. OA1 ES—Certainly, I have no objection to its being read. 

The Secretary read the amendment as follows: “During any 
regular session of the Legislature the aggregate appropriations 
made shall not exceed in amount the income from the revenues of 
the State available before the last day of the next regular session 
of the Legislature, as estimated by the Governor and Auditor." 

MR. OATES—I have great respect for the ingenuity and 
aptitude of the gentleman from Limestone, but I cannot see the 
necessity for it. I think it is clear and means that substantially 
without being tied up, especially as his amendment proposes. 

PETiLS—I suggest to the disinguished Chairman of 
the committee the amendment of the gentleman from Wilcox will 
prohibit the Legislature from appropriating for the four succeed¬ 
ing years any amount except the amount of revenue for that year 
as estimated by the Governor and Auditor. My proposition is 
that the great law-making body of this State should have the right 
to dispose of the revenues of this State for the ensuing four years 
as they see proper, and if there is a surplus in the next year after 
the Legislature adjourns or in any other one of the years, above 
the current expenses of the State government, they ought to have 
a right to appropriate that surplus in any one of the four years. 
The only legitimate reason for putting the Legislature in such a 
straight-jacket as this is to prevent them from anticipating the 
revenues of the next Legislature. 

MR. OATES—I do not like to cut off gentleman from their 
opportunities, but if that is in order I am willing to include it and 
will insist on my motion upon the section and amendments. 

THE PRESIDENT—The queston is on the substitute of the 
gentleman from Limestone to the amendment of the gentleman 
from Wilcox, and the gentleman from Montgomerv moves the 
previous question. 

MR. WATTS—I move, to lay the section and all the amend¬ 
ments on the table. 

MR. OATES—That is not in order. That has been done 
before and voted down. This amendment, at a former stage mo¬ 
tion was made to lay the section and pending amendments on the 
table, and that was voted down. 

THE PRESIDENT—The chair will hold that a motion to 
lay the section as reported by the committee and the amendment 
offered by the gentleman from Wilcox, as the chair now recollects 
has been voted down. 



2425 


CONSTITUTIONAL CONVENTION, 1901 
^ ^ 1 ^ There has been other business—another sec- 

tion offered. 

^ k TRhSIDIvN 1 The fact that there has been other busi¬ 
ness will not change it. If the gentleman will confine his motion 
to the substitute of the gentleman from Limestone it might be in 
order. 


MR. W A I IS No, sir; I want the whole thing laid on the 
table. 

1 HL PRLS1DLNT—The question is, shall the main question 
be now put? 


I he main question was ordered. The question then recurred 
on the substitute offered by the gentleman from Limestone, and a 
vote being taken the substitute was lost. 


The question then was on the substitute offered by the gentle¬ 
man from \\ ilcox, and on a division there were sixty-one ayes and 
twenty-one noes. 


MR. LONG (Walker)—I call for an aye and no vote. 

THE PRESIDENT—The ayes and noes are called for. Is the 
call sustained ? 


MR. CHAPMAN—I rise to a point of order. It is too late 
now to call for the ayes and noes—but still I have no objection. 

MR. LONG—I make the point of order that there is no quorum 
voting'. 

THE PRESIDENT—The question is on the motion of the 
gentleman from Walker for an aye and no vote. 

MR. LONG—My point of order is that no quorum voted, and 
I ask a verification of the vote by an aye and no vote. 

THE PRESIDENT—It appears that there are sixty-one ayes 
and twenty-one noes, and the substitute is adopted. The chair 
overrules the point of order that no quorum voted. It appears that 
a quorum did vote. 

MR. LONG—Is there no way to ascertain that fact? 

THE PRESIDENT—The vote show it. 

MR. LONG—There is no way to question the vote. 

THE PRESIDENT—The gentleman can question it. Does 
the gentleman desire to verify the vote? 

MR. LONG— Yes, sir; I do. 

THE PRESIDENT—The chair will submit the question to 
the Convention. As many as favor the adoption of the substitute 



2426 


OFFICIAL PROCEEDINGS 


will please rise and remain standing until they are counted. The 
question is on the substitute offered by the gentleman from Wilcox. 
All delegates are required to vote. 

MR. LONG—I call for an aye and no vote. 

THE PRESIDENT—The chair submitted the call of the gen¬ 
tleman for an aye and no vote to the Convention and the call was 
not sustained. 

A vote being taken, resulted in sixty-one ayes to sixteen noes. 

THE PRESIDENT—The chair decides that there are a suffi¬ 
cient number of delegates in the Convention who have declined to 
vote to make a quorum, and the substitute is adopted. The ques¬ 
tion now is on the section as amended. 

MR. O’NEAL (Lauderdale)—I ask for an aye and no vote on 
the adoption of the section. 

The call for an aye and no vote was sustained. 

On request of the gentleman from Jackson, the section as 
amended was again read by the clerk, 

MR. PETTUS—Is it open for discussion now? 

THE PRESIDENT—The previous question has been ordered. 

MR. LONG—I rise to a point of order. No quorum voted on 
the amendment, and it is claimed that it is adopted. I ask for a 
roll-call so that the amendment can be legally adopted. 

MR. CHAPMAN—The ayes and noes have been called on 
this vote and it will determine whether or not there is a quorum 
present. 

The result of the roll call was as follows: 

AYES. 


Messrs. President, 

Craig, 

Glover, 

A Itman, 

Cunningham, 

Graham, of Montgomery 

Barefield, 

Davis, of DeKalb, 

Graham, of Talladega, 

Bethune, 

deGraffenreid, 

Grayson, 

Boone, 

Duke, 

Greer, of Calhoun. 

Browne, 

Eley, 

Greer, of Perry, 

Burns, 

Eyster, 

Harrison, 

Bvars, 

Espy, 

Heflin, of Randolph, 

Cardon, 

Ferguson, 

Hodges, 

Chapman, 

Fitts, 

Howell, 

Cobb, 

Fletcher, 

Howze, 

Coleman, of Greene, 

Foster, 

Inge, 

Cornwall, 

Freeman, 

Jackson, 



CONSTITUTIONAL CONVENTION, 1901 


242 


Jenkins, 

Jones, of Wilcox, 
Kirk, 

Knight, 

Kyle, 

Leigh, 

Locklin, 

I,on^ (Walker), 

M aedonald, 

McMillan (Baldwin), 
M c M illan (Wilcox), 
M alone, 

M art in. 

Maxwell, 

Miller ( Wilcox), 

M oo<lv, 

M urpliree. 

XeSmith. 

Total—92 


Hanks. 

Heddow, 

Blackwell. 

Brooks, 

Bulger, 

Carmichael, of Colbert, 
Davis, of Etowah, 
Foshec, 

Haley, 

Hood, 

Total—30. 


Oates, 

Opp, 

1 ’aimer, 

Parker (Cullman), 
Parker ( Elmore), 
Pearce, 

Lilians, 

Pitts, 

Porter, 

1 ’rector, 

Keese, 

Keynolds (Henry), 
Rogers (Lowndes), 
Rogers (Sumter), 

Sam ford, 

Sanders, 

Sanford, 

Searcy, 

NOES. 

Jones, of Bibb, 

Jones, of Montgomery, 
Kirkland. 

Lomax, 

M err ill, 

Norman, 

O’Neal (Lauderdale), 
O’Neill (Jefferson), 
O’Rear, 

Pcttus, 


Sentell, 

Sloan, 

Smith (Mobile), 
Smith, Mac. A., 

Smith, Morgan M., 
Sorrell, 

Spragins, 

Stewart, 

Studdard, 

Tayloe, 

Vaughan, 

Whiteside, 

Williams (Barbour), 
Williams (Marengo), 
Wilson (Clarke), 
Wilson (Wash’gton). 
Winn, 


Reynolds (Chilton), 
Robinson, 

Sellieimer, 

Sollie, 

Spears, 

Thompson, 

Waddell, 

Watts, 

Weakley, 

White, 


ABSENT OR NOT VOTING. 


Almon. 

Ashcraft, 

Bartlett, 

Reavers, 

Burnett, 

Carmichael, of Coffee, 
Carnathon, 

Case, 

Cofer, 

Coleman, of Walker, 
Dent, 


Gilmore, 

Grant, 

Handley, 

Heflin, of Chambers, 
Henderson, 

Hinson, 

Jones, of Hale, 

King, 

Ledbetter, 

Long (Butler), 

Lowe (Jefferson), 


Lowe (Lawrence), 
Miller (Marengo), 
Morrisette, 

Mulkey, 

Norwood, 

Phillips, 

Renfro, 

Walker, 

Weatherly, 

Willet, 

Williams (Elmore), 


So the section as amended was adopted 



2428 


OFFICIAL PROCEEDINGS 


MR. COLEMAN (during the call of the roll)—I am willing 
to vote if I can be satisfied as to the substitute. I want to know 
what it means. As I understand it there may be a surplus in the 
treasury each year of $50,000 not appropriated, and it can be car¬ 
ried over four years, and there is no way of reaching it at all, and 
if that is what it means, I will vote aye. 

MR. BLACKWELL—The gentleman has not permission to 
explain his vote, and it is out of order. 

MR. COLEMAN—Suppose it is not all used up in one year— 

THE PRESIDENT—The gentleman from Morgan makes the 
point of order that it is not in order for a delegate to explain his 
vote without the permission of the Convention. 

MR. WHITE—I rise to a point of order. The gentleman 
from Greene is not explaining his vote, but explaining why he 
didn’t want to vote. 

MR. COLEMAN (Greene)—I vote aye, if it provides for the 
Legislature to use the money if there is a surplus carried over 
from year to year. 

THE PRESIDENT—Does the gentleman desire to have it 
read over again? 

MR. COLEMAN—Yes. 

The section as amended was again read by the Clerk. 

MR. COLEMAN—That is exactly what I said, if there is a 
surplus there, you cannot get at it in one hundred years. 

THE PRESIDENT—It is not in order to explain a vote. How 
does the gentleman vote? 

MR. COLEMAN—I will vote aye. 

MR. LONG (Walker)—I desire to change my vote from no 
to aye for the purpose of moving a re-consideration on tomorrow 
morning. 

MR. COLEMAN—I move to reconsider the vote by which the 
section was adopted. I do so for the purpose of offering an amend¬ 
ment authorizing the legislature to appropriate any surplus that 
may have accumulated in addition to the estimated revenues. If 
this Convention is satisfied, that the surplus, if any, should remain, 
is at the disposal of the legislature, why I would be glad to see the 
motion to reconsider voted down, but as I heard that section read 
it may accumulate there until the next Convention meet again. 

A VOICE—Four years? 



CONSTITUTIONAL CONVENTION, 1901 2429 

MR. COLEMAN—Four years don’t reach it, it will remain 
there until the next Convention meets to authorize the appropria- 
tion of it. 1 hat is the way it strikes me and that is the reason I 
hesitated to vote. Now, if I am mistaken in my construction, I 
would like for my motion to reconsider to be voted down, but if I 
am right, that is the condition, you will place the Treasury in, 
with any surplus that may accumulate there. 

MR. LONG (Walker)—It would take a suspension of the 
rules at this time to move to reconsider. 

1 HE PRESIDENT—The point of order is well taken. 

MR. COLEMAN—Then I move the suspension of the rules. 

I want the question settled and that is the only purpose I have in 
view. 

MR. PILLANS—Would it not be better to let it go over until 
tomorrow, and then bring in your amendment. 

MR. COLEMAN—I will let it go over. I give notice that I 
will make a motion in the morning to reconsider, and in the mean¬ 
time, we will have time to consider it. 

THE PRESIDENT—The Clerk will read Section 28. 

The Clerk read Section 28 as follows: 

Sec. 28. All stationery, printing, paper and fuel used in the 
legislative and other departments of government shall be furnished 
and the printing and distribution of laws, journals, department re¬ 
ports and all other printing and binding and repairing and fur¬ 
nishing the halls and rooms used for the meeting of the legislature 
and its committee shall be performed under contract, to be given 
to the lowest responsible bidder below a maximum price, and under 
such regulation as shall be prescribed by law; no member or officer 
of any department of the government shall be in any way interested 
in such contracts, and all such contracts shall be subject to the 
approval of the Governor, Auditor and Treasurer. 

MR. PILLANS—I have an amendment to offer. 

MR. CHAPMAN—Allow me to ask a question, whether or 
not there is a little mistake here in the fourth line as read by the 
Clerk, whether it is “committee” or “committees.” 

THE CLERK—It is “committees”—plural. 

MR. CHAPMAN—It is “committee” in my copy. 

The Clerk read the amendment offered by Mr. Pillans, as fol¬ 
lows : “Amend Section 28 by adding at the end thereof, the follow¬ 
ing words: ‘The legislature may, however, provide that for such 
supplies or printing no bid from any non-resident person or foreign 



2430 


OFFICIAL PROCEEDINGS 


corporation shall be considered* and by striking out the period at 
the end of the Section and inserting a semi-colon instead.” 

MR. P1LLANS—I have nothin# to say more than is said bv 
the amendment which is offered. The section as it is reported is a 
#ood section. It is in line with the requirement of the Federal 
government and State governments generally in all public con¬ 
tracts that they shall be given to the lowest responsible bidder, but 
it occurs to me in our experience in Alabama, particular in the 
matter of printing, recently, does not justify our making a hard 
and fast rule, that we shall give to the lowest bidder in Jackson¬ 
ville. Florida, in Nashville, Tennessee, or in buffalo. X. Y., the 
public printing, and send to these distant points the archives clear 
beyond the boundaries of the State. 1 confess if 1 were a member 
of the legislature, and the Constitution did not forbid it, and I were 
inspired by the very motives which inspired this Committee, I 
should, unless there were evidences that there was adequate print 
in# offices in the State, or their prices excessively high, 1 would be 
quite unwilling to let the printing go beyond the borders of the 
State. With the variety of industries and the number of cities and 
towns and printing houses in Alabama, and I speak of printing 
particularly because that is a matter that has come considerable 
under mv notice, it does seem to me that the legislature ought to 
be permitted to provide if it sees fit in its wisdom so to do from 
time to time either that the bidding may come from the entire 
I r nion or that it may be confined to the people who are domiciled 
in the State, and that is the object of the amendment. 

MR. JO NFS ( Montgomery)—Will the gentleman from Mobile 
permit me to ask a question. 

MR. PILLAXS—Certainly. 

MR. JONES-—I think it an excellent idea, but would it not 
be a good idea to put a provision in there in case of combination 
to put the prices up. In this case as it is now, it is the lowest 
bidder and there are only three or four in the State, and if thev 
combine the legislature is bound to take it at their prices. 

MK. PI LEANS I agree with the views of my distinguished 
friend, and I would be glad if an amendment could be offered such 
as suggested by the gentleman, but the amendment as I offered it 
does not undertake to legislate, but to enable the legislature to see 
it they can find a plan to confine it to the State, unless thev find 
it should go into the hands of a trust. It is not intended as legisla¬ 
tion but as fundamental law. 

Mr. Miller of Wilcox, here took the Chair. 

MR. REESE—A great deal has been said in this hall about 
the Legislature of this State. ] don’t believe that any State has 




CONSTITUTIONAL CONVENTION. HOI 


2431 


ever had better Legislatures than those of Alabama which have 
assembled in this historic hall. Take this body and surround it by 
the conditions and temptations that have confronted that body, 
and this Convention would be led along the same paths that the 
Legislature has traveled. 

MIL ESPY—1 arise to a point of order. The gentleman is 
not addressing himself to the question before the House. He is 
discussing the character of the Legislature. 

TIIK PR ESI I )1\\ T T PRO TKM -I will wait on the gentle¬ 
man a little longer. 

MIL R K KSK I do not admit the right of gentlemen to dic¬ 
tate* what I shall sav in this Convention. 1 am holding nivself 
>lriclly to tin* matter before this Convention. Here is a proposi¬ 
tion. and 1 -uppose this will he followed by other amendments to 
hamper and particularize the conditions tinder which the Legisla¬ 
ture shall make these contracts. This is a Constitutions Conven¬ 
tion. Mr. President. It is not a legislative body, and there are 
important duties that remain for a Legislature to perform, and 
this Convention should not usurp those functions. Mr. President, 
it would be a reflection upon the intelligence of the people of Ala¬ 
bama, and those who may conn* here in the future to honorable 
represent the State as they have in the past, to hamper and load 
them down with these conditions. 'Phis provision leaves to the 
Legislature some discretion, and 1 contend that they are equal to 
and will rise to the full measure of their duty. We do not know 
what the conditions of the future* may he. and therefore let them 
he left to the wisdom of the Legislature*. In conditions arise such 
as the gentleman from Moblie contends for, the Legislature in its 
intelligence and wisdom can provide for it. That body may per¬ 
haps have made some mistake in a recent printing of the Acts, but 
we all make mistakes. Mr. President, 1 am afraid that even this 
Convention before it shall have adjourned, will be charged with 
having made some mistakes, ami I believe we will make a mistake 
now, if we hamper down the Legislature with details which may 
he inconvenient and expensive to the State in the future. I now 
move the previous question on the pending amendment and the 
Section as reported by the Committee. 

MR. PRDDOW—I ask the gentleman to withdraw’ that just 
one moment. 

THK PRESIDENT PRO TKM—Hoes the gentleman yield? 

MR. REESE—I have make my motion. 

Upon a vote being taken, a division was called for, and by a 
vote of 49 ayes and 38 noes the main question was ordered. 

MR. BEDDOW—I desire to offer a substitute. 



2432 


OFFICIAL PROCEEDINGS 


MR. SAMFORD (Pike)—I object. I rise to a point of order. 
The previous question has been ordered, and after the previous 
question is ordered no substitute or amendment can be offered. 

THE PRESIDENT PRO TEM—The point of order is sus¬ 
tained. 

MR. O'NEAL—I would like to ask the Chairman of the Com¬ 
mittee a question for information. As I understand it this Section 
reported by the Committee is the exact Section found in the Con¬ 
stitution of 1875, is it not? 

MR. OATES—It is. 

MR. O'NEAL—Word for word, isn't it. 

MR. OATES—Yes, sir, and I will state in that connection in 
my absence, that it is so reported- 

MR. WADDELL—A point of order. The previous question 
has been ordered. 

MR. O'NEAL—Some gentlemen never want anybody to talk 
in this Convention blit themselves. 

MR. FITTS—I make the point of order that there is nothing 
in order, but a vote on the main question. 

THE PRESIDENT PRO TEM—The point of order is well 
taken. 

MR. SAMFORD (Pike)—I make the point of order that the 
Chairman of the Committee is entitled to close on this matter 
after the previous question is ordered. 

MR. LONG (Walker)—I make the point of order that the 
Chair itself has decided that the motion for the previous question 
w r as called. 

MR. FITTS—No he didn't. The previous question was or¬ 
dered. 

THE PRESIDENT PRO TEM—The point of order made 
by the gentleman from Pike is well taken. 

MR. O’NEAL—I rise to a point of order. The Chairman of 
the Committee has the right to close this debate after the previous 
question is ordered. 

THE PRESIDENT PRO TEM—That is what the Chair has 
decided. 

MR. BULGER—A parliamentary inquiry. I would like to 
know if the motion for a previous question extended further than 
the substitute. 



CONSTITUTIONAI, CONVENTION, 1901 


2433 


THE PRESIDENT PRO TEM—Only to the substitute. 

MR. REESE—The previous question was called on the Sec¬ 
tion and substitute. 

To which there were expressions of dissent. 

THE PRESIDENT PRO-TEM—The Chair understood the 
previous question to apply only to the substitute. 

MR. REESE—The motion applied to the pending amendment 
and the Section. 

THE PRESIDENT PRO TEM—The gentleman from Mont¬ 
gomery has the floor. 

MR. GREER (Calhoun)—A point of order. The Chairman of 
the Committee has a right to speak to the main question after the 
previous question is called, hut not to the substitute. 

MR. REESE—I ask for a reading of the stenographer’s notes. 

MR. JONES (Montgomery)—I desire to ask the Chairman a 
question, which he can answer later on, as I do not want to in¬ 
terrupt him. Is this Section not in the exact language of the Con¬ 
stitution, and under that did not the State have to send its printing 
to Florida because the Floridian was the lowest bidder? 

MR. OATES—In reply to that question I will state- 

MR. CHAPMAN—A parliamentary inquiry; Is the gentleman 
from Montgomery who is Chairman of the Committee, now speak¬ 
ing upon the amendment or on his right to close the debate on 
this question? 

MR. REESE—I rise to a question of information. What is 
the ruling of the Chair ? 

THE PRESIDENT PRO TEM—In the opinion of the Chair 
the previous question was ordered upon the substitute. 

MR. REESE—I ask for the reading of the stenographic re¬ 
port, as it will show what my motion was. 

MR. BEDDOW—I object. 

THE PRESIDENT PRO TEM—We will be governed by the 
reading of the Journal. 

MR. REESE—I ask for the reading of the Journal. 

MR. OATES—I think you will find that the delegate from 
Dallas moved the previous question on the section and pending 

amendment. . , 

The Journal was read, stating the motion to be for the previous 

question on the section and amendment. 



2434 


OFFICIAL PROCE1\ D IX0S 


MR. OATES—I have but little to say on this section, and by 
way of answer to the question of my colleague from Montgomery, 
if printing had not been given to a house in Jacksonville, Florida, 
not long since? I will say that such is my information, and further¬ 
more I heard a good deal of complaint about its being unsatisfac¬ 
tory. But the section requires not the letting of printing acts and 
Journals, etc., to any bidder, but to the lowest responsible bidder. 
Now, if those who have charge of the letting out of the printing 
do their duty they should have proper bonds and obligations from 
the lowest responsible bidder insuring that the work will be well 
done, and done in accordance with the law. I oppose for the com¬ 
mittee the amendment offered by the delegate from Mobile, only 
for the reason that the gentlemen who examine this will find that 
it leaves the power in the Legislature to regulate this matter. It is 
unnecessary to add any amendment. It is the section which we 
find in the existing Constitution, and it ought not to be amended. 
If it has been improperly or defectively executed, unless there is 
some internal fault in this section, and none occurs to me, vests the 
Legislature properly with the power, and if the executive officers 
do their duty under the provisions of the Constitution, it is as good 
a law as can be made upon that subject. I do not know of any¬ 
thing that is necessary to be added to this statement, and therefore 
will not consume further time. I am opposed to the amendment 
whether it be offered as a substitute or an ordinary amendment to 
the section reported by the committee. 

The question being upon the amendment offered by the gen¬ 
tleman from Mobile (Mr. Pillans) the vote being taken the amend¬ 
ment was lost. The question recurring upon the section as re¬ 
ported by the committee, upon a vote being taken the section was 
adopted. 

MR. BEDDOW—I voted aye on that proposition, and f give 
notice now that I will move a reconsideration of it at the morning- 
session tomorrow. 

MR. SAMFORD (Pike)—I move that the rules be suspended 
for the purpose of reconsidering it now. 

MR. LONG (Walker)—On that I call for the ayes and noes. 

The call was not sustained. Upon a viva voce vote being taken a 
division was called for. 

Mr. Samford (Pike) sought recognition. 

MR. BROOKS—I rise to a point of order. The vote has not 
been announced. 

MR. BEDDOW—I make the point of order that no quorum 
voted. 



CONSTITUTIONAL CONVENTION, 1901 


2435 


THE PRESIDENT PRO TEM.—Upon casting up the vote 
there are fifty-nine yeas and nineteen nays, exactly a quorum. 

MR. SAMFORD (Pike)—I move- 

MR. BEDDOW—I call for a verification of that vote. 

MR. SAMFORD (Pike)—I have the floor, and I move to re¬ 
consider the vote, and then I move to table the motion for a re¬ 
consideration. 

MR. WILSON (Washington)—I rise to a point of order. The 
rules require a two-thirds vote of the members present to suspend 
the rules. The roll call on the last vote showed about one hundred 
and thirty members present. 

To this there were loud expressions of dissent. 

THE PRESIDENT PRO TEM.—The question recurs upon a 
motion of the gentleman from Pike to reconsider the vote whereby 
Section 28 was adopted, and the motion to table the motion to 
reconsider. 

MR. BEDDOW—I make the point of order that he can’t 
make two motions at one time. 

MR. REESE—I move to table the motion of the gentleman 
from Pike to reconsider the vote by which the section was adopted. 

MR. OATES—The parliamentary rule of procedure is that a 
member can move to reconsider, and at the same time move to 
table that motion. It is a means of settling the question so that it 
cannot be brought up thereafter, and it is taken on one vote. 

THE PRESIDENT PRO TEM.—The question recurs upon 
the motion of the gentleman from Pike to reconsider the vote by 
which Section 28 was adopted, and the gentleman from Dallas 
moves to lay that motion upon the table. 

MR. GREER (Calhoun)—Upon that I call for the ayes and 
noes. 

The call was not sustained, and upon a viva voce vote the mo¬ 
tion to table was carried. 

Section 29 was read as follows: 

Sec. 29. All bills for raising revenue shall originate in the 
House of Representatives; but the Governor, Auditor, Treasurer 
and Attorney General shall, before each regular session of the Leg¬ 
islature, prepare a general revenue bill to be submitted to the Leg¬ 
islature for its action, and the Secretary of State shall have print¬ 
ed for the use of the Legislature a sufficient number of copies of 
the bill so prepared which the Governor shall transmit to the House 
of Representatives as soon as organized. The Senate may propose 



2436 


OFFICIAL, PROCKKDINC.S 


amendments to revenue bills. No appropriation or revenue bill 
shall be passed during the last five days of the session. 

MR. OATES—My recollection is that “the treasurer should 
not have been included in this section, and 1 therefore ask unani¬ 
mous leave to amend by striking out the word “Treasurer” and 
leave it reading "The Governor, Auditor and Attorney General. 

There being no objection the amendment was allowed. 

MR. VAUGHAN—1 have a substitute for the section. 

The substitute was read as follows: All bills for raising reve¬ 
nue shall originate in the House of Representatives, but the Sen¬ 
ate may propose amendments as in other bills. 

MR. VAUGHAN-—Section 29 as reported bv the committee, 
it seems to me, puts it in the power or in the hands of the Gov¬ 
ernor. Auditor and the several other officials to draft the revenue 
law, to which the Senate may propose amendments, but taking 
from the House the power to originate the bill, or propo ing 
amendments thereto. The substitute 1 have offered is simply the 
section of the old Constitution on the -object, and 1 hope it will h< 
adopted. 

MR. BROOKS—I was going to offer an amendment in line 
with what the gentleman has already proposed, and desire to >a\ 
in that connection that the difference between the present Cornu i- 
tution and the one proposed by the committee is found in the 
words just after the word “representative" in the first line, “all 
bills for raising revenue shall originate in the House- of Repre¬ 
sentatives.” So much is in the present Constitution, and it goe> 
on to say, “The Governor, Auditor and Attorney General shall, 
before each regular session of the Legislature, prepare a general 
revenue bill to be submitted to the Legislature for its action, and 
the Secretary of State shall have printed for the use of the Legisla¬ 
ture a sufficient number of copies of the bill so prepared, which 
the Governor shall transmit to the House of Representatives as 
soon as organized.” That is the new part. Now. sir, T submit 
that we have already enlarged the power of the Executive of this 
State sufficiently by constitutional amendments so far. I am one 
of those who believe that we ought to keep the three co-ordinate 

branches of government — legislative, judicial and executive_as 

separate and distinct as possible. Now, this proposed amendment 
creates a sort of imperium imperio. It creates a third legislative 
house, the members of which will be influenced by a desire to car¬ 
ry through their pet measure on the subject of revenue, whatever 
it may be. I submit that Representatives in the General Assembly 
are able enough and have sufficient knowledge of the wants of the 
State to be able to formulate a revenue bill, without the assistance 
of this new board. As a matter of course, the Executive is ex¬ 
pected, and at every session does send in his message containing 



CONSTITUTIONAL CONVENTION, 1901 


2437 


his suggestions as to matters of revenue, but it remains for the 
Representatives of the people to formulate the bill. Those Repre¬ 
sentatives have before them not only the Auditor's report and the 
1 reasurer’s report, but they can go from time and consult with all 
(he executive officers, and they are perfectly able, without any sug¬ 
gestions from this third house, who will be influenced, as I say, by 
desire to perpetuate or carry through their particular ideas, to 
formulate such a bill as will he necessary for the wants of their 
constituents. Therefore, 1 am opposed to the proposition contain¬ 
ed in the section reported by the committee. 

The President resumed the chair, 

MR. LOXC (Walker) — 1 rise to support the amendment of¬ 
fered by the gentleman from Dallas, or the substitute which leaves 
it exactly like it i> in the old Constitution. T ask the members on 
this floor to think what the}” are doing. We have just passed a 
section here which takes away from the Legislature every right or 
power on this earth, and says that they shall be governor exclu¬ 
sively and solely by the estimates made by the Governor and Au¬ 
ditor. If the Governor and Auditor of the State of Alabama esti¬ 
mate the revenues of the State for the next two years at only S10. 
although there may he a million and a half in the treasure, the 
Legislature cannot appropriate one dollar of that money. 

MR. CHAPMAN—I rise to a point of order. 

THE PRKSTDKNT—The gentleman will state the point of 
order. 

MR. CHAPMAN—The remarks of the gentleman are not ger¬ 
mane to the subject before the Convention. 

MR. LONG—If the gentleman will listen to me, I will trv to 
enlighten him on the subject. 

THE PRESIDENT—It seems to the chair that the gentleman 
is in order and the chair will overrule the point of order. 

MR. LONG—Now Mr. President, I mentioned that fact to 
show von that we are giving the Governor and Auditor of Ala¬ 
bama more power than the Czar of Russia has. There is not a 
civilized government on this earth that takes away from the legis¬ 
lative body the right to appropriate money and we are asked in 
this bill in the very next section here, to provide that all bills for 
raising revenue shall originate in the House of Representatives, and 
just listen how it reads: “Rut the Governor, Auditor and Attor¬ 
ney-General, shall, before the regular session of the Legislature, 
prepare a general revenue bill to be submitted to the Legislature 
for its action, and the Secretary of State shall have printed for the 
use of the Legislature a sufficient number of copies of the bill so 
prepared which the Governor shall transmit to the House of Rep- 



2438 


OFFICIAL Pk<ICKF.DI NGS 


resentatives as soon as organized. The Senate may propose amend¬ 
ments to revenue bills. One hundred and five Representative- 
in the House cannot propose an amendment. They sit here like 
dummies and tools, and fools. I ask this Convention to pause and 
think what they are doing. You have abused the Legislature ever 
since we have been in session. Has the time come when the Gov- 


ernor shall be President, shall be chairman of the Wavs and Mean- 
Committee of the House, and is he to have all the power and to be 
the only wise man in this State? I am ready now to adopt a sec¬ 
tion to provide that no Legislature shall ever again meet in tlu- 
State of Alabama. That it shall be organized and mav be called 
together by the Governor, but it shall have no power on this earth 
except to call a Constitutional Convention. That is exactly what 
you do when you adopt this section. Do you propose to >av that 
the people of this State shall not manage their own affairs? We 
say in one section that the revenues shall he estimated and that the 
Legislature must take that as their medicine, and here in Section 
“■L y nn say that the Governor and Auditor shall prepare the rev ¬ 
enue bill, and that the House shall not even have the- right to offer 
a single amendment. What is the use of v„ur Legislature if von 
have that? Has it come to pass that we are unwilling to trust tin- 
people of the State of Alabama? Has our government become so 
con upt that the Legislature of Alabama cannot be trusted? Shall 
we surrender all power to the Governor? If so, let us go to him 
on oi„- knees, and let the Legislature go to him and say, “Oh, Most 
excellent and Mighty Governor, give us the right to appropriate 
$10 to the common schools." Go to him and say . “Oh. Most ex¬ 
cellent and Mighty Governor, we. the Representatives of the peo¬ 
ple ot Alabama, beg you. sir. to let us frame a revenue bill." Go 
to him and say. “Give us the right to regulate the whiskev license- 
m the State of Alabama." for you even denv that right in' this sec¬ 
tion. You silence the voice of the Legislature completedv. You 
make them sit here and appropriate monev. but vou give them no 
power to raise money, except to pass a revenue'bill prepared for 
than, to which they must not even offer an amendment It i- 
time that the members on this floor were thinking what thev were 
( o |n s- a ' e y °J- 1 so far forgotten yourselves, and are your minds 
so poisoned against the Legislature, that you think they are all 
rascals and will be rascals for a hundred vears to come? I be- 
lieve that this Convention will lay upon the table the section re¬ 
ported by the committee, and adopt the substitute offered bv the 
ftf n fro!n , Dallas, which has been the fundamental law of 

t is State, as a landmark, ever since it has been a State. It is an 
old land-mark in every State of the Union. There has never been 

TbJm iq* * mea T sure as /his proposed in any Constitution of the 
a es ’ . t says that you cannot even offer an amendment 
to a revenue bill, but it must be drawn up by the Governor. At¬ 
torney General and Auditor before the Legislature meets. What 



CONSTITUTIONAL CONVKNTION, 1901 


2439 


do you want with a Legislature? Do you need them? You say to 
them when they come here, that thus far you can go and no farther, 
and you absolutely put in the hands of three men the exclusive 
right of raising every dollar of revenue in the State of Alabama. 

MR. O’NEAL—I will suggest an amendment and read it t<> 
see if it meets with your approval: The Governor, Auditor, Treas¬ 
urer and Attorney General shall be ex-officio members of the leg¬ 
islature and shall direct and control all legislation. 

MR. LONG — Mr. President, T am opposed to that, unless 
they are elected as members of the legislature by the people. They 
have no right to be ex-officio members of the legislature. (Laugh¬ 
ter.) f now move if no one else wishes to speak on this subject, 
the previous question on the amendment. 

Mr. Chapman sought recognition. 

MR. LONG (Walker)—I will withdraw my motion, as I see 
the distinguished gentleman rise. They all want to defend it. and 
1 want them if they can enlighten the people of Alabama as to the 
reason why they put a measure so radical as this in the Constitu¬ 
tion. 


MR. CHAPMAN — Since the speech of my distinguished 
friend from Walker, I am afraid that thev have bored an oil well 
up in his county, and they have found combustible oil, and he is 
imbued with tlie spirit of combustion. It does seem to me that my 
good friend is a little off, either on oil or on this section. Now. 
Mr. President, and gentlemen of the Convention, what does this 
section provide? I hope that the reading of it will be oil on the 
troubled waters with my distinguished friend from Walker. It 
reads: 

Sec. 29. All bills for raising revenue shall originate in the 
House of Representatives; but the Governor, Auditor, Treasurer 
and Attorney General shall, before each regular session of the leg¬ 
islature, prepare a general revenue bill to be submitted to the leg¬ 
islature for its action, and the Secretary of State shall have print¬ 
ed for the use of the legislature a sufficient number of copies of 
the bill so prepared which the Governor shall transmit to the House 
of Representatives as soon as organized. The Senate may pro¬ 
pose amendment to revenue bills. No appropriation or revenue bill 
shall be passed during the last five days of the session. 

I believe, Mr. President, that I was the originator of the idea 
and it was for this reason, every man in this Convention who has 
ever been in the legislature, or who knows anything about its prac¬ 
tices, its habits, and its rules, knows that the most difficult thing 
is to get a general revenue bill promptly and properly acted upon. 
The most difficult thing is to get a general revenue bill prepared. 
I remember distinctly that during the last General Assembly, dur- 



2440 


OFFICIAL PROCEEDINGS 


ing the fall, a committee was appointed to prepare a general reve¬ 
nue bill, that was done in November, and what was the result of 
it, a resolution was adopted, authorizing that committee to sit dur¬ 
ing the recess. That Committee had from in November until in 
February to prepare a bill. 

MR. BULGER—The gentleman appears to be familiar with 
the origin of the section, and I would like to ask if the section re¬ 
quires the legislature to enact a revenue law recommended by the 
Governor and Auditor. 

MR. CHAPMAN—Not a bit of it. 

MR. BROOKS—Do I understand the gentleman from Sum¬ 
ter to say that a resolution was adopted at the last session of the 
legislature authorizing the Ways and Means Committee to sit dur¬ 
ing recess? 

MR. CHAPMAN—Oh, no; I did not say that. 

MR. SANFORD (Montgomery) — I would like to ask the 
gentleman this question: The first section here says that all bills 
for the raising of revenue shall originate in the House of Repre¬ 
sentatives. To originate it must have its origin or beginning, and 
how can it originate in the Legislative Department if it is prepared 
in the Executive Department? 

MR. CHAPMAN—It is not prepared there. I want to explain 
to the gentleman exactly how that it. We know that the prepara¬ 
tion of a general revenue bill is the most difficult of all bills that 
are presented in the legislature, it requires more time, more talent, 
more investigation, and more study than any other bill that is pre¬ 
sented to the legislature. Now, I was interrupted, when I was 
speaking about the last lession of the legislature. At the last ses¬ 
sion of the legislature the general revenue bill was not presented 
until about ten or fifteen days before the legislature closed, and 
what was the result of it? It was not considered by a single man 
in the legislature, except the five members who eventually had to 
be appointed to determine what we should pass, and we sat here. 
I among the other mummies—I was among them—we sat here 
and intrusted to that committee of five, within fifteen days of the 
close of the session, what we should pass, and they went down 
into the committee room, or somewhere else, I don’t know where, 
and they brought up a bill of about three hundred sections, in¬ 
volving the State and the people of the State, and we did not know 
what was in it, and I don’t know until this day, because the Acts 
have not yet come out. I do not know what was in that bill, and 
yet I voted for it, and all the balance of us did. My good friend 
over there, and my friends all around us here, voted for it under 
the same circumstances. Now, this section is simply directory. 
It is simply advisory, and nothing more. It says that all bills for 



CONSTITUTIONAL CONVENTION, 1901 


2441 


raising revenue shall originate in the House of Representatives. 
Now, I will have my distinguished friend from Montgomery to un¬ 
derstand that the duty imposed upon the Governor, the Auditor 
and Attorney General is not the origination of the bill, but it is do¬ 
ing nothing more than the Governor has done for fifty years, ad¬ 
vising the Legislature as to the finances of the State, that is all it 
does, and all it proposes to do, but we know this- 

THE PRESIDENT—The time of the gentleman has expired. 

MR. LONG (Walker)—I move that he be allowed to complete 
his sentence, and not be cut off in the middle of it. 

MR. CHAPMAN—If my time is up, Mr. President, all that I 
can do is to pray to the Lord to give me time in the next world to 
finish on this. I have not and cannot within ten minutes possibly 
reach the merits of this Section. It is purely advisory and nothing 
more. 

MR. LOMAX—I submit that the substitute offered by the 
gentleman from Dallas (Mr. Vaughan) for this Section ought to 
be adopted. There is no necessity for this. It is a mere matter of 
suggestion on the part of the Governor and the other State of¬ 
ficers, and there is no necessity in the Constitution, because the 
Governor Iras it now, and will have it under this Constitution, to 
make suggestions as to a revenue bill, if he sees fit to do so. It is 
a dangerous innovation upon the principles of American govern¬ 
ment. We have it from the English Constitution, and in every 
American Constitution, and in the Constitution of the United 
States, that measures for the raising of revenue must originate in 
the House of Commons, or in the House that comes from the peo¬ 
ple. which is the House of Representatives under our system of 
government. Now to say in our Constitution that the Governor, 
the Auditor, and the Attorney General, or any other officer of the 
State, shall prepare and present to the Legislature a revenue bill, 
in my judgment seriously encroaches upon the rights of the peo¬ 
ple in this direction. It is utterly unrepublican. The power of 
suggestion carries with it the powder of persuasion, and the power 
of persuasion carries with it the power of threat, and the Governor 
might come to the General Assembly, and hold it by the throat and 
say if you do not pass my revenue law, your bills will either be 
pigeon-holed or be vetoed in the Executive Office. Are you pre¬ 
pared to put in a Constitution which will last twenty-five or fifty 
years so dangerous an innovation upon the rights of the people? 
We have made changes enough already We have changed the bi¬ 
ennial session of the Legislature. We have taken away the right 
of the people ever two years to change their Representatives, and 
now you propose to come in and say to this Governor that you 
put it in his powder for four years to say here is the revenue bill that 
I have prepared, adopt it, or refuse to adopt it at your peril. 



2442 


O FF I Cl AI. PROC K HI >1N < '* S 


We cannot defend these changes and these innovations before 
the people. They are not expecting them. They were not demand¬ 
ing them, so far as my information goes, and I had something to 
do with the canvass that preceded the calling of this Convention, 
and I tell you when you make innovations of so serious a nature, 
you cannot successfully defend them before the people who are 
watchful and anxious as to what the work of this Convention will 
do. The legislative power ought to be a separate and distinct pow¬ 
er; there ought not to be put into the hands of the Executive of 
Alabama anything which encroaches in the slightest degree upon 
the right of the people’s representatives to say what their law> 
shall be. By this amendment you put the hands of the Executive 
upon the many strings of government when the English idea and 
the American idea has always been to keep the hands of the Ex¬ 
ecutive away from them and to put them into the hands of the 
people. 

MR. SOLLIE—Will it not strike down the system of checks 
and balances which has always been at the foundation of our (Gov¬ 
ernment in America? 

MR. LOMAX—In my judgment that would be its tendency. 
It says he may suggest it merely. That is all right. The lan¬ 
guage sounds innocent enough. 

MR. MACDONALD—You say it is undemocratic and unwise 
to put an obligation upon the Governor to make suggestions to 
the General Assembly? 

MR. LOMAX—No sir, I do not; on the contrary 1 said that 
the Governor now had the power to make suggestions. 

MR. MACDONALD—Is it not his duty to make them? 

MR. LOMAX—Yes, it is his duty and he has the power to 
make it, but it don t say he has the power to make a revenue bill 
and to bring it into the House of Representatives and say you must 
adopt it or you can’t get any legislation through. 

MR. O’NEAL—He prepares laws for the Legislature. 

MR. LOMAX—He prepares them for the Legislature? 

MR. CHAPMAN—Does this Section say that? 

MR. LOMAX—No, sir, but I say that is the tendency and 
natural consequence of it, and I appeal to this Convention not to 
put such power into the hands of the Executive that wili defeat 
an expression of the will of the people as shown in the representa¬ 
tive body of the General Assembly. Keep your departments sep¬ 
arate and distinct. Reserve the monuments of liberty, and your 
people will bless you rather than curse you when you go to your 
homes. (Applause). * y 



CONSTITUTIONAL CONVKNTION, 1901 


2443 


MR. SAMKJRl) (Pike)—I desire to add a few simple words 
in advocacy of the substitute for this section, and in aid of the rea- 
>on so eloquently put by the gentleman from Montgomery. Every 
one who is at all familiar with the workings of our State govern¬ 
ment, and when I say our State government, I suppose it applies to 
every State government in America, that the Governor, as a gen¬ 
eral rule, has wonderful power and influence over a great number 
of the members. Now, place in the Constitution of this State a 
sll R£ es P° n from the Convention, if you merely call it a suggestion 
but give the Governor, in connection with other State officers, the 
authority to draft revenue bills for the purpose of running the gov¬ 
ernment during his administration, and you place in his hands a 
power that is dangerous in the extreme, and I submit to this Con¬ 
vention that they arc drifting away from the land-marks of our 
forefathers. 1 he people will come together in their General As¬ 
sembly once in four years, and be met with a budget prepared bv 
the Governor of the State, which budget will be submitted to the 
General Assembly, and the General Assembly will be required and 
urged, and forced almost, to submit to the revenue bill as prepared 
by the Governor, as to what is estimated as necessary for its needs, 
and I sav to the Convention that it is a proposition—think of it 
as you please—that you can never defend before the people of the 
State of Alabama. The members in the Lower House of the Gen¬ 
eral Assembly are supposed to be the representatives directly from 
the people. It is the House, in governments like ours, which 
should govern the expenditures, because they are the representa¬ 
tives of the people. 

MR. RORINSON—Would not the Governor that frames the 
revenue bills be out of office when the Legislature is in session? 

MR. SAM FORD (Pike)—I don't know whether he will or 
not. under the Constitution we are framing, for God knows where 
we are going to, or where we are to quit at the rate we have been 
going for the past two years. 

MR. O'NEAL—In this section, when the Governor and Au¬ 
ditor submit their revenue bill, is not the Legislature bound either 
to pass it, or to reject it? Is there any authority for the Legisla¬ 
ture to amend it? They are bound to take action, and don't that 
mean that they must adopt or reject it, and that they have not the 
power of amendment? 

MR. SAMKORD (Pike)—Under the provisions of this section, 
it does occur to me that the revenue bill will absolutely be pre¬ 
pared by this committee appointed by this Constitutional Conven¬ 
tion for submission to the General Assembly. They may propose 
amendments, but the right of amendment is left to a limited ex¬ 
tent— 



2444 


OFFICIAL PROCEEDINGS 


MR. CHAPMAN—Is there anything- here in this section to 
prevent the Legislature from absolutely rejecting the suggestion 
made by the Governor, and are there men in Alabama more cap¬ 
able of framing a revenue bill than the Governor, Auditor and At¬ 
torney General? 

MR. SAM FORD (Pike)—I will answer the gentleman: The 
people of this government from the time of the foundation of this 
nation up to the present time, have always considered that the 
Lower House of Representatives was the only place for the origi¬ 
nation of a revenue bill. They do not elect the Governor for that 
purpose; they do not elect the Auditor for that purpose, but for 
other duties of State, and they have always maintained that the 
right to levy taxes upon the people should remain in their Repre¬ 
sentatives in the House, which is supposed to be the closest to the 
people. I will not draw inviduous comparisons between the high 
offices of the State and the members of the General Assembly, that 
have been selected by the people. It is not necessary to do so, and 
in answer to your other question, it seems from this section that 
they must either receive it as a whole or reject it as a whole, and 
that is the only option left to them. I respectfully submit to this 
Convention that we ought not to go in this direction. We ought 
not to adopt the section reported by the committee, but we should 
adopt the substitute as proposed by the gentleman from Dallas. 

MR. MACDONALD—When the Committee on Legislation 
adopted this section, they did not anticipate any such bitter oppo¬ 
sition as has been developed on the floor of this Convention. Thev 
had not the slightest idea they would be met by the tornado from 
Walker, the earthquake from Montgomery and the cyclone from 
Pike. 

It seems to me if you carefully consider this section, it is en¬ 
tirely free from the objections that have been urged to it here. 
We have been told with great force and fury that it was an in¬ 
fringement upon the rights of the people and a departure from the 
theories of our fathers. What do we find in Section 11 of Article 
V of the section? The Governor shall from time to time give the 
General Assembly information on the state of government and 
recommend to their consideration such measures as he may deem 
expedient at the commencement of each session of the Legislature, 
etc. Is that any tyranny? 

MR. SAMFORD (Pike) — I will ask the gentleman from 
Montgomery if he finds anything in the section which he has just 
read which permits the Governor or any other State officer, outside 
of the General Assembly, to prepare a general revenue bill for the 
levying of taxes upon the people? 

MR. MACDONALD—Of course I do not, and what is the 
purpose of the question? What is the significance of it? If he 



CONSTITUTIONAL CONVENTION, 1901 


2445 


recommend a measure in the General Assembly, and it is made his 
duty to recommend the measure, how much better it would be to 
put it in correct and proper form for passage? Gentlemen, is it 
any tyranny, when the obligation of this duty is put upon the Gov¬ 
ernor in the Constitution as it now stands, and by the section 
suggested by the committee, it is put upon the Governor, Auditor 
and Attorney General, and to do what, Mr. President, to present 
a measure to the Legislature which they must take as it is offered. 
Not by any means. It requires the wildest exercise of imagination, 
and not reason, to say that because the Governor, Auditor and At¬ 
torney General shall present to the Legislature in the shape of a 
bill, knowledge, experience and wisdom they have as to these par¬ 
ticular questions. No men are better able to form a conclusion 
than they are. because it is made their duty to prepare such a 
measure and to present it to the General Assembly, submitting it 
to them as any other bill is submitted. They say that the Legisla¬ 
ture is bound hand and foot and cannot amend it. Where does 
the gentleman get that idea that it cannot be amended by the Gen¬ 
eral Assembly? From what phraseology of this section, or from 
what reasoning applicable to it, do they get that idea? It has to 
be presented as any other bill. It has to go through the same 
methods for passage as any other bill, and it is subject to amend¬ 
ment and subject to absolute rejection, just as any other measure 
that is submitted to them. 

MR. SOLLIE—I would like to ask the gentleman if the pro¬ 
vision contained in this section is not in substance the origination 
of a revenue bill, and if there is any State in the American Union 
or any people among the English speaking nations, in which it is 
not left to the popular representative body of the people to origi¬ 
nate legislative bills. 

MR. MACDONALD—No. sir. this is not the origination of a 
bill and more than a bill which is written in my office and brought 
up to the Legislature could be said to have originated in any office. 
The origination of a bill is when it is presented by some member 
of the House to the House, and then it comes as a bill which has 
been framed by men whose position peculiarly qualified them to 
get up and prepare a proper measure. 

MR. LONG (Walker)—I understood the gentleman to say 
that this was not a bill to be framed by the Governor, etc. 

MR. MACDONALD—It is a measure to be prepared by them. 

MR. LONG (Walker)—It say it is a revenue bill. 

MR. MACDONALD—It may be called that, but it does not 
become a bill until it is introduced in the House. 

MR. BOONE—I desire to offer a substitute for the substi¬ 


tute. 



2446 


OFFICIAL PROCEEDINGS 


The substitute was read as follows: 

All bills for the raising’ of revenue shall originate in the House 
of Representatives. The Governor, Auditor and Attorney General 
shall, before the regular session of the Legislature, prepare a Gen¬ 
eral Revenue Bill, to be submitted to the Legislature for its ap- 
and the Secretary of State shall have printed for the use 
of the Legislature a sufficient number of copies of the bill for its 
use, which the Governor shall transmit to the House of Repre¬ 
sentatives as soon as organized, to be delivered to or used as the 
House may elect. The Senate may propose amendments to the 
revenue bill. No appropriation or revenue bill shall pass during 
the last five days of the session. 

MR. LOMAX—I rise to a point of order. You cannot offer 
a substitute for a substitute. 

MR. BOONL—I offer it as an amendment to the substitute. 

MR. LOMAX—I submit that it is a substitute and not an 
amendment. 

Indefinite leave of absence was granted to Mr. Byars. 

The hour of 6 o clock having arrived, the Convention there¬ 
upon adjourned. 


CORRECTIONS. 

In remarks of Mr. O’Neal on forty-seventh dav, note following- 
corrections : 

In second column, first page, thirty-second line from bottom 
ot page, read “never” instead of “ever.” 

“I,, . In t S e c on d column, thirtieth line from bottom of page, read 

« ,l n . thirfl column - thirty-eighth line from bottom of page, read 
and between “presented” and “every.” 

„ column, forty-sixth line from bottom of page, read 

will instead of “would.” 

In fourth column, eighty-sixth line from bottom of page read 
induce instead of “drag.” 

( In fourth column, ninety-fifth line from bottom of page read 
cent per cent.” instead of “percentum.” 

In third column, seventh line from top of page, read “other” 
between “every” and “alternate.” 



CONSTITUTIONAL CONVENTION, 1901 


2447 


In remarks of Mr. Rogers (Sumter): 

MR. ROGERS (Sumter)—The suggestion made comes from 
a mind that is unable to grasp the first rudiments of the funda¬ 
mental of government. Suppose I were to say to a doctor, “I don't 
want you to give my child a bottle of quinine at a single dose." 
Would he be fool enough to think I was arguing against quinine 
as a medicine? 

They should be lifted above all considerations and be able to 
pass upon these things like it was said of Job of old, when he sat 
in the market place, “righteousness clothed him there and justice 
was a robe and a diadem." 


FORTY-NINTH DAY 


MONTGOMERY, ALA., 
Friday, July 19, 1901. 

The Convention met pursuant to adjournment, was called to 
order by the President, and opened with prayer by the Rev. C. B. 
McDaniel as follows: 

Almighty God, it is a good thing to give thanks unto Thee, 
and to sing praises unto Thy name. O, most High, to show' forth 
Thy loving kindness in the morning, and Thy faithfulness every 
night. We praise Thee for the refreshing showers of rain. We 
praise Thee that Thou has blessed us in basket and in store. We 
praise Thee for civil and religious liberty. We praise Thee for the 
gift of Thy Son, our Savior. We beseech Thee to help Thy ser¬ 
vants to do the work which will bear witness to Thee; help them 
to w'ork while it is day, for the night cometh when no man can 
work. We pray Thee to bless the homes w T e represent. W r e com¬ 
mend one another to Thy tender care. Thou know'est how frail 
we are. Thou art not only able to keep us from failing, but from 
falling; Thou art able to present us faultless at last. Pardon our 
sins. Deliver us from evil. This we ask in the name of Christ, 
our Savior. Amen. 

Upon the call of the roll 110 delegates responded to their 
names. 

Mr. Merrill in the chair. 

MR. deGRAFFENREID—I rise to a question of personal 
privilege. The stenographic report incorrectly reports some re¬ 
marks that I made on yesterday but I do not want to take up the 




2448 


OFFICIAL FROCK FI >1 \ 0S 


time of the House in correcting these remarks now, and I will ask 
leave to be allowed to write out what I did say and hand it up to 
the secretary so that the correction may appear in tomorrow’s 
report. 

There being no objection leave was granted. 

Leaves of absence were granted Mr. Waddell and Mr. Kirk 
land and Mr. Ledbetter for Saturday. Mr. Porter for Saturday, 
Monday and Tuesday next. 

MR. WATTS—1 rise to a question of personal privilege. Sev¬ 
eral clays ago in the discussion of a measure upon the floor of this 
House I asked the question of one of the speaker* whether the 
Tax Collector of Dallas County had not deposited money of the 
State in the Commercial Hank of Selma, and having lost it, applied 
to the Legislature for relief, and the bill was vetoed. 1 am in¬ 
formed that the information upon which l asked that question was 
erroneous, and 1 feel perhaps an injustice might have been done 
the Tax Collector of Dallas in my question; and therefore I desire 
to disclaim such intention and to state that f am satisfied that 
the information upon which 1 asked it was erroneous. 

The Committee on Journal reported that they had examined 
the journal for the forty-eighth day <>i the Convention and found 
the same to be correct. And upon motion the report of the Com¬ 
mittee on Journal was adopted. 

MR. COLEMAX (Greene)—[ l>elie\e this is the proper time 
to bring up a motion for the reconsideration oi a section that was 
adopted late yesterday, and so I would like to proceed with it. 

THE PRESIDED I PRO 'I EM—The gentleman will suspend 
until after the roll call. 1 he proper time tor that question to come 
up is immediately after the roll call. The Chair is in error and the 
gentleman will proceed. 


MR COLEMAN (Greene) —1( the delegates will look at the 
sixth column of the stenographic report thev will see the section 
as it was adopted yesterday afternoon here about midwav it reads 
as follows: During- any regular session of the Legislature the 
appropriations for each four years before the next meeting of the 
Legislature shall not exceed m amount the income from the reve- 

Ev e t S J r f °[ f C r ° f .* aid - vears respectively, as estimated 

by the Governor and Auditor. I hesitate,1 to vote because it was 
my opinion that the proper construction to he placed noon that 
section excluded the authority of the Legislature to a ronriaJe 
any surplus that might be fonntl i„ the treasure. After a more 
careful exammat.on my conclusion was correct. Read it lor your' 
selves and you will see that the Legislatures has no authority to 
” a t k VaPproprtations at all at any time other than those esth 
mated by the Governor and Auditor. Now if the revenues should 



CONSTITUTIONAL CONVENTION, 1901 


2449 


exceed that estimate year by year for the four years, when a new 
Legislature might be convened, and for all time, it has no authority 
to make any appropriation of any surplus that might accumulate. 

I gave notice that I would move for a reconsideration for the pur¬ 
pose of enabling the Legislature to appropriate any money that 
might be accumulated and in accordance with that motion have 
prepared an amendment to meet the views of certain gentlemen in 
regard to the Capitol. It reads in this way: “To amend Section 
17 by adding to this section the following: ‘Any surplus that may 
he in the State Treasury provided if from any cause it becomes 
necessary to rebuild the Capitol of the State, the Legislature is 
authorized to make such appropriations as may be required.” 

1 do not anticipate that any such emergency will arise, and 
according to my opinion there will be plenty of money in the treas¬ 
ury for such purpose; but to meet the remotest contingency that 
might happen, that amendment has been added to the one I propose 
to make. I therefore move that Section 27, as adopted, be recon¬ 
sidered that 1 may offer this amendment. 

MR. OATES—I cannot share in the apprehensions of the dele¬ 
gate just addressed to the Convention. His apprehension seems 
to be in the first place that the Legislature cannot appropriate be- 
vond the estimate made by the Governor and the Auditor, as for 
the future incomes, the estimates made by those officers fixes a 
point beyond which the aggregate appropriations cannot go. Now 
his other apprehension is that if a surplus accumulates in the 
Treasury that under this provision there will he no power to ap¬ 
propriate it. Why, sir, the delegate only misconceives the limita¬ 
tions fixed by this section. It is to prevent the Legislature from 
appropriating in excess of the income; and if there he an accumu¬ 
lated surplus it will be because the income is greater than the 
appropriations. 

MR. WALKER—Will the gentleman permit an interruption? 

MR. OATES—Certainly. 

MR. WALKER—Suppose that surplus is received from reve¬ 
nues of a year preceding the current year, how can you appro¬ 
priate it? 

MR. OATES—That don’t make a bit of difference. There is 
nothing in this section that prevents such action upon the part of 
the Legislature. It is to keep them from going beyond the income 
of each year. There is nothing in it that prevents them from ap¬ 
propriating any amount of surplus that may have accumulated. 
The gentleman cannot point out a word in the section that has 
such an operation or effect as that. 



2450 


OFFICIAL PROCEEDINGS 


MR. WALKER—The language is: ‘‘appropriations made 
shall not exceed in amount the income from the revenues for the 
current fiscal year.” 

MR. OATES—The aggregate appropriations shall not ex¬ 
ceed ; but suppose the accumulated income does not exceed the 
amount of appropriations there is no surplus; but in the event the 
income does exceed the amount of the appropriations, is there any¬ 
thing in there to prevent the Legislature from appropriating it r 

MR. WALKER—I think so. 

MR. OATES—Nothing at all; it only prevents them from 
appropriating in excess of the income. 

(Mr. Robinson here propounded a question to Mr. Oates which 
the stenographer was unable to hear.) 

MR. WALKER—Suppose that there was a fund in the treas¬ 
ury arising by a sinking fund arrangement on the issue of bonds, 
how could that fund be appropriated under this provision? It would 
be in excess of the revenues of the current year. 

MR. OATES—Isn’t that assuming that it would be in excess. 
It is only to prevent the Legislature from appropriating more 
money than the income or the estimated income. Now if the in¬ 
come’exceeds the amount of the regular appropriations, there is 
nothing in the world in it that prevents the Legislature from ap¬ 
propriating that excess, just so they do not go beyond the amount 
of the income. 

MR. WALKER—That would be going beyond the amount of 
the income. 

MR. DENT—I have been absent unfortunately and I would 
like to get some information. As I understand it this section limits 
the amount to be appropriated by the Legislature to the income 
from the revenues of the State. Do I understand in this section 
that we have adopted, anything beyond the revenues arising from 
taxation for that particular year could be appropriated by the Leg¬ 
islature? That is the question that is in my mind and I would be 
glad if the distinguished Chairman of the Committee would make 
that plain to me. I don’t see how we could appropriate anything 
beyond the income from the revenues as estimated. 

MR. OATES—It seems to me that is clear. It is a limitation 
on the power of the Legislature not to make appropriations beyond 
the estimated income for each year; but if the income exceeds the 
amount of the ordinary appropriations and expenses—suppose it 
does, you cannot have a surplus in the treasury unless it does ex- 
ceed the amount of expenditures appropriated; but sir, the limita¬ 
tion does not attempt, nor is there any language in it which goes 



CONSTITUTIONAL CONVENTION, 1901 


2451 


t*> tilt* extent of preventing tin Legislature from appropriating 
where there is a surplus accumulated by a greater income than the 
amount of expenditures. The limitation is to keep the Legislature 
from making appropriations beyond and above the income. You 
won’t have any surplus at all unless the income is more than the 
outgo; and if it is more there is no limitation upon it. If it is 
more where is any language that prevents the Legislature from 
appropriating it and using it, just so they do not exceed the amount 
of the income. That is the limitation that this section puts upon it. 

MR. HOOD—If they appropriated an amount that exceeded 
the estimated income, would the appropriation be void? 

MR. OATKS—Now you have propounded to me a question 
for the court to decide. That would present a question of entirely 
a judicial character and I cannot say whether it would be void 
or not. 

MR. HOOD—Wouldn’t it he discretionary with the Legisla- 
turt*—wouUIn’t it be left to the discretion of the Legislature. 

MR. OATES—That presents, as I sav a judicial question. 
Now if the appropriations were to exceed, actually exceed the esti¬ 
mate of the income? 


MR. HOOD—Yes sir. 

MR. OATES—Then suppose the income exceeded the esti¬ 
mate? Is there any limitation or restriction upon the Legislature 
in appropriating that? So they do not go beyond the income 

MR. HOOD--It reads “the aggregate appropriations made 
shall not exceed in amount the income from the revenues of the 
State for the current fiscal year.” 

MR. OATES—That is not the section now, a substitute was 
adopted. 

MR. O’NEAL (Lauderdale)—What was the substitute."' 


M R. ()ATES—To be estimated for each year. 

(Mr. Knox here resumed the chair.) 

MR SAMFORD (Pike) — I will ask the gentleman from 
Montgomery if the Legislature is to be governed by the estimate 
made bv these officers with reference to the revenues to be derived 
from taxation and other sources, if that would not place the ap¬ 
propriations by the Legislature absolutely in the hands of the party 
who makes the estimate? 

O ATES_Not at all. It seems that certain delegates, I 

mean the delegate from Pike, but there seems to be such a 
wide apprehension in the minds of a good many of the delegates. 



2452 


OFFICIAL PROCEEDINGS 


They seem to think that the Governor and the other officer charg¬ 
ed with the duty, are not to be trusted, are unworthy of being 
trusted. We have had no such experience as that in this State--no 
such trouble as that. The Legislatures, however, at times do get 
too wild in their appropriations and go beyond the probable in¬ 
come. Every one knows, or ought to know, that the Governor 
take for instance my friend, the delegate irom I’ike and put him 
in the Governor’s chair, would he estimate faithlessly, or would 
he not estimate according to the best information that would not 
go beyond the probable income? .Any gentleman in that high po¬ 
sition will do that and no more. It is not putting the power of ap¬ 
propriation altogether into the hands of the Governor and the Au¬ 
ditor. It is putting a limitation upon the powers of the Legisla¬ 
ture in this regard. Of course, it is largely directory. I presume, 
while the question presented by the delegate from Etowah is a 
judicial one, in a case of the kind that he mentions, whether the 
appropriations would be void or not, it might be held by the Court, 
and probably' would be held, that this section wa> directory, and 
if an honest mistake was made the appropriation would probable 
be sustained. I think it would. I don’t see any necessity for ,-uch 
an apprehension of danger as the delegates see in this section. It 
seems to me to be a clear case. F'rom what source can we appre¬ 
hend any danger? It is certainly no limitation upon the Legisla¬ 
ture from appropriating a surplus. It just holds that body down 
or those bodies down, so that they cannot make appropriations 
in the aggregate which would exceed the estimated income. That 
is the only purpose of it. 

MR. JONES (Montgomery)—Does the gentleman know of 
any case in which the courts have ever held that a provision in the 
Constitution is directory, when it says the Legislature shall not do 
a specific thing? Don’t they always declare any action in viola¬ 
tion of such a provision void? 

MR. OATES—It depends upon the phraseology of it. 

MR. JONES—Isn’t it mandatory when it savs vim shall not 
do a thing, when the Legislature shall not do a certain thing? 

MR. OATES—Yes, when you see that language. 

AIR. JONES That you shall not exceed in amount the in¬ 
come from the revenues of the State. 

MR. OATES—That means a limitation—suppose they were 
to exceed in appropriations the income, in the aggregate, $50. 
would the court hold that the bill would be void—that the appro¬ 
priation bill is void for that reason? Wouldn’t they hold that it 
was directory? 

MR. JONES—That might come under the maxim of de mini¬ 
mis non curat lex—the law does not concern itself with trifles. 



CONSTITUTIONAL CONVENTION, 1901 


2453 


If there were any grave discrepancy, I think they would hold it 
void beyond any question. 

MR. OATES—This question need not arouse our apprehen¬ 
sions. 

MR. JONES—I don’t want to interrupt the delegate with my 
questions, but I simply rise for information: It says that our Leg¬ 
islature shall not exceed in amount the income from the revenues 
of the State for each of said years respectively, that is four years. 
Rut suppose when you started out you had a surplus in the Treas¬ 
ury derived say from the year 1901, could the Legislature for the 
next four years appropriate the whole amount in the Treasury on 
the ground that the amount that they started with in 1901 was 
a part of the revenues of the four years next succeeding. 

MR. OATES — The only construction, the only reasonable 
one, that can be placed upon it is a limitation or restriction that 
they shall not make their appropriations in the aggregate to ex¬ 
ceed the amount—the estimated amount of the income. It has 
nothing to do with the surplus; and if there shall be more money 
than the income—suppose the income would be greater, half as 
great again, 50 per cent, greater than the amount of the expenses 
or ordinary appropriations, why there is no reason why the Legis¬ 
lature could not dispose of that. It only prevents them from ap¬ 
propriating in excess of that amount. There is no other restric¬ 
tion upon it at all. 

MR. PILLANS—I think if the distinguished chairman will 
read the clause there as reported, or as adopted, he will find there 
is reason to fear, not only to fear, but to see that the only inter¬ 
pretation which could be given this clause is that it stands as we 
have adopted it, that not one dollar could be appropriated ex¬ 
ceeding the estimate of the income for the succeeding four years. 
Now let us take figures. Let us suppose that the income an¬ 
nually of the State of Alabama was $2,500,000, estimated by these 
said officers. Then for the four years $10,000,000 would represent 
the full amount that could be appropriated. Suppose it is declared 
in the terms of the section that $10,000,000 would represent the 
full amount that could he appropriated and let us suppose that 
the State’s revenues during that four years were $150,000 or $100.- 
000, we will say, more each year than had been anticipated. At 
the end of the four years you would have beyond any question 
$400,000 of surplus earned by thrift which had been the result of 
this clause, and the action of this clause, by which the State of 
Alabama would have a sinking fund, or whatever you might choose 
to call it, should have wealth or money salted down to the amount 
of $400,000. 

MR. OATES—Would that be interfering with the provision 
that it should not appropriate in excess of the income? If there 



2454 


OFFICIAL PROCEEDINGS 


were an excess in the income over the appropriations made, why 
couldn't they appropriate it? 

MR. PILLANS—I was coming to that. My distinguished 
friend, the Chairman of the Committee, contends that you could ap¬ 
propriate that but what I am addressing myself to is that the clause 
as written, prevents doing that, and I will ask your attention to it. 
Now I have stated a case where the officers have been moderate 
in their estimate, and have put an estimate of 2,500,000 as the 
probable amount of income to be subject to appropriation, and in 
four years that would be ten million dollars, and if they receive 
during the four years from taxation and the other sources of reve¬ 
nue four hundred thousand in excess of the ten million dollars, 
you have got that as I express it, salted down, just as every thrifty 
man has an income and a surplus. Every man that saves ten dol¬ 
lars a year, has got his income, and has the surplus which he has 
saved when he balances his books, be he a merchant or professional 
man. That becomes his surplus or a part of his wealth and is no 
longer income. There comes another session of the legislature 
which is to make appropriations for another four years, and the 
members of this board, who are to furnish the figures to the legis¬ 
lature declare that their estimate is that the amount which can 
be safely estimated as the revenue of the State for that four years is 
two million six hundred thousand dollars per annum, and that 
gives the right to the legislature to go the extent of $10,400,000 
for that four years, and not one dime or penny beyond it. Be¬ 
cause you cannot say that the $400,000 surplus "from the last four 
years is within the terms of the estimate of income for another 
four years. Any one can see that you cannot claim that it is in¬ 
come, any more than you can claim a man who had a surplus last 
year is going to make a surplus next year in the prosecution of 
any particular business. Now you have got $400,000 to the good, 
and your officers come in and they are bound to act conscientious¬ 
ly and they cannot untruthfully certify to the legislature that the 
income will be what they expect to come in, in addition to what 
has already been saved. If they are truthful, honorable men, such 
as are usually elected to office in Alabama they will not do that, 
but they will say that the taxes are so much, the licenses are so 
much, and other sources of revenue are so much, which makes us 
believe that the income for the next four years will be so many 
dollars. Now that does not touch the surplus at all. It does not 
relate to surplus does it? No more than any man would consider 
his surplus as a part of his income for the ensuing year. If it is 
stated to you fairly and honestly as these gentlemen will do, no 
man who makes an estimate of his income for next year is going 
to, for instance, to give it into the tax gatherer, the amount which 
would include his savings for the preceding year, or the preceding 
twenty years of the laborious life. Now if you can add the sur¬ 
plus accumulated for the four preceding years you could add the 



CONSTITUTIONAL CONVENTION, 1901 


2455 


surplus for the preceding* fifty years and claim that that is the es¬ 
timated income which you will receive from your different sources 
of revenue for the next four years. I take it it will not do to put 
language into the Constitution such as this, if we desire to give 
the legislature the power to appropriate that surplus, and we in¬ 
tend to give that power, and for that reason I remarked to the dis¬ 
tinguished gentleman from Jefferson on yesterday that while 1 
voted as he did for the passage of the resolution I also voted for 
it to be reconsidered, in order to have it so drawn as to make it be¬ 
yond doubt so that the State would not go on accumulating money 
out of the tax-payers and keeping it in the treasury where it could 
not be used for any purpose whatever. 

MR. O’NEAL—Suppose that the income is less than the esti¬ 
mate made by the Covernor, say by $400,000, what would be the 
condition of the State,? 

MR. PILLANS—It would be beyond question just as before. 

MR. O’NEAL—The legislature cannot meet to correct the 
evil under the present law, and what would he the remedy? 

MR. PILLANS—As a matter of course that is the old case 
of a man making ten dollars and spending eleven. If there are 
excessive appropriations notwithstanding all the pains we take to 
prevent it. and these appropriations are in excess of the revenue, 
the State is simply in the position it has occupied before, of having 
to borrow money to carry on the government, and if the State 
should be getting too greatly in debt. I assume the Governor of 
the State would call the legislature in special session and take 
measures to provide against the deficit growing too large. 

But that does not affect the question under consideration. The 
question under consideration is how are we going to give the legis¬ 
lature the power to spend the money that they raise, if they should 
raise it in excess of the amount that is appropriated upon the esti¬ 
mate of the Governor. 

MR. PETTUS—The object with which the gentleman from 
Greene moves a reconsideration of this question is somewhat in 
line with the idea I had when I proposed a substitute to the amend¬ 
ment offered by the gentleman from Wilcox on yesterday. I of¬ 
fered that substitute to authorize the legislature to dispose of the 
revenues that would accrue as estimated, before the next General 
Assembly met, and would not limit them absolutely, as the pres¬ 
ent section does to the income and revenues for the year in which 
the appropriations were made. But I think even that would have 
been one of the most dangerous sections that could have been 
adopted by this Convention. The legislature is a public assembly, 
the lower House is the body in which all measures and bills for the 
raising of revenue should originate and it is a body which should 
have the untrammeled power to disburse the revenue of the State 



2456 


OFFICIAL PROCEEDINGS 


as they see fit and I think the undivided responsibility for their 
action should rest upon the legislature and should not be upon the 
Governor except in so far as he may abuse his power, or may fail 
to use his power to veto measures which, in his opinion, are bad. 
The Governor is the executive arm of the State government, and 
I do not think that he should have the right himself, or in conjunc¬ 
tion with the Auditor, to place an absolute inhibition upon the 
power of the people in the popular branch of the government, the 
General Assembly. I do not think it is either right or wise, or ex¬ 
pedient to so concentrate the power of the State government in the 
hands of any one man. It might be thought that at some time 
there should be a man in the Executive office of the State, whose 
interest it would he to under-estimate the revenues of the State 
for the next four years, and I submit that if that be true, and the 
revenues are under-estimated the succeeding legislature will not 
only he prohibited from appropriating what might accrue, but the 
General Assembly would be prohibited from appropriating for any 
purpose the surplus that would accrue for four years, except for 
the year in which it accrues. Then there is another danger which 
it seems to me should be taken into consideration. The presump¬ 
tion is that the organic law which we are now framing is to he 
the Constitution for the State of Alabama for the next twenty or 
thirty or forty years, and in the course of that time different po¬ 
litical parties might arise in the State of Alabama, and it mav be 
possible that in the future we shall be confronted with the condi¬ 
tion of having a Governor of one political party and a General 
Assembly of another political party, and I submit that if such a 
condition should arise that the Governor of the State would have 
in his hand a dangerous power, that it would be within his power, 
under political conditions like that, to prevent the Legislature, and 
to prohibit the Legislature, from taking such action as in its wis¬ 
dom it might deem best. Mr. President, I favor the reconsidera¬ 
tion of this section for the purpose either of striking out the part 
which authorizes the Governor and Auditor to make the estimate, 
and leave it to the General Assembly as a purely legislative func¬ 
tion to estimate the income, and to limit their appropriation to the 
estimates they themselves may make, or of laying this section al¬ 
together upon the table, and I move the previous question upon 
the motion to reconsider. 

Upon a vote being taken, the main question was ordered. 

MR. COLEMAN (Greene)—The last delegate who addressed 
you has gone over the question that was so fully discussed on yes¬ 
terday and settled by this Convention not to trammel the Legis¬ 
lature in the appropriation of revenues, hut to restrict them within 
the limits of the revenue. That was indicated very clearly by the 
votje on yesterday, and I think that is a very sound provision. 
The trouble of my friend, the distinguished chairman of the com- 



CONSTITUTIONAL CONVENTION, 1901 2457 

mittee, proceeds, I think, from the fact that he has got one idea in 
is mind, and there is another in the law. I have called the at¬ 
tention of delegates to the reading of the law, and I venture to as- 
^tthere are not three lawyers in this Convention who will agree 
with him upon the legal construction of this section. He con- 
tounds income with estimated income. If anything can be clear 
it is that the Legislature cannot make appropriations exceeding 
the estimated income. That is the basis of the argument of the 
delegate from Mobile, which has not been answered legally, and 
cannot be answered. When you adopt this section as amended 
the Legislature will have authority not only to appropriate the 
(revenues as they arise, respectively each year, but any surplus that 
may accumulate in the treasury, and the purpose of the section is 
to prevent the Legislature from making appropriations beyond 
the revenues of the State, and any money that may be accumulated 
in the treasury. That is all I have to say. The previous question 
has been ordered. 

THE PRESIDENT—The question is upon the motion to re¬ 
consider the vote whereby this Convention adopted Section 27. 

Upon a vote being taken, the motion to reconsider was carried. 

MR. COLEMAN (Greene)—I offer an amendment. 

The amendment was read as follows: “Amend Section 27 by 
adding to the section the following, ‘And any surplus that may be 
in the State treasury; provided, that if from any cause it becomes 
necessary to rebuild the Capitol of the State the Legislature is au¬ 
thorized to make such appropriation as is required.’ ” 

MR. COBB—I move to amend that by striking out the whole 
section and the amendment. 

AIR. COLEMAN Can that be done after the previous ques¬ 
tion has been ordered? 

^HE PRESIDENT The previous question was ordered on 
the reconsideration. 

MR. SAMFORD (Pike) I move to lay the whole business 
on the table, the section and the amendment. 

MR. WILLIAMS (Marengo)—A point of order. That was 
voted down on yesterday on the motion of the gentleman from 
Barbour, Mr. Merrill. 

MR. O’NEAL—Yes, but it is reconsidered, Mr. President. We 
are not bound by what we did yesterday after a reconsideration. 

MR. COLEMAN (Greene)—The question before the House 
now is upon the amendment. 

MR. COBB—I have offered a substitute. 



2458 


OFFICIAL FROCKFDISCS 


Substitute was read: “To amend by striking out the section 
and the amendment.” 

MR. WALKER—Is there anything before the House now, 
the question of reconsideration having been passed upon." Is the 
consideration of this question properly before the House at this 
time? 

THE PRESIDENT—It seems to the chair that after the Con¬ 
vention reconsiders the section that it then takes its place to be 
reconsidered when the report of the committee is regularly reach¬ 
ed, and the point of order will be sustained. 

MR. OATES—I do not see the objection to considering it 
now, inasmuch as it is reconsidered, f think we should take it up 
and consider it. 

THE PRESIDENT—It would require a suspension of the 
rules to do so. The regular order is the call of the roll of delegates 
for the introduction of ordinances etc. 

MR. HOWZK—I offer a petition, and ask unanimous consent 
that it be read. 

Objection was made. 

MR. HOWZE—f move a suspension of the rules, and that 
the petition be read. 

Upon a vote being taken, a division was called for. and the 
motion to suspend the rules was carried. 

The petition was thereupon read as follows: 

Petition 23, by Mr. Howze: 

To the Honorable the Constitutional Convention of Alabama: 

In a Section of the proposed new Constitution of Alabama, 
adopted by you last week, fixing a debt limit upon cities, there 
is an exception as to cities over six thousand (6,000) population 
of “obligations incurred and bonds issued for street or sideu-alk 
improvements where the cost of the same in whole or in part is 
to be assessed against the property abutting said improvements.” 

While the city of Birmingham is progressive and growing, it 
has a very large bonded debt at a high rate of interest, and unless 
there is a debt limit fixed in the Constitution for this city, there is 
no chance to advantageously fund the city’s bonded debt. 

To allow the city to further issue bonds to purchase water 
works, light plants, etc., is dangerous enough, hut in the exercise 
of this power, the city will at least get some property for the in¬ 
debtedness incurred, and there is some limit in this regard by sup¬ 
plying the needs of the city. 



CONSTITUTIONAL CONVENTION. 1901 


2459 


But the exception from the debt limit above set forth, is dan¬ 
gerous, ruinous; this exception virtually nullifies the debt limit 
fixed. J 

Suppose Birmingham goes on and issues two or three million 
dollars ot improvement bonds, as it is likely to do if not restrained. 
an< * len those bonds should become a charge upon the general 
revenues of the city, bv reason of the courts holding that the as- 
stssinents against abutting property are invalid, on account of the 
law authorizing the improvements being invalid or the failure of 
the dtv authorities to comply with the requirements of the law 
(such things have happened) what would be the financial condi¬ 
tion of the city? 

I lie bonds would be paid, if paid at all, out of the general reve¬ 
nues ot the citv. which are now strained to the utmost limit. 

1 lie linancial condition of Birmingham is such that the real 
propcit\-holders recognize the fact that all improvements here¬ 
after made will have to be made at the expense of the property, it 
cannot be made at the expense of the general fund of the city. 

In all improvement laws, an opportunity is given each prop¬ 
el tv holder to pay cash for the cost of the improvement assessed 
against his property, 'i his being true, if the improvements are 
to be made at the expense of the abutting property, is it fair or 
right for a property holder who has paid the assessment against 
his property, to be required to guarantee the payment of the as¬ 
sessment against other property where improvement bonds are 
issued by the city? 

If the city issues improvement bonds, the city of course be¬ 
comes primarily liable for the debt, and if it fails for any cause 
to collect the assessments, the debt becomes a charge upon the 
general revenues of the city, and necessarily a charge by way of 
taxation upon all the property in the city. 

It may be said that the city can borrow money cheaper than 
an individual—this is a delusion—our experience in the past has 
been that where provisions for ten year improvement bonds were 
made, the property holder is required to pay in annual install¬ 
ments. or in the average term of five years—you have but to ex¬ 
amine the last Charter of the City of Birmingham to see that the 
property-holder could borrow money to pay for the improvements 
and incumber his own property therefor, and not pay more than 
he would have to pay to the cityx 

If the cost of the improvements is to be paid for in whole or in 
part by the abutting property, each property-holder should be re¬ 
quired to pay cash, if the money has to be borrowed, let the prop¬ 
erty holder borrow it and encumber his property—let the city have 
the power to order the improvements, let the contract, make and 



2460 


OFFICIAL PROCEEDINGS 


collect the assessments and sell the property if not paid. In this 
way, when the property holder pays his assessment he is done with 
it, his property is not liable directly or indirectly for the payment 
of the assessment against property which does not belong to him. 

To allow the city to issue bonds for improvements, where the 
cost is to be assessed against the abutting property, makes the 
city guarantee the validity of the law under which the improve¬ 
ments are made and guarantee that the city officials have con¬ 
formed to the requirements of the law. 

In the past, experience shows that city authorities (not only 
in Birmingham but elsewhere) are prone to be profligate in the 
expenditure of money, when pay day is in the distant future, and 
the experience of property holders constrains them to say that 
there should be a restraining power upon the city authorities. 

The property holders are more interested than any others in 
improving the city and in maintaining the credit of the city. 

And we respectfully ask you to protect the property holders 
in Birmingham by striking out the exception above set forth, which 
authorizes the city to issue bonds for improvements where the 
cost is to be assessed in whole or in part against the abutting 
property. 

In making this request, we feel satisfied that we voice the 
sentiments of the great majority of the real property holders in 
Birmingham, any statement to the contrary notwithstanding. 

Resolved, By the Birmingham Real Estate Association, in 
meeting assembled. That the above and foregoing address and pe¬ 
tition be adopted and the same be forwarded by the Secretary to 
the members of the Constitutional Convention from fefferson 
County, and that said delegates be requested to present the same to 
the Convention. T. H. Molton, 

July 9, 1901. President. 

HR. HOWZE—I ask that it be referred to the Committee on 
Municipal Corporations. So referred. 

MR. HOOD I yield my call to the gentleman from Greene. 

MR. COLEMAN—-In line with the petition just presented I 
desire to offer the petition there purporting to represent a million 
and a half of property of the taxpayers of Birmingham. I do not 
care to have the names read, but would like for them to appear so 
that the delegates from that county may see who are interested 
in this matter, for they know more about them than I do. Read 
the caption, then the names can appear in the stenographic report. 

Upon a vote being taken the motion to read the petition was 
carried, and the Secretary read the petition as follows: 



CONSTITUTIONAL CONVENTION, 1901 2461 

Petition 24 Mr. Coleman (Greene). 

Hon. I. \V. Coleman, Montgomery, Ala.: 

1 he undersigned citizens and tax payers of the city of Bir¬ 
mingham, Ala., earnestly desire a tax limit on the power of taxa¬ 
tion by municipalities and especially of this city, and desire the 
amendment proposed by Mr. Weakley with its exceptions rejected, 
and we respectfully pray that the Convention now in session place 
a limit on the powers of taxation and of assessment for invest¬ 
ment on municipal authorities: 

John (i. Smith, H. P. Smith, J. H. Stillman, L. R. Edge, A. 
Speaker, 1). R. Dunlap, L. Burger, T. C. McDonald, William Sny- 
’ Cycler, S. West Jones, W. A., Smith, N. P. Leavins, 
1\ K. Davison, W. T. Robinson, A. W. Abbott, Otto Marx, Fred¬ 
erick (i. Mack, W. S. Brown, J. A. Downley, George H. Blin, Jr., 
M. W. Bliner. W E. Holloway, Norman Webb. James Spence, 
Calvin Jones, R. H. Baugh, C. A. Mountjoy. 

J lie same petition as above, but with the following statement: 
“These parties own property worth approximately one million 
dollars” was signed by the following names: T. H. Molton & Co., 
for Joseph R. Smith, Sr.; E. L. Watts, John C. Henley, B. F. Sim¬ 
mons, C. K. Crenshaw, E. J. Pierce, Kate D. Pierce, L. L. Molton, 
X. H. Anderson, M. J. Ansley, William Fort, Mary D. Fitzpat¬ 
rick, R. }>. Haney, J. H. La Prade, M. Lewars, M. J. Lunquest, 
Betty Montgomery, C. H. Molton, F. Nelson, Jr., J. A. Robertson, 
M. C. Roper, K. \Y. Storey, J. E. Torrey, C. B. Thompson, H. H. 
Vance, M. If. Ware, D. Walker, B. F. Roden, O’Bryne & Frank¬ 
lin. II. Franklin. T. T. Ashford, George Cobb, John F. White, S. 
W. White, J. If. Patterson, W. H. Wilder, Mrs. W. H. Wilder, 
Thomas I). Bradford, H. H. Mayberry, T. H. Spencer, H. S. Hall, 

S. K. Thompson. C. F. Enslen, Jefferson County Savings Bank 
bv C. K. Knsley. President; J. Ellis Davis, Mrs. Lydia L. Davis by 
J. K. Davis, agent. 

The same petition was signed by the following names, but 
without any statement attached thereto: W. R. Houghton, George 
Huddleston, William C. Ward, J. L. Yancey, J. D. Chichester, L. 
Schneinbrathcn, P. M.; M. T. Porter, J. M. Gillespy, John W. 
Webb, Wilbur C. Offott, Mrs. Idella M. Middleton, S. B. Garrett, 
Louis Saks. J. F. Sulzby, Hermann Saks, J. P. Lynch, M. E. Wat- 
lington, F. M. Lynch, J. D. Callius, Sam H. Harris, J. M. Yahill, 

T. W. Hasz, Sam L. Earle, M. M. Boggan, J. C. Abernethy, H. C. 
Abbott. E. I. Burn, L. E. Bates, John P. Rosenthal, W. F. Hodges, 
J. N. Reason, W. D. Cooper, A. B. Vandergrift, R. R. Robinson, 
Jones Schwab, R. N. Wheeler, F. B. Johnson, Sidney Hart, B. 
Meyerstein, Joseph Lovemdary, S. Rich, James A. Going, R. V. 
Mobley, R. A. McAdory. 



2462 


OFFICIAL, PROCEEDINGS 


The same petition was sign by the following names, but with¬ 
out any statement attached thereto: 

I. H. Benners, Wesley M. Smith, H. V. Johnson, T. F. Cheek, 
James A. Allen, R. E. Middleton, J. E. Wilson, T. N. Anglin, M. 
M. Williams, Oliver Caldwell, G. W. Chambers, M. A. May, John 
B. Bonner, J. B. Francis, T. C. William S. Morrow, J. P. Stiles, 
John L. Davis, H. M. Geever, H. W. Crook, city of Bessemer; M. 
H. Crittenden, C. C. Ellis, C. C. Ellis, Jr., Lewis Whaley. C. R. 
Sexton, Mrs. F. M. Gardner, Mrs. K. B. Beard, Mrs. Jane T. Lynch. 
J. C. Kyle, Mrs. L. A. Peace, H. E. Hewitt, M. H. Snedecor, A. F. 
White, E. J. Black, Warner, Smiley & Co., by Newton, Mrs. Annie 
Brooks, A. B. Lovelace, Joe Slaughter, J. M. Bradley, J. L. Wor¬ 
cester, L. J. Haley, Jr„ 

MR. PRESIDENT—The petition will be referred to the Com¬ 
mittee on Municipal Corporations. 

The hour of 10:30 having arrived the call of, the roll of dele¬ 
gates was discontinued. Upon a call of the standing committees 
the following business was transacted: 

MR. O’NEAL — The Committee on Local Legislation has 
been called and the Committee on Engrossment reported yester¬ 
day the engrossed article. I would ask that the article be read a 
third time for final passage. Is it in order at this time? 

THE PRESIDENT—It seems to the Chair that would come 
under unfinished business. Whether it did or not, without a sus¬ 
pension of the rules it could not be done. 

MR. O’NEAL—It is the report from the Committee on En¬ 
grossed Bills. Their report is in order. That would come up 
under the head of special committees. 

MR. O’NEAL—It is the report of a standing committee. 1 
call your attention to the report of the standing committees. Is 
not the Committee on Engrossed Bills a standing committee? 

THE PRESIDENT—It is a special committee, and when that 
committee is called it will merely be called for reports That 
would come under No. 9, unfinished business. 

MR. deGRAFFENREID—Mr. President, I want to state that 
the Committee on Order and Harmony have gotten down to busi¬ 
ness and that it will be perhaps in the interest of shortening tile 
work of the Convention, if each article was read and put upon its 
passage. 

THE PRESIDENT - The regular order could he reached 
while you gentlemen are talking. 

The head of unfinished business being called_ 



CONSTITUTIONAL CONVENTION, 1901 


2463 


MR. O’NEAL—I ask that the report of the Committee on En¬ 
grossment be now taken up and that the articles engrossed by 
them be put upon final passage. 

THE PRESIDENT — It is moved that the article on local 
legislation reported by the Committee on Engrossment be read a 
third time and passed. 

MR. BROWNE—I move to amend that motion by taking up 
for passage the articles as reported by the committee, if the gen¬ 
tleman will accept, there were three articles reported at the same 
time. 

THE PRESIDENT—It is moved that the articles reported by 
the Committee on Engrossment be taken up and read a third time 
and passed. 

Upon a vote being taken, the motion was carried. 

The ordinance on local legislation was first in order. 

MR. WILSON (Clarke) — I desire to explain why I vote 
against this ordinance. I would wait until my name is called on 
the roll, but judging from the experience of those who have tried 
that before objection will be interposed and therefore as I have 
the right to explain I want to say that my reason for voting against 
the ordinance, is that one section of it permits the court to strike 
down a law which the Legislature has passed, which has been acted 
on. upon which rights have been based on a decision by the courts 
that the relief which the act gave might be secured from the courts 
and for that reason I vote against the ordinance, otherwise I am in 
favor of it. 

MR. deGRAFFENRElD—Mr. President, I vote against the 
ordinance for the same reason. 

MR. DENT—I would like to inquire if the Convention has 
not power to strike that part out by some action? Could not they 
introduce an independent ordinance striking out after its adop¬ 
tion. 


THE PRESIDENT—An independent ordinance might be in¬ 
troduced, yes sir. 

MR. DENT—I agree with the gentlemen who have expressed 
that opinion. I propose to introduce a separate ordinance to strike 
out the objectionable clause. 

MR. KIRK—I vote against it for the reasons stated by the 
gentleman from Clarke. 

MR. PETTUS—I shall vote against it for the reason stated 
by the gentleman from Clarke. I would like to have that stricken 
out and for the additional reason this Convention has absolutely 



2464 


OFFICIAL PROCEEDINGS 


cut off certain subjects from local legislation and has refused to 
provide any other forum to which the people might look for relief. 
For those reasons, I vote against it. 

MR. BURNS—I would like to ask the gentleman a question. I 
want to ask if he votes against this article this morning, if he will 
vote against ratification? 

MR. PETTUS—Oh no, nothing of the sort. 

MR. O’NEAL—I rise to a point of order. Delegates have no 
right to explain their votes at this time. 

THE PRESIDENT—It seems to the Chair it is competent 
now on the final passage of the bill to discuss the question of the 
acceptance or the injection of the entire article and gentlemen 
may state they propose to vote against the entire article, and art- 
explaining their attitude. 

MR. O’NEAL—I think it is doing indirectly what the rules 
prohibit. 

MR. LONG (Walker)—I will vote aganist it because I think 
it will result in endless litigation, if any law passed by the Legisla¬ 
ture can be carried into court and the court is given the absolute 
right to inquire into it and hold that any law which the judge may 
think should be done by a general law. I think it will bring about 
endless litigation and I will vote against the article. 

MR. O’NEAL—I would suggest to the gentleman that any 
amendment desired can be made when the article comes up for 
final passage from the Committee on Harmony and Consistency. 
Under our rules that can be done if the Convention desires to do it. 

MR. COLEMAN—I would like to make a statement. It is 
hardly consistent to vote against the adoption of the entire article 
because there is a section in it that can be remedied. I shall vote 
aye for the adoption of the article whatever position I may take 
upon the particular section. 

The article was read as follows: 

An ordinance concerning local legislation: 

Be it ordained by the people of Alabama in Convention as¬ 
sembled, That the following article on local legislation be inserted 
in the Constitution: 


ARTICLE -. 

Local Legislation. 

Section. The General Assembly shall not pass a special, pri¬ 
vate or local law in any of the following cases: 



CONSTITUTIONAL CONVENTION, 1901 


2465 


1st—Granting’ a divorce. 

2d—Relieving- any minor of the disabilities of non-age. 

3d—Changing- the name of any corporation, association or in¬ 
dividual. 

4th—Providing for the adoption or legitimizing of any child. 

5th—Incorporating a town, city or village. 

6th—Granting a charter to any corporation, association or in¬ 
dividual. 

7th—Establishing rules of descent for distribution. 

8th—Regulating the time within which a civil or criminal ac¬ 
tion may be begun. 

9th—Exempting any individual, private corporation or asso¬ 
ciation from the operation of any general law. 

10th—Providing for the sale of the property of any individual 
or estate. 

11th—Changing or locating a county seat. 

12th—Providing for a change of venue in any case. 

13th—Regulating the rate of interest. 

14th—Fixing the punishment of crime. 

15th—Regulating either the assessment or collection of taxes, 
except in connection with the readjustment, renewal or extension 
of existing municipal indebtedness, created prior to the adoption 
of the Constitution of 1875. 

16th—Giving effect to an invalid will, deed or other instru¬ 
ment. 

17th—Authorizing any county township, city, town or village 
to issue bonds or other security, except in cases in which the is¬ 
suance of said bonds or other securities has been authorized by a 
vote of the duly qualified electors of such county, township, city, 
town, or village, at an election held for such purpose in the manner 
that may be prescribed by law; provided, the General Assembly 
may pass special laws to refund bonds issued before the date of the 
ratification of this Constitution. 

18th.—Amending, confirming or extending the charter of any 
private or municipal corporation, or remitting the forfeiture there¬ 
of. 


19th—Creating, extending or impairing any lien. 

20th—Chartering or licensing any ferry, road or bridge. 



2466 


OFFICIAL PROCEEDINGS 


21st—Increasing the jurisdiction and fees of justices of the 
peace or the fees of constable. 

22d—Establishing separate school districts. 

23rd—Establishing separate stock districts. 

24th—Creating, increasing or decreasing fees, percentage or 
allowance of public officers. 

25th—Exempting property from taxation or from levy or sale. 

26th—Exempting any person from jury, road or other civil 
duty. 

27th—Donating any land owned by or under control of the 
State to any person or corporation. 

28th—Remitting fines, penalties or forfeitures. 

29th—Providing for the conduct of elections or designating 
places of voting, or changing the boundaries of wards, precincts 
or districts, except on the organization of new counties, and chang¬ 
ing the lines of old counties. 

30th—Restoring the right to vote to persons convicted of in¬ 
famous crimes, or crimes involving moral turpitude. 

31st—Declaring who shall be liners between counties. 

No special, private or local law. except a law fixing the time 
of holding court, shall he enacted in any case, which is provided 
for by a general law, or when the relief sought can be given by 
any court of this State, and the courts, and not the General As¬ 
sembly shall judge as to whether the matter of said law is provided 
for by a general law, and as to whether the relief sought can be 
given by any court; nor shall the General Assemblv indirectly 
enact any such special, private or local law by the partial repeal 
of a general law. 

The General Assembly shall pass general laws for the cases 
enumerated in this section ; provided, that nothing in this section 
or article shall affect the right of the Legislature to enact local 
laws regulating or prohibiting the liquor traffic; provided, that 
the notice is given as required in Section 2 of this article. 

Sec. 2. No special, private or local law shall be passed on any 
subject not enumerated in Section I of this article, except in refer¬ 
ence to fixing the time of holding courts, unless notice of the inten¬ 
tion to apply therefor shall have been published, without cost to 
the State, in the county or counties where the matter or thing to 
be affected may be situated, which notice shall state the substance 
of the proposed law, and be published at least once a week for four 
consecutive weeks in some newspaper, or if there is no newspaper 



CONSTITUTIONAL CONVENTION, 1901 


2467 


published in the county, by posting* the said notices for four con¬ 
secutive weeks at five different public places in the county or coun¬ 
ties, prior to the introduction of the bill; and the evidence that said 
notice has been given shall be exhibited to each House of the Gen¬ 
eral Assembly, and the fact of said notice spread upon the Journal. 
The courts shall pronounce void every local law which the Jour¬ 
nals do not affirmatively show was passed in accordance with the 
provisions of this section. 

Sec. 3.—The General Assembly may repeal or modify by a 
special, private or local law, any special, private or local law upon 
notice being given and shown, as provided in the last preceding 
section. 


Sec. 4.—The operation of no general law shall be suspended 
for the benefit of any individual, private corporation or association, 
nor shall any individual private corporation or association be ex¬ 
empted from the operation of any general law, except as in this ar¬ 
ticle otherwise provided. 

Sec. 5.—The General Assembly shall pass general laws under 
which local and private interests shall be provided for and pro¬ 
tected. 


Sec. 6.—A general law within the meaning of this article is a 
law which applies to the whole State a local law is a law which 
applies to any political subdivision or subdivisions of the State less 
than the whole. A special or private law, within the meaning of 
this article is one which applies to an individual, association or 
corporation. 

Sec. 7.—No bill introduced as a general law into either House 
of the General Assembly shall be so amended in its passage as to 
become a special, private or local law. 

Upon the call of the roll the vote resulted as follows: 

AYES. 


Messrs. President, 
Altman, 

Banks, 

Barefield, 

Beddow, 

Bethune, 

Blackwell, 

Boone, 

Brooks, 

Browne, 

Bulger, 

Burnett, 

Burns, 


Cardon, 

Chapman, 

Cobb, 

Cofer, 

Coleman, of Greene, 
Cornwall, 

Craig, 

Cunningham, 

Davis, of DeKalb, 
Davis, of Etowah, 
Duke, 

Eley, 

Espy, 


Ferguson, 

Fletcher, 

Glover, 

Graham, of Talladega, 
Grayson, 

Greer, of Calhoun, 
(»reer, of Perry, 
Handley, 

Harrison, 

Heflin, of Chambers, 
Heflin, of Randolph, 
Hinson, 

Hodges, 



2468 


OFFICIAL PKOCF.LntNOs 


Hood, 

Howell, 

Howze, 

Inge, 

Jackson, 

Jones, of Bibb, 

Jones, of Montgomery, 
Jones, of Wilcox, 
Knight, 

Kyle, 

Leigh, 

I .ocklin, 

Lomax, 

Macdonald, 

McMillan (Baldwin), 
McMillan (Wilcox), 
Malone, 

Martin. 

Maxwell, 

M iller ( Wilcox), 
Total—99. 


Carmichael, of Colbert. 
1 >ent, 

deOraffenreid, 

Foster, 

Oil more, 

Total—14. 


M oody, 

M urphrce, 

XeSmith, 

Xorman, 

( )ates, 

( )‘ Xi-al ( Lauderdale >. 
i >'Xt-ill ( Jefferson L 
( M*P. 

< >'Reai\ 

{’aimer, 

! ’arker (t 'nl:mar- . 

! Varce. 

! ’ilians, 
l\ eese. 

R ey noid- i II ( i i r \ : 
k obinxm, 

l\ i >gil- i I.OU m|e- 1 , 

Sou. !«•!'", 

>a 11 r i ird. 

Sea ivy. 

NOKS. 

11 ender>on, 

K i r k. 

K irk land. 

Long ( Walker », 

M errill. 


Seihemier. 

Sloan. 

Smith i Mobile ), 
Smith. Mac. A , 

>mit h. Mi >rgan M 

Si »r i elI. 

>prag in-. 

Stewart. 

Ta> h *e, 

Va tig ban. 

U added. 

Walk, r. 

Wait-. 

W raklev . 

White. 

Whiteside, 

\\ illiant- < harbour >. 
W d! ai:i- ( \| a rengo - 

W iNon i \\ a-li gton i 
W mm 


1 'ett U". 

Spear-, 

Muddard. 

A Loom dark * 


ABSECXT OR XOT VoTIXO. 


Alnion, 

Ashcraft, 

Bartlett, 

Beavers, 

Byars, 

Carmichael, of Colbert, 
Carnathon, 

Case, 

Coleman, of Walker, 
Kyster, 

Fitts, 

Foshee, 

Freeman, 

(Graham, of Montgomery, 


( irant. 

Haley, 
j enkins. 

Julies, of Hale. 

KI n g, 

Ledbetter, 

Long ( Butler I. 

L< >\\ e ( j e? tt rs< ai i, 

I auve ( I at wrence ). 
-M iller t Marengo ). 

Morri-ettc. 

M u I key, 

X orwood, 

1 karker ( h.lniore), 


and 


Mr. Beddow here took the Chair. 
14 noes the Article was adopted. 


Fitts. 

I ’orter, 

1 'roc tor, 

Renfro, 

Reynolds (Chilton), 
Rogers I Sumter), 

Sam ford. 

Sen tell. 

Sol lie, 

Thompson, 

Weatherly, 

Willet, 

W illiams (Kimore), 
and Lv' a vote of 99 avc 






CONSTITUTIONAL CONVENTION, 1901 


2409 


I HE PRESIDENT PRO TEM—The Article will be ordered 
printed and referred to the Committee on Order, Consistency and 
Harmony of the Whole Constitution. 

The President here resumed the Chair. 

I he engrossed Article on State and County boundaries was 
read as follows: 

An ordinance to create and define the State and County Boun¬ 
daries and to regulate the location of county sites and the forma¬ 
tion of new counties. 

Be it ordained by the people of Alabama in Convention as¬ 
sembled. That Article II, of the Constitution be stricken out and 
the following Article inserted in lieu thereof: 

ARTICLE II. 

State and County Boundaries, Count}' Sites and New Counties. 

Section 1. The boundaries of this State are established and 
declared to be as follows, that is to say: Beginning at the point 
where the 31st degree of North Latitude crosses the Perdido River; 
thence east, to the western houndary line of the State of Georgia: 
thence along said line to the southern boundary line of the State 
of Tennessee, crossing west along the southern boundary line of the 
State of Tennessee, crossing the Tennessee River and on to the sec¬ 
ond intersection of said river by said line; thence up said river to the 
mouth of Big Bear Creek, thence by direct line to the northwest 
corner of Washington County, in this State as originally formed; 
thence southerly, along the line of the State of Mississippi to the 
Gulf of Mexico, thence eastwardly to and including all islands 
within six leagues of the shore to the Perdido River, thence up the 
said river to the beginning. Provided, that the limits and jurisdic¬ 
tion of this State shall extend to and include any other land and 
territory now acquired, or hereafter acquired by contract or agree¬ 
ment with other States, or otherwise, although such land and terri¬ 
tory are not included within the boundaries hereinbefore designated. 

Sec. 2. The boundaries of the several counties of this State as 
they now exist are hereby ratified and confirmed. 

Sec. 3. The General Assembly may by a vote of two-thirds of 
both Houses thereof arrange and designate boundaries for the sev¬ 
eral counties of this State, which boundaries shall not be altered, 
except by a like vote; but no new counties shall he hereafter formed 
of less extent than 600 square miles, and no existing county shall 
be reduced to less than 600 square miles; and no new county shall 
be formed which does not contain a sufficient number of inhabi¬ 
tants to entitle it to one Representative under the ratio of repre¬ 
sentation existing at the time of its formation, and leave the county 
or counties from which it is taken without the required number 



2470 


OFFICIAL PROCEEDINGS 


of inhabitants, entitling* such county or counties to separate repre¬ 
sentation; Provided, that out of the counties of Henry, Dale and 
Geneva a new county may be formed under the provisions of this 
Article for forming* new counties, so as to leave said counties of 
Henry, Dale and Geneva with not less than 500 square miles each. 

Sec. 4. No county line shall be altered or changed, or in the 
creation of new counties, shall l>e established, so as to run within 
seven miles of the County Court House of an old county. 

Sec. 5. No county site shall be removed except by a majority 
vote of the qualified electors of said county, voting in an election 
held for such purpose, and when an election has once been held 
for such purpose, no other election can be held for such purpose 
until the expiration of four years. Provided, that the county site 
of Shelby County, of this State, shall be and remain at Colum¬ 
biana, unless removed by a vote of the people as provided for in 
an act entitled an Act to provide for the permanent location of 
the county site of Shelby County, Alabama, by a vote of the quali¬ 
fied electors of said county, approved the 9th day of February, 
1899, and the Act amendatory thereto approved the 20th da v of 

February, 1899, or by an election held under the provisions of this 
Article. 

fHE PRESIDEN 1 1 he question is upon the adoption of 

the Article. 


And upon a call of the roll the vote resulted as follows : 


Messrs. President, 
Almon, 

Altman, 

Ashcraft, 

Banks, 

Barefield, 

Beddow, 

Bethune, 

Blackwell, 

Boone, 

Brooks, 

Browne, 

Bulger, 

Burnett, 

Burns, 

Cardon, 

Chapman, 

Cobb, 

Coleman, of Greene, 
Craig, 

Cunningham, 


AYES. 

Ha vis, of DeKalb, 

Davis, of Etowah, 

I )ent, 

deGraftenreid, 

Duke, 

Kiev, 

Ivys ter, 

Espy, 

Ferguson. 

Fletcher, 

Graham, of Montgomery, 
Graham, of Talladega, 

Grayson, 

Greer, of Calhoun, 

Haley, 

Handley, 

Harrison, 

Heflin, of Chambers, 
Heflin, of Randolph, 
Henderson, 

Hinson, 


Hodges, 

Hood, 

I lowell, 

Hcnvze, 

I nge. 

Jackson, 

J enkins, 

Jones, of Bibb, 

Jones, of Montgomery 
Jones, of Wilcox, 

Kirk, 

Kyle, 

Knight, 

Leigh, 

Eocklin, 

Lomax, 

Long, of Butler, 

Long, of Walker, 
Macdonald, 

McMillan, of Baldwin, 
McMillan (Wilcox), 



CONSTITUTIONAL CONVENTION, 1901 


2471 


Malone, 

1 *earce, 

Stewart, 

Martin, 

Lilians, 

Tayloe, 

Maxwell, 

I Mtts, 

Vaughan, 

Merrill, 

Proctor, 

Waddell, 

Miller (Wilcox), 

Robinson, 

Walker, 

Moody, 

Rogers (Lowndes), 

Weakley, 

Ne Smith, 

Sanders, 

White, 

Xornian, 

Searcy, 

Whiteside, 

O’Neal (Lauderdale), 

Selhcimer, 

Williams (Barbour), 

()’Neill, of Jefferson, 

Sentell, 

Williams (Elmore), 

Opp, 

Smith (Mobile), 

• Wilson (Clarke), 

O’Rear, 

Smith, Morgan M 

Wilson (Wash’gton) 

Palmer, 

Sorrell, 

Winn, 

Parker (Cullman), 

Spears, 


Parker (Elmore), 

Total—107. 

Spragins, 

NOES. 


Cofer, 

Mulkey, 

Sanford, 

Kitts, 

Oates, 

Sloan, 

Foshee, 

Porter, 

Smith, Mac. A., 

Freeman, 

Reynolds, of Henrv, 

Stoddard, 

Total—12. 


ABSENT OR NOT VOTI 

NG. 

Bartlett, 

Grant. 

Phillips. 

Beavers, 

Greer, of Perry, 

Reese, 

Byars, 

J ones, of Hale, 

Renfro, 

Carmichael, of Colbert, 

King, 

Reynolds (Chilton), 

Carmichael, of Coffee, 

Kirkland, 

Rogers (Sumter), 

Carnathon, 

Ledbetter, 

Samford, 

Case, 

Lowe, of Jefferson. 

Sol lie, 

Coleman, of Walker, 

Lowe, of Lawrence, 

Thompson, 

Cornwall, 

Miller (Marengo), 

Watts, 

Foster, 

Morrisette, 

Weatherly, 

Gilmore, 

M urphree, 

Willet, 

Glover, 

Norwood, 

Williams (Marengo) 


By a vote of 107 ayes and 12 noes the article was adopted. 

THE PRESIDENT—The article will he ordered printed and 
referred to the Committee on the Order, Consistency and Har¬ 
mony of the Whole Constitution. 

The article of Banks and Banking being called— 

MR. HENDERSON—I desire to explain my vote upon this 
article. I shall vote against the adoption of the report because I 
do not believe that Sections 8 and 9 should be embodied in the 
Constitution. 



2472 


OFFICIAL PROCEEDINGS 


The article was read as follows: 

ARTICLE XIV. 

Section 1. Subdivision Banks and Banking. The General As¬ 
sembly shall not have the power to establish or incorporate any 
bank or banking company or money institution, for the purpose of 
issuing bills of credit or bills payable to order or brearer, except 
under the conditions prescribed in this Constitution. 

Sec. 2. No bank shall be established otherwise than under a 
general banking law, nor otherwise than upon a specie basis. Pro¬ 
vided, that any bank may be established with authority to issue 
bills to circulate as money in equal amount to the face value of 
bonds of the United States or of this State, convertible into specie 
at their face value, which shall, before such bank is authorized to 
issue bills for circulation, be deposited with the State Treasurer or 
other depository prescribed by law in an amount equal to the 
a gg re £ ate of such proposed issue, with power in such Treasurer or 
depository to dispose of any or all of such bonds for a sufficient 
amount of specie to redeem the circulating notes of such bank at 
any time and without delay, should such bank suspend specie pay¬ 
ment, or fail to redeem its notes on demand. 

Sec. 3. All bills or notes issued as money shall be at all times 
redeemable in gold or silver, and no law shall be passed sanction¬ 
ing directly or indirectly the suspension of any bank or banking 
company of specie payment. 

Sec. 4. Holders of bank notes and depositors who have not 
stipulated for interest, shall for such notes and deposits, be entitled 
in case of insolvency, to the preference of payment over all other 
creditors. Provided this section shall apply to all banks whether 
incorporated or not. 

Sec. 5. Every bank or banking company shall be required to 
cease all banking operations within twenty years from the time of 
its organization (unless the General Assembly shall extend the 
time) and promptly thereafter close its business, but shall have cor¬ 
porate capacity to sue and shall be liable to suits until its affairs 
and liabilities are fully closed. 

Sec. 6. No banks shall receive directly or indirectly a greater 
rate of interest than shall be allowed to individuals for lending 
money. 

Sec. 7. Neither the State nor any political subdivision thereof 
shall be a stockholder in any bank, nor shall the credit of the State 
ever be given, or loaned, to any banking company, association or 
corporation. 

Sec. 8. The General Assembly shall by appropriate laws, pro¬ 
vide for the examination, by some public officer, of all banks and 



CONSTITUTIONAL CONVENTION, 1901 


2473 


banking institutions and trust companies engaged in banking busi¬ 
ness in this State. And each of such banks and banking companies 
or institutions shall, through its President or such other officer as 
the General Assembly may designate under oath, make a report of 
its resources and liabilities at least twice a year. 

Sec. 9. That the provisions of this article shall apply to all 
banks, trust companies and individuals doing a banking business 
except national banks, whether incorporated or not. 

THE PRESIDENT—The question will be upon the adoption 
of the ordinance. 

And upon a call of the roll the vote resulted as follows: 

AYES. 


Messrs. President, 
Union, 

Ashcraft, 

Hanks, 

Barefield, 

Beddow, 

Bethune, 

Blackwell, 

Boone, 

Brooks, 

Browne, 

Bulger, 

Burnett, 

Burns, 

Cardon, 

Carmichael, of Colbert, 
Cobb, 

Cofer, 

Coleman, of Greene, 
Cornwall, 

Craig, 

Cunningham, 

Davis, of Etowah, 
Dent, 

Duke, 

Espy, 

Ferguson, 

Fitts, 

Fletcher, 

Glover, 

Graham, of Talladega, 
Grant, 

Grayson, 

Greer, of Calhoun, 


Greer, of Perry, 

Haley. 

Han dley, 

Harrison, 

Heflin, of Chambers, 
Heflin, of Randolph, 
Hinson, 

Hodges, 

Hood, 

Howell, 

Howze, 

Inge, 

Jackson, 

J enkins, 

Jones, of Bibb, 

Jones, of Wilcox, 
Kirk, 

Kirkland, 

Kyle, 

Leigh, 

Locklin, 

Lomax, 

Lowe (Jefferson), 
Macdonald, 

McMillan (Baldwin), 
McMillan (Wilcox), 
Malone, 

Martin, 

Maxwell, 

Miller (Wilcox), 
Moody, 

Mulkey, 

Murphree, 

NeSmith, 


Norman. 

Oates, 

O’Neal (Lauderdale), 
O’Neill (Jefferson), 
Opp, 

Palmer, 

Parker (Cullman), 
Parker (Elmore), 
Pearce, 

Pettus, 

Pillans, 

Pitts, 

Porter, 

Proctor, 

Reynolds (Henry), 
Robinson, 

Rogers (Lowndes), 
Sanders, 

Sanford, 

Searcy, 

Selheimer, 

Sentell, 

Smith, Mac. A., 
Smith, Morgan M., 
Spears, 

Sorrell, 

Spragins, 

Stewart, 

T ayloe, 

Studdard, 

Waddell, 

Vaughan, 

Weakley, 

White, 



2474 


OFFICIAL PROCHKD1NC.S 


Whiteside, 

Williams (Elmore), 
Total—108. 


Williams (Barbour), 
Wilson (Clarke), 


NOES. 


Wilson (Wash’gton). 
Winn. 


deGraffenreid, 

Eley, 

Foshee, 


Freeman, 
Henderson, 
Long ( W alki-r). 


Total—7. 

ABSENT OK NOT VOTING. 


Altman, 

Bartlett, 

Beavers, 

Byars, 

Carmichael, of Coffee, 
Carnathon, 

Case, 

Chapman, 

Coleman, of Walker, 
Davis, of DeKalb, 

Eyster, 

Foster, 

Gilmore, 

Graham, of Montgomery, 


I ones, of Hale, 

Jones, of Montgomery, 
King, 

Knight, 

Ledbetter, 

Long ( Butler), 

Lowe (Lawrence), 
Merrill. 

Miller (Marengo), 

\1 orrisette, 

Norwood. 

( LRear, 

1 Miillips, 

Renfro, 


Reynolds (Chilton), 
Rogers (Sumter), 
Sam ford, 

Sloan, 

Smith ( Mobile), 

So! lie, 

Thompson, 

Walker, 

Watts. 

Weatherly, 

Willet, 

Williams (Marengo) 


And by a vote of 108 ayes and 7 noes the article was adopted. 

MR. KIRKLAND—I was not in the room at the time the 
vote was taken on the Article on State and County Boundaries. 
I desire to vote for the adoption of the report of that Committee, 
and vote “aye.” 


THE PRESIDENT—It seems to the Chair that it is too late 
for the gentleman to be recorded. The result has been announced 
and the Article referred to the Committee on Order, Consistency 
and Harmony. 

MR. O’NEAL—I am directed by the Committee on Rules to 
report a resolution. 

The resolution was read as follows: 


Resolution No. 255, by Rules Committee: 

Resolved, that the rules of the Convention limiting debate be 
suspended when the report of the Suffrage Committee is taken up 
for consideration, and that each delegate be allowed to speak once, 
and not longer than thirty minutes upon any proposition presented 
by the report of the Committee or any amendment thereto, except 
that the Chairman of the Committee or mover of the amendment. 



CONSTITUTIONAL CONVENTION, 1901 


2475 


or such delegate as such Chairman or mover may yield his time 
to, may, after the previous question has been ordered, close the de¬ 
bate, and in so doing may speak for a like period of thirty minutes; 
provided, that the time here limited may be extended by a major¬ 
ity of the delegates voting without a suspension of the rules. 

MR. KIRKLAND—I make the point of order that the report 
is not in order at this time. 

THE PRESIDENT—The report of the Committee is a privi¬ 
leged report. 

MR. O'NEAL—I desire to state that the resolution is in ac¬ 
cordance with the suggestions of the Committee on Suffrage. 

Upon a vote being taken the resolution was adopted. 

THE PRESIDENT—Special order will be the consideration 
of the report of the Committee on Legislative Department. Inas¬ 
much as Section 27 was reconsidered, it would seem to be in order 
to recur to that section. The question is upon Section 27 which 
was reconsidered upon the amendment offered by the gentleman 
from Greene, to the substitute offered by the gentleman from Ma¬ 
con to the Section as reported and the amendment offered by the 
gentleman from Greene which was to strike out the amendment 
and Section. 

MR. SANFORD—I ask for information, are any of these 
amendments in order? until the question of reconsideration has 
been determined? 

THE PRESIDENT—The question of reconsideration has been 
determined and the Convention has voted to reconsider. 

MR. SANFORD—I was absent at the time. 

MR. COBB—It seems to me that this Convention is at times 
in danger of becoming dangerously impatient. We had an exhi¬ 
bition of this spirit on yesterday. At one time, we had under con¬ 
sideration a proposition as harmless as an infant and yet the gen¬ 
tlemen have spent hours of time here discussing it and we sat and 
listened to protests that made the hair of timid delegates like my¬ 
self rise up. We can see the walls of this Capitol crumbling: we 
can see the great pillars that sustain our republican institutions 
falling and everything going to Sheol and I don’t know where else, 
and all because it was proposed to impose upon the Governor of 
Alabama some labor that he ought to have been here to protest 
against; a proposition I confess that ought not to have been in the 
Constitution, but as utterly harmless as anything could be con¬ 
ceived to be. That was one spectacle, and then we had another 
and that was to see the delegates of this Convention turn imme¬ 
diately around and adopt and fasten into the Constitution a pro¬ 
vision that would so hamper the legislative department of the State 



2476 


OF FICIA [. P ROC F. F. I > I NT. S 


of Alabama that we could not foresee the evils which would come 
from it. At one moment, we had a usurping Governor that was 
to be shackled; at another moment, we struck off the shackles and 
put them upon the legislative department of the government. Men 
fresh from the people. Fortunately for us, the right of reconsidera¬ 
tion remains and now if these members will just simply possess 
their souls in patience a little bit, and recover a small amount of 
their common sense, they will be enabled to see the mischief that 
they did on yesterday. I think we have fallen into the error, Mr. 
President, of thinking of ourselves as partisans, as Democrats, as 
the people—“we are the people," and all power and authority and 
all wisdom resides with us, and yet we are proposing here, and as 
has been repeatedly asserted, this is the main work before us—to 
make a Constitution which will dangerously affect our supremacy. 
Pass the Constitution which you propose to frame and adopt it, 
strike off the shackles which have been upon the people, and you 
will get something more than we have heretofore had in Alabama 
of free thought, of free speech, and free political action, and when 
we get that, who of you are so wise as to predict that the day is 
not distant when some other political party than the Democratic 
may have some control of the affairs of our State? I am not saying 
it is to be deprecated by any means, for if that time comes it will 
be an evidence that we have got another or other political parties 
in Alabama which are respectable besides the Democratic. Now, 
Mr. President, let me see if I can make good the assertion that 1 
advanced a moment ago and which leads me to make the propo¬ 
sition that I do before the House to strike out the whole of this 
Section 27. If you strike out from that Section a duty that is 
imposed upon the Governor and the Auditor and the power which 
is given to these officials, then you will leave them to the Consti¬ 
tution something which is a work of superorgation merely. You 
put in something which the Legislature alreadv possesses and there¬ 
fore utterly unnecessary. Hence, Mr. President, the whole argu¬ 
ment turns upon the proposition of excluding from this provision 
or leaving - within it the power which is conferred here upon the 
Governor or upon the Auditor to make an estimate for the Legis¬ 
lature and that is the reason I am opposed to the amendment of 
my good friend from Greene. Otherwise, it would be all right ex¬ 
cept for the reason that I have given of putting something unneces¬ 
sary in the Constitution, but as long as you leave there the power 
in the Governor and in the Auditor to make these estimates for 
the Legislature, you give to them a dangerous prerogative. Now, 
there is no sort of question in my mind about the correctness of 
the interpretation of the gentleman from Greene of this provision. 
Leave it as it comes from the Committee, and you make it abso¬ 
lutely impossible for the Legislature of the State of Alabama to 
appropriate money that is already in the State Treasury for general 
purposes. The surplus that comes from year to year from general 



CONSTITUTIONAL CONVENTION, 1901 2477 

appropriations and which goes into the Treasury as a part of the 
State revenue, cannot be touched under this provision as it comes 
irom the Committee for general purposes and there can be in 
inv mind at last no doubt of that fact. The gentleman from 
Greene in that regard is eminently correct, but I repeat the vi¬ 
ciousness lies in the fact that he does not go far enough and strike 
down this dangerous power that is to be given to the Governor 
and the Auditor. I say it is dangerous and I emphasize it. I do 
not know how to be understood, but I make use of that term that 
I expect the devil is to be to pay in our institutions whether we 
drop it or not. I do not mean that you tear down the Capitol and 
the pillars of the republic and all that sort of thing. We are going 
to live and flourish and be a people and a self-governing people, 
notwithstanding the grevious mistakes of this Constitutional Con¬ 
vention, but we are sensible people. Now look at it in a sensible 
and common-sense way. Suppose the time comes when you have 
in the Kxecutive Chair a Republican Governor. Suppose the time 
conies when you have a Republican Auditor and a Democratic 
General Assembly. Then what is your condition. Under this pro¬ 
vision as it is now framed, during any regular session of the Legis¬ 
lature the aggregate appropriations made shall not exceed in 
amount the incomes from the revenues of the State for the cur¬ 
rent fiscal year—that is not all—as estimated by the Governor 
and Auditor. This Republican Governor and his Republican Au¬ 
ditor are about to step down and out. A Democratic Governor 
and a Democratic Auditor are about to succeed him. You have a 
Democratic General Assembly, or vice versa, then what? This 
Governor and this Auditor will make it absolutely impossible if 
they are vicious enough to use their power improperly for the af¬ 
fairs of the State of Alabama to be conducted. They make the 
estimate and propose these estimates to the General Assembly. 
The General Assembly cannot change them although it knows as a 
matter of fact they are viciously, improperly and wrongfully made. 
Not a single dollar that we appropriated out of the State Treas¬ 
ury for general purposes except to the amount estimated for by 
these two hostile officers and therefore they absolutely tie the 
hands of the Legislature so this body that comes from the people 
and represents the interests of the people, the body that is nearer 
in touch with the people than any other, cannot make an appro¬ 
priation for the ordinary general expenses of the State of Alabama. 
That is the condition that you are placed in. Now, Mr. President, 
I will not prolong the argument, but I want to say my proposi¬ 
tion is to strike out the whole of it, partly for the reason I have 
given, but mainly for the fact that we can and ought to trust the 
General Assembly of the State of Alabama in managing the affairs 
of the State. Why, sir, the very foundation of our government is 
trust in the people, confidence in the people, the integrity and wis¬ 
dom of the people, and you say that from time to time there will 



2478 


OFFICIAL PROCEEDINGS 


be brought here members of the Legislature who are not to be 
trusted, who sell out who can be influenced by this state of af¬ 
fairs and that, or by this influence and that, you make a direct at¬ 
tack upon the wisdom and the intelligence and the honesty of the 
people themselves. For these reasons. Mr. President, I believe 
the whole Section ought to be stricken out of this report. 

MR. KIRKLAND—I call for the previous question. 

Mr. Harrison requested Mr. Kirkland to vicld. The gentle¬ 
man declined. 

MR. COLEMAN (Greene)—It is my substitute. I believe 
that I have the right to close the argument. It was reconsidered 
and I offered the amendment, and they cannot cut me off. 

THE PRESII)ENT-The previous question is asked on the 
original Section and the amendment. 

MIL COLEMAN That authorizes me to close the argument? 

THE PRESIDENT — That authorizes the Chairman of the 
Committee. 

MR. OATES—In this matter the Chairman of the Committee 
has been knocked out, he has nothing to say. 

MR. HARRISON Do I understand the delegate to refuse to 
yield a moment? 

MR. KIRKLAND—I will yield if the gentleman from Lee 
will renew my motion. I will withdraw it. 

MR. HARRISON—I will. I am not in favor of either of the 
proportions pending. I think there is merit in the proposition as 
offered by the Committee, and I think that the majority of the 
delegates in this Convention have by a decided vote expressed their 
approval of the proposition, but I do agree in a great measure with 
the remarks of the delegate from Macon, and entirely in the re¬ 
marks of the delegate from Greene, but in deference to the ex¬ 
pressed wish of the delegates of this Convention, in favor of the 
proposition that the General Assembly of Alabama should be pro¬ 
hibited, or the Legislature as we now call it, from making appro¬ 
priations that shall exceed in amount the income of the revenues 
of the State, I submit that this cannot be properly incorporated 
into the Constitution and the matter left to the discretion of the 
Legislature. This is mandatory language, and the Legislators 
having sworn to support the Constitution — I think it will make 
them careful and guarded, and so far as he understands the situa¬ 
tion that he would not make greater appropriations than are ap- 
proved by the Constitution. I heartily endorse the proposition of 
the danger in there, relying upon the assessment or estimate made 
by the Governor and Auditor. In the first place, I think that it is 



CONSTITI TIONAL CONVENTION, 1901 


2479 


a duty that should be left to be discharged by the Legislature it- 
self, in the next place, Mr. President, I know of no law and I be¬ 
lieve the question was asked the distinguished chairman of this 
committee, 1 don t remember his answer, where is there any law 
constitutional or otherwise requiring the Governor or the Auditor 
to make this estimate.'' Mr. President the gentleman said if there 
was a conflict between them that the Governor would rule. I do 
not understand but that it is left to the joint opinion of these two 
officers, or joint estimate. Suppose they differ, there is no provi¬ 
sion made to require them to do it. Suppose they fail to agree? I 
object to it> first, because I think it is invading the prerogative of 
the Legislature, and, second, it is impracticable and cannot well be 
enforced, and vet 1 favor the general proposition and not only see 
no harm in it, but in view of the fact that past Legislatures have 
appropriated more than the income. I think it would be a reason- 
aide provision that you should not exceed your income. It is a 
business proposition addressed to the Legislature. I had hoped, 
Mr. President, that if I could have gotten the floor in time, I had 
intended to offer an amendment by striking out the words “as 
estimated by the Governor and Auditor/' where they occur in this 
section. With that stricken out I believe it would be a good pro¬ 
vision —we would adopt all the merit that is in the suggestion 
emanating from the committee and relieved of all the term so ably 
presented by the delegate from Macon and others, and representing 
this view and trusting that the Convention will vote down this 
proposition 1 move to make under my agreement with the delegate 
from Dale that I would call the previous question- 


MR. OATHS—I would like to ask the gentleman from Lee 
whether he takes any issue with this: Section 24 requires the Au¬ 
ditor to give information to the Governor, and Section 11 of the 
Constitution says the Governor shall from time to time, give the 
General Assembly a statement of the condition of the govern¬ 
ment and at the commencement of the session of the General As¬ 
sembly, and at the close of his office- 

MR. HARRISON—In reading the Constitution you are taking 
up all of my time. 

MR. BROWNE—Can the Legislature enact a law requiring 
the Auditor and Governor to make an estimate? 


MR. HARRISON— They might or might not. You are re¬ 
quiring something here now, limiting the Legislature itself to an 
estimate and under your present Constitution, if you are going to 
make a constitutional provision of it you will have to put some¬ 
thing else in to provide for it, which I think ought not to be done, 
and I hope won’t be done. When interrupted by the gentleman 
from Montgomery I was proceeding to state my position, and ask 
the Convention that the previous question be called, let us vote it 



2480 


OFFICIAL PROCEEDINGS 


down and let us vote on the pending amendment—if the Conven¬ 
tion agrees with me, it is only my opinion, I think there is merit 
in the amendment. 

MR. COBB—I would like to ask the gentleman a question. 

MR. HARRISON—I believe my time is out. I would love to 
answer the gentleman's question. 

MR. COBB—I move to extend the time of the gentleman, he 
has been interrupted, and that he be allowed five minutes. 

THE PRESIDENT—The motion would not be in order. 

MR. COBB—I move to suspend the rules. 

Upon a vote being taken the Convention refused to suspend 
the rules. 

MR. HARRISON—I do not want but a moment only wanted 
to present the question to the Convention and appeal to the gen¬ 
tlemen who are so very much opposed to this measure, that some 
of us will vote to strike out what you think the harm is. but I will 
not, because I think there is some merit in the general proposition, 
and I think it is a good provision that the appropriation shall not 
exceed the income of the State. 

MR. O’NEAL—Allow me to ask a question. 

MR. HARRISON—No sir; my time is out. I hope the Con¬ 
vention understands my position, and I hope the gentlemen will 
vote to strike out, and I will if I get an opportunity. I will have 
to call the previous question. 

THE PRESIDENT—The question is on the section as re¬ 
ported and the pending amendments. The question is shall the 
main question be now put? 

Upon a vote being taken, the previous question was ordered 
by 64 ayes to 34 noes on a division. 

THE PRESIDENT—I recognize the gentleman from Mont¬ 
gomery. 

MR. OATES—I don’t care about occupying the floor at all, 
and yield it to the delegate from Greene. 

MR. O NEAL—I suggest that the gentleman from Greene 
made the motion, and he had a right to close. 

THE PRESIDENT—The ruling of the chair has been uni¬ 
form in this Convention where the previous question is ordered on 
the amendment and original section, the right to close cannot rest 
in two dejegates, therefore the chair has uniformly referred it to 
the chairman of the committee. 



2481 


CONSTITUTIONAL CONVENTION, 1901 

Mk. () N LAL I did not understand the motion. I thought 
it was on the amendment. 


VK*1< 


1 HE 1 RESIDEN f — The gentleman from Montgomery 
Is to the gentleman from Greene. 


MR. COLEMAN (Greene)—I will inquire whether a motion 
has been made to adopt the amendment. 

1H1\ PRESIDENT—Yes. The immediate question now is 
upon the substitute offered by the gentleman from Macon to strike 
out the amendment offered and the original section as reported 
bv the committee. 


MR. COLhMAN—The amendment which I offered simply 
puts thi-s section precisely where you placed it yesterday when you 
adopted the section. The defect in it was in not providing for a 
surplus if it might accumulate. It was almost impossible to solve 
properly a statement by hearing it read as we hear these statutes 
read, and 1 \va> not surprised that the real significance of the sec¬ 
tion had been overlooked. My only purpose was to remedy the 
section and put it precisely as you thought it was when you adopt¬ 
ed it yesterday, and that is the effect of it at this time. My friend. 
Judge Cobh, ha- said as much on one side of this question as he 
understood the other. If you analyze this section and give it its 
full significance, it means nothing more nor less than he has con¬ 
tended for and I say to the distinguished gentleman from Lee that 
the amendment he proposes will amount to nothing upon a legal 
construction of it. All he wants is there, when you understand. 
Now, what power is given there except for the Governor to furn¬ 
ish an estimate for the information of the Legislature and the pro¬ 
vision in there that the appropriation shall not extend beyond the 
estimate given by him was fatally vicious in leaving out the fact 
that if the income exceeded that, that the Legislature had no au- 
thoritv beyond, hut as amended it amounts merely to this, what¬ 
ever income or revenue may be derived from the State is subject 
to the appropriation of the Legislature, the only limitation upon 
them is that they cannot put this State in debt beyond the reve¬ 
nues of the State. 

MR. COBB—Will the gentleman allow me to interrupt him? 

MR. COLEMAN—Certainly. 

MR COBB—Does not your motion still limit the Legislature 
in its power of appropriation to the estimate made by the Governor 
and Auditor? 

MR. COLEMAN—That is precisely what it does not do. 

MR. COBB—Does not limit it? 



2482 


OFFICIAL PROCEEniNGS 


MR. COLEMAN—It limits the appropriations to the estimate 
made and whatever surplus may be in the Treasury. • 

MR. COBB—One moment, if you please. Suppose there be no 
surplus, then would it limit it to the estimate of the Auditor and 
Governor? 

MR. COLEMAN—I, for one, sir, think it does precisely what 
the Convention intended it to do, and that is to keep the Legisla¬ 
ture from putting the State in debt beyond the revenues, and that 
is what we adopted yesterday. 

MR. COBB—Beyond the estimated revenues by the Auditor 
and Governor? 

MR. COLEMAN—If the revenue is not beyond the estimate, 
why, then, it ought not to make appropriations beyond the esti¬ 
mate. If the revenue is beyond the estimate, then the Legislature 
has control and can appropriate it. Every objection that they have 
raised is fully covered by the amendment. Not only does the 
Convention carry out its original designs, but the State is secured 
and no harm can result. 

MR. HARRISON—Will the gentleman allow a question? 

MR. COLEMAN—Yes, sir. 

MR. HARRISON — Do I understand that you insist your 
amendment obviates our objection to the estimate being- made by 
the Governor and Auditor? 

MR. COLEMAN—Mr. President and delegates of the Con¬ 
vention, I am not sitting as a judge and neither do I presume to 
say that I embody all the wisdom of the law. That is my opinion 
and that is what it was put there for, and if anybody can sav that 
it is to the contrary, I would like to hear him say so. There are 
words there that they are afraid of, but the object is to authorize 
the legislature to appropriate whatever income or revenues there 
may be to the State. 

MR. HARRISON—And there would be no harm in the esti¬ 
mate? 

MR. COLEMAN The estimate is an implied duty imposed 
upon them but the estimate does not limit the authority of the 
legislature to make appropriations up to the revenue, and the Gov¬ 
ernor and Auditor ought, for the information of the legislature, 
to present these estimates there, but when they do that there is the 
extent of their power and the legislature comes in and appropriates 
all of the revenues whether beyond the estimate or not. That is 
all I have to say. 

THE PRESIDENT And the question is upon the adoption 
of the substitute offered by the gentleman from Macon. 



CONSTITUTIONAL CONVENTION, 1901 


2483 


MR. BROWNE-1 rise to a question of information, delegates 
do not know what they are voting on. Is it the amendment of the 
gentleman from Greene or the substitute of the gentleman from 
Macon ? 


MR. BOONE—I rise to a question of privilege, the gentleman 
assumes too much when he claims that the delegates do not know 
what they are voting on. 

MR. BROWNE—1 say several gentlemen do not know, and 
I am one of them. Is the question upon the amendment of the 
gentleman from Macon? 

THE', PRESIDENT—The Chair will state the question—the 
Chair stated it very distinctly, but will state it again. The ques¬ 
tion is upon the adoption of the substitute proposed by the gentle¬ 
man from Macon. As many as favor the adoption of that substi¬ 
tute will please rise and remain standing until counted. 

The vote resulted in there being 55 ayes and 60 noes and the 
substitute was lost. 

MR. O’NEAL—I call for a verification of the vote. T ask for 
one other vote—I think some sat down—it was mixed up, a veri¬ 
fication is what I want. 


MR. WATTS—I call for an aye and no vote. 

The call for an aye and no vote was sustained. 

MR. WILLIAMS (Elmore)—Please have the substitute and 
amendment both read. 

THE PRIvSl DENT—The substitute is to strike out the sec¬ 
tion and the amendment of the gentleman from Greene. 

MR. WILLIAMS (Elmore)—What is the amendment of the 
gentleman from Greene. 

THE PRESIDENT —The Secretary will read the amendment. 

The Secretary read the amendment as follows: “Amend Sec¬ 
tion ?7hv adding to the section the following: [And any surplus 
. cn a t e Treasury provided that if from any cause 

'be"^: necessary to rlbuild ,'hjcapi.ol of the State the legis¬ 
lature is authorized to make such appropriation as may be requir- 

e<i Substitute by Mr. Cobb - “To strike out the Section and 

amendment. 

The roll call resulted as follows: 

AYES 


Messrs. President, 
Alinon, 


Ashcraft, 

Banks, 


Bethune, 

Blackwell, 



2484 


OFFICIAL PROCEEDINGS 


Boone, 

Brooks, 

Burns, 

Carmichael, of Colbert, 
Cobb, 

Cunningham, 

Davis, of DeKalb, 

Davis, of Etowah, 

Dent, 

Eyster, 

Ferguson, 

Fitts, 

Foshee, 

Graham, of Montgomery, 
Greer, of Calhoun, 

Haley, 

Handley, 

Harrison, 

Heflin, of Chambers, 
Heflin, of Randolph, 
Hodges, 

Hood, 

Howell, 


Jones, of Bibb, 

Jones, of Montgomery, 
Kirkland, 

Knight, 

Leigh, 

Lomax, 

Long, of Walker, 

Lowe, of Jefferson, 
McMillan, of Wilcox, 
Maxwell, 

Merrill, 

Miller, of Wilcox, 
Moody, 

Mulkey, 

NeSmith, 

Norman, 

O’Neal, of Lauderdale, 
O’Neill (Jefferson), 
Opp, 

O’Rear, 

Parker, of Cullman, 
Parker, of Elmore, 
Pettus, 


Lilians, 

Proctor, 

Reese, 

Robinson, 

Rogers, of Lowndes, 
Saiuford, 

Selheimer, 

Sentell, 

Sloan, 

Smith, of Mobile, 
Sorrell. 

Spears, 

Vaughan, 

Waddell, 

W atts, 

Weakley, 

White, 

Williams, of Marengo. 
Williams, of Elmore, 
Wilson, of Clarke, 
Wilson, of Washington 


TOTAL—73 


NOES 


Altman, 

Grayson, 

Palmer, 

Barefield, 

Greer, of Terry, 

Pearce, 

Beddow, 

Henderson, 

Pitts, 

Browne, 

Hinson, 

Porter, 

Bulger, 

Howze, 

Reynolds (Henry), 

Burnett, 

Inge, 

Sanders, 

Cardon, 

Jackson, 

Sanford. 

Chapman, 

Jenkins, 

Searcy, 

Cofer, 

Jones, of Wilcox, 

Smith, Mac A., 

Coleman, of Greene, 

Kirk, 

Smith, Morgan M., 

Cornwall, 

Kyle, 

Spragins, 

deGraffenreid, 

Locklin, 

Stewart, 

Duke, 

Macdonald, 

Studdard, 

Eley, 

McMillan (Baldwin), 

Tayloe, 

Espy, 

Malone, 

Walker, 

Fletcher, 

Martin, 

Whiteside, 

Glover, 

Murphree, 

Williams, of Barbour 

Graham, of Talladega, 

Oates, 

Winn. 

TOTAL—54 


ABSENT OR NOT VOTING 

Bartlett, 

Byars, 

Carnathon, 

Beavers, 

Carmichael, of Coffee, 

Case, 



CONSTITUTION A I. CONVENTION, 1901 


2485 


Coleman, of Walker, 
Craig, 


f ; u>Ur, 

Freeman, 

Gilmore, 

Gram, 

I olio, of Hale. 
King, 


Ledbetter 
bong, ot Butler, 
Lowe, of Lawrence, 
Miller, of Marengo, 
Mon isette, 

Norw ood, 

Phillips. 

Ken fro. 


Rogers, of Sumter, 
Reynolds, of Chilton, 
Sollie, 

Thompson, 

Weatherly, 

Willet. 


During mil call: 

MR. BAREKIKLD—I would like to vote but 1 do not know' 
whether it is a motion to table the substitute offered by the gen¬ 
tleman from Greene. 

THK PRESIDENT- The motion is not to table, it is to strike 
out the section. 


MR. HA R Kb I ELL) —I vote no. 

THK PRESIDENT—Upon casting up the vote it appears 
that there are 73 ayes and 54 noes and the substitute is adopted. 

MR. KYIJv -1 desire to offer a substitute for Section 27. 

THK PRKSIDKXT—It is out of order. The Secretary will 
read the next section. 

Section 29 was read as follows: 

Sec. 29. All bills for raising revenue shall originate in the 
House of Representatives; hut the Governor, Auditor, Treasurer 
and Attorney General shall, before each regular session of the legis¬ 
lature, prepare a genera] revenue bill to be submitted to the legis¬ 
lature for its action, and the Secretary of State shall have print¬ 
ed for the use of the legislature a sufficient number of copies of 
the bill so prepared which the Governor shall transmit to the 
House of Representatives as soon as organized. 4 he Senate may 
propose amendments to revenue bills. No appropriation or reve¬ 
nue bill shall be passed during the last five days of the session. 

MR jACKSON—Am I in order to offer a substitute for Sec¬ 
tion 29? 

THK PRESIDENT—There are two pending substitutes. 

MR BOONE—I desire to ask unanimous consent to with- 
draw the substitute I offered and offer this one in its place. 

MR LOMAX—On yesterday when the substitute of the gen¬ 
tleman from Mobile was offered I made a point of order on the 
substitute, and I do not want to lose 

THE PRESIDENT— The gentleman is correct, but the point 
of order would apply equally to the substitute. 



2486 


OFFICIAL PROCKKDINO.S 


AIR. LOMAX—Very well, sir. 

THE PRESIDENT—The Chair will now rule upon the point 
ot order made by the gentleman from Montgomery. It seems to 
the Chair that the point of order is not well taken. A substitute 
is regarded by all the authorities that the Chair has examined as 
merely a form of amendment. Every amendment, says Mr. Cush¬ 
ing in his work on Law Practice of Legislative Assemblies, which 
can be proposed whether by leaving out or adding, or leaving and 
adding, is itself susceptible of amendment, but there can be no 
amendment to an amendment to an amendment. Thus, if a propo¬ 
sition consists of AB, and it is proposed to amend bv inserting 
CD, which is an entire substitute, strikes out the whole and adds 
a different proposition entirely, it may be moved to amend the 
amendment by inserting EF, but it cannot be moved to amend 
this amendment as for example by inserting G. It seems to the 
Chair that the substitute offered by the gentleman from Mobile 
will be in order. The point of order is overruled. 

AIR. LOMAX—Will the chair permit a parliamentary inquiry? 
I would like to ask if in Cushing’s Law and Practice there is any 
treatment separately of a substitute? 

THE PRESIDENT—There is not, but the substitute is re¬ 
garded and so stated by Air. Cushing that a substitute is a mere 
form of amendment. 

AIR. LOMAX—Did the Chair ever examine the rule of the 
House of Representatives in Congress with reference to substi¬ 
tutes ? 

THE PRESIDENT—The Chair has not. The rules of the 
House of Congress would not govern this body. 

MR. LOMAX—No. sir, certainly not, except as a precedent. 

THE PRESIDENT—The question is upon the substitute of¬ 
fered by the gentleman from Mobile. The Secretary will read 
the substitute. 

The Secretary read the substitute as follows: “All bills for 
raising revenue shall originate in the House of Representatives. 
The Governor, Auditor and Attorney General shall before each 
regular session of the Legislature prepare a general revenue bill 
to be submitted to the Legislature for its information, and that 
the Secretary of State shall have printed for the use of the Legis¬ 
lature a sufficient number of copies of the bill so prepared which 
the Governor shall transmit to the House of Representatives as 
soon as organized to be used or dealt with as that House may 
elect. The Senate may propose amendments to revenue bills. No 
appropriation or revenue bill shall be passed during the last five 
days of the session. 



24X7 


° ,NSTm tionai. ro.WK.Mi, >\. iwi 

’ Al , h V c!' 1 ?;',," 11 ' , «•-»•■«*. ..i*™- 

■ 1 ' 1 i vt i pi it -ul>-<itutcs tor the word "ac- 

tlOll till* \ \ * • 1 t } ! 11 j i )] J 11 -i t ]i ,n ’ * w 1 i .1, • » 

. , , * WitHll 1 - UJH »1 > |ect i( Ulable - it wa- '|]~ 

wav- intended } >, t !{ vnv> ] •• , . , 

, , , . 1 1 /i""'" 11,1,1 on tlu* >fvcmh line. 

f„„„ M..l.a<- tli.it i, ,„ 1(r |„ 

I ,, t’ 1 ”"/’ 1 •""" ' v,,r ‘S 'Iiould |,r omitlcd. \o 

, ' , l V n "‘ 1 !’•■ >!" I;>'t live (lav. of the .«•>- 

,n ' ' !i " ! -d'l'l' to a)i]>id|niat ion I dll-. 

• ''VS !'l " °T 1 ' ;,v ' I ’rc'irlritt. that the ,Ideate 

trot,, Mol.il, 1 -.,lowed m the Lot ..wen Imc tin exact wordin- 

• »1 t f) c * \ <] Mtlt < l h r o mint jure. 


. ^ ( } * ! I.S ! hai !- (jiiitc true. 1 »nt I had not tlu* oppor- 

n,mtN amendment • that Murnld not he* in there. 

th(iM*'tuo \*. • »rd -, and I a>k unanimnu- consent to strike them 
out. a] >pi < •]»? ;at a *n <u ” two word- in tlu* seventh lim—so that it 
i wo] that n<* f t \« i i u<• hill -hall lx* p.a^-1oI during the* last five 

(lavs. 


I here being m. objection the amendment \va- ordered. 

MK. L< u >Xh I a-k that tlu* same wonh he -tricken out of 
tile suh-titute. 


Mu c* • 11' ( n! w a- "iven. 

I 111% I*1\ i\S11)I\X I - The (jiiestion is on the adoption of tlu* 
-uh-titute. 


M l\ hl.ACKW LLI. 1 hope that substitute will not be* 
adopted. and I do hope very much that the substitute of the gen¬ 
tle man from 1 )alla- will be adopted. The substitute of the gen¬ 
tleman from Mobile doe- not cure, so far as T can see. the defects 
in the section at all. It still leaves the power with the Governor 
and the Auditor to prepare this general revenue hill for the Legis¬ 
lature, no matter for what purpose it is prepared, and it takes out 
of the hands of the Legislature the right to prepare that bill. The 
difference between the separate departments of government un- 
douhtcdlv is that while the Legislature enacts the laws, the Kx- 
ecutive execute- and the judiciary construes the law. The power 
of the Governor insofar as tin* Legislative Department is concern¬ 
ed, is confined almost exclusively to the approval of hills. As the 
Executive, he* communicates to the two houses information con- 
rerning the condition of the State, and he may recommend meas¬ 
ures to their consideration, hut heretofore he has never been al¬ 
lowed to originate or introduce bills, and the power to appropri¬ 
ate tnonev, or to provide for the expenses of the government has 
been lodged in those that directly represent the people. The power 
to originate all hills for the purpose of raising revenue has been 
confined exclusively to the legislative body heretofore, in both 



2488 


O F F l Cl A l P ROC K KDINGS 


houses, the Senate having the right to make amendments to such 
bills. This section proposes a radical change in this long settled 
policy, and it proposes that change without any satisfactory reason 
being offered for it. There is no showing of incompetence upon 
the part of the Legislature, or of the superior qualities of the (io\- 
ernor and the Auditor to do this, in any arguments that have been 
made upon this floor. If this Section means nothing but to allow 
the Governor to simply make a recommendation, or furnish in¬ 
formation as the gentlemen have said, then why change its phrase¬ 
ology, and why alarm the conservatives who desire to keep sep¬ 
arate and distinct the co-ordinate branches of the government. If 
it is simply a recommendation, he has that power now. 

Mr. President, we have made the Legislature a target since 
we convened here. There is no question about that. The Legisla¬ 
ture has been made a target, we opened fire on it with musketrx. 
and then with mountain howitzers, and now we are bringing up 
the siege guns. [Everything has been brought to hear against the 
Legislature, and we have been constantly encroaching on that 
branch of the government. I suppose after we have hampered it. 
and destroyed its power to a very large extent, that the unlv rea¬ 
son we have got now' for continuing to shoot at it is upon the same 
theory that the man continued to heat a vicious dog, after killing 
tlie dog. in order to show that there really was punishment after 
death. That is the theory upon which we still seem to be shoot¬ 
ing at the Legislature. It is my opinion that the people are not 
clamoring for us to take this power out of the hands of 133 of the 
representatives that they choose, and put it in the hands of the 
three State officials who cannot know the various conditions of 
this State as well as the Representatives do. Why should we 
think that the Governor and Secretary of State and the Attorney- 
General know more about framing a bill for the people than 133 
representatives selected directly by the people. Those representa¬ 
tives have aside from their own knowledge access to the informa¬ 
tion of these officers, and they are entitled to advise with them, 
and to have the recommendation of the Governor without having 
that recommendation put in the form that it is here. The pro¬ 
posed change would rob them of the power that they have always 
had since the formation of our State. This is a consolidation of 
powers which takes away one of the checks upon one of the powers 
of one of the branches of the Government. Mr. Webster in talk¬ 
ing about matters of this character said that every encroachment, 
great or small, is enough to awaken the attention of those who are 
entrusted with the preservation of constitutional government, and 
this is an encroachment on the legislative branch of the Govern¬ 
ment bv another co-ordinate branch of the Government. We do 
not have to wait until great public misfortune comes, or wait un¬ 
til our liberty is put in jeopardy before we see the dangers that 
confront us. Our fathers saw them in a change in the British 



CONSTITI'TIOXAI. CONVKNTION. , 41t9 

Parliament, and the assemble , , , . 

germ ol unjust power Tliev ^tJ* - ts> ° mischief there and the 

(Ik-v dra«{i,l fjrlh ,hu. ii,' , »» Mr. Webster says. 

rights of the people, and they L'mVuJf'Ti 1 l,,vaslon °f the 

ed their active efforts againsUt until it u- 1 'T "T f'!" 1 
latere will no. wan, to be shor of ,i t. ' "'ta 1 <: ^ 

send us here did not ask us to t-.k-H 1 ( T r ‘ J lle People who 
islature. an,I the „e„, r , "p' a ",“ y " 'ron, the I.eg- 

we desire to ohc tl,, ot,UT StaU ‘ “‘fn-ers on whom 
, , pl ‘ Ul th,s ‘ <1,ht,< mal power have not asked for it and 

It o m a the.rihi’ SC< , , v an ' V , thinB that , ue ha vt* said to the’peo- 
-.1 r - , ‘V J<I<l,tlo 'ial power. Thev have enough to do 

\\ith their other duties that devolve upon them. They arenot try- 

•md the'in* ;T V C °' ,,nlina . ,c l,ranch of the Government of power. 

people are not asking us to confer it upon them. It seems 

Iveholtl TTl To Pr ° ,K ' r , lv fear ourselves in what we are doing. 
\\ t hold the trust that we have here for the benefit of the people. 

M R. M.U'lH )X.\IJ > Is it not a fact that one of the greatest 
evils that the people of Alabama have been troubled with for the 

past h teen or twenty years is in artificial and hastilv drawn reve- 
nue hills. 


MR. lU.ACKW ELL—There may be something in that. There 
may have been some bills improperly drawn, but as a matter of 
fact the gentleman docs not know that it was because they were 
hastily drawn. 1 hey have had plenty of time to draw these bills, 
and he does not know and cannot say that the Governor, the Au¬ 
ditor and the Attorney-General can draw a bill more perfectlv 
than 133 Representatives. 

MR. O’NEAL—They may have drawn the last bill. 

MR. MACDONALD—No the} 1 did not. The record shows 

that. 


MR. BLACKWELL—As a matter of fact it is not shown that 
the Governor would make it any more perfect. The reasons for 
what we do in this matter of invading a co-ordinate branch of the 
Government must not be doubtful. We must know that it is a 
benefit and that the people desire it and are willing to have it. It 
must not be that character of intention which like the twilight, 
lingering between night and day, takes on the hues of both. As 
a matter of fact, it must be clear and effulgent. The reason, the 
benefit, and all must be clearly shown. 

After all the abuse we have heaped upon the Legislature. I 
desire to say that they put into operation this Constitution under 
which we have lived since 1875, and they have enacted the laws 
which have enabled us to drive out the enemies of white man’s 
government in this country, and restored the Government to the 
white people of Alabama again, and I think we are going a little 



2490 


OFFICIAL PROCEEDINGS 


too far in our efforts here to invade the province of the Legisla¬ 
ture of the State of Alabama, and I hope very much that the 
original Section as it appears in our present Constitution, and of¬ 
fered by the gentleman from Dallas as a substitute, will be adopted 
by this Convention. 

MR. SMITH (Mobile)—There was a resolution referred to 
the Judiciary Committee instructing it to consider and advise the 
Convention as to its power to order the continuance of pay to the 
members and officers of the Convention after the expiration of 
fifty days. The Committee finding that the Attorney-General was 
advising the State officers on the subject, ascertained that they 
would be inclined to act upon the opinion of the Attorney-Gen¬ 
eral, and in accordance with the views of the Attorney-General 
the Committee has drafted an ordinance which I now present and 
ask that the rules be suspended and that the ordinance he adopted. 

Ordinance No. 424, by Judiciary Committee. 

Be it ordained by the people of Alabama in Convention as¬ 
sembled, That this Convention shall continue in session until it 
shall, by careful revision and amendment of the present Consti¬ 
tution, frame and adopt a revised Constitution for this State. 

Be it further ordained. That during the time this Convention 
shall so continue in session, the officers thereof shall receive the 
same compensation, payable out of the Treasury of the State, as 
corresponding officers of the House of Representatives are by law 
allowed; and that the delegates shall receive for their services the 
same per diem and mileage from the Treasury of the State as is 
allowed the members of the General Assembly. The payment 
shall be made on the certificates of the President and Secretary 
of the Convention, to the Auditor of the State, as payment of com¬ 
pensation to members of the General Assembly is by law directed 
to be made. 

Upon a vote being taken, the rules were suspended. 

I HE PRESIDENT—The question will be upon the adoption 
of the ordinance. 

MR. REESE—I desire to ask whether it will be necessary to 
suspend the rules specifically, to prevent the re-reading of this 
ordinance. I believe, under the laws we have adopted in this Con¬ 
vention, that it requires three readings. Will there have to be a 
specific motion to suspend that particular rule? 

THE PRESIDENT—It seems that a motion to suspend the 
rules would cover that point. The question the chair desires to 
submit is whether the Convention desires the ordinance to be pass¬ 
ed by a yea and nay vote. 

MR. deGRAFFENREID—I call for an aye and no vote. 



2491 


CONSTITl TIONAK CONVKKTION, 1901 

MR. JONES (Montgomery) ] ask that the ordinance go over 
until tomorrow. 

MR. SMI I H As far as the committee is concerned, I know 
of no objection. 

Mk J< )NES (Montgomery) — 1 hope that the or¬ 
dinance will go over until tomorrow. I have been of a diffident 
opinion, but it is possible I may be convinced when I hear the At¬ 
torney (»eneral s opinion. It is too important a question to be tak¬ 
en up now'. 

MR. < ) NEAE---I desire to ask whether it would not be neces¬ 
sary for us to dispense with the second reading and order this to 
a third reading. We have had no second reading of this ordinance, 
and under the rules that is required. 

MR. SM ITH (Mobile)—Our idea was that it should be drawn 
and submitted to the Convention for its action. I want to state 
that the resolution is a reiteration of the language of the Enabling 
Act, except that the limitation is omitted and the provision for pay 
is expressly extended indefinitely. The Attorney General stated 
that he would prefer that it should he put in that language, and 
the committee adopted his suggestion. His view's upon the sub¬ 
ject were that it would be sufficient whether provided for by ordi¬ 
nance or resolution, but he suggested that it be put in the form 
of an ordinance 

MR. WHITE—I ask for a reading of the ordinance. 

MR. FITTS—I demand the previous question on the adop¬ 
tion of the ordinance by an aye and no vote. Under the Consti¬ 
tution of 1875 it takes an aye and no vote. 

THE PRESIDENT — Will the gentleman from Tuscaloosa 
vield to the gentleman from Jefferson. 

MR. FITTS—No, sir. 

THE PRESIDENT—The question will be upon the motion 
of the gentleman from Tuscaloosa for the previous question, un¬ 
less the gentleman yield for an amendment. 

MR. WHITE—I thought I had the floor. 

MR. FITTS—I declined to yield. 

MR HARRISON—I submit that the delegate from Jefferson 
was on the floor and had secured the recognition of the chair be¬ 
fore the gentleman from Tuscaloosa made the motion. 

MR. WHITE—I understood the chair recognized me. 

THE PRESIDENT—The chair did not intend to cut off the 
gentleman from Jefferson. 



2492 


OFFICIAL VROC FKDIXtiS 


MR. PETTUS—I rise to a point of order. The motion for the 
previous question is not debatable. 

THE PRESIDENT—The attention of the chair was diverted 
for a moment, and the chair possibly failed to recognize the gen¬ 
tleman from Jefferson. This was unintentional, and there was 
another matter in the mind of the chair about which he was con¬ 
ferring with several delegates. 

MR. WHITE—I had not heard the chair call the name of the 
gentleman from Tuscaloosa, and I make the point that when mv 
name was called and I was recognized, that 1 had the floor. 

MR. FITTS — I understood that the gentleman never was 
recognized. I demanded the previous question upon the ordinance, 
and asked for a yea and nay vote in accordance with the Consti¬ 
tution of 1875. 

THE PRESIDENT — The chair is in doubt for the reason 
there was another matter in the mind of the chair just at the time, 
and the chair was speaking to the gentleman from Talladega, and 
for that reason is not clear upon the subject. The chair will rule 
that the gentleman from Jefferson was entitled to the floor. 

MR. FITTS—I call for the reading of the journal, and make 
a point of order that I was recognized by the chair. 

MR. \\ HITE—I make the point of order that the chair has 
ruled upon the question. 

MR. F ITTS—I call for the reading of the stenographic report. 

MR. WHITE—I make the point of order that the only way 
open to the gentleman is to appeal from the decision of the chair. 

THE PRESIDENT—It seems to the chair that the gentle¬ 
man from Jefferson was on the floor, and the chair cannot recollect 
whether he was recognized or not. but gentlemen in whom the 
chair has confidence, state that he was recognized, and it would 
not be proper in the opinion of the chair, for the gentleman to be 
deprived of the privilege of offering his amendment simply because 
the mind of the chair was detracted by another subject. 

MR. FITTS—I make the motion, then, that we remain in ses¬ 
sion until this pending motion is disposed of. 

MR. WHITE—I have the floor, as I understand it. 

MR. Fl r 1 S—I insist upon my motion and call for a suspension 
of the rules. 

THE PRESIDENT—The gentleman will send up his amend¬ 
ment, and the chair will submit the question of a suspension of 
the rules to the Convention. 



O )NSTm TlON’AL CONVENTION, 1901 


2493 


l pun a being taken, the rules were suspended. 

MR. h 1 i 1 S 1 move that we remain in session until the pend¬ 
ing matter i- disposed of. 

I poll a vote bring taken, the vote was carried. The amend¬ 
ment offered by the gentleman from Jefferson (Mr. White) was 
read a> tollow^: “Amend by striking out all of said ordinance 
alter the wonR * 1 >\ law allowed/” 

MR. \\ 111 I h 1 am not tjuile sure that the amendment 
trike- i>m tin exact words that 1 want stricken out or not, be¬ 
cause 1 had t<> gather the substance of the ordinance hv simple 
iicarm^ it read rather hurriedly, the purpose of the amendment 
i- i<. >trike out that part which allows pay to the members of this 
t An , eiiih »n Tin* purpose of the amendment is to allow the of- 
fieri" of the Convention pay for their services, but not to allow 
tin* member^ m the Convention pay for their services. I do not 
know of ;ni\ thine that would commend il>elf so much to the people 
ui Alabama a- lor the delegates of thi> Convention to show' their 
pairi«»ti<m upon thi- occasion. We all know- that the members 
of tin- Convention, generallv speaking. are sacrificing very much 
more than the per diem which they receive. The man who came 
to thi- Convention tor the purpose of being compensated hv the 
per diem winch i- allowed by law could hardly be of that type that 
would be to tile 1 >0-1 interest of the State to send. A very large 
majoritv of thi- Convention an* losing every day much more than 
the per diem, and n we could convince the people of Alabama and 
convince them thoroughly (if the fact that we are acting slowly 
troin patriotic' motives, it would go far indeed towaids ratifying 
tin* work which we will submit to them, and I do hope that this 
amendment will Ik* adopted. 

MR. ITITS- I do not think the people of this State desire 
to be fed on gir-h or bosh in respect to this matter. (Applause.) 
i do not suppose there is a delegate here, or there are very few 
indeed, to whom the compensation of four dollars per day amounts 
to an\ thing more than furnishing the means of paying his ex- 
pe U s(N in attending this Convention. I do not believe that the gen¬ 
tleman from letter son speaks for the people of Alabama when he 
>avs that theV have a desire that as representatives of the people 
tlie^e delegate- should remain here without compensation. If he 
\vant< to plav that role, Mr. President, he need not take his pay, 
but lie can turn it over to an orphan asylum, or to any charity 
that he mav desire, but I do not believe there is any yearning 
sentiment among the people of Alabama that they should pay the 
pages and the officers of this Convention and not pay the expenses 
of the delegates for devoting their best time and attention to 
framing this Constitution. They are willing— 

MR. WILLIAMS (Marengo)—May I interrupt the gentle¬ 
man ? 



2494 


OFFICIAL PROCEEDINGS 


MR. FITTS—No, sir. 

MR. WILLIAMS (Marengo)—Just for a minute. 

MR. FITTS—Not even for a minute. The people are perfect¬ 
ly willing that the laborer should be worthy of his hire here today 
as it was in olden times in the scriptural days, and I do not be¬ 
lieve that the position of the delegate represents the true desire 
of the people of this State. I belive that they desire to bear the ex¬ 
penses of their representative, and desire that this work be thor¬ 
oughly but expeditiously done, and that we should remain here 
and receive the compensation fixed by law. I move to lay the 
amendment upon the table. 

MR. WHITE—I call for an aye and no vote. 

The call was sustained, and the vote upon the call of the roll 
resulted as follows: 

AYES 


Messrs. President, 

Glover, 

Maxwell, 

Almon, 

Graham, of Montgomery, 

Merrill, 

Altman, 

Grayson, 

Miller (Wilcox), 

Ashcraft, 

Greer, of Calhoun, 

Moody, 

Banks, 

Greer, of Perry, 

Mulkey, 

Barefield, 

Handley, 

Murphrey, 

Bethune, 

Harrison, 

NeSmith, 

Blackwell, 

Heflin, of Chambers, 

Norman, 

Boone, 

Heflin, of Randolph, 

Oates, 

Brooks, 

Henderson, 

O’Neal (Lauderdale), 

Browne, 

Hinson, 

Opp, 

Bulger, 

Hodges, 

O’Rear, 

Cardon, 

Hood, 

Palmer, 

Carmichael, of Colbert, 

Howell, 

Parker (Cullman), 

Chapman, 

Howze, 

Parker (Elmore), 

Coleman, of Greene, 

Inge, 

Pearce, 

Cunningham, 

Jackson, 

Pettus. 

Davis, of DeKalb, 

Jenkins, 

Pillans, 

Davis, of Etowah, 

Jones, of Bibb, 

Pitts, 

Dent, 

Jones, of Wilcox, 

Porter, 

deGraffenreid, 

Knight, 

Proctor, 

Duke, 

Leigh, 

Reese, 

Eley, 

Locklin, 

Reynolds (Henry), 

Eyster, 

Lomax, 

Rogers (Lowndes), 

Espy, 

Long (Butler), 

Samford, 

Ferguson, 

Long (Walker), 

Sanders, 

Fitts, 

Macdonald, 

Sanford, 

Fletcher, 

McMillan (Baldwin), 

Searcy, 

Foshee, 

McMillan (Wilcox), 

Selheimer, 

Freeman, 

Malone, 

Sentell, 



CONSTITUTIONAL CONVENTION, 1901 


2495 


Smith (Mobile), 

Tayloe, 

Williams (Elmore), 

Smith, Mac. A., 

Vaughan, 

Williams (Barbour), 

Smith, Morgan M., 

Waddell, 

Williams (Marengo), 

Spears, 

Walker, 

Wilson (Clarke), 

Sorrell, 

Watts, 

Wilson (Washington), 

Stewart, 

Weakley, 

Winn. 

Stoddard, 

Whiteside, 

TOTAL—IK 


NOES 


Hed (low, 

Jones, of Montgomery, 

O’Neill (Jefferson). 

burns, 

Kirk, 

Robinson, 

Cobb, 

Kirkland, 

Spragins, 

(‘ofer, 

Lowe (Jefferson), 

White, 



TOTAL—12 


ABSENT OR NOT VOTING 

bartlett. 

Gilmore, 

Morrisette, 

beavers, 

Graham, of Talladega, 

Norwood, 

Burnett, 

Grant, 

Phillips, 

Byars, 

Haley, 

Renfro, 

Carmichael, of Coffee, 

Jones, of Hale, 

Reynolds (Chilton), 

Carnathon, 

King, 

Rogers (Sumter), 

Case, 

Kyle, 

Sloan, 

Coleman, of Walker, 

Ledbetter, 

Sollie, 

Cornwall, 

Lowe (Lawrence), 

Thompson, 

Craig, 

Martin, 

Weatherly, 

Poster, 

Miller (Marengo), 

Willet. 


By a vote of 119 ayes and 12 noes, the motion to table was 
carried. 


During the call of the roll: 

MR. SANFORD (Montgomery)—As Alabama is not begging 
for charity from this Convention, I vote aye. 

MR. WILLIAMS (Marengo)—I move the adoption of the 
ordinance, and upon that I move the previous question. 

MR. BROOKS—Before that motion is put I desire to move 
that when this Convention adjourns that it adjourn until 4 o’clock 
this afternoon. 

Upon a vote being taken the vote was lost. 

MR. HARRISON — I rise for an inquiry. This matter was 
submitted to the Judiciary Committee as I understood it to investi¬ 
gate the matter as to the power of this Convention to adopt an 
ordinance to do what this ordinance proposes. I understood the 
Chairman of the Committee to state that having ascertained that 



24% 


O FFICIA L P R OC KK1) ING S 


the Attorney General had given an o]>inion upon this matter, the 
Committee did not investigate it, and the Committee expressed 
no opinion upon it, nor is the report of the Committee accom¬ 
panied by the opinion of the Attorney General. I desire to inquire 
of the Chairman of the Committee if they investigated the matter, 
and if so what is their conclusion, and if they have not, and rel\ 
upon the Attorney General's opinion, if they will allow the Con¬ 
vention to have a copy of that opinion. 

MR. BURNS—I move that we adjourn. 

MR. FITTS—The previous question has been ordered. 

MR. BURNS—A motion to adjourn is always in order. 

THE PRESIDENT—The main question has been ordered. 
The question is upon the adoption of the ordinance reported by 
the Committee. 

During the call of the roll: 

MR. BURNS—In the absence of the opinion of the Attorney 
General I vote no. (Laughter.) 

MR. JONES (Montgomery)—I ask unanimous consent for 
one minute to explain my vote. (There were loud expressions of 
dissent and objections.) I vote no, because this Convention has 
no authority to appropriate money. 

The vote upon the call of the roll resulted as follows: 

AYES 


Messrs. President, 

deGraffenreid, 

Howell, 

Almon, 

Duke, 

Howzc, 

Altman, 

Elcy, 

Inge, 

Ashcraft, 

Eyster, 

J ackson, 

Banks, 

Espy, 

Jones, of Bibb, 

Barefield, 

Ferguson, 

Jones, of Wilcox, 

Bethune, 

Fitts, 

Knight, 

Blackwell, 

Fletcher, 

Leigh, 

Boone, 

Foshee, 

Locklin, 

Brooks, 

Freeman, 

Lomax, 

Browne, 

Glover, 

Long, of Butler, 

Bulger, 

Graham, of Montgomery, 

Long, of Walker, 

Cardon, 

Grayson, 

Lowe, of Jefferson, 

Carmichael, of Colbert, 

Greer, of Calhoun, 

Macdonald, 

Chapman, 

Handley, 

McMillan, of Baldwin, 

Coleman, of Greene, 

Heflin, of Chambers, 

McMillan (Wilcox), 

Cornwall, 

Heflin, of Randolph, 

Malone, 

Cunningham, 

Henderson, 

Maxwell, 

Davis, of DeKalb, 

Hinson, 

Merrill, 

Davis, of Etowah, 

Hodges, 

Miller (Wilcox), 

Dent, 

Hood, 

Moody, 



CONSTITUTIONAL CONVENTION, 1901 


2497 


Mulkey, 

Murphree, 

Norman, 

Oates, 

O'Neal (Lauderdale), 
Opp, 

O’Rear, 

Parker (Cullman), 
Parker (Elmore), 
Pearce, 

Pettus, 

Pillans, 

Pitts, 

Porter, 

Proctor, 


Beddow, 

Burns, 

Cobb, 

Cofer, 

Harrison, 


Reese, 

Reynolds, of Henry, 
Rogers (Lowndes), 
Samford, 

Sanders, 

Sanford, 

Searcy, 

Selheimer, 

Sentell, 

Smith (Mobile), 

Smith, Mac. A., 

Smith, Morgan M., 
Sorrell, 

Spears, 

Stewart, 

NOES 

Jones, of Montgomery, 
Kirkland, 

Kyle, 

Palmer, 

Robinson, 


Stoddard, 

Tayloe, 

Vaughan, 

Waddell, 

Walker, 

Watts, 

Weakley, 

Whiteside, 

Williams (Barbour), 
Williams (Marengo), 
Williams (Elmore), 
Wilson (Clarke), 
Wilson (Washington), 
Winn. 

TOTAL 108 


Sloan, 

Spragins, 

White, 


TOTAL—13 


ABSENT OR NOT VOTING 


Bartlett, 

Beavers. 

Burnett, 

Byars, 

Carmichael, of Colbert, 
Carnathon, 

Case, 

Coleman, of W'alker, 
Craig, 

Foster, 

Gilmore, 


Graham, of Talladega, 
Grant, 

Haley, 

Jenkins, 

Jones, of Hate, 

Kirk, 

Ledbetter, 

Lowe, of Lawrence, 
Martin, 

Miller (Marengo), 
Morrisette, 

PAIRS 


Norwood, 

O’Neill, of Jefferson, 
Phillips, 

Renfro, 

Reynolds (Chilton), 
Rogers (Sumter), 
Sollie, 

Thompson, 

Weatherly, 

Willet. 


NeSmith, aye; Kirk, no. 

And by a vote of 108 ayes and 13 noevS, the ordinance was 
adopted. 

Leaves of absence were granted to Mr. Thompson of Bibb, 
for today and Saturday; Mr. Grayson for Saturday and Monday; 
Mr. Inge for Saturday and Monday; Mr. Reynolds of Chilton, for 
today; Mr. Howze for Saturday; Mr. Weatherly for today on ac¬ 
count of sickness; Mr. Foster for today and tomorrow; Mr. Jones 



2498 


OFFICIAL PROCEEDINGS 


of Bibb, for Saturday and Monday; Mr. Foshee for todav and to¬ 
morrow evening. 

Thereupon the Convention adjourned until 3:30 o’clock. 


A F T E R N O O N SESSION 


The Convention was called to order by the President and the 
roll being called showed the presence of 109 delegates. 

Leaves of absence were granted as follows: Mr. Haley for 
Saturday and Monday; to Mr. Cardttn for this afternoon, on ac¬ 
count of sickness; to Mr. Pearce until Thursday; to Mr. Davis of 
Etowah for tomorrow; to Mr. Heflin of Randolph for tomorrow. 

MR. SAMFORD (Pike)—I ask unanimous consent to be per¬ 
mitted to present a petition, to have it printed in the stenographic 
report. 

THE PRESIDENT —The gentl email asks unanimous con¬ 
sent to introduce a petition. 


MR. KIRKLAND—1 object. 

THE PRESIDENT—Objection is made. 

MR. SAMFORD—I move a suspension of the rules that I be 
permitted to have this short petition introduced, ft has been uni¬ 
versally accorded to every gentleman on this floor. 

MR. KIRKLAND—I withdraw the objection. 

The clerk then read the petition as follows: 

Petition by Mr. Samford (Pike) : 


Troy, Ala., July 15. 1901. 

To Hons. J. C. Henderson, J. D. Murphree and W. H. Sam¬ 
ford, members Constitutional Convention: 


We, the undersigned, respectfully petition through you Un¬ 
constitutional Convention, to embody in the organic law plenary 
powers to the R. I. Commission, they to be elected by the people 
and paid by the State. 

Alex Henderson & Co.. W. C. Windham. J. (). Pinson, f. P 
Wood, John Gamble. J. Randolph Brown, C. A. Simpson. F. Brant¬ 
ley & Sons, White & Edmondson, H. T. Babcock, T. J. Dillard. 
V. D. Jones. Rosenberg Bros., James Walters, Bob Flinn, Brainier 
& Henderson, J. F. Paul, P. L. Enzor. T. S. baulk, J. D. Murphree. 
Jr., Redden Bros., Charles Carroll, Charles Henderson, J. F. Car- 
roll, N. J. Ross. B. B. Wilkerson, Coleman & White, Saul Parchten. 
Ben Rubenstein. Sellers, Miller & Co.. Rainie Bros., W. A. Sims! 



CONSTITUTIONAL CONVENTION, 1901 


2499 


McLeod Darby, W. B. Johnson, B. M. Owens, J. M. Mullan, W. K. 
Hanchey, Charles C. Williams, I. Jackson. Sain A. \\ illiams, I - 
Darby & Son, F. S. Wood. T. McBryde. J. S. Copeland. J. D. Wil- 
liams. 


Referred to Committee on Corporations. 

MR. SANKOR1) (Montgomery)—What is the business before 
the Convention? 


THK PRESIDENT-—When the Convention adjourned, the 
gentleman from Tallapoosa had the floor. The special order for 
this afternoon is the consideration of the report of the Committee 
on Legislative Department. The Convention had under consider¬ 
ation Section 69 to which there was pending an amendment and 
substitute to the amendment and section. The Chair recognized 
the gentleman from Tallapoosa. 


MR. BULGER—When we suspended in the forenoon, 1 was 
undertaking to give my views briefly on this section of the report 
of the committee as amended. It has been the experience of al¬ 
most every Legislature in Alabama since the war that the most im¬ 
portant and yet the most complicated propositions with which they 
have to contend is the framing and passing of a revenue bill. It is 
important because it is one of the ways by which the State govern¬ 
ment procures revenue with which to defray the expenses of the 
administration of the affairs of State. It is complicated because 
it necessarily embraces a large variety of enterprises that go on 
in everv part of the State. Now, one way by which the State pro¬ 
cures it's revenue is bv an ad valorem tax. This Convention in its 
wisdom has reduced the rate of taxation from seventy-five cents 
to sixtv-five cents thereby reducing the revenue from that source 
about a quarter of a million dollars, making it important that every 
other source through which revenues must be obtained shall be 
carefully guarded by this Convention and by the House of Repre¬ 
sentatives of the State. Now, I submit that the average Repre¬ 
sentative who comes to the Legislature is not prepared to go into 
and ascertain the necessary information to intelligently draw a bill 
like this He comes from the evervdav avocations, he is not fa¬ 
miliar with the affairs of State, and the ordinary man will take 
from thirty to sixty days to acquire this information and become 
familiar enough to draw a bill on this subject. Now. I understand 
the purpose of this section reported by the committee is to aid the 
Legislature in preparing this particular bill. Now, if a representa¬ 
tive is to have information on any important subject like this, it is 
important that he have the best information obtainable. He is un- 
able to get it from the people who send him here, he is hardly 
Qualified to go into the Auditor’s office, and into the Treasurers 
office and get the information. Now, this bill proposes to relieve 



2500 


OFFICIAL PROCEEDINGS 


him of this labor and put upon his desk when he comes here this 
information so that he cannot be mistaken about what it is. Now, 
this section proposes to have that information to come from the 
Chief Executive of the State, the man of all men who should be 
informed about the necessities and financial condition of the State. 
It also provides that he shall be accompanied by the Auditor whose 
business it is to keep the account of the State and be familiar with 
its condition. The Attorney General is not put upon this force 
for any such purpose, he is not expected to know any more about 
the financial condition of the State and its affairs than the ordinary 
representative. His business is in a different department. Now, 
when the revenue bill is prepared and passed it is important that 
it should be legal and constitutional, therefore, the committee acted 
wisely in putting the Attorney General on the Board. So you see 
that this combination of information to be laid upon the desk of 
every member of the House of Representatives early in the session 
makes him better prepared to vote upon a revenue bill when it is 
presented. Now, some gentlemen objected because they said it 
would put the Executive too nearly in touch with the House of 
Representatives. If this Constitution be adopted, that will not be 
the fact, because the out-going Governor, who has held his office 
for four years, the out-going Attorney-General and out-going Au¬ 
ditor must present this bill—this information. The Legislature who 
follow after him is accompanied by a new Governor. The old Gov¬ 
ernor makes the report and gives the information. The new Gov¬ 
ernor has nothing to do with that bill, except he mav recommend 
in his message, and to veto or approve it. So von sec* the alarm 
of the gentlemen on the other side is unfounded. The Governor 
who makes this report to the Legislature has no more to do with 
the House of Representatives, his term is at an end. and thev are 
left alone with a new Governor. Now, the amendment of the gen¬ 
tleman from Mobile is wise and conservative. He strikes out of 
the original section the word “action and instead thereof puts the 
word “information” so the bill would read, “prepare a general 
revenue bill to be submitted to the Legislature for its information,” 
instead of for its “action.” Therefore, the Governor, as gentleman 
have said, does not introduce a bill into the Legislature. The 
further ^amendment by the distinguished gentleman from Mobile 
is this, which the Governor shall transmit to the House of Repre¬ 
sentatives as soon as organized. Here is the amendment, “to be 
used or dealt with as the House may elect. So you see it is only 
at most a recommendation; it is only at most information trans¬ 
mitted from a source about which there can be no doubt. Now, 
it seems to me, gentlemen of the Convention, that there can be 
no objection to this. It seems to me that it would aid the House of 
Representatives wonderfully to have this information spread upon 
their desks early in the session. 



CONSTITUTIONAL CONVKNTION, 1901 


2501 


THE PRESIDENT—The time of the gentleman has ex¬ 
pired. 

MR. SANFORD (Montgomery)—I hope, Mr. President, that 
this 2^)th section will not pass. It is a departure from the customs 
of Alabama; it is an innovation upon its time-honored policies, 
and it is more—it is a retrogression ; it is going back to the very 
principles from which our forefathers revolted more than one hun¬ 
dred years ago. They were greatly disturbed by the influence 
which the executive officers had over the Legislature, especially in 
the matter of taxes. Now, the question of taxation has been the 
cause of more revolutions than any one single cause in the history 
of the world, not only in England, but in Europe, and not only in 
Europe and England, but in our own country. Your great Revolu¬ 
tion of 1775 was fought on the question of taxation. 1 said, Mr. 
Chairman, that this is a matter of retrogression—it is precisely the 
policy of a monarchy; it is precisely the policy of Great Britain as 
it exists today. At the commencement of every Parliament the 
Chancellor of the Exchequer, under the influence of the adminis¬ 
tration, prepares what is called his budget. His budget consists of 
two distinct departments. One is the statement of the financial 
condition of Great Britain, and the other is what he calls his scheme 
or method to meet that condition, and the scheme consists of repeal¬ 
ing subjects of taxation, or of adding new items, or of suggesting 
alone. Now, what is this but precisely the English budget, the mon¬ 
archical plan of raising revenue and restrictions proposed by this sec¬ 
tion. Monarchies have one system of policy; Republics another—and 
this system is a mingling, is a mixture, of monarchical government 
and republican government, and, like all unnatural mixtures, a gov¬ 
ernmental hybred will be produced that will have the evils of both 
and the virtues of neither. I can see no reason why we should adopt 
the English system in Alabama—one being the system of a mon¬ 
archy and the other that of a great republic. What would our 
friend Sowell, my friend the Auditor, think if he was to play the 
part of Chancellor of the Exchequer, under the direction of the ad¬ 
ministration—for that is precisely the position that he would hold. 
The Chancellor of the Exchequer of England is the Auditor. He 
states the financial condition, and then he proposes certain sub¬ 
jects of taxation and recommends them to the House of Parlia¬ 
ment, w'here the bill originates, and to the House of Lords. Now, 
this is precisely the same thing, and f don’t think that our people 
would like the monarchical policy of being taxed applied to them. 
For these reasons, and the incongruity and inconsistency between 
the policies of a republic and a monarchy, limited or otherwise— 
in a republic the voice of the people should be heard. My friends 
forget that this whole idea of originating revenue bills, with the 
Commons, is really nothing more than a development. Originally, 
as vou know 7 , in England, there w as no such thing as a Parliament 



2502 


OFFICIAL I'ROCKKDINOS 


being elected for the purpose ot making laws. The people were 
instructed to send up Burgesses and Knights from counties and 
boroughs for the purpose of doing what? Simply to report how 
much their communities could contribute to the Government under 
which they lived. Sometimes their aversion to going to Parliament 
was so great that they were fined. I remember, one instance of a 
Burgess being fined a yoke of oxen because he declined to go to 
Parliament after he had been designated for that purpose. I men¬ 
tion that simply to show that the origin of this whole idea of taxa¬ 
tion originating in the House of Representatives in every State in 
the Union, in Congress itself, and in England, really comes from 
the exactions of the King to bring these men up to report what 
they could contribute. That is the origin of the whole system. 
This English system, as I say, has existed for hundreds of years 
and is called the budget. For instance, Robert Peel’s budget, when 
he introduced an income tax in 1842, and on repealing the Corn 
Laws in 1846, or in reducing the wine duties in 1860, all these are 
budgets—and this is nothing but reporting the budget as reported 
by England, and they will get together and tell you that the con¬ 
dition of finances in Alabama is so and so, and we recommend by 
this bill—we call it “information”—that these items shall be taxed 
at certain per cents in order to raise the requisite revenue to carry 
on the government. Inasmuch as 1 am opposed to monarchical 
forms of government, Mr. President, in all shapes and forms I 
hope this particular Section will not be passed. 

KIRKLAND I move the previous question on the ori- 
ginal Section and amendment. 


MR. BROOKS I hope the gentleman \vi 
until the author of the amendment can he heard. 

The delegate declined to withdraw. 


withdraw that 


., (Chambers)—I make the point of order that 

the author of the amendment has a right to be heard. 

the ^ai'r d wh ,RAFFENRElD ~ It has been the uniform ruling of 
the Chair when previous question has been ordered on the Section 

s h oukT* be tieard.' ^ ^ Ch ~ ^ Article ^ 


manYo R ru?e° ONE 1 ^ aUth ° r perfcctl - v uil,in S for Chair- 

m a i „ T q H uLf„^„ S ol D ^« ? PR ° TRM - Th ' *«*• <* ** fe 

Upon a vote being taken the main question was ordered. 

THE PRESIDENT PRO TFM—T ^ . 

of the Committee. U1 I recognize the Chairman 



2503 


CONSTITUTIONAL CONVENTION, 1901 

^ ^ Mr. President, I have listened to the debate, 

especially the speeches in opposition to this Section on yesterday 
evening* until, ii I had not known what it was, I should have felt 
very much startled, and felt it was time to be looking for the mob 
or armed force to kill any man who undertook to be Governor, if 
this was put in operation, because it was alleged that it destroyed 
our liberties, it was absolutely assumed and argued that the Gov¬ 
ernor could make this estimate and send in this bill, and it was not 
within the power of any member of the Legislature to change it, 
and he could with his v eto sitting back there compel the passage 
of the bill that he submitted. A most monstrous proposition when 
there was not a line or word that authorized any such assertions. 

I was not so much astonished at the wild speech made by my 
triend, the delegate from Walker, as I was when my learned friend 
and colleague from Montgomery, an astute lawyer, Mr. Lomax, 
went off on the same line, and now, sir, another one of my col¬ 
leagues who is a very learned gentleman, has seen another bugaboo 
in it, and that is that we have gone back to the English system. 
Not quite, sir, not quite! There the bills are sent in and the Cabin¬ 
et officers have a seat in the House of Parliament, as I have had 
the honor of seeing and observing myself. He is the leader and 
explains everything, and the debates are had in that way, comes 
from the Government, and no other measure is tolerated to displace 
it at all. Now, sir, I don’t think experience is worth very much 
to the delegates to this Convention, judging bv their records, they 
all seem to think for themselves and go whichever way they are 
convinced is right without regard to any road that man has traveled 
heretofore, or any knowledge he has gained thereby. Now, I have 
had a little knowledge on this very question, which I will at the 
risk of being considered uninteresting and tedious, state to the 
Convention. 

MR. O’NEAL—May I ask the gentleman a question. 

MR. OATES—Certainly. 

MR. O’NEAL—I was going to ask you this question. You 
speak of Parliament. Isn’t it a fact that the Chancellor of the 
Exchequer may be a member of Parliament and have the right to 
submit their Budgets to Parliament? 

MR. OATES—Certainly they have, and the Government has 
precedence over everything else. 

MR. O’NEAL—If it is such a good thing for the Government 
to prepare the revenue bill, why not prepare bills on all subject of 
general legislation? 

MR. OATES—That is not done. 

MR. O’NEAL—That is the principle on which you bill is 
based. 



2504 


OFFICIAL PROCEEDINGS 


MR. OATES—If you will not interrupt with any more ques¬ 
tions I will get along and will meet that argument. I had the 
honor once of being a member of the Legislature in this House in 
1870, when we were practically under carpet-bag government. That 
was about the time that we emerged, and in the Senate, I remem¬ 
ber distinctly, they were all of the other party except two Demo¬ 
crats. There w'ere two Democratic Senators in there. I was made 
Chairman of the Ways and Means Committee. When we had to 
deal with the acts of 1868, and more of them that were obnoxious 
to our people, there was no limit then to the term of the Legisla¬ 
ture, there was no limit to taxation, and the terms of the Legisla¬ 
ture were annual. I held that position and labored here in 1870-71, 
and 1871-72, and I do know something about the difficulty of 
framing a revenue bill. Prior to that time, I had never had any 
such experience and I found myself utterly and entirely at a loss 
as to what I should do, there was no information practically from 
the Governor, who was Smith at that time, Lindsey succeeding 
him during the session. There was no information upon which we 
could proceed, and I remember how long and how' tedious w'ere 
the labors of that Committee, when they were trying to get up 
and finally succeeded in getting up an imperfect revenue bill. Since 
that time they have had much less difficulty. Times have im¬ 
proved, and legislation has been much less troublesome to deal 
with than it was then, and still you take even the last Legislature, 
and we have heard from one of the delegates on this floor, the great 
trouble they had in getting up the revenue bill, and got up a verv 
defective one at last. Now' w'hat is this Section? What does it 
require? Some say. Oh, well, you are going to give the Governor 
dictatorial power, he and the Auditor will just run things as they 
please. Well, now you find in Section 24 of the Executive De¬ 
partment where the Treasurer, the Auditor and Attorney General 
shall perform such duties as are prescribed by law, and the Treasur¬ 
er and Auditor shall, every year, at a time the General Assembly 
may fix, make a full and complete report to the Governor showing 
all receipts and disbursements of every character, of claims audited 
and paid by the State by items, and all taxes and revenue collected 
and paid into the Treasury from what sources, and they shall make 
reports on any matter pertaining to their office if required to do so 
by the Governor or the General Assembly. The Auditor who has 
the best opportunity, the best information on the subject of the 
amount of income and expenditures to make a report and everv 
particular and detail reported to the governor of what the revenue 
will be, and what will be the necessities of the government, and 
what are the probable expenditures, so as to enable the Governor 
in his message to lay these facts before the Legislature. Then 
Section 11, the Executive Department, “The Governor shall from 
time to time give to the General Assembly information of the state 
of the government and recommend to their consideration such 



CONSTITUTIONAL CONVENTION, 1901 


2505 


measures as he may deem expedient, and at the comtnencement of 
each session of the General Assembly and at the close of his term 
of office give information by written message of the term of his 
State, and he shall account to the General Assembly as may be 
prescribed by law for all monies received and paid out by him from 
and funds subject to his orders, with the vouchers therefor” and 
also this “arid he shall at the commencement of the regular session 
present to the General Assembly estimates of the amount of money 
required to be raised by taxation for all purposes. Now, sir. that 
involves complete information on his part with everything. Of 
course, if there should be income from other sources then that 
might be imposed. Now, is there any fear of any enlargement of 
this power? 

MR. LONG (Walker)—I see here in Section 29 the Governor 
is required to prepare a bill and transmit the same to the House of 
Representatives, a general revenue bill, and members of the House, 
you say, would have the right to amend it. I don’t think a member 
would. If he should offer an amendment would he not be in the 
attitude of fighting the administration? 

MR. OATES—Not at all. The member might lay it on his 
desk. That has nothing to do with it. 

MR. LONG—The gentleman did not answer the question. 
Would he not be in the attitude of fighting the administration? 

MR. OATES—No, he would not be doing anything of the 
kind, not at all, and we have never had any Governor big enough 
fool to suppose such a thing, and I hope we never will have. 

THE PRESIDENT PRO TEM.—The gentleman's time has 
expired. The question recurs on the amendment of the gentleman 
from Mobile. 

MR. OATES—Mr. President, I think the Chair is mistaken. 

MR. BULGER—I rise to a point of order. Does not the 
Chairman of the committee have thirty minutes instead of ten 
minutes. 

MR. OATES—It is only on amendments that they are limited 
to ten minutes. 

MR. BULGER—I understand the rule to be under the amend¬ 
ment is only ten minutes, but the previous question being ordered 
the chairman has thirty minutes. 

THE PRESIDENT PRO TEM.—The recollection of the Chair 
is, and would like to be informed, that a recent rule was adopted 
limiting all debate. 

MR. OATES—Only to the amendment. 



2506 


OFFICIAL PROCLK1MNGS 


THE PRESIDENT PRO TEAI. -The point of order is well 
taken and the chairman of the committee will proceed. 

MR. OATES—I will not consume more time than l deem 
absolutely necessary, and necessary only to put the delegates in 
full possession of the views of your committee, and 1 think the 
correct view of this proposition. Now, sir, the only object and pur¬ 
pose of it was this. Inasmuch as the Auditor is the main State 
officer to give the Governor such information in regard to the fi¬ 
nancial condition of the State as will enable him to make proper 
communication to the Legislature he is named, but it is upon the 
Governor, who has to communicate to the Legislature the condition 
of the finances, and it is right and it is the custom in that com¬ 
munication for the Governor to make whatever he deems to be 
suitable recommendations to the Legislature for legislative 
measures. My friend from Walker is apprehensive that it would 
be construed into fighting the Governor. A member of the Legis¬ 
lature, if he sees proper, he will agree with the recommendations 
of the Governor, but he is not in hostility to the Governor in 
differing from him in his views. Now, inasmuch as it is incumbent 
upon the Governor to lay before the Legislature the necessary in¬ 
formation about the State and condition of the finances, your com¬ 
mittee thought it was advisable, and would be a proper economy 
of time. 

MR. LONG (Walker)—May I ask a question? 

MR. OATES—I must decline to be interrupted. It is pretty 
bad to be broken up, to have one’s line of argument broken into. 
I do not object to answering questions, and I will do so before I 
sit down. It was deemed entirely proper and really saving time 
for the Governor who has to look into these matters and inform 
himself so that he may make proper communications to the Legis¬ 
lature, and particularly inform himself of the financial conditions. 
Nobody could object to this, except it is an imposition of addition¬ 
al labor to him. It is simply imposing additional labor upon the 
Governor and the officers of his cabinet associated with him. As 
has been properly stated, and the delegate from Tallapoosa is the 
only man I have heard speak on this subject, who seems to have 
a perfectly correct conception of what it meant and what it pro¬ 
vided for. The Attorney General is associated so he can investigate 
the legal questions. In framing the bill on different points always 
arising, constructions of revenue measures and the Auditor furnish¬ 
ing the information and aiding the Governor in getting at these 
facts, and when they send in the bill printed it is nothing in the 
world except a suggestion to the House of Representatives and 
when a committee is appointed having charge of matters of revenue 
they take this bill, and I submit to any man of common sense if it 
would not aid him in investigating to see what ought to be done, 
what should be recommended to the Legislature as revenue mea- 



CONSTITUTIONAL CONVENTION, 1901 2507 

sures. Not bound to take anything that is recommended, nothing 

dt , al *u n th u , . tlley don t see P ro P er to do so and that was the 
way that the bill read. There are some criticism upon the word 
action by the Legislature. Why you would read the whole in- 
strument to find out what the words mean in it. The substitute 
that has been offered and is now pending I have no objection to. 

am very willing to accept it for it does not change the sense at 
a , it changes that word from “action or” to “information” and 
makes the section so plain that even a child, a school boy, can read 
it and not be mistaken about what it means. “All bills for raising 
revenue shall originate in the House of Representatives.” That is 
j ut t * le Governor, Auditor, Treasurer and Attorney General 
Miall before each regular session of the legislature prepare a gen- 
eal revenue bill to be submitted to the legislature for its action and 
the Secretary of State shall have printed for the use of the legis¬ 
lature a sufficient number of copies of the bill so prepared which 
the Governor shall transmit to the House of Representatives as 
soon as organized, to be used or dealt with as the House may elect.” 

I hrow it upon the table if they want to, or out of the window, yet 
some gentlemen are fearfully afraid of it, they fear there is some¬ 
thing wonderful in it, that in this thing the Governor will be a king 
with absolute power. Then the following: “The Senate may pro¬ 
pose amendments to revenue bills.” That is an old provision, has 
had place in the Constitution all the time. The following is new: 
“No revenue bill shall be passed within the last five days of the 
session. That is to give the Governor time to look over it and 
examine it carefully. The Governor may veto any item in it and 
that item can be considered by the General Assembly while the 
balance of it remains good. I do not wish to talk just to hear my 
own voice. I never was charmed enough with it. I think I have 
gone over it and said all that is necessary. I am ready to answer 
the question of the gentleman from Walker. 

MR. LONG—The gentleman has changed his argument so 
much that the question I wanted to ask would not do any good. 

MR. OATES—Ah, changed my argument so much—I had not 
made one before. Mr. President, the substitute offered by the gen¬ 
tleman from Mobile is acceptible to me. I have no right to accept 
it for the Committee, but it is acceptable to me and I hope it will 
be adopted. 

PRESIDENT PRO TEM—The question recurs upon the 
amendment offered by the gentleman from Mobile to the amend¬ 
ment of the gentleman from Dallas to Section 29. 

MR. VAUGHAN—I move to lay the substitute offered by 
the gentleman from Mobile on the table, and I call for the ayes 
and noes on that. 



2508 


OFFICIAL l*K(>CKK DISCS 


MR. BOONE—I ask that the substitute be read to the Con* 
vention. I raise the point of order that the pre\ ions question has 
already been ordered, and it is too late to make a motion to lay 
upon the table after the previous quotion on the section and 
amendments have been ordered. 

THE PRESIDENT PRO TEM-- The point of order is over* 
ruled. Ayes and noes are demanded. Upon a motion to lay upon 
the table the amendment to tin* amendment ottered bv the gentle¬ 
man from Mobile. Is the call sustained ' 

Upon a vote being* taken, the call was sustained. 

THE PRESIDENT PRO TKM The ayes and noes are de¬ 
manded, and the question recurs on the motion ot the gentleman 
from Dallas to lay upon the table. 

MR. WILLIAMS (Marengo)- -The rule of the Chair ha> been 
heretofore on a call for the previous question that a motion to table 
has precedence but after the call has actually been ordered l>v the 
House it is too late. 

MR. O'NEAL—The rules do not >ay that. 

MR. WILLIAMS—That has been the ruling of the Chair. 

MR. OATES—I think the temporary Chairman has a right to 
rule for himself. 

MR. O'NEAL—It makes no ditfemice what the rules are. The 
question is, what is right? 

The President here read Rule 25. 


Under this rule, the Chair feels con-trained to rule that the 
motion to lay upon the table has precedence. 

MR. DUKE—I would like you to read Rule 2(>, which is a> 
follows. A motion to adjourn shall alwavs be* in order, even in 
the absence of a quorum, except when on the call tor the previous 
question, the main question shall have been ordered, or when the 
Chair is stating a question or when the roll i> being called or ha- 
been called, the vote has not been announced, <, r when a vote i- 
being venhed or when a member has the floor and such motion 
shall be decided without debate.'’ A motion to adjourn at this 
stage would not be in order, and yet it has precedence over a mo- 
tion to lay on the table. A motion to adjourn now would not be in 
order, it having the preference over a motion to lay on the table. 
How would a motion to lay on the table have preference over a 
motion after the previous question has been called. 


MR. O’NEAL— 
ruled on the question 


I make the point of order that the Chair has 
and further debate is out of order. 



CONSTITUTIONAL CONVENTION, 1901 


2509 


PRESIDENT PRO TEM—The Chair would like to be right. 
1 take a moment to consider this. 

MR. DUKE—I will call the attention of the President to Rule 
17, which, in my opinion states the question. It says: “The pre¬ 
vious question shall be in the following form: ‘Shall the main 
question be now put?’ If demanded by a vote of the majority of 
the delegates present, its effect shall be to cut off all debate and 
bring the Convention to a direct vote.” 

PRESIDENT PRO TEM—The Chair sustains the point of 
order and the question is on the adoption of the amendment of the 
gentleman from Dallas to Section 29. 

MR. BOONE—I ask that the amendment be read. 

MR. LOMAX—I ask that the original amendment be also 

read. 

The Clerk read the amendment of Mr. Vaughan as follows: 
“All bills for raising revenues shall originate in the House of Rep¬ 
resentatives, but the Senate may propose amendments as in other 
bills. ,, 

Substitute by Mr. Boone: “All bills for raising revenues shall 
originate in the House of Representatives, the Governor, Auditor, 
and Attorney-General shall, before each regular session of the Leg¬ 
islature, prepare a general revenue bill, to be submitted to the Leg¬ 
islature for its information, and the Secretary of State shall have 
printed for the use of the Legislature a sufficient number of copies 
of the bill so prepared, which the Governor shall transmit to the 
House of Representatives as soon as organized, to be used or dealt 
with as the House may elect. The Senate may propose amend¬ 
ments as in other bills.” 

PRESIDENT PRO TEM—The words “no appropriations’" 
have been stricken out by consent. The question is upon the mo¬ 
tion to lay upon the table. 

MR. O’NEAL—I call for the ayes and noes. 

The call for the ayes and noes was sustained. 

THE PRESIDENT PRO TEM—The question is upon the 
adoption of the amendment proposed by the gentleman from Mo¬ 
bile. As many as favor its adoption will say aye and those opposed 
no as their names are called. 

MR. PILLANS—I rise to a question of parliamentary inquiry. 
As the clerk read this I understood him to say that by unanimous 
consent “no appropriations ,, were the words stricken out. It should 
be “appropriations or.” 



2510 


OFFICIAL PROCEEDINGS 


THE PRESIDENT PRO TEM—For the information of the 
gentleman from Mobile, it is as indicated by him. 


Altman, 

Ashcraft, 

Beddow, 

Boone, 

Bulger, 

Burnett, 

Burns, 

Chapman, 

Cofer, 

Cornwall, 

Craig, 

Davis, of Etowah, 

Dent, 

deGraffenreid, 

Duke, 

Eley, 

Eyster, 

Espy, 

Ferguson, 

Fletcher, 

Glover, 

Graham, of Montgomery, 
Graham, of Talladega, 
Grayson, 

Greer, of Calhoun, 
Total—75. 


Almon, 

Banks, 

Barefield, 

Blackwell, 

Brooks, 

Carmichael, of Colbert, 
Cobb, 

Cunningham, 

Davis, of DeKalb, 
Heflin, of Randolph, 
Henderson, 

Hodges, 

Jones, of Montgomery, 
Kirk, 


AYES. 

Greer, of Perry, 
Haley, 

Handley, 

Harrison, 

Heflin, of Chambers. 
Hood, 

Howell, 

Howze, 

Inge, 

Jenkins, 

Jones, of Bibb, 

Jones, of Hale, 

Jones, of Wilcox, 
Kirkland, 

Knight, 

Kyle, 

Long (Butler), 
Macdonald, 

McMillan (Baldwin), 
Malone, 

Maxwell, 

Miller (Wilcox), 
Murphree, 

NeSmith, 

Norman, 


NOES. 

Leigh, 

Lomax, 

Long (Walker), 
Lowe (Jefferson), 
McMillan (Wilcox), 
Martin, 

Merrill, 

Moody, 

Pettus, 

Porter, 

Proctor, 

Rogers (Lowndes), 
Samford, 

Sanders, 


Norwood, 

Oates, 

O’Neal (Lauderdale). 
O’Neill (Jefferson), 
Opp. 

O’Rear, 

Palmer, 

Parker (Cullman), 
Parker (Elmore), 
Pearce, 

Pillans, 

Pitts, 

Reynolds (Henry), 
Robinson, 

Searcy, 

Sentell, 

Smith, Mac. A., 

Smith. Morgan M„ 
Spragins, 

Tayloe, 

Walker, 

Williams (Barbour), 
Williams (Marengo), 
Wilson (Clarke), 
Winn, 


Sanford, 

Selheimer, 

Sloan, 

Smith (Mobile), 
Spears, 

Stewart, 

Studdard, 

Y’aughan, 

Weakley, 

White, ’ 

Whiteside, 

Willet, 

Wilson (Wash’gton), 


Total—41. 



2511 


CONSTITUTIONAL CONVENTION, 1901 


ABSENT OR NOT VOTING. 


Messrs. President, 
Bartlett, 

B cavers, 

Bethune, 

Browne, 

Byars, 

C'ardon, 

Carmichael, of Coffee, 
Carnathon, 

Case, 

Coleman, of Greene, 
Coleman, of Walker, 
Kitts, 


Foshee, 

Foster, 

Freeman, 

Gilmore, 

Grant, 

Hinson, 

J ackson, 

King, 

Ledbetter, 

Eocklin, 

Lowe (Lawrence), 
Miller (Marengo), 
Morrisette, 


Mulkey, 

Phillips, 

Reese, 

Renfro. 

Reynolds (Chilton), 
Rogers (Sumter), 
Sol lie. 

Sorrell, 

Thompson, 

Waddell, 

Watts, 

Weatherly, 
Williams (Elmore). 


Ami by a vote of 72 ayes and 42 noes, the substitute was 
adopted. 

MR. O’NEAL—I change my vote from no to aye for the 
purpose of moving a reconsideration tomorrow morning. 

MR. WILLIAMS (Marengo)—I now move to reconsider the 
vote just taken whereby that amendment was passed. For the 
purpose of moving a reconsideration, I move to suspend the rules 
in order that that motion may be put upon its passage. 

MR. O’NEAL—Upon that motion I call for an aye and no 
vote. 

MR. WILLIAMS (Marengo)—I move to suspend the rules 
for the purpose of acting upon this motion to reconsider the vote 
whereby this amendment was adopted. 

MR. O’NEAL—If you want to gag us and keep us from press¬ 
ing the matter tomorrow, we will give you all the trouble we can. 

The call for the ayes and noes was sustained. 

A vote being taken and a division called for, and by a vote of 
ayes 59, noes 39, the Convention refused to suspend the rules. 

MR. O’NEAL—You cannot gag us all the time. 

The question recurring upon the amendment as amended, a 
vote being taken, it was adopted, and upon a further vote, Section 
29 as amended was adopted. 

MR. LOMAX—I rise to a point of order. A motion to re¬ 
consider the vote by which the substitute was adopted having been 
made to be considered tomorrow morning;, it was not in order to 
vote either upon the substitute or the original section. 

MR. deGRAFFENREID—The point of order comes too late. 



2S12 


OFFICIAL PROCEEDINGS 


MR. WILSON (Clarke)—I desire to direct the chair's atten¬ 
tion to the last section and Rule 27. A motion to reconsider is 
subsidiary or an incidental motion, and does not go over until to¬ 
morrow, but should be considered forthwith. An amendment to 
the section is merely a subsidiary motion. 

MR. BULGER —I rise to a point of order. 

MR. O’NEAL—That is not an incidental motion. 


MR. LOMAX—[ submit I made a point of order before the 
point of order made by the gentleman from Clarke, that you cannot 
make a point of order on a point of order, and his point of order, 
even if it could be entertained is not germane to the proposition 
submitted by me, and therefore I am entitled to a ruling upon mv 
point of order. This action should not have been taken, because of 
a motion to reconsider has been given. 

MR. O’NEAL—I desire to call the attention of the chair to 
what constitutes an incidental question. Incidental questions are 
such as arise out of other questions and consequentlv are to be 
considered before the questions which give rise to them. Of this 
nature, first, are questions of order; second, motion for reading of 
papers; third, leave to withdraw a motion; fourth, suspension of a 
rule, and fifth, the amendment of an amendment. Now. this was 
not an amendment of an amendment but a substitute. It was a 
substitute for the original section. 


MR. OATES—-The point of order is not correct anywav, with¬ 
out regard to the time at which the point of order was made a 
point of order is where notice has been given on the adoption'of 
an amendment, and it applies to evervthing in regard to that sec¬ 
tion. That cannot be true. Tt would put'it in the power of anv 
man at any stage, to give notice that any such amendment had 
been adopted and to move the previous question, move to recon¬ 
sider. and it would unfortunatelv disturb business That is not 
the correct rule at all with regard to the matter. I have no ob¬ 
jection to his having the motion to a reconsideration on tomorrow 
or at any time the session deems proper, but that is not the correct 
one to go on to perfect the section and the motion to reconsider 
reaches the whole thing whenever it is made, but a notice of a 

section at°all C01,S d ° CS not st0,, tlu * consideration of this 


MR. LOMAX—In view of the remarks of the chairman of 
the committee, I would like to be heard on mv point of order The 
rules are upon notice being given of a motion to reconsider that 
that motion shall be considered in the morning hour of the next 

r efubd a ,o'su'oe„ r d rt° f "T ConVe " ,io " '£n. the ConvemS, 
refused to suspend the rules in order to entertain that motion iust 

a moment a K o. so under our rules it is impossible for a motion to 



CONSTITUTIONAL CONVENTION, 1901 


2513 


reconsider to be considered until tomorrow morning. That mo¬ 
tion to reconsider was made upon the adoption of the substitute of 
the gentleman from Mobile, for the substitute of the gentleman 
from Dallas, to the original section. Now, if the Convention goes 
on, notwithstanding the motion to reconsider has been given, and 
adopts a substitute, then adopts the substitute as substituted, and 
then adopts the original section. I submit that action necessarily 
cuts off the power of this Convention to consider on tomorrow 
morning a motion to reconsider, of which notice has been given. 
So that if that be true, the notice of a motion to reconsider is ab¬ 
solutely useless and has no effect. So I do not think that a very 
proper course for the Convention to pursue when a notice of a mo¬ 
tion to reconsider has been given and the House has refused to 
suspend its rules to consider that motion, to reconsider is to sus¬ 
pend action upon the section upon which that amendment is pend¬ 
ing until the time at which that motion to reconsider can be heard. 
There can be no other fair or just or equitable rule in this body 
if the rules stand as they are written. I submit that the other votes 
ought not to he taken until the question of reconsideration has 
been determined. 


MR. I ONES (Montgomery)—I would like to ask the gentle¬ 
man from Montgomery a question. Suppose this Section is adopted 
and we reconsider the amendment tomorrow. What would be 
accomplished by it? 

MR. LOMAX—We have no right to consider it if it is adopt¬ 
ed ; if the Section is adopted, we have no right to consider any 
amendment to that Section nor the motion to reconsider the vote 
by which it was adopted. It is merely a perfunctory performance, 

MR. REESE—Suppose some man gave notice on every amend¬ 
ment that was lost here during the whole day. Would the Con¬ 
vention have to stop its work and could not adopt a single Section 
because a notice has been given that the same amendment would 
be reconsidered? 


M R 1 QM AX—No, sir, it would not, because the Convention 
would then verv‘properly suspend the rules and consider motions 
to reconsider and not have that sort of business to interfere with 
the Convention. 

AIR. MACDONALD—I rise .to a question of parliamentary* 


inquiry. 

THE PRESIDENT—The Chair will entertain it, if it is in 
the nature of a suggestion. 


MR MACDONALD—It is in the nature of a suggestion. 1 
was under the impression this Section has been submitted and 
adopted by a vote before Mr. Lomax ever raised his point of 

order at all. 



2514 


OFFICIAL l’ROC E ED IN GS 


THE PRESIDENT—The Chair is of the opinion that the 
point of order of the delegate from Montgomery is to a certain 
extent well taken and had the attention of the Chair been called to 
it before the other questions were put, he would have sustained it, 
but the Chair is also of the opinion that this is a subsidiary or in¬ 
cidental question and that the motion to reconsider ought to have 
been put without the suspension of the rules under Rule 27 so as 
to prevent the Convention from being delayed. The Chair’s atten¬ 
tion was not called to it, or it would have sustained it then, and 
therefore in order to correct the error as far as practicable, the 
Chair will rescind the action and entertain a motion to reconsider 
now. 

MR. WILLIAMS (Marengo)—I move to reconsider. 

MR. BULGER—I move to lay the motion on the table. 

MR. O’NEAL—I rise to a point of parliamentary inquiry. 1 
voted for the original Section as amended with the intention to¬ 
morrow morning of moving for a reconsideration. I give notice 
now I will move to reconsider the Section as amended. 

THE PRESIDENT—The question being raised, in order to 
correct it, there was no point made. As soon as the Chair’s at¬ 
tention was called to it and the question to reconsider was made 
by the delegate from Marengo, the matter should have been con¬ 
sidered then. 

MR. WILLIAMS—I now renew that motion. 

MR. BULGER—I move to lay that motion on the table. 

MR. SANFORD (Pike)—I rise to a point of order. It is no 
longer a subsidiary motion, but it has been adopted as a Section. 
It is no longer a subsidiary motion and cannot be considered as 
such and the only way it can be considered is as an original Sec¬ 
tion. 


MR. O’NEAL—And under the rules it cannot be considered 
until tomorrow morning, and I give notice again that I will move 
tomorrow morning to reconsider the Section as adopted. 

MR. WILLIAMS—Just one word on that. It strikes me the 
motion of the gentleman from Lauderdale is out of order. If the 
position of the delegate from Montgomery, Mr. Lomax, is correct 
then this motion to reconsider under the rules of the Chair, should 
come up at this time and may be properly laid on the table on the 
motion of the delegate from Tallapoosa. 

THE PRESIDENT—It would not cut off a motion, the Chair 
would say, to reconsider the whole Section. The Chair regards 
it as an incidental or subsidiary question which should have been 
considered then. 



2515 


CONSTITUTIONAL 


CONVENTION, 


1901 


crroHiv vin^e of R in ( ? lhOUn) 'T I su . ppose the House fell into an 

Ch iir his the rit'lit t m ^ ru ^ n ff of the Chair, therefore, the 

C haii has the right to correct the error and ought to do it. 

<>o crt-chtsVne^u mO, '/ (k ' s ! rt “ to . sa - v that tHc gentleman from Maren- 

Pike Mr S-nnf ') T j ,olnt ol order made hv the gentleman from 
I ike, Mr. S.unford. I desire to correct him. 

\ ( . )K , 1 \ } 1 suggest to the Chair that after 
* .i c las • )ct ‘ n a(p) P^ e< l hy the House and then adopted 

. s «n origma , ection, it is too late for the Chair to correct any 
errors 1>y doing a useless thing, and having a reconsideration of 
an amendment that is then incorporated in the Constitution. 

1 Hh, PRESIDENT-—'I'he point of order is well taken and the 
Sec ret a r \ will read the next Section. 


Section 30 was read by the Secretary: 

See. 30. I he general appropriation bill shall embrace nothing 
but appropriations for the ordinary expenses of the Executive, Leg¬ 
islative and Judicial Departments of the State, interest on the debt 
and for the public schools. T he salary of no officer or employe 
shall be increased in such bills, nor shall any appropriation be made 
for any officer or employe unless his employment and the amount 
ot his salary have already been provided for by law. All other ap¬ 
propriations shall be made by separate bills, and each embracing 
but one subject. 


MR. LONG (Walker)—I ask unanimous consent to offer a 
short resolution. 


The Secretary started to read the resolution. 

MR. JONES—I would like to know how that resolution got 
in. The rules have not been suspended. 

PRESIDENT—There was no objection. 

MR. JONES—1 was objecting all of the time. 

MR. O’NEAL—I rise to a point of order. The objection comes 
too late. 

PRESIDENT—The Chair did not hear it, but several of the 
gentlemen say they did object, and the Chair will put the question 
again 

MR. O’NEAL—I move that the rules he suspended and that 
the gentleman from Walker be allowed to offer the resolution now. 

A DELEGATE—I move to suspend the rules that the delegate 
from Walker may have leave to offer his resolution. The question 
is on suspension of rules. 



2516 


OFFICIAL PROCEEDINGS 


MR. HEFLIN (Chambers)—I make the point of order that 
the Chair said unless objection is made the resolution may be sent 
up, and the Chair hears none, and the gentleman will send up the 
resolution. 

THE PRESIDENT—The Chair will state for the benefit of 
the delegate from Walker, he so announced that the point of order 
was well taken, but several delegates said they had made objections 
and in deference to the wishes of the Convention, the Chair would 
put it over. The question is on the motion to suspend the rules. 

The motion was carried and the rules were suspended. 

The Clerk then read the resolution offered by Mr. Long of 
Walker, as follows: “Whereas, a wave of patriotism has taken a 
rabid hold upon some of the members of this Convention to such 
an extent as to wound their consciences by being required to draw 
their per diem, and whereas, this Convention has no intention of 
infringing upon the right of any delegate. Therefore, be it resolved, 
by the people of Alabama in Convention assembled, That the Sec¬ 
retary be and he is hereby required to secure a blank book to be 
used only by the members who desire no pay, which fact shall he 
determined by the member signing his name therein said book, to 
be kept open for signatures of volunteer members at all hours, and 
the Secretary shall witness each signature under the proper date, 
and no member shall he allowed any pay from the State thereafter. 

Provided, that the hotels, restaurants, boarding houses and 
saloons of Montgomery be and they are hereby required to furnish 
free of charge, board, lodging, laundry, liquors and cigars to such 
members as voluntarily surrender their pay. Because the Good 
Book says: “The laborer is worthy of his hire and the ass shall 
not be muzzled.” (Prolonged laughter.) 

MR. LONG (Walker)—I ask that the resolution be referred 
to Mr. White. 

MR. COBB—I de sire to be heard on that resolution. 

MR. HEFLIN (Chambers)—I call for the regular order. 

MR. REESE—I move that the gentleman he granted leave to 
be heard. 

Unanimous consent was given. 

MR. COBB—I do not allow any human being to question my 
Democracy. I believe I am just as good a Democrat as any man 
on the floor. Well, I am, with the exception of my friend from 
Chambers over there, possibly, and maybe my friend from Jeffer¬ 
son. Being a good Democrat, I am a friend of the people. 

MR. KIRKLAND I rise to a point of parliamentary inquiry. 
What is before this House? 



2517 


CONSTITUTIONAL CONVENTION, 1901 
M R. COBB—I am. 

MK. O XLAL 1 move that the Clerk b^ requested to furnish 
a cop\ to u gentleman of what is before the House, in writing. 

MR. KIRKLAND—Maybe you had better do it. 

MR. COHB Being a good Democrat, I am a good friend of 
the people as good perhaps, as anybody on the floor, except, it 
may be my friend from Jefferson over yonder and my distinguished 
friend from Walker. 

MR. LON(, (Walker)—I ask unanimous consent to withdraw 
the resolution. (Laughter.) 

Objection is made. 

lHh PRhSIDKNT—The delegate will remember that bv 
unanimous consent the delegate from Macon has been accorded 
the floor. '1 he Chair asks that the delegates keep in order. 

MR. COHB—It is very well understood by the delegates upon 
this floor that my distinguished friend from Walker has a pre¬ 
emption right—a standing right—to speak to the people upon the 
floor of this Convention, but recognizing that right, I say that I 
am a friend of the people, and I am a good Democrat. Now, the 
cardinal rule of the Democracy has always been, as I have under- 
.stood, the prompt and cheerful obedience to the will of the major¬ 
ity. Now the majority has acted; they have said to me that as a 
good Democrat and as a good friend of the people, I am in con¬ 
science bound to take this pay that they have voted upon me this 
morning, and in strict obedience to my life-long Democracy, I 
expect to take it. But I want to say that I always bow to the will 
of the majority without any mental reservation or secret evasion 
whatever and without any grumbling about it and I do not think 
that my friend from Walker or anybody else has got a right after 
forcing me into this position to come here— 

MR. LONG (Walker)—There is nothing in my resolution 
requiring a man to accept pay or refuse his pay. It is voluntary. 

MR. COBB—Yes, but you voted it on me this morning and 
said I should have it and said that I should take it and you have 
no right to go back on that. I raise a point of order. You cannot 
jrjye and take away in the same breath. It is out of order. It is 
unparliamentary; it is not in accordance with the rules of this 
House, and therefore, I say that the gentleman cannot put me in 
the attitude of being undemocratic or not a friend of the people. 

MR. LOMAX—I move that the resolution of the gentleman 
from Walker be referred to a special committee composed of gen¬ 
tlemen from Walker and gentlemen from Macon. 



2518 


OFFICIAL P R O C K L DIN G S 


MR. GREHR (Calhoun)—I rise to a point of order. The 
resolution has already Jbeen referred. 

THE PRESIDENT—The point is well taken. 

The Secretary read Section 30 as follows : 

Sec. 30. The general appropriation bill shall embrace nothing 
but appropriations for the ordinary expenses of the Executive, 
Legislative and Judicial Departments of the State, interest on the 
public debt, and for the public schools. The salary of no officer or 
employee shall be increased in such bill, nor shall any appropriation 
be made for any officer or employe unless his employment and the 
amount of his salary have already been provided for by law. All 
other appropriations shall be made by separate bill, and each em¬ 
bracing but one subject. 

Sec. 31. No money shall be paid out of the Treasury except 
upon appropriation made by law, and on warrant drawn by the 
proper officer in pursuance thereof; and a regular statement and 
account of receipts and expenditures of all public moneys shall be 
published annually, in such manner as may be by law directed. 

MR. OATES—That is substantially the provision in the pres¬ 
ent Constitution. The only change is that no officers salary shall 
be increased on the appropriation bill. I move its adoption. 

MR. LOWE (Jefferson)—Section 30, second line, refers to 
ordinary expenses. I hardly know what might be termed ordinary 
expenses. I think the tendency is to narrow or limit the legislature 
in that respect and for that reason, without further discussion on 
the question, I desire to send up an amendment. 

The Secretary read the amendment to Section 30, to strike out 
the word “ordinary" where it appears in the second line of said 
Section. 

MR. OATHS—That is an innovation upon the section as found 
in the existing Constitution and I therefore move to table the 
amendment. 

Motion to table the amendment was carried. 

MR. JENKINS—In a general appropriation bill, we have in¬ 
cluded the Montevallo school, and I wish to know the Chairman’s 
opinion if the appropriation made to the Montevallo school, or the 
University, is affected by that section. 

MR. OATES—This Section in that respect is not changed 
from the way it has been all the time. 

MR. JENKINS—I know we have been doing it all the time, 
but the point I make is, haven’t we been doing it wrong, and ought 
we not to put it in there? 



OONSTITl TlONAl. CONVKNTiON, 1901 


2519 


M J\. < )A 1 hS I don t know whether I have the floor or wheth¬ 
er he has it. 

MR J KN KINS I yield. 

MR. < >A 1 RS 1 think ii in order that the ainendinent he read. 

'1 he Secretary read the amendment as follows: “To amend 
Section 30 t>\ adding after the word “debt” in the third line the 
following “appropriation for the State University, Alabama Polv- 
technic Institute, and Industrial school for white ^irls at Monte- 
vallo. 

MR. < >ATKS All of that is wholly unnecessary and ! move to 
lav the amendment <>n the table. 

MR. ROMAN Will the Chairman of the Committee permit 
me a question. I )oi> the section as it stands, include those appro¬ 
priations. 

MR. OATHS-- The section, as it stands is as it has been all 
the time. There is no trouble about that. 

The motion to table the amendment was carried. 

Upon a further vote the section was adopted. 

Secretary read Section No. 31 as follows; 


“No money -hall he paid out of the treasury except upon ap- 
preprint ion made bv law. and on warrant drawn by the proper offi¬ 
cer in pursuance thereof; and a regular statement and account ot 
receipts and expenditures of all public moneys shall be published 
annuallv. in Mich manner as may he by law directed.’ 

I he section as read was adopted. 

Sect inn 32: “No appropriation shall be made to any charitable 
or educational institution not under the absolute control of the 
State other than Normal schools established by law for the* pro¬ 
fessional training of teachers for the public schools of the State, 
except bv a vote of two-thirds of all members elected to caph 

house/’ 

MR. < )ATKS~—I move its adoption. 

MR. SI’KAGINS—I have an amendment. 

The clerk read the amendment. Striking out the words “other 
than Normal schools established by law for the professional train¬ 
ing of teachers for the public schools of the State. 

MR. O’NEAL—I move to lay the amendment on the table. 

\TR SPRAGINS—I offered that amendment because I saw 
n„ good «hc Agricultural Schools o. the State, the 



2520 


OFFICIAL PROCEEDINGS 


Southern University at Greensboro, the Howard College should 
require a two-thirds vote in order to receive an appropriation and 
the Normal School should get an appropriation by a majority vote, 
f saw no good reason for that and thought it an injustice. 

MR. OATHS—The section as reported by the committee is 
just as it is found in the Constitution of 1875, and I do not think 
those institutions have suffered by it. Therefore 1 move to lay it 
on the table. 

The motion to table was carried. 

Upon a further vote the section was adopted 

Section No. 33 was read by the Secretary. “No act of the 
Legislature shall authorize the investment of any trust fund by 
executors, administrators, guardians and other trustees in the 
bonds, or stock of any private corporation and any such acts now 
existing are avoided, saving investments heretofore made." 

AIR. OATHS—That is just as it stands in the present Consti¬ 
tution and I move its adoption. 

Section adopted as read. 

Section No. 34 was read as follows: “The power to change 
the venue in civil and criminal causes is vested in the courts, to he 
exercised in such manner as shall be provided by law." 

AIR. OATHS—That is just as it is found in the present Con¬ 
stitution. I do not see why it should remain in the Legislative 
Department. It applies rather to the Judicial Department. 

AfR. JONHS—Can’t the Harmonics put it there? 

AIR. OATHS—I suppose they can if they see proper. 1 move 
its adoption. 

The section as read was adopted. 

Section No. 35 was read by the secretary as follows: “When 
the Legislature shall be convened in special session, there shall be 
no legislation upon subjects other than those designated in the 
proclamation of the Governor calling said session, except bv a vote 
of two-thirds of each House.” 

AIR. JONES ( Montgomery)—I have an amendment to Section 
35 by striking out the words “except by a two-thirds vote of each 
House.” 

AIR. .JONHS—The object of the amendment is to keep the 
Constitution as it now is and to keep the Legislature when called 
in special session from legislating on any subjects except those 
designated by the Governor in his proclamation. He is made judge 
of the evils on extraordinary occasions which require their presence, 



CONSTITUTIONAL CONVENTION, 1901 


2521 


and very often a special session which ought to he ordered would 
not he called because the Governor and the people might he afraid 
the Legislature would go to tinkering with other things. I think 
when an extraordinary session is called it is a wise provision to 
confine the Legislature to specific work mentioned in the proclama¬ 
tion. My experience is with the Legislators when a power is not 
to he exercised except by a two-thirds vote of each house they 
always get that two-thirds vote. You remember at one time the 
Constitution of this State limited the session unless the Legislature 
by a two-thirds vote extended it, and they did extend it, and 1 
think it is unwise to change the present Constitution and therefore 
made the amendment. 

MR. REESE—We are dealing with the Legislative Depart¬ 
ment at this time and the amendment offered by the gentleman 
from Montgomery seeks to transfer some of the rights that have 
heretofore pertained to that department to the Executive Depart¬ 
ment. 

MR. (ONES—Is not the law now that when a Legislature 
convenes in special session it shall not act upon anything except 
the special matter for which it is called together." 

MR. REESE—We have taken a great forward step in this 
matter of cutting down the time of the Legislature, it is unwise in 
the opinion of some of the delegates on this floor that the Legisla¬ 
ture shall onlv meet once in four years, and dire predictions of 
calamities have been made which will result from that provision. 
Now, when the Governor calls the Legislature here on some occa¬ 
sion i do not think they ought to he here as lackies of the Governor 
to execute his will and legislate only on such matters as he may say. 
provided there are two-thirds of each house that think it to the 
best interests of the people of Alabama that other subjects than 
those suggested by the Governor shall be legislated upon. I have 
more respect for the intelligence of the people of Alabama than to 
think they would send a Legislature here and two-thirds of them 
would agree to legislate upon matters upon which no legislation 
should he had. 

MR. 1 ONES'—The language does not say two-thirds of the 
members of each house. It says two-thirds of each house. That 
might mean two-thirds of a quorum. 

MR. REESE—I think if the Legislature meets here they will 
not do anything wrong. I believe we can trust them and, Mr. 
President, I move to lay upon the table the amendment of the 
gentleman from Montgomery. 

THE PRESIDENT—The question is upon the motion of the 
gentleman from Dallas to lay upon the table the amendment pro¬ 
posed by the gentleman from Montgomery. 



2522 


OFFICIAL PROCEEDINGS 


The motion was withdrawn. 

MR. OATES—I am perfectly aware of the objection made 
by my colleague from Montgomery, and what he proposes to strike 
out is new and all that is new in this section. Now, sir, it is a 
small matter in words, but it is a matter of very great importance 
in its consequences. Now, the extension of the Legislature and 
confining it to one session in four years puts things in a somewhat 
different attitude from what they are now. The Governor may 
see proper to call the Legislature together and specify in the call 
as he is required in the Executive Department to do the matters 
and things to which he invites the attention of the Legislature, 
but, sir, with the new Constitution and with such seldom sessions 
of the Legislature it might be the case that he did not foresee some 
important matter, which, in the opinion of the Legislature, and in 
his own opinion, ought to be attended to. If as the Constitution 
now is, he committed that oversight and failed to specify in his 
message to assemble the Legislature in extraordinary session, al¬ 
though he wanted the Legislature to deal with that particular ques¬ 
tion and fully concurred with them in it. that ought to be attended 
to. yet he could not by any message of his change it or confer upon 
them that power. If they could consider nothing more than the 
things named in his proclamation calling the extra session it would 
be necessary for them to adjourn and to call them again in order 
to attend to that. I am not wedded to the requirement of a two- 
thirds vote as in this case, but it ought to be in the power of the 
Legislature, say, by two-thirds of the members elected, or, I don't 
care, if it be three-fourths of the members; but it ought to be within 
their power, if there should be anything omitted or anything that 
is absolutely necessary for them to give attention to when in extra 
session, additional to which the Governor has specified, thev ought 
to be able to attend to it. 


MR. ROBINSON—I want to ask a question. When an extra 
session of the Legislature should be called, would thev ever ad¬ 


journ? 


MR. OATES—As a matter of course, they would. 

Mr. President, it seems to me some delegates on this floor 
act not on the presumption of innocence but on the presumption 
t at the representatives and Governor in certain contingencies are 
unprincipled and will not discharge their duties faithfully This 
only proposes that by a two-thirds vote they might extend their 

i ( ^u n0t ? )JCC , t lf the (ielc ^ a te wants to offer an amendment 
that it be three-fourths, but I want it to be possible for the Legis¬ 
lature to attend to something else, if it be found necessary. 

Iin , m ^ t R , ROBI NSON— D °es not a two-thirds vote give them an 
unlimited session. Would it be limited at all. 



CONSTITUTIONAL CONVENTION, 1901 2523 

MR. OATES I said a while ago, I am not wedded to it. I 
of perfectly willing that it should be enlarged or that any other 
restrictions may be put in so that it may be possible, that is all, 
and this is the action of the committee. The question was before 
them and they considered it and adopted this amendment. I have 
stated all the reasons according to my mind that I have heard dis¬ 
cussed. 

MR. REESE—Will you move to table this amendment when 
you get through? 

MR. OATES—I yield the floor to you for that purpose. 

MR. O'NEAL—Nobody else has any rights here, one delegate 
yields to another, and I desire to offer an amendment. 

THE PRESIDENT—The delegate from Lauderdale has the 
floor. 

MR. OATES—I promised to yield to the delegate from Dallas. 

MR. REESE-—I have no string to tie to any amendment, and 
the gentleman is at liberty to act as he sees fit. 

The amendment of the gentleman from Lauderdale was read 
as follows : 

Amend Section 35 by adding thereto the following: That a 
special session of the Legislature shall be called by the Governor 
every two years, but such special session shall not continue longer 
than forty days. 

MR. MACDONALD—I move to lay the amendment offered 
bv the delegate from Lauderdale on the table. 

MR. O'NEAL—I call for the ayes and noes on that. 

There were expressions of dissent. 

The call was not sustained. 

MR. O'NEAL—I thought I would have an opportunity to 
explain my amendment. 

To which there were expressions of dissent. 

THE PRESIDENT—Will the gentleman yield to the gentle- 
mna from Lauderdale. 

MR. MACDONALD—I do not withdraw the motion, because 
I think it is another attempt to have biennial sessions. 

MR. O'NEAL—I call for the ayes and noes. 

THE PRESIDENT—The call has been submitted and not 
sustained. 



2524 


OFFICIAL PROCEEDINGS 


Upon a vote being taken the motion to table was carried. 

MR. SAMFORD (Pike)—I offer an amendment. 

The amendment was read as follows: 

“And special sessions shall be limited to thirty days.” 

MR. O’NEAL—I move to lay the amendment upon the table. 

Upon a vote being taken a division was called for, and by a 
vote of 36 ayes and 46 noes the motion to table was lost. 

MR. JONES (Montgomery)—I move the adoption of the 
amendment. 

MR. O’NEAL—I move to amend by making it fifty days. 

THE PRESIDENT—It is not in order. 

MR. VAUGHAN—I move the previous question upon the 
Section and amendments. 

The main question was ordered. 

MR. DENT—I would like to have the Section and amendments 
read. Do I understand that the amendment of the delegate from 
Pike is addressed to the amendment offered by the gentleman from 
Montgomery? 

MR. SAMFORD (Pike)—It is addressed to the Section. 

MR. O’NEAL—I rise to a point of order that it is out of 
order because it is not an amendment to the amendment. 

MR. SAMFORD (Pike)—It is an amendment to the Section. 

MR. O’NEAL—He cannot offer an amendment to the Sec¬ 
tion. The gentleman from Montgomery offered an amendment to 
the Section and all the gentleman from Pike could do would be to 
offer an amendment to the amendment, and I raise the point of 
order that the amendment of the gentleman from Pike is out of 
order. 

MR. SAMFORD (Pike)—Then I ask that it be considered as 
a substitute. 

MR. O NEAL The previous question has been ordered, and 
you gag us, and must take some of the gag yourselves. 

THE PRESIDENT—The Chair holds that the point of order 
comes too late. 

The question being upon the adoption of the amendment of 
the delegate from Pike, upon a vote the same was adopted. 

THE PRESIDENT The question recurs upon the adoption 
of the amendment of the delegate from Montgomery. 



CONSTITUTIONAL CONVENTION, 1901 


2525 


MR. REESE—I desire to ask if it is not a fact that this Con¬ 
vention laid upon the table the amendment that was offered by 
the gentleman from Montgomery. 

THE PRESIDENT—It did not. 

MR. JONES (Montgomery)—No sir, the gentleman made a 
motion and withdrew it in order to have the Chairman of the Com¬ 
mittee hammer me. 

The question recurred upon the adoption of the amendment 
offered by the gentleman from Montgomery, and upon a vote being 
taken a division was called for, and by a vote of 30 ayes and 50 
Does the amendment was lost. 

MR. CUNNINGHAM—I rise to a point of order. The defeat 
of the amendment offered by the gentleman from Montgomery 
carries with it the amendment that was offered by the gentleman 
from Pike, and which was adopted. 

THE PRESIDENT—The point of order is well taken, and 
the question recurs upon the adoption of the Section as reported 
by the Committee. 

MR. O’NEAL—Is an amendment in order? 

THE PRESIDENT—The previous question has been ordered. 

M R. REESE—I desire to make a motion to reconsider the 
vote by which the previous question was ordered. 

MR. PETTUS—A point of order. It would require a sus¬ 
pension of the rules before that motion would be in order. 

MR. REESE—I move for a suspension of the rules. 

MR. O'NEAL—I call for an aye and no vote on that motion. 

The call was not sustained. 

Upon a vote being taken a division was called for and the 
motion to suspend the rules was lost. 

MR. ASHCRAFT—I desire to have the Section as amended 
read. 

THE PRESIDENT—It is not amended. 

MR. SAMFORD (Pike)—As I understood it the amendment 
from Montgomery was carried. 

THE PRESIDENT—The Chair will state for the information 
of the delegate from Pike that his amendment was adopted as an 
amendment, and the question recurring upon the adoption of the 
amendment, it was lost, and therefore the question recurs upon 
the adoption of the Section as reported by the Committee. 



2526 


OFFICIAL PROCEEDINGS 


Upon a vote being taken the Section was adopted. 

MR. SAMFORD (Pike)—I give notice now, having voted for 
the adopiton of this Section, that I will make a motion in the 
morning to reconsider for the purpose of adding the amendment 
that I propose to the Section. 

Section 36 was read as follows: 

Sec. 36. No State office shall be continued or created for the 
inspection or measuring of any merchandise, manufacture of any 
merchandise, manufacture or commodity; but any county or munici¬ 
pality may appoint such officers when authorized by law. 

Mr. Harrison here took the chair. 

MR. BROOKS—We have been in session here a good deal 
today, and our session was extended half an hour before our recess 
for dinner, and we have done a great deal of work. It is not within 
twenty minutes of 6 o'clock, and I move that we adjourn. 

There were loud expressions of dissent and a vote being taken, 
the Convention refused to adjourn. 

THE PRESIDENT—The question is upon the adoption of 
Section 36. 

MR. OATES—That section, as reported, is just as it exists in 
the present Constitution, and I move its adoption. 

MR. SANFORD (Montgomery)—If that section is passed, 
will it not hinder or stop altogether the inspection of commercial 
fertilizer by the Agricultural Department. 

MR. OATES—No, sir. The section reads the same as in the 
present Constitution, and has been the law for twenty-five years. 

MR. JONES (Montgomery)—The Supreme Court has de¬ 
cided that it does not. 

Upon a vote being taken, the section was adopted. 

Section 37 was read as follows : 

Sec. 37. No act of the Legislature changing the seat of govern¬ 
ment of the State shall become a law until the same shall have 
been submitted to the qualified electors of the State at a general 
election, and approved by a majority of such electors voting on the 
same; and such act shall specify the proposed new location. 

MR. OATES—That is unchanged, and is the same as in the 
present Constitution. I move its adoption. 

Upon a vote being taken the section was adopted. 

Section 38 was read as follows: 



CONSTITUTIONAL CONVENTION, 1901 


2527 


Sec. 38. A member of the Legislature who shall corruptly 
solicit, demand, or receive, or consent to receive, directly or in¬ 
directly, for himself or for another, from any company, corpora¬ 
tion or person, any money, office, appointment, employment, or 
personal advantage or promise thereof, for his vote or official in¬ 
fluence, or for withholding the same, or with an understanding, 
expressed or implied, that his vote or his official action shall in 
any way be influenced thereby; or who shall solicit or demand 
any such money or other advantage, matter or thing aforesaid, for 
another as the consideration of his vote or official influence, or 
for withholding the same; or shall give or withhold his vote or 
influence in consideration of the payment or promise of such money, 
advantage, matter or thing to another, shall be guilty of bribery 
within the meaning of this Constitution, and shall incur the dis¬ 
abilities provided thereby for such offense, and such additional 
punishment as is or shall be provided by law. 

MR. PETTUS—I have an amendment. 

The amendment was read as follows: “Amend Section 38 by 
striking out the word ‘corruptly' where it appears in said section. 

MR. OATES—That would leave it so that soliciting would 
be an offense. 

MR. PETTUS—I desire to state in regard to that amendment 
that the present section of the Constitution is believed by some to 
be somewhat ineffectual in prohibiting the evil that it is aimed at. 
fn this section, which I believe is the same as in the old Constitu¬ 
tion, it says that a member of the Legislature who shall corruptly 
solicit, demand or receive or consent to receive any of these things. 
Of course the evasion is on the word “corruptly/' It could not be 
proved that his intention was corrupt at the time he solicited or 
received it, and in that way the section has been evaded and has 
been a dead-letter in the Constitution and on our statute books. 
Now, I think that if that section is good at all, and if we are going 
to put anything into the Constitution on that subject, we ought 
to put something that can be enforced, and which if we strike out 
the word “corruptly" and make this section apply where a man 
solicits or accepts anything of this character, that it will reach in 
a large measure the evil that it is aimed at. For that reason, I 
move the adoption of the amendment. I think this is one section 
where it cannot be argued in favor of it, that it is the same as it 
was in the old Constitution, because the section as written in the 
old Constitution has been an absolute and unmitigated failure. 

Upon a vote being taken, the amendment was adopted. 

MR. HEFLIN (Chambers)—I was about to prepare an amend¬ 
ment in line eleven, where it reads “and shall incur the disabilities 
provided thereby for such offense." I don't see any good reason 



2528 


OFFICIAL PROCEEDINGS 


or good sense for “thereby” being in there, and it is not in the old 
Constitution, but it should read, “shall incur the disabilities pro¬ 
vided for such offense.” 

MR. O’NEAL—It is in the old Constitution. 

MR. OATES—I have not compared it. 

The amendment offered by the gentleman from Chambers was 
read as follows: “Amend by striking out the word ‘thereby’ in 
line eleven of said section.” 

MR. OATES—I have heard no reasons given why it should 
be stricken out. We find on examination that it is in the old Con¬ 
stitution. 

MR. JONES (Montgomery)—Does not “thereby” in this sec¬ 
tion refer to the Constitution? 

MR. OATES—It does. 

MR. JONES—And the other part, as may be provided by 

law? 

MR. OATES—Yes. 

MR. JONES—And is it not, therefore, necessary? 

MR. OATES—I think it is. I had not examined it when I 
was up before. I move to lay the amendment on the table. 

Upon a vote being taken, the motion to table was carried. 

MR. PETTUS—I desire to offer an amendment. 

The amendment was read as follows: “Amend Section 38 
by striking out the word ‘official’ where it appears in line eight of 
Section 38, page 17, of the Article on Legislative Department.” 

MR. PETTUS—I would like to call the attention of delegates 
to the fact that this provides for his vote or official influence in 
line eight, but further down it is for withholding vote or influence, 
and not his official influence, as provided in line eight. I think 
it ought to be made harmonious by inserting official in 
line nine, or striking it out of line eight, and I think that it 
would be better to strike it out, because it is his official influence 
which is desired, and I do not think a man ought to he allowed to 
play pooh-bah, and for that reason I think he ought not be per¬ 
mitted to sell his influence, personal or otherwise, while he is in 
office. 

MR. LONG (Walker)—Do you think a member of the Legis¬ 
lature has got any influence? 

MR. PETTUS—I doubt it. 



CONSTITUTIONAL CONVENTION, 1901 2S29 

MR. BURNS—I offer an amendment. 

The secretary started to read the amendment. 

MR. PETTUS I make the point of order that the amend- 
ment goes to the substitute offered by the gentleman from Dallas, 
and it is not in order at this time. 

1HK PRESIDENT PRO TEM—The point of order is well 
taken. 

The question recurred upon the adoption of the amendment 
of the gentleman from Limestone. 

Upon a vote being taken, the amendment was adopted. 

The secretary thereupon read the amendment offered by Mr. 
Burns of Dallas as follows: “Amend Section 38 by adding* after 
the word reward’ in the third line, the words ‘free pass.’ ” 

MR. BURNS—I move that my amendment be referred to the 
Committee of Corporations. (Laughter). 

MR. GREER (Calhoun)—I move that the amendment be 
tabled. 

A vote was taken, and during the vote Mr. Pillans sought 
recognition. 

MR. PILLANS—I call for the ayes and noes. 

The chair declared the motion to table carried. 

MR. REESE—I call for the ayes and noes. 

MR. BULGER—A point of order. The gentleman from Mo¬ 
bile is too late. The result was announced before the gentleman 
caught the eye of the chair. 

MR. PILLANS—I had the floor. 

MR. GREEN (Calhoun)—A further point of order. The gen¬ 
tleman from Mobile is not in his seat. 

MR. PILLANS—That is a point of order if the gentleman 
makes it. 

MR. BROOKS—Does the chair refuse to consider the point 
made by my colleague from Mobile, because he was not in his 
seat? I make the point of order, Mr. Prseident, that the meaning 
of the rule is that a delegate who is in any regular seat is pro hac 
vice in his seat, and the object of the rule is to prevent disorder by 
the members speaking from the aisle or somewhere else. It does 
not mean that he cannot speak from a regular seat. That is his 
seat for the time being, otherwise the President could not come 



2530 


OFF1CIAL PROCKK1 ) 1 X(‘,S 


down from the chair and take the seat of any delegate on the floor 
and address this Convention. Therefore, I make the point of order 
that my colleague is in his seat. 

MR. GREER (Calhoun)—In reply to that, I will state that 
the President of this Convention has universally ruled that the point 
of order that a gentleman was not in his seat was always well 
taken. 

THE PRESIDENT PRO TEM—That is the recollection of 
the present occupant of the chair, and the chair will state further 
that so far as the demand of the delegate from Mobile for the 
ayes and noes, the chair did not hear him. If the chair had heard 
the gentleman, he would have put the question over, and the chair 
will ask now to be permitted to do so and that the gentleman he 
allowed to make the point he was about to make. 

There being no objection, the leave was given. 

MR. PILLANS—I respectfully say that J knew the chair did 
not hear me. I have such confidence in the chair personally, as 
well as the position he occupies, that I knew he did not hear me. 
but the instant the question was stated I called for the ayes and 
noes. 

THE PRESIDENT PRO TEM—Upon what question? 

MR. PILLANS—Upon the question before the house—the 
amendment offered by the gentleman from Dallas. 

THE PRESIDENT PRO TEM—A motion was made and 
put by the chair to table the amendment of the gentleman from 
Dallas. 

MR. PILLANS—And I immediately demanded the ayes and 
noes upon that question. 

THE PRESIDENT PRO TEvM—In order that no injustice 
may be done, the chair asks that the call for the ayes and noes he 
put. 

MR. REESE—I rise to a point of order. The gentleman from 
Dallas, my colleague, offered this amendment, and he never had 
surrendered the floor. He was upon the floor and a motion was 
made to table, and immediately the gentleman from Dallas com¬ 
menced demanding the ayes and noes, and he has had the floor 
ever since. 

THE PRESIDENT PRO '1 EM—The Chair has consented, 
and I believe the Convention will not consent, to put the call for 
the ayes and noes. The Chair dees not agree with the last gentle¬ 
man from Dallas, because there is a motion made by his colleague 
to refer the amendment to the Committee on Corporations. 



CONSTITUTIONAL CONVENTION, 1901 


2531 


MR. BURNS—I take the position that I had the floor. 

THE PRESIDENT PRO TEM—The delegate will pardon 
the Chair, hut the delegate certainly took his seat, and the Chair 
recognized another gentleman. The Chair asks consent of this 
Convention that the Convention now act upon the call for the 
ayes and noes demanded by the delegate from Mobile. 

MR. COKER—I rise to a point of order, that this is not ger¬ 
mane and it has been defeated by this House on a different occa¬ 
sion, and has been settled. 

THE PRESIDENT PRO TEM—The Chair rules the point 
of order well taken. 

MR. JONES (Montgomery)—I appeal from the decision of 
the Chair. 

MR. BOONE—1 call for the ayes and noes on the question 
whether the Chair shall be sustained in ruling that it is not ger¬ 
mane. 

MR. GREER (Calhoun)—I move that we now adjourn. 

MR. REESE—I demand the ayes and noes on the motion to 
adjourn. I will withdraw the call. 

MR. BROOKS—I insist on the ayes and noes being called. 

MR. JONES (Montgomery)—What does the Chair do with 
my appeal? 

THE PRESIDENT PRO TEM—There are so many appeals, 
of the delegate will pardon the Chair and allow him one moment. 
After the appeal of the delegate from Montgomery there was a 
motion to adjourn, and the ayes and noes were demanded, and the 
Chair is told by the Secretary that the demand was sustained. 

MR. O'NEAL—The demand for the ayes and noes was with¬ 
drawn. 

MR. FITTS—There never was any standing up on that propo¬ 
sition. 

MR. JONES (Montgomery)—Then my appeal is still pending 
on ruling that this matter cannot be offered. 

MR. VAUGHAN—The time is nearly out and I move that we 
remain in session until the question under consideration is disposed 
of. 

MR, HEFLIN (Randolph)—The motion of the gentleman 
from Calhoun to adjourn is before the House. 

MR. PROCTOR—I demand the ayes and noes. 



2532 


OFFICIAL PROCEEDINGS 


MR. deGRAFFENREID—I rise to a point of order. Pending 
an appeal from the decision of the Chair no other motion is in 
order. 

MR. BURNS—The motion to adjourn is always in order. 

MR. ASHCRAFT—I have not the rule in my hand, but I am 
sure that it is a parliamentary rule that pending an appeal from 
the decision of the Chair no other motion is in order. 

MR. OATES—I desire to say that certainly the delegate from 
Lauderdale is mistaken. I have known an appeal to be taken and 
discussed, and doubtless the present occupant of the Chair has 
been in the Congress of the United States where they observe the 
highest rule of parliamentary law. It may be discussed for one 
or two days before it is decided, and we adjourned when it was a 
pending question, and it does not have to be disposed of as the 
main question before the Convention. 

MR. SAMFORD (Pike)—I give notice of a reconsideration 
of Section 35, and I have received information that I have sickness 
in my family and cannot be here tomorrow. I desire to make the 
motion to reconsider the vote whereby Section 35 was adopted 
and ask that it lie over until tomorrow. 

There being no objection the motion was entered. 

THE PRESIDENT PRO TEM—Before putting the motion 
to adjourn the Chair desires to submit to the Convention the fol¬ 
lowing requests for leaves of absence. Mr.- 

MR. PILLANS—Before that is done I want to understand 
if we have called for a vote by the ayes and noes, if the clock 
strikes 6 it goes over, and I shall insist that we have the vote on 
that question, and that the vote be proceeded with. 

jVIR. JONES (Montgomery)—I move that we remain in ses¬ 
sion until that appeal has been settled. 

To which there were loud expressions of dissent. 

MR. GREER (Calhoun)—-I move we do now adjourn. 

THE PRESIDENT PRO TEM—All who favor the motion 
of the delegate from Montgomery will say I. 

A division was called for. 

Mr. Greer (Calhoun) and Mr. Cofer sought recognition upon 
a point of order. 

The clock struck the hour of 6. 

THE PRESIDENT PRO TEM—The point of order is over¬ 
ruled. The Convention is taking a vote. 



CONSTITUTIONAL CONVENTION, 1901 


2533 


MR. GREER (Calhoun)—Before that vote is taken I want to 
raise the point of order that it should be a vote to suspend the 
rules. 

THE PRESIDENT PRO TEM—The point of order is over¬ 
ruled. A motion to fix the time of adjournment is always in order. 

By a vote of 50 ayes and 36 noes the motion of the gentleman 
from Montgomery (Mr. Jones) was carried. 

MR. GREER (Calhoun)—Do I understand that the rule that 
this Convention can remain in session without a suspension of the 
rules. 

MR. JONES—It does not require a suspension of the rules. 

MR. HEFLIN (Chambers)—I make the point of order that 
it requires a two-thirds vote to suspend the rules, and the point of 
order of the gentleman from Calhoun is well taken. 

MR. O’NEAL—I make the point of order that a motion to 
adjourn or fix the time of adjournment is a motion of the highest 
privilege, and can be put at any time. 

MR. JONES (Montgomery)—I make the point of order that 
the Convention unanimously remain here when the report of the 
Judiciary Committee came up in regard to our pay. 

THE PRESIDENT PRO TEM.—There was so much con¬ 
fusion the Chair has not had an opportunity to examine the rules, 
but the Chair is of the opinion that a motion to fix the time of 
adjournment is one of the highest order. 

MR. BROOKS—It is a question of extending the session, and 
not a question of adjourning. The Convention adjourns by reason 
of the hour being 6 o’clock. 

MR. JONES (Montgomery)—I make the point of order that 
the Chair has already decided that this Convention shall remain in 
session until the appeal is disposed of. 

MR. LONG (Walker)—I move that we adjourn. 

MR. REESE—I make the point of order that the time has al¬ 
ready been fixed and the motion is out of order. 

THE PRESIDENT PRO TEM—The Chair will ask the in¬ 
dulgence of the house a moment that he may examine the papers. 
The Chair has been ruling rapidly. 

MR. JONES (Montgomery)—Don’t the Chair sometimes hear 
members on a question of this sort? 

THE PRESIDENT PRO TEM—With pleasure. 

MR. REESE—I make the point of order that an appeal from 
the decision of the Chair is not debatable. 



2534 


OFFICIAL PROCEEDINGS 


MR. JONES—I understand that, but it is the custom of every 
civilized parliament in the world, if the Chair choses to do so, to 
accord a member that privilege. 

MR. PETTUS—I cite the Chair to Rule 2, which provides 
that an appeal shall be decided without debate, except that the 
delegate to whom he may yield, may speak to the appeal not ex¬ 
ceeding five minutes. 

MR. JONES—I think the Chair, perhaps in the confusion— 

MR. BULGER—I rise to a point of order. The delegate from 
Walker made a motion to adjourn, and I cite the Chair to Rule 26, 
that it is always in order, unless prevented by certain exceptions, 
of which this is not one. 

MR. PETTUS—The point ot order comes too late. 

THE PRESIDENT PRO TKM—The Chair would be pleased 
to hear from the delegate from Limestone on that. 

MR. BULGER—I invite the attention to Rule 26, which is 
very clear in defining the time of adjournment. 

MR. JONES—I make a point of order that no new business 
has been transacted and he could not make a motion to adjourn. 

MR. BULGER—I submit, Mr. President, that the motion to 
adjourn made by the gentleman from Walker was pending when 
the gentleman from Montgomery took the floor. Now, I believe 
that this Convention has the right to have that motion put to ad¬ 
journ, under Rule 26 on page 10 of the rules governing this Con¬ 
vention. 

MR. PETTUS—The Chair, I believe, announced that he want¬ 
ed to hear from me upon the point of order, or was willing to hear 
from me. I would like to state that a motion to adjourn shall al¬ 
ways be in order, except in certain cases, and one of the exceptions 
is when a roll is being called or when a vote is being verified, or 
when a member has the floor. The gentleman from Montgomery 
had the floor under Rule 2, and was discussing a point of order, 
and a motion could not be put while he had the floor under Rule 
26, and I make the further point of order that the Convention had 
already, by its previous action fixed the time at which the Conven¬ 
tion should adjourn, and that that motion had precedence of the 
motion to adjourn, and that motion having been acted upon, the 
motion to adjurn was not in order, especially since the gentleman 
from Montgomery had the floor, especially under the latter part 
of Rule 26, which states that a motion to adjourn is not in order 
when a member has the floor. 

PRESIDENT PRO TEM—The gentleman from Montgomery 
has the floor and the point of order is not well taken. 



CONSTITUTIONAL CONVENTION, 1901 


2535 


MR. JONES—I was about to say that in the hurry of the de¬ 
cision the Chair, perhaps, did not apprehend the precise point 
passed upon by the Chair. The Chair ruled that the inclusion of 
the word “pass’’ in this section with reference to the General As¬ 
sembly was not germane to the section. If that is what the Chair 
put its ruling on, that something of that sort had already been 
decided. I submit to the Chair with all due defference that the 
argument hardly needs refutation to say that the sovereign people 
of Alabama, in Convention assembled, are powerless to insert in 
any clause to which the matter relates, a prohibition upon the mem¬ 
bers of the General Assembly. What does germane mean? It is 
cognate to, relates to, not foreign to, akin to, or a cousin to, the 
proposition. There is not a semblance of ground on which to 
maintain the argument that it is not germane. 

THE PRESIDENT PRO TEM.—The Chair will say this, the 
question is not whether it is germane or not, but whether it was 
included in the former action of this Convention, if it has been it 
is res adjudicata. 

MR. JONES—Then I say with all due respect. How in the 
name of God can a thing be res adjudicata by a motion to lay on 
the table which simply says we won't hear the matter now. That 
would have been the effect if this original matter was offered here, 
but that matter that is laid on the table is not offered here. It i> 
simply saying that they shall not receive, and before it was a long 
provision about their removal from office and making them guilty 
of a misdemeanor, and I submit on reflection that I think the Chair 
will conclude that the sovereign people of Alabama in Convention 
assembled are not bound by such extremes that they cannot con¬ 
sider such a matter. I do not wish to take up the time of the Chair 
further. 

THE PRESIDENT PRO TEM.—The Chair desires to state 
that a question previous to this, proposed in the attempt to dispatch 
business rapidly, when the Chair ruled rapidly, and I am informed 
by the Secretary that this very amendment was laid upon the table. 

MR. JONES — There were three amendments, one that he 
should not receive his mileage if he used a pass, and a second one 
that if a member of the General Assembly should use a pass he 
would be guilty of a misdemeanor and forfeit his office, that is all 
the amendments that have been before the house. 

THE PRESIDENT PRO TEM.—The very question on which 
you raised the point of order, the Secretary informs me that be¬ 
fore your point of order was raised, on motion, it was laid upon 
the table The Secretary will read the record, and the Chair asks 
the indulgence of the house to straighten the record. 

The record was read as follows: Amendment by Mr. Burns: 



2536 


OFFICI AL FROCK KDl NOS 


Mr. Greer of Calhoun moved In table and the motion pre¬ 
vailed. 

MR. PILL A NS— 

MR. SAM FOR I)—That is not correct- 

MR. FITTS—Nothing like that happened. 

THK SECRETARY-The Chair did announce that the mo¬ 
tion was tabled. 

MR. JONES (Montgomery) — l object to the secretary having 
a colloquy with the members of the house. 

MR. LONG (Walker)—I move that this Convention do now 
adjourn. 

MR. JONES—That is not in order. Let us stay here and vote 
on this thing that is all we want. 

MR. LONG (Walker)—I insist on my motion. 

MR. PKTTUS—I insist that the motion to fix the time to 
which the Convention adjourns is of the highest privilege, and hav¬ 
ing fixed the time, a motion to adjourn subsequently cannot be 
maintained without a suspension of the rules. 

MR. SAMFORD (Pike)—I desire to change the statement I 
made with reference to the remark I made in respect to the record. 
I meant no reflection upon the Secretary, but the Secretary got it 
as it transpired, the Chair afterwards on the protest of the gentle¬ 
man from Mobile, stated that he would put the vote on the ayes 
and noes as demanded. 

THE PRESIDENT PRO TEM.—The Chair will state to the 
delegates that is what the Chair was trying to do when the dele¬ 
gate arose and insisted upon his appeal, and stopped the Chair 
from doing it. 

MR. LONG (W'alker)—I rise to a question of personal privi¬ 
lege. I made a motion to adjourn and ask a ruling on it. 

THE PRESIDENT PRO TEM.—The Chair rules, the Con¬ 
vention having agreed to remain in session until this question is 
disposed of, that the motion is out of order. 

MR. LONG (Walker) — 1 appeal from the decision of the 
Chair. 

THE PRESIDENT PRO TEM.—The gentleman is out of or¬ 
der. 

MR. BROOKS—I move that the appeal be put to the house. 

MR. O’NEAL—Let me call the attention of the Chair to a 
principle of parliamentary law which bears upon this question. 



CONSTITUTIONAL CONVENTION, 1901 


2537 


There were loud cries of no no. 

MR. REESE—I rise to a question—— 

MR. ASHCRAFT—I arise to a point of order. When the 
President put the vote on the motion to table the amendment by 
the gentleman from Dallas, as soon as the question was announced 
the gentleman from Mobile began to demand the ayes and noes. 
but the Chairman, not hearing him, proceeded until, as the Clerk’s 
records show, he had announced that the vote had carried, there¬ 
upon the gentleman from Mobile was heard by the Chair and the 
Chair by unanimous consent proposed to repeat the question, and 
thereupon the gentleman from Calhoun made the point of order 
that the question was res adjudicata, having been passed upon at 
a previous hour. The Chair sustained the point of order made by 
the gentleman from Calhoun, and thereupon the gentleman from 
Montgomery appealed from the decision of the Chair. 

THE PRESIDENT PRO TEM.—That is the Chair’s recollec¬ 
tion of it, the Chair appeals to the Convention to let it fix the 
record. The gentlemen who are appealing shall have what they 
desire. I want to do what is fair, but I want to correct this re¬ 
cord. 

MR. CARMICHAEL (Colbert)—I arise to a point of order. 
The gentleman from Lauderdale stated the proposition correctly 
except in this respect: The Chairman of this Convention never did 
submit the question as to whether there was objection, or whether 
unanimous consent would be given to a yea and nay vote as de¬ 
manded by the gentleman from Mobile, but the Chairman was 
endeavoring to facilitate the Convention and to get them to agree, 
but the Chairman never did succeed. 

MR. REESE—I make the point of order that this Convention 
has ordered an appeal, the appeal is pending, and that the gentle¬ 
man is out of order at this time. There is nothing except to take 
a vote. 

THE PRESIDENT PRO TEM.—The Chair will be your ser¬ 
vant and carry out your wishes and no advantage will be taken of 
any member, but I insist there is an error, in the record, and the 
Chair’s recollection sustains the Secretary’s minutes, and it will 
put the records in a bad shape to say that this motion was laid on 
the table. 

MR. JONES—We can correct the journal tomorrow morning, 
when it is read. We are satisfied as to what the facts are. 

MR. BULGER—I submit that the journal speaks the truth 
in this transaction, and that this Convention has no power now in 
this manner to correct the journal. 



2538 


OFFICIAL PROCKKD1NGS 


AIK. REEbE I make the point of order that the appeal is not 
debatable and the gentleman from Tallapoosa has spoken sixteen 
times on the proposition. 

AIR. BROWNE I make the point of order that a gentleman 
cannot appeal from a decision of the Chair as to the state of the 
record when the record speaks for itself. 

AIR. JONES It has not been approved 1>\ this house, and it 
does not speak the truth until then. 

AIR. SAAIFORD—In view of the state of the record_ 

There were vociferous cries of vote, vote_ 

SA ^ It0R p- In view of the state of the record, 1 move 
that the gentleman from Dallas be taken from the table. 

motion^ P ^ RKE J (CiiUman)-I make the point of order that no 
motion can be made while an appeal is being taken. 

AIR SAAIFORD (Pike)—And upon my motion I demand the 
ayes and noes. 

MR. REESE—I rise to a point of inquire. Is the request at 
this time for a ver.t.cation ? There seems to be some doubt as to 
whether the gentleman’s amendment was tabled or not, and in the 
confusion the vote was misunderstood. I contend that the Con¬ 
vention had a right after the commencement of the vote to de¬ 
mand a verification, and I call for a verification of the vote. 

that SAAIFORD The Chair has ruled, as I understand it, 
Secretary is correct and that being the fact the amend¬ 
ment of the gentleman from Dallas is upon the table, and I have 
made a motion that the amendment be taken from the table, and 
upon that I call for the ayes and noes. 

MR- BROWNE—I make the point of order that this house 
stands adjourned. That is new business, a motion to take from 

the table, and was not incorporated in the motion to extend the 
session. 

, t ^ PRESIDENT PRO TEM—I appeal to the Convention 

that we are not acting with proper regard for each other. The 
Chair is desirous of doing what is right but there are so many 
delegates on the floor, and so many points of order, that it is im- 
possible for the Chair to decide anything. 

MR. PETTUS—I ask what the appeal was taken from? 

. THE PRESIDENT PRO TEM-I. was taken from the ml- 
mg of the Chair in respect to the amendment offered by the gen¬ 
tleman from Dallas. * 



CONSTITUTIONAL CONVENTION, 1901 


2S39 


MR. O’NEAL—I move that the Sergeant-at-Arms be request¬ 
ed to keep order in this house. 

MR. PILLANS—Have we a right to have a yea and nay vote 
upon the appeal? We can fix the record afterwards. 

MR. BULGER—I insist that the record is right now. It don't 
need any fixing, and won't have to he fixed. It is put down as 
this things occurs and the gentleman from Mobile cannot take a 
vote and afterwards fix the record. I say it is unparliamentary 
and cannot be done. The record in this case speaks the truth, 
just as it occurred. 

MR. REESE—I charge that the gentleman from Tallapoosa 
has made that point of order half a dozen times, and he is filibuster¬ 
ing in this Convention. 

MR. HEBXIN (Chambers)—I would like to ask the gentle¬ 
man from Tallapoosa a question. Do you not think, sir, that when 
Patrick Henry said, “Give me liberty or give me death," he said 
a great thing? 

MR. BOONE—I make the point of order that Patrick Henry 
is long since dead. 

THE PRESIDENT PRO TEM—The chair will listen, when¬ 
ever the Convention comes to order, and remains so. 

MR. SAMFORD (Pike)—This Convention is entitled to have 
the vote put to it, and I respectfully demand, as a member of this 
Convention, that we have the vote upon the question of appeal, 
made by the gentleman from Montgomery. I do not desire to be 
disrespectful to the Convention, or to the chair, but an appeal has 
been taken from a decision of the chair and the Convention is en¬ 
titled to a vote upon it, whatever it may be. 

THE PRESIDENT PRO TEM.—And the Convention shall 
have the opportunity if they will stay here and vote. 

MR. BROWNE—I desire a ruling upon my point of order. 

MR. O’NEAL—The gentleman is out of order; there is noth¬ 
ing before this house but the appeal. 

MR. BROWNE—I rise to a point of order. I know the gen¬ 
tlemen do not want to decide it, but I make the point of order that 
the chair should not entertain an appeal for the purpose of making 
the records speak what is not the truth. 

MR. O'NEAL—Who is to judge whether it is true—you or 
the house? 

MR. BROWNE—The chair. 



2540 


OFFICIAL FROCK FLINGS 


MR. O’NEAL—No, sir; this house proposes to judge whether 
it is true or not. This house proposes to do it, and no one can con¬ 
trol this house. 

MR. BROWNE—I desire a ruling upon a point of order. 

MR. LONG (Walker)—I respectfully ask the ruling of the 
chair. Awhile ago I made a motion to adjourn. The chair ruled 
that I had no right to make the motion at that time. On that I 
took an appeal from the decision of the chair that should have pre¬ 
ceded over the appeal of the gentleman from Montgomery. The 
last appeal should be settled first, and I contend that a majority 
of this Convention have a right to adjourn. 

MR. JONES—I respectfully insist that we are entitled to have 
this vote, and ask the chair respectfully if he is going to put the 
question. 

MR. BROWNE — Will the chair rule on my point of order 
against this appeal, because it is an attempt to make the records 
speak what is not the truth? 

THE PRESIDENT PRO TEM.—The chair will ask the dele¬ 
gate from Montgomery and others favoring his position, if they 
will consent that the action the chair was about to take upon the 
demand of the delegate from Mobile would enable us to correct 
the ioiirnal about that matter being laid upon the table? 

MR. JONES—This house will settle what its records contain, 
and I respectfully insist upon my appeal. 

THE PRESIDENT PRO TEM — Then the delegate shall 
have it, and the question is, shall the chair be sustained? 

MR. JONES—I demand the ayes and noes. 

The call for the ayes and noes was sustained. 

MR. WILSON (Clarke)—I have come into the hall since the 
ruling of the chair was made, and I would like to know what the 
chair ruled, and from which there is an appeal, so that I may in¬ 
telligently vote upon the appeal from the ruling of the chair. 

MR. JONES—If the gentleman will allow me, I will state it. 

Objection was made. 

MR. FERGUSON—I arise to a question of inquiry. What is 
it that we are voting on? 

THE PRESIDENT PRO TEM.—The chair will state for the 
information of the delegates that the Convention had under con¬ 
sideration Section 38 to the Article on Legislative Department. An 
amendment was offered by the delegate from Dallas (Mr. Burns) 



CONSTITUTIONAL CONVENTION, 1901 


2541 


to amend said section by adding after the word “reward” in the 
third line the words “free passes.” 

The point of order was raised by the delegate from Calhoun 
that the quevStion of free passes was res adjudicata, having here¬ 
tofore been settled by this Convention and the chair sustained the 
point of order, and from that ruling the delegate from Montgom¬ 
ery appealed, and the question is shall the decision of the Chair 
be sustained? 

MR. WILSON (Clark)—1 arise to state my position on the 
question. 

MR. REESE—An appeal is not debatable, and the gentleman 
has no right to debate the question. 

THE PRESIDENT PRO TEM.—The point of order is well 
taken. Proceed with the call. 

MR. BURNS (Dallas)—I arise to a question of privilege. I 
have never yet yielded the floor. 

Upon the call of the roll the vote resulted as follows: 

AYES 


Mmon, 

Barcficld, 

Browne, 

Bulger, 

Carmichael, of Colbert, 
Cofer, 

Davis, of DeKalb, 
Davis, of Etowah, 
Eyster, 

Greer, of Calhoun, 


Ashcraft, 

Banks, 

Beddow, 

Blackwell, 

Boone, 

Brooks, 

Burns, 

Cobb, 

Coleman, of Greene, 
Cunningham, 

Dent, 

Duke, 

Eley, 


Heflin, of Chambers, 
Heflin, of Randolph, 
Henderson, 

Knight, 

Long, of Butler, 
XcSmith, 

Parker, of Cullman, 
Porter, 

Proctor, 

Reynolds (Henry), 


NOES 

Ferguson, 

Fitts, 

Fletcher, 

Glover, 

Handley, 

Hood, 

Howell, 

Jenkins, 

Jones, of Hale, 

Jones, of Wilcox, 
Jones, of Montgomery, 
Kyle, 

Leigh, 


Rogers, of Lowndes, 
Searcy, 

Sentell, 

Sloan, 

Smith, of Mobile, 
Smith, Mac A., 

Sorrell, 

Williams, of Marengo, 
Wilson, of Clarke, 
Wilson, of Washington, 

TOTAL—30 


Lomax, 

Lowe, of Jefferson, 
Macdonald, 

McMillan, of Wilcox, 
Martin, 

Maxwell, 

Merrill, 

Miller, of Wilcox, 
Moody, 

Murphree, 

Norman, 

Norwood, 

Oates, 



2542 


OFFICIAL PROCEEDINGS 


O'Neal, of Lauderdale, 

Robinson, 

Tayloe, 

Opp, 

Rogers, of Sumter, 

Vaughan, 

Palmer, 

Samford, 

Walker, 

Parker, of Elmore, 

Sanders, 

Weakley. 

Pettus, 

Sanford, 

Whiteside, 

Pillans, 

Selheimer, 

Winn. 

Pitts, 

Spragins, 


Reese, 

Stewart, 

TOTAL— *61 

ABSENT OR NOT VOTING 

Messrs. President, 

Graham, of Talladega, 

Morrisette, 

Altman, 

Grant, 

Mulkey, 

Bartlett, 

Grayson, 

O’Neill (Jefferson). 

Beavers, 

Greer, of Perry, 

O’Rear, 

Bethune, 

Haley, 

Pearce, 

Burnett, 

Harrison, 

Phillips, 

Byars, 

Hinson, 

Renfro, 

Cardon, 

Hodges, 

Reynolds, of Chilton, 

Carmichael, of Coffee, 

Howze, 

Smith, Morgan M., 

Carnathon, 

Inge, 

Sollie, 

Case, 

Jackson, 

Spears, 

Chapman, 

Jones, of Bibb, 

Studdard, 

Coleman, of Walker 

King, 

Thompson, 

Cornwall, 

Kirk. 

Waddell, 

Craig, 

Kirkland, 

Watts, 

deGraffenreid, 

Ledbetter, 

Weatherly, 

Espy, 

Locklin, 

White, 

Foshee, 

Long, of Walker, 

Willet, 

Foster, 

Lowe, of Lawrence, 

Williams, of Barbour, 

Freeman, 

McMillan (Baldwin), 

Williams, of Elmore, 

Gilmore, 

Malone, 


Graham, of Montgomery, M iller, of Marengo, 


And by a vote of 30 ayes and 60 noes 
was not sustained. 

the decision of the Chair 

MR. HEFLIN 

(Chambers)—I make 

the point of order that 


the House stands adjourned. 

Leaves of absence were granted Mr. Vaughan of Dallas, Mr. 
Reese, Mr. King and Mr. Smith of Autauga, for tomorrow (Satur¬ 
day) and thereupon at 6:30 o’clock the Convention adjourned. 



2543 


CONSTITUTIONAL CONVENTION, 1901 

FIFTIETH DAY 

MONTGOMERY. ALA., 
Saturday, July 20, 1901, 

The Convention met pursuant to adjournment, was called to 
order by the President, and opened with prayer by the Rev. Mr. 
Howell, as follows: 

O Lord, we thank Thee for the preservation of our lives. We 
thank Thee for Thy loving providence, which has been over and 
about us all the days of our life. We thank Thee for this land of 
civilization and for its Christian men and women. We thank Thee 
for all the influences of Thy providence, which have been brought 
to bear upon us, and lead us away from our sins. We pray Thee 
to direct 11 s this dav, aid us in the work in which we are engag¬ 
ed, and may the actions of our lives, the words of our mouths and 
meditation of our hearts be acceptable to Thy sight. O Lord, di¬ 
rect us in this work. May we realize the responsibility we are 
under unto Thee, and that we are under to the people we repre¬ 
sent, and may the Great King of Kings, Lord of Lords, lead us 
and direct us in the way of all truth. Forgive our sins, blot out all 
our transgressions and may we live soberly and righteously and 
godly lives in this present world, and when at last we come to the 
end of life, may we have a conscience void of offense toward Thee, 
and toward all mankind, and finally when our lives and labors 
are all over, and we appear in the great beyond, may the Lord 
accept and save us, through Jesus Christ. Amen. 

Upon the call of the roll 94 delegates responded to their 
names. 

Leaves of absence were granted as follows To Mr. Miller 
(Wilcox) for today and Monday; Mr. Winn for Monday; to Mr. 
Burnett for today; to Mr. Kirk for today; to Mr. Sanford (Pike) 
today on account of sickness; to Mr. Pitts of Dallas for today. 

The roll was called for introduction of ordinances, resolutions, 

etc. 

MR. BOONE—I yield my turn to the delegate from Cham¬ 
bers. 

MR. ROBINSON—I have a resolution I desire to offer for 
passage. 

The Clerk read the resolution as follows: 

Resolution No. 257, by Mr. Robinson: 

Resolution for final adjournment: 



2544 


OFFICIAL PROCEEDINGS 


Whereas, The Act of the General Assembly of Alabama calling 
this Convention together in fixing the compensation of the mem¬ 
bers thereof, contained the following proviso: '‘That the per dieru 
compensation shall not be allowed or paid to any member of the 
Convention for a longer time than fifty days.” 

And whereas. The Democratic party of Alabama, when it 
nominated its candidates for membership to this Convention, de¬ 
clared in its platform as follows, to-wit: “The Democratic party 
of the State of Alabama, in Convention assembled, endorse the act 
to provide for the holding of a Constitutional Convention to re¬ 
vise and amend the Constitution of this State, approved Decem¬ 
ber the 11th, 1900. and favor the carrying out of all the provisions 
of said act.” 

And, whereas. The chairman of the Campaign Committee of 
said party in an address issued to the voters of this State urging 
the election of the candidates of said party, promised the people 
as follows, to-wit: “The Campaign Committee of the Democratic 
party hereby reasserts the pledges made and in the name of every 
Democratic nominee. State, Congressional, Senatorial, and county, 
unqualifiedly assures the people that every plank of the platform 
and every provision of the act calling the Convention shall be kept 
and complied with. “And, whereas, the fifty days for which the 
members of this Convention shall receive pay as provided in said 
act will expire today. 

And, whereas. The members of this Convention have declar¬ 
ed by resolution that they are unwilling to remain longer in ses¬ 
sion without pay, and 

Whereas, the Democratic members of This Convention should 
not be required to violate the sacred pledges made by them to the 
people who elected them. 

Therefore, be it Resolved, That this Convention shall stand 
adjourned sine die at 6 o'clock p. m. today. 

The question being upon the adoption of the resolution a vote 
being taken, the resolution offered by the gentleman from Cham¬ 
bers was lost. 

MR. BURNS—I have a resolution to offer. 

The Clerk read the resolution as follows: 

Resolution No. 258, by Mr. Burns: 

Resolved, That the expenses of this Convention exceeds the 
amount actually necessary. 

Referred to the Committee on Rules. 

MR. COLEMAN (Greene)—I have an ordinance I desire to 

offer. 



CONSTITUTIONAL CONVENTION, 1901 


2545 


I he clerk read the ordinance as follows: 
Ordinance No. 425 hy Mr. Coleman (Greene.) 

AN ORDINANCE 


lie it ordained that no railroad or other transportation com¬ 
pany or corporation shall grant free passes, or sell tickets or passes 
at a discount other than as sold to the public generally, to any 
member of the Legislature or to any person holding office under 
this State, and any such member or officer receiving such pass or 
ticket for himself or procuring the same for another shall be guilty 
of a misdenianor and upon conviction, shall be fined in a sum not 
exceeding $1,000 and at the discretion of the court trying the case, 
in addition to such fine, may be imprisoned for a term not exceed¬ 
ing six months, and upon such conviction, shall be subject to im¬ 
peachment and removal from office. The courts having jurisdic¬ 
tion shall give this law specially in charge to the grand juries, 
and when the evidence is sufficient to authorize an indictment, 
the grand jury must present a true bill. Any county into or through 
which, such member or officer is transported, by the use of such 
prohibited pass or ticket, shall have jurisdiction of the case, pro¬ 
vided only one prosecution shall be had for the same offense, and. 
provided further, that nothing herein contained shall prevent the 
Governor or other authorized person from making special arrange¬ 
ments for transportation of State troops, within the State at less 
than the regular rates. 

Referred to Committee on Corporations. 


The report of the Committee on Journal was read, stating that 
they had examined the journal for the forty-ninth day of the Con¬ 
vention and found the same to he correct. 


MR. TONES (Montgomery) — I would like to inquire as to 
what the ‘journal shows with reference to the amendment offered 
bv the gentleman from Dallas being laid upon the table. 

MR. PROCTOR—I move that the journal pertaining to that 
matter be read. 


MR LONG (Walker)—I make the point of order. That is 
out of order. The roll is being called for the introduction of resolu¬ 
tions, It would be out of order at this time. 


MR. OATES—The point of order, it seems to me, would have 
been well taken before the report was received and read. Tt is had 
practice to interrupt proceedings in that way. 


THE PRESIDENT— It seems to the Chair that the regular 
order is called for. and the regular order will be the call of the roll 
of delegates, and after that the Convention may take up the re- 



2546 


OFFICIAL PROCEEDINGS 


port of the Committee for consideration if it desires. The Secre¬ 
tary will proceed with the call of the roll. 

MR. DENT I send up a resolution, and I ask the attention 
of the Convention to it when read, as I propose to move the sus¬ 
pension of the rules to put the resolution upon its passage. 

The clerk read the resolution, (No. 259) as follows: 

Resolution No. 259 by Mr. Dent: 

Resolved, That the Committee on Corporations to which has 
been referred the ordinance introduced today by the delegate from 
Greene in reference to railroad passes, are herb}' instructed to sub¬ 
mit a report on said ordinance not later than Tuesday next the 
23rd inst. 

When the Secretary had completed the reading of the resolu¬ 
tion, the gentleman from Barbour moved to suspend the rules to 
have the resolution put upon its immediate passage, and called for 
the ayes and noes. 

The call for the ayes and noes was sustained. 

THE PRESIDENT The question is upon suspension of the 
rules. 


MR. GREER (Calhoun)—I would like to hear that resolution 
read. 


THE PRESIDENT Gentlemen will please give attention to 
the reading of resolutions. The gentleman from Barbour announc¬ 
ed that he would propose to suspend the rules, which ought to in- 
vite the attention of delegates. The Secretary will read the reso¬ 
lution. 1 he Chair will not feel bound to order a re-reading where 
notice has been given of an intention to move to suspend the rules. 

The Secretary again read the resolution. 

THE PRESIDENT—The ayes and noes have been called for 
upon a motion to suspend the rules. As many as favor the suspen¬ 
sion of the rules for the purpose of placing the resolution just read 
upon its immediate passage, will say aye, and those opposed no 
as your names are called. 


On the call of the roll the vote resulted as follows: 


Ashcraft, 

Banks, 

Barefield, 

Beddow, 

Blackwell, 

Boone, 


AYES 


Brooks, 

Burns, 

Chapman, 

Cobb, 

Coleman, of Greene, 
Dent, 


deGraffenreid, 

Duke, 

Bley, 

Ferguson, 

Fitts, 

Fletcher, 



CONSTITUTIONAL CONVENTION, 1901 


2547 


Freeman, 

Glover, 

Graham. of Talladega, 
Handley, 

Heflin, of Chambers, 
Henderson, 

Hood, 

Jackson, 

Jones, of Montgomery, 
Jones, of Wilcox, 

Kyle. 

Leigh, 

Locklin, 

Lomax, 

Lowe, of Jefferson, 
Macdonald, 


Messrs. President, 
Almon. 

Browne, 

Bulger, 

Cardon. 

Carmichael, of Colbert. 
Gofer, 

Craig, 

Cunningham, 

Davis, of DeKalb, 
Kyster. 

Greer, of Calhoun, 


McMillan, of Baldwin, 
McMillan (Wilcox), 
Malone, 

Martin, 

Maxwell, 

Merrill, 

M oody, 

Murphree. 

Norman, 

Norwood, 

Oates, 

O’Neal (Lauderdale), 
Opp, 

Palmer, 

Parker (Elmore), 
Pettus. 


NOES 

Harrison, 

Hodges, 

Howell, 

Kirkland, 

Knight, 

Long, of Butler, 
Long, of Walker, 

M ulkey, 

NeSmith, 

Parker (Cullman), 
Proctor, 

Rogers (Lowndes L 


Pillans, 

Robinson, 

Rogers (Sumter), 
Sanders, 

Sanford, 

Selheimer, 

Smith. M ac. A., 
Sollie, 

Spears, 

Spragins, 

Tayloe, 

Walker, 

White, 

Whiteside, 

Williams (Barbour). 
Winn, 

TOTAL—66 


Searcy, 

Sloan. 

Smith (Mobile). 
Stewart, 

Stoddard, 

Weakley, 

William (Marengo), 
Williams (Elmore), 

W ilson (Clarke), 
Wilson (Washington). 


TOTAL—34 


ABSENT OR NOT VOTING 


Altman, 

Bartlett, 

Beavers, 

Bethune. 

Burnett, 

Byars, 

Carmichael, of Coffee, 
Carnathon, 

Case, 

Coleman, of Walker, 
Cornwall, 

Davis, of Etowah, 
Espy, 

Foshce, 


F'oster, 

Gilmore, 

Graham, of Montgomery. 
Grant, 

Grayson, 

Greer, of Perry, 

Haley, 

Heflin, of Randolph, 
Hinson, 

Howze, 

Inge, 

Jenkins, 

Jones, of Bibb, 

Jones, of Hale. 


King, 

Kirk, 

Ledbetter, 

Lowe, of Lawrence, 
Miller (Marengo), 
Miller (Wilcox), 
Morrisette, 

O’Neill, of Jefferson, 
O' Rear, 

Pearce, 

Phillips, 

Pitts, 

Porter, 

Reese, 




2548 


OFFICIAL PROCEEDINGS 


Renfro. Smith. Morgan M., Waddell. 

Reynolds (Chilton), Sorrell, Watts, 

Reynolds, of Henry, Thompson, Weatherly, 

Samford, Vaughan. W diet, 

Sentell, 

THE PRESIDENT—On casting up the vote, it appears that 
there are 66 ayes and 34 noes, and the motion to suspend the rules 
is lost. 

MR. JONES (Montgomery)—Does it take two-thirds of the 
entire house, or two-thirds of those voting under the rules? 

THE PRESIDENT — It requires two-thirds of those who 
voted. 

MR. DENT — I ask that the resolution be referred to the 
Committee on Rules. 

MR. LONG (Walker)—I rise to a point of order, the resolu¬ 
tion should be referred by the Chair under the rules, and it would 
require a two-third vote to suspend the rules. 

THE PRESIDENT—The Chair has not yet referred it. 

MR. DENT—I ask that it be referred to the Committee on 
Rules. 

THE PRESIDENT—The Chair will consider the request of 
the gentleman. It seems to the Chair that the resolution should 
go to the Committee on Corporations as it relates to a report 
from that committee, and is expressing the sense of the Conven¬ 
tion. The Chair will refer the resolution to the Committee on 
Corporations. 

MR. JONES (Montgomery)—Has the Convention the right to 
direct how it shall be referred? 

THE PRESIDENT—Yes, if the gentleman makes a motion. 

MR. JONES—I move that it be referred to the Committee on 
Rules. 

MR. DENT—I second the motion. 

MR. LONG (Walker)—It will require a two-thirds vote to 
overrule the chair in the matter of reference. 

THE PRESIDENT—It is competent for any delegate to move 
a different reference. Two-thirds of the Convention can order a 
different reference. 

The question will be on the motion to refer, contrary to the in¬ 
dication made by the Chair, this resolution to the Committee on 
Rules. The Chair thinks it ought to be referred to the Commit- 



2549 


^ OX'S 1111 j 1()N.\], CONVHN’i'IOX, 190] 

tee on Corporations. The onest.V^ in-, 

Committee on Corporations as e ia ie re f err ed to the 

those opposed no. It seems'To^heVl? T ^ wil1 say aye and 

see,,l! ' to tlle Chair that the noes have it 

MR. HROOKS—The Chair com i , 

Conunittee on Corp<,rations--that was^i^dle^n^"^ ^ ^ 

l,<.ur 1 irtha I Mld S ! 1 )K | N t T ~T he T tion ° f the ^ entle,11 <' 1 " from Bar- 
f w Chib U ri [ iT"" hc ‘, referred to the Committee on Rules. 

referred o he r If 111 ^ ° 1>in,on o{ the Chair it should he 
S rVr? ,,n Corporations, and it shall he so re- 
Presidenl ,ll( ' ^-.vention overrules the reference made hy the 


A vote* being taken on a division 
noc‘>, and the 1 motion oi the gentleman 


there were 45 ayes and 
from Harbour was lost. 


5 J 


THK PRESIDENT—The resolution 
Committee on Corporations. 


will he referred to the 


The Secretary will continue the call of the roll. 

MR de(«RAH<BNREID—I have an ordinance that I want 
to introduce, and I ask that it he referred to the Committee on 
Banks and Banking. 


The Clerk read the ordinance as follows: 


Ordinance No. 426, by Mr. deGraffenreid: 

Amendment to the fourth section to the article heretofore 
adopted on Banks and Banking. 

Strike out of Section 4 the words “shall, for such notes and 
deposits,” and insert in lieu thereof the following words: “the pur¬ 
chasers of exchange from the bank, and persons to whom the bank 
is indebted for the proceeds of notes, bills of exchange and other 
claims collected bv it. shall, for such notes, deposits, exchange and 
collections.” 


Referred to Committee on Ranks and Banking*. 

MR. FREEMAN—I have an ordinance I desire to introduce. 

The Clerk read the ordinance as follows: 

Ordinance No. 427, by Mr. N. H. Freeman : 

Be it ordained by the people of Alabama in Convention as¬ 
sembled that no corporation attorney shall be eligible to office as 
member of the Legislature. 

Referred to Committee on Corporations. 

MR. GRAHAM (Talladega)—I have a resolution that I de¬ 
sire to introduce, and if in the opinion of the Chair it will be neces- 



2550 


OFFICIAL PROCEEDINGS 


sary. I will ask a suspension of the rules that it be put upon its 
immediate passage. 

The Clerk read the ordinance as follows: 

Resolution No. 260, by Mr. Graham of Talladega: 

Resolved, That this Convention remain in session today until 
2 p. m., and then stand adjourned until II a. m. next Monday. 

THE PRESIDENT—It seems to the Chair that it is a privi¬ 
leged motion. 

MR. GRAHAM—I move the adoption of the resolution. 

MR. WILLIAMS (Marengo)—I move to amend by inserting 
9:30 in place of 11. 

THE PRESIDENT—The question will be upon the amend¬ 
ment offered by the gentleman from Marengo. 

MR. SANDERS—I propose to further amend by striking out 
2 p. m.. and that the Convention stand adjourned at the regular 
time. 

MR. COBB—I move to lay the amendment of the gentleman 
upon the table. 

THE PRESIDENT—The motion is out of order. As many 
as favor the amendment of the gentleman from Limestone to 
strike out 11 and insert 9:30 will say aye. The ayes seem to have 
it. 


A division was called for. 

THE PRESIDENT—As many as favor the adoption of the 
amendment by striking out 11 and inserting 9:30 will please rise 
and remain standing until counted. 

MR. O’NEAL—I rise to a point of order—the gentleman from 
Limestone did not make that motion. 

THE PRESIDENT—The Chair should have stated the gen¬ 
tleman from Marengo. Mr. Williams. The question is on the mo¬ 
tion to strike out 11 and insert 9:30. The Chair will entertain the 
motion of the gentleman from Limestone as soon as this result is 
ascertained. 

A vote being taken there were 37 ayes and 47 noes. and the 
amendment was lost. 

MR. SANDERS—I move to amend by striking out 2 p. m. 
today so that the Convention shall stand adjourned at its regular 
time, 1 p. m. 



2551 


CONSTITL'TIONAI. CONVENTION, 1901 


H I\ l K I\S11) 1\N 1 -Stand adjourned 
1 p. m. stands adjourned until 3:30 p. m. 
out 1 and insert 1 in the resolution? 


? The Convention at 
Do you wish to strike 


MR. SANDERS—Y 


es, sir. 


THE PRKS1DENT- 

of the gentleman from L 
and insert 1 p. m. 


~ I he question will be on the amendment 
imestone, which is to strike out 2 p. in. 


MR. STEWART—1 

ment on the table. 


move to lay the resolution and ainend- 


I II1\ PRESIDENT—The motion is not in order. This is a 
motion to fix the time on adjournment. 

A vote being taken there were 48 ayes and 33 noes, and the 
amendment was adopted on a division. 

MR. O’NEAL—I ask for a verificat ion of the vote. 

THK PRESIDENT—Verification is demanded. 

There were loud cries of “No.” 


MR. M UR PH REE—I move to strike out 11 and insert 10. 

THE PRESIDENT — Verification is demanded of the vote 
just had. As many as favor the motion of the gentleman from 
Limestone will please rise and remain standing, all those who 
voted should rise, this is a verification of the vote, and the correct¬ 
ness of the Secretary’s count is challenged. 

MR. LOMAX—I did not vote before; have I right to vote 
now ? 

THE PRESIDENT—Not on the verification. 

THE PRESIDENT — Does the gentleman from Pike. Mr. 
Murphree. desire to vote on this verification? The Secretary has 
him voting on both sides of this proposition. 

MR. MURPHREE—I am opposed to the motion of the gen¬ 
tleman. 

The vote on verification showed 51 ayes and 35 noes, and the 
amendment was declared adopted. 

THE PRESIDENT — The gentleman from Pike moves to 
strike out 11 and insert 10 o clock. 

MR. HEFLIN (Chambers) — I move to lay that upon the 
table. 

Upon a vote being taken there were 28 ayes and 49 noes, and 
the amendment was lost. 



2552 


OFFICIAL PROCKKDi \'GS 


THE PRESIDENT—The motion recurs upon the resolution 
as amended. The amendment of the gentleman from Pike is lost. 
The question recurs upon the resolution as amended by the gen¬ 
tleman from Limestone. 

The resolution as amended was adopted. 

MR. JONES (Montgomery)—I have a resolution. 

The Secretary read the resolution as follows: 

Resolution No. 261, by Mr. Jones of Montgomery: 

Resolved, That the Secretary of this Convention procure a 
copy of the opinion of the Attorney General as to the right of this 
Convention to appropriate pay for its members beyond the time 
fixed in the enabling act, and to have the same printed in the 
stenographic report. 

MR. JONES—I move the suspension of the rules. I think it 
is important— 

THE PRESIDENT—The question is not debatable. The gen¬ 
tleman will state the motion. 

MR. JONES—I move to suspend the rules for a considera¬ 
tion of the resolution. 

THE PRESIDENT—It is moved to suspend the rules to place 
the resolution upon its immediate passage. 

A vote being taken there were 58 ayes and 21 noes, and the 
rules were suspended. 

MR. JONES (Montgomery)—Mr. President, my only object 
in doing that is that I think it is due to the Convention that the 
opinion of the Attorney General should be printed. Now, some of 
us were of different opinions, and it may be that the opinion of 
the Attorney General may convince members and the public, and 
I think at all events it ought to be a part of the record of this Con¬ 
vention. 

A vote being taken the resolution was adopted. 

Montgomery, Ala., July 18th, 1901 

Hon. Thos. L. Sowell, Auditor. 

At Office: 

My Dear Sir—I have considered the questions propounded by you for my 
official opinion in the following communication: 

“Hon. Charles G. Brown, Attorney-General, etc., Montgomery, Ala.: 

“Dear Sir—It is apparent that the Constitutional Convention, now in 
session, will not be able to complete its labors within fifty days. Section 9 of 



2553 


CONSTHTTIONA). CONVK.NTIO.N, 1901 

an Act entitled An Act to provide (or holding a Convention to revise and 
amend the Constitution of this State, approved Dec. 11th, 1900 provides that 
per d.en. compensate shall not he allowed or paid to any member of the 
Convention for a longer time than fifty days ’ I„ case the Convention does 
hold on in session for a longer time than fifty davs, shall I he governed l>v 
the mandate of sa.d Act? Or i„ case the Convention should adopt an or¬ 
dinance or pass a resolution appropriating monev out of the Treasury to 
cover the extended time, or should order warrants to he drawn to cover the 
per diem for this extended time, what will he the duty of the Auditor? In 
your opinion, has the Convention the power to appropriate money out of 
the Treasury to pay themselves for per diem beyond the limits prescribed 
in the above mentioned Act? 


"Very respectfully, 
*T. L. Sowell, 
“Auditor.” 


A categorical reply by simple yea, or nay, answers to the several ques¬ 
tions in the order propounded, would not be proper under the circumstances, 
as the importance of the inquiry presented and the fact that an official 
opinion from tins office is for your guidance only which, if followed, would 
protect you in your official action thereon; yet if it does not meet with 
vour approval, you can, and should, act according to the dictates, of your 
judgment and disregard the opinion of the Attorney-General—renders it 
highly proper that I should state the reasons for the opinion submitted for 
your consideration. A correct solution of this, to me, intricate problem de¬ 
mands a consideration of the legal and political concept of a Constitu¬ 
tional Convention, its office and powers, its relation to the whole people of 
the State and the proper boundaries between the office and powers of the 
Convention and those of the General Assembly of the State as the deposi¬ 
tory of the legislative power of the State government on matters or sub¬ 
jects, of general and ordinary legislation, except as limited by provisions 
of the fundamental law of the State. 


I do not deem it necessary to even epitomize the history and development 
of the law of Constitutional Conventions, or to note the distinction between 
what are termed, by Mr. Jameson, Revolutionary Conventions and Con- 
stitutional Conventions, and shall content myself with only saying that I 
cannot concur with this learned, but partisan, writer in many of his defini¬ 
tions and conclusions on this subject. As the very threshold of th.s tnvesti- 
gation we are confronted with the consideration of the question as to the 
legitimate office and relation of the General Assembly of Alabama towards 
a Constitutional Convention, and whether, or no, it can lawfully define, 
and limit the powers of a Constitutional Convention and restrict their ex¬ 
ercise as to time, mode and method. It is contended by Mr. Jameson m h.s 
work on Constitutional Conventions that the legislative department of a 
State can thus define and limit the powers of a Constitutional Convention. 
I shall endeavor to show that many of his postulates are incorrect and the 
authorities relied upon by him are not applicable to the Constitution and form 



2554 


OFFICIAL PROCKLDINGS 


of government of the State of Alabama. It its last analysis, he holds that the 
authority and commission of the delegates of a Constitutional Convention 
and the powers of a Convention are derived from the Act of the Legislature 
in what is commonly termed (hut improperly so, as applied to the Constitu¬ 
tion of this State), the "F,nabling Act” to provide for the holding of a Con¬ 
stitutional Convention. The decisions relied upon by this author and Mr. Or- 
dronaux were rendered upon Constitutions defferent from our Constitution 
on the matter of the revision and alteration and amendments of Constitu¬ 
tions; in some of which there were no provisions as to such revision, altera¬ 
tion and amendment, either by the proposal of amendments by the Legis¬ 
lature, or providing for a call of a Convention, and others contained simply 
provisions for amendments by proposals originating in the Legislature and 
still others with provision for proposals of amendments, and with a provision 
empowering the Legislature to submit to the people the question of the expe¬ 
diency of holding a Convention and then empowering the Legislature, if a 
majority of the qualified electors voted in the affirmative, to call a Convention 
and for such purposes and in such manner and under such regulations as 
deemed best and expedient. In these States, except the State of Rhode Is¬ 
land, the power to call a Convention was referred to the general legislative 
powers of the Legislative department of the State and a submission of the 
question of the expediency of a Convention was left to the discretion and 
will of the same department, and the vote of the people was considered as 
advisory merely—simply addressing itself as a moral or political inducement 
for the Legislature to grant the expressed desire of the people. In Rhode 
Island it was held by the court of last resort that as the Constitution specifi¬ 
cally provided that amendments should be made by proposals originating 
in the Legislature, a convention could not be held to form a new Constitu¬ 
tion, or revise, amend, or alter the existing Constitution. In Massachusetts 
it was doubted under the Constitution of 1820, which provided only for pro¬ 
posals of specific amendments by the Legislature, whether the Legislature 
could take any steps towards submitting to the people the expediency of 
holding a Convention for the adoption of specific amendments. 

It is necessary to call attention to the provisions of the present Constitu¬ 
tion of Alabama on this subject, contained in Article XVII. 

Section 1. I he General Assembly may, whenever two-thirds of each 
House shall deem it necessary, propose amendments to this Constitution * * * 
for the consideration of the people; and it shall be the duty of the several re¬ 
turning officers at the next general election, which shall be held for Repre¬ 
sentatives, to open a poll for the vote of the qualified electors of the State 
on the proposed amendments * * * ; and if it shall thereupon appear that 
a majority of all the qualified electors of the State who voted at said election, 
voted in favor of the proposed amendments, said amendments shall be valid 
to all intents and purposes as parts of this Constitution. * * * . ” 

Sec. 2. No Convention shall hereafter be held for the purpose of alter- 
ing or amending the Constitution of this State, unless the question of Conven¬ 
tion or no Convention shall be first submitted to a vote of all the electors of 
the State, and approved by a majority of those voting at said election.” 



CONSTITUTIONAL CONVKNTION, 1<X)1 


2555 


There was a provision substantially as Section 1 in the several preced¬ 
ing Constitutions of the State; hut in the Constitution of 1819 there was no 
provision for a call of a Convention The Constitutions of 1865 and 1868 
contained a pro\iMon. differing >lightlv in immaterial particulars, substan¬ 
tially similar to Section 2 of the present Con>titution of 1875; but the Con¬ 
stitution of I KM. adopted at what ^ commonly known as the Secession Con- 
\cntion, was totally dissimilar and antagonistic in its provisions defining 
the office and authority ol the General Assembly with respect to a Conven¬ 
tion, to those of the Constitutions of 1865, 1868 and 1875. The provision in 
the Constitution of 18M is as follows: “Provided further, that a Conven¬ 
tion of the people of tlie State may be called by a vote of two-thirds of each 
branch of the General Assembly under such rules and regulations as the 
legislature may prescribe to amend the Constitution, or for any other pur¬ 
pose/' W ho can doubt in the light of history that the powers of the legisla¬ 
ture under the Constitution of 1861 were most materially restricted and lim¬ 
ited and even prohibited by the Constitution of 1865, 1868 and 1875 formed 
after tlu* close of the "war between the States.” Who can question the doc¬ 
trine under the Constitutions of 18(o, 1868 and 1875, that the delegates to 
a Constitutional Convention derive their authority and commission and pow¬ 


ers from the sovereign people of the State and not from the legislature, or 
from any improperly so called Mumbling Act of the legislature? Can a 
department OT the State government not vested with the authority to confer 
a power, but positively prohibited from exercising such power, and which au¬ 
thority is expressly and solely vested in the people, limit the power of the 
“highest legislative assembly recognized by law,” in a ‘representative 
Democratic form” of government directly called into existence by that body 
in whom the ultimate sovereignty resides? Goodrich vs. Moore, 2 Minne¬ 


sota, p. 61. It would be an unnecessary consumption of time to comment 
on and criticallv examine the several decisions of the courts relied upon to 
sustain the contrarv contention of Mr. Jameson and other like new “doc- 
trinaries” as a consideration of most of them will demonstrate that the 
question* involved was not presented, or decided, and that no legitimate con¬ 
clusion can be drawn therefrom antagonistic to the doctrine contented for 
in this opinion. The opinion delivered by Chief Justice Agnew in the case of 
Wells vs Bainc, 75 Penn. pp. 39-58, is the leading and strongest presenta¬ 
tion of this doctrine of legislative power, and upon which the greatest stress 
is laid by the advocates for this power of the legislature The facts of that 
case essential to the comprehension of the question before the Court were 
that the legislature of Pennsylvania on June 2, 1871, passed an act to sub¬ 
mit to a popular vote the question of calling a Convention by the legislature 
to amend the Constitution without any special warrant m the existing Con- 
• t State and which contained no provision for amending the 

of the l.fp.fa.u.0 flowed by a rati,lea,ion 

of the people and this action of the legislature in submitting the ques ,on of 
t calling of a Convention was referred to and based upon its general leg.s- 
ative powers; so that the question, as stated m the opinion o the Court on 
5» nassed upon by the vote of the people, was only that of the ex- 
ped'enev of a call to be subsequently made by the legislature; and if the 



2556 


OFFICIAL PROCEEDINGS 


question was answered in the affirmative, in the language of the Court, the people 
simply replied “you (the legislature) may call a Convention. This was all the vote 
expressed.” In April, 1872, the legislature passed an act to provide for the calling of 
a Convention and among other things provided that the Convention submit the 
amendments agreed to by it to the qualified voters of the State for their 
adoption or rejection; and further enacted that such election should be con¬ 
ducted by the officers and in the manner general elections are held in the 
Commonwealth. The Convention passed an ordinance that the election 
should be held in the city of Philadelphia by certain persons therein called 
commissioners, other than those required by law to hold general elections, 
and giving to the commissioners somewhat fuller and different powers. Two 
bills in equity were filed against these commissioners of election — one by 
Wells and other citizens and voters of Philadelphia, and the other by one 
of the inspectors of election under the general laws of the State governing 
general elections, averring the invalidity of the ordinance and praying an 
injunction against the commissioners restraining them from holding said 
election. The Chief Justice, in his opinion construing the purpose of the 
act of the legislature in submitting the question of calling a Convention to 

a vote of the people on pp. 50 and 51, uses the following language: “The 

present inquiry is not how much power may be conferred by law, but what 
power was conferred on this Convention. A law must be passed according 

to the forms of the Constitution. One of these is that no bill shall contain 

but one subject, which shall be clearly expressed in its title. The title of 
the act of June 2, 1871, is ‘An Act, To authorize a popular vote upon the 
question of calling a Convention to amend the Constitution of Pennsylvania.' 
The text of the act is: ‘That the question of calling a Convention to amend 
the Constitution of the Commonwealth be submitted to a vote of the peo¬ 
ple at the general election to be held, etc. The one subject of both title 
and text is the question of calling a Convention. That question was au¬ 
thorized to be submitted to a popular vote. In that election each elector 
expressed his individual opinion on that question and that alone by voting 
‘for a convention/ or ‘against a Convention.' This question was answered 
in the affirmation by a majority of votes, and the people answering the leg¬ 
islature said: ‘You may call a Convention.’ This was all the vote expressed. 
Each vote expressing the opinion of the elector on that question, the ma¬ 
jority expressed no more. Thus an analysis of the act, both in title and in 
text demonstrates that the vote was not a delegation of power except to 
the legislature. The result of that vote was that the legislature might call 
a Convention. It was not in itself a call nor did it declare when and how 
or on what terms the call should be made. That, the very answer to the 
question necessarily left to the legislature which asked their judgment on the 
propriety of the call. It was not even a mandate, further than the moral 
force contained in an expressed desire of the people. It is very evident had 
the matter dropped there and the legislature had made no call, no Conven¬ 
tion and no terms would ever have existed.” 

The “italics” are those shown in the published opinion of the Court. 
Right here it is proper to be observed that a submission by the legislature 



2557 


CONSTITUTIONAL CONVENTION, 1901 

of a call for a Convention, or the proposal of specific amendments by the 
legislature, to a vote of the people, is not an act of general, or ordinary, 
legislation, and the forms prescribed in the Constitution for the enactment 
of a statute by the Legislature need not be complied with, and the contrary 
doctrine has been nearly universally repudiated by the courts of highest re¬ 
pute, including that of the Supreme Court of Pennsylvania. 

6 Am. and hnc. Lncy. of Law, p. 906 and notes; Commonwealth vs. ex 
rel Likin vs. Griest (Penn.) 50 L. R. A. page 574 and authorities therein 
cited; State ex rel Morris vs. Mason (La.) 9 so. Rep., p. 776. 

It is, therefore, manifest that this construction of the Pennsylvania Act 
of 1871 by the Court was the major and minor premises—the foundation 
stones on which rested the reasoning, conclusion and decision of the court 
that the Legislature, and not the people, was the source of the authority and 
commission of the Convention and that the definition, extent and limit and 
scope of its powers and the manner, method and regulation of their exercise 
must be found alone in the subsequent act calling the Convention. This is 
further shown by similar expressions used by the same Chief Justice in the 
analagous case of Wood's appeal in same volume of Pennsylvania Reports 
p. 71. This is also clearly demonstrated by Mr. Jameson in approving the 
construction and reaching the conclusion expressed by him in the follow¬ 
ing quotation from his work “that in all cases wdien a Convention act is 
submitted to the people it is the mere question of expediency that is passed 
on by the people. An affirmative vote declares it to be expedient and a nega¬ 
tive vote declares it to be inexpedient for the Legislature to call such Con¬ 
vention; a declaration which has neither the effect or form of law. The 
language of law is “flat,” he it done, that such a vote of the people is 
“Vidctur,” it seems good—“desideradum est,” it is to be desired—a mere ex¬ 
pression of a wish, not the uttering of a command.” And in a subsequent 
section he emphasizes this view and follows the language quoted from Wells 
vs. Paine supra, to the effect that such vote of the people has no binding 
force on the Legislature and that body has still the power and authority 
at its will and pleasure to call, or not to call a Convention, and if called the 
Legislature has the sole sovereign power in the act calling the Convention, 
or in a subsequent act passed before the assembling of the Convention, to 
define, fix and regulate the powers and purposes of the Convention and the 
mode,' method and time of their exercise by the Convention. It therefore 
appears to me that it would be the height of illogical juristic reasoning to 
assert that such a construction could possibly be placed on the provision of 
our Constitution expressly prohibiting the General Assembly from calling 
a Convention and directly conferring on the people alone the authority to 
declare peremptorily by a majority vote that the “Convention shall be held.” 
That such a construction cannot be given to the provision of the Constitution 
of the State of Alabama is the keystone of the arch of this argument mainly 
supporting the correctness of this opinion and must be my excuse for in¬ 
voking its further consideration by you. The power to propose amendments 
by the Legislature as prescribed by the Constitution, or the power to submit 
to the vote of the people for their sole and sovereign determination that 



2558 


OFFICIAL PROCEEDINGS 


a Convention shall be held, does not confer the power to break it either in 
the act proposing the amendment or in the act submitting the question of 
Convention to the people any more than to legislate on any subject contrary 
to its provisions. 

State vs. Swift vs. Swift 69 Ind. p. 518-19. 

Now let us consider the part which under our present Constitution the 
General Assembly may act in amending the Constitution. It is evident that 
its part is restricted to the proposal of amendments in the form and manner 
prescribed by Section 1 of the Constitution. This provision must be strictly 
construed and if the form and order in which the proposal of amendments 
is disregarded by the Legislature it is approved doctrine that the proposed 
amendment will be invalid, null and void. A strict observance of every 
substantial requirement in this special grant by the Constitution is enjoyed. 

Collier vs. Frierson 24 Ala., p. 100; Koehler vs. Hill 60 Iowa, p.: 543; 
Oakland Paving Co., vs. Hilton 69 Cal., p. 479. 

It is useless to multiply citations to this effect as this is the accepted 
doctrine. Now if the General Assembly is restricted by this special grant of 
power to the specific mode, form and manner of proposing amendments, it 
necessarily follows that all other methods, form and manner, either direct¬ 
ly or indirectly, are prohibited to the General Assembly as a matter of right 
and power in such body. In other words the power and authority to propose 
specific, amendments, being restricted and limited in the special grant to 
the specified way, the General Assembly cannot directly, or indirectly say, as 
a matter of power and authority, what a Constitutional Convention, receiv¬ 
ing its commission and authority and power from the vote of a majority of 
the sovereign people, shall or shall not place into the fundamental law of 
the State. The Constitution thus expressly prohibits the exercise of any 
such power and authority by the General Assembly. Its only function as 
to amendments, or revision, of the Constitution is limited to the initiative of 
proposals of specific amendments as prescribed in the Constitution, and the 
initiative of a proposal to be submitted to the people for a Convention to 
be held—not to be called by the General Assembly—to revise and amend, 
or alter, the whole Constitution. Therefore, every other function is ex¬ 
pressly, or impliedly, prohibited by the Constitution. An implied prohibi¬ 
tion is as effectual as an express one. 

14 R. I. page 654; Taylor vs. Place, 4 R L. p. 324. 

The Constitution thus limiting the power of the General Assembly to 
the proposal of specific amendments and which proposals must be passed 
in a particular way before submission to the people, if the General Assembly 
can dictate to the Constitutional Convention what amendments shall, or 
shall not be made, then it follows that the General Assembly would indirect¬ 
ly be clothed with the power to enact amendments, such a construction in 
its last analysis would empower the Legislature to do that which the Con¬ 
stitution by the limitation on its power forbids it to do. It is a question of 
power and authority solely—where is it lodged by our Constitution? There 



CONSTITUTIONAL CONVENTION, 1901 


2559 


are limitations by the express provision of our Constitution and form of 
State government on the General Assembly—restrictions direct and positive 
'uul are imposed in the only grant of power to the General Assembly. It is 
a special grant of restricted and limited power to be exercised according 
to and within the form and methods prescribed by the Constitution. A 
special grant of particular and limited power cannot by construction be ex¬ 
tended beyond the restrictions and limitations of the grant, and the grantee 
of such power cannot by indirection go beyond these limitations and re¬ 
strictions, or evade these prohibitions. The power of the General Assembly 
to initiate any proposal of amendments to the Constitution is to be strictly 
construed and must be confined to the mode and manner and form prescribed 
in the special grant in the Constitution. The Legislature is not authorized, 
but is directly prohibited from assuming any of the powers of a Constitution¬ 
al Convention, and cannot propose for the adoption by the people a revision 
of the whole Constitution in the form of amendments. 

Livermere vs. Wait, 25 L. R. A., p. 315. 

The power to revise and amend generally the whole Constitution is 
vested in the Convention which derives its whole power from the people. If 
the General Assembly cannot, under the form of law, thus assume the powers 
of the Convention, much less can it command in advance what revision, or 
amendment, or alteration, shall or shall not be made in the Constitution by 
the Convention in which alone this sovereign power is vested. Would not 
such doctrine be in effect to vest in the General Assembly, may be indirect¬ 
ly and negatively, but nevertheless in substance, the power to control the 
people, to dictate to them and to the Convention, what amendments, altera¬ 
tions and revisions shall, or shall not, be considered and placed in the Con¬ 
stitution. Would it not arm the General Assembly with the power in ad¬ 
vance by the act for submitting a mere proposal to the people that a Con¬ 
vention shall be held to revise and amend the whole Constitution, to per¬ 
petuate provisions obnoxious to the people? Could it have been the in¬ 
tention of the framers of the Constitution of 1875 to arm the General As¬ 
sembly with the paramount power of restricting a Convention called by the 
people to those alterations and amendments only which the General Assembly 
deemed proper or desired, and thus hampering, binding and fettering in ad¬ 
vance the only body which can place restrictions on its power? The very 
Act itself forbids such a construction. Section 1 plainly and unmistakably 
speaks its purpose and scope, namely: “That on Tuesday, the 23rd day of 
April, 1901, an election shall be held for the purpose of determining whether, 
or not a Convention shall be held to revise and amend the Constitution of 
this State, and the question of Convention, or no Convention, shall be sub¬ 
mitted to the vote of the qualified electors of this State, and if a majority 
of the voters, voting at said election, shall approve the holding of a Con¬ 
vention for the purposes stated, the Convention shall be held as herein¬ 
after provided.” And Section 7 is in the following language: “Said Con¬ 
vention shall continue in session until it shall, by careful revision and amend¬ 
ment of the present Constitution, frame and adopt a revised Constitution for 
this State.” 



2560 


OFFICIAL PROCEEDINGS 


Can it be contended with any show of reason, or authority, that the 
power to revise and amend the Constitution was not to be lodged by the 
people, but lodged by the Legislature, in the Convention according to the 
express provisions of the Constitution and of this Act? It cannot be con¬ 
tended that by the clause “as hereinafter provided” that the General As¬ 
sembly had the authority to dictate to a Convention with such broad pow¬ 
ers vested by the Constitution in the people and their Convention, what pro¬ 
visions (as the General Assembly seemingly attempted to do), should, or 
should not, be placed in the Constitution by the commissioned representa¬ 
tives of the sovereign people in the exercise of their delegated and para¬ 
mount powers to revise and amend the fundamental law of the State. The 
expression “as hereinafter provided” cannot exceed the power vested in the 
General Assembly under the limitations of the Constitution, namely: To 
prescribe the qualification and mode of selecting the delegates and fixing 
the time and place for the assembling of the Convention, and such other 
incidents within the limitation on its powers prescribed in the Constitution 
in its special grant and in harmony with the expressed purpose and power 
of the Convention and in aid of the sovereignty of the people. Any other 
commands, provisions and limitations, restrictions and penalties, direct or 
indirect, not thus in harmony or in aid of the purpose and powers of the 
Convention are void. This is a different question from that of submitting 
back to the people for their approval, or disapproval, the revision and 

amendments of the Constitution—the appointed work of their delegates—for 
this is not in opposition to their inherent and sovereign rights, and is in har¬ 
mony with a wise policy conservative of the privilege of the sovereign peo¬ 

ple to finally supervise the work of their representatives and delegates and 
approve, or disapprove, the same. In the other cases, the General Assembly 
proposed to limit the powers of the sovereign people and dictate in advance 
what a Convention called by the people and receiving its authority solely 
from them shall do and restrict the exercise of power over which it has no 
control. The one is in aid of, and in consonance with, the power; the 

other is antagonistic thereto and subversive thereof. The one may be valid, 
the other must be invalid—that in aid of and in consonance and harmony 
with the sovereign power and its full and free exercise can stand the other 
must fall. If the General Assembly has the vested right to limit the time 
of the Convention to fifty years, it can restrict it to ten days, or one day; 
if it has the vested right to provide for per diem compensation for fifty 
days, it can provide for only one day, or for no compensation. It is admit¬ 
ted by the very able lawyers holding a contrary view 7 , that if the General 
Assembly had made no provision for the payment of any compensation to 
the members and officers, clerks, or for stationery printing, and all other 
things proper and necessary to enable the Convention to perform freely and 
according to its own best judgment and discretion the duties imposed upon 
it, that the Convention would have the pow 7 er and authority to fix the com¬ 
pensation of the members of the treasury of the State. This is, therefore, an 
admission of the inherent pow 7 er of the Convention to do so; and then can it 
be contended that the full exercise of this power by the Convention is for¬ 
bidden, controlled and abrogated by a clause in this Legislative Act provid- 



CONSTITUTIONAL CONVENTION, 1901 


2561 


ing compensation for part only of the time? Is it not the correct doctrine 
and construction that the section fixing the per diem compensation of the 
members, being in harmony and consonance with the purpose and power 
of the Convention and the sovereignty of the people, should he held valid, and 
that the proviso thereto in the nature of a covert penalty, forbidding com¬ 
pensation for a longer time than fifty days, must he held invalid and void 
as being antagonistic to the power of the Convention and not in aid, hut in 
antagonism to the sovereignty of the people. The people, and they alone, 
could, by their vote, peremptorily command that a Convention shall be held 
for the purpose of revising and amending the whole Constitution, and they 
alone elected and commissioned their delegates and vested them only with 
full power to do their work, and in the language of Section 7 of said Act, “To 
continue in session until they shall, by careful revision and amendment of 
the Present Constitution frame and adopt a revised Constitution for the 
State.” 

11ns was the purpose of the Convention, and this was the power and au¬ 
thority vested by the sovereign people in the members of the Convention. 
\\ here a general power is conferred, or a duty enjoyed, every particular 
power proper and necessary for the full and free exercise of the one, or the 
careful performance of the other, is also conferred, and when a general 
power is possessed by a convention to perform a duty, it possesses, by im¬ 
plication every special power conducive to the proper performance of the duty 
enjoined, and the sole measure of the power is the extent and scope of the 
purpose to be accomplished—so it unmistakably follows that there was im¬ 
plied in this full, plenary and general authority, the particular power to pass 
any ordinance or resolution, proper and necessary to the full, free and “care¬ 
ful” exercise of the authority and to the faithful discharge of the duty". This 
power to do everything proper and necessary, fairly within the scope of the 
purpose of the Convention, so as to make the pow'er effectual and to ac¬ 
complish the purpose, is absolutely conferred by implication, and any re¬ 
striction upon this implied power is as completely void as a restriction on 
the granted powder, and any restriction and limitation antagonistic to the 
accomplishment of the duty imposed by the General Assembly must neces¬ 
sarily be invalid, void and of no effect. Every restriction and limitation 
and provision imposed by the General Assembly antagonistic to this right 
of the people to have their delegates freely and fully and carefully and de¬ 
liberately perform their duty untrammeled and unhampered, and finish their 
work of “careful revision of the present Constitution, and of framing and 
adopting a revised Constitution for the State, must be held null and void 
as in excess of the powder and authority of the General Assembly of Ala¬ 
bama. It therefore follows that the regulation so far as it provides for the 
per diem compensation of the members is valid, but the proviso thereto 
“that per diem compensation shall not be allowed or paid to any member of 
the Convention for a longer time than fifty days” must be held void and 
thus leaving in force the other provision for compensation for the whole time 
the Convention is in session. 

It is, however, insisted that the Convention cannot provide for the pay¬ 
ment out of the Treasury of this per diem compensation, because such pro- 



2562 


O FFI Cl A L PROC F KOI XGS 


vision would be in contravention of Section 33, Article IV (Legislative De¬ 
partment) of the Constitution of this State, to wit: “That no money shall 
be paid out of the treasury except upon appropriation made by law and on 
warrant drawn by the proper officer in pursuance thereof,” and it is con¬ 
tended that this means that it must be by statute enacted by the General 
Assembly of Alabama—that a bill must he introduced in the General As¬ 
sembly and passed in compliance with the requirement of the Constitution 
for the passage of an act of the General Assembly and must be approved 
by the Governor, and that as the Convention is but one body, and cannot 
comply with these requirements of the Constitution, it has no powers of 
legislation. I have been unable to find any direct adjudication by the courts 
on this question, but have found some dicta in opinions which, arguendo, 
tend to sustain this contention; and Mr. Jameson fails to cite any such di¬ 
rect adjudication of the courts to this eftect. He does, however, give the 
three opinions respectively of the Attorney-Generals of Georgia, New York 
and Pennsylvania against the power of the Convention to appropriate money 
out of the treasury to payment of compensation to members of convention 
and clerks et al., and for printing, and for stenographic reports. 

These States had provisos in their Constitutions similar to said Section 
33 of Article IV of the Constitution of Alabama: but the Constitution of all 
these States in force at the time of the rendition of these opinions did not 
contain the same provisions as to amendments of the Constitution by Con¬ 
ventions as those of this State; and their arguments were based on the as¬ 
sumption that such appropriation was vested solely in the Legislative De¬ 
partment, and that a statute must he passed according to the form prescribed 
by the Constitution and that the legislature had the authority under these 
Constitutions to restrict the exercise of the powers of the Convention. It is 
not a full and correct statement of the law to say that a Constitutional Con- 
venion possesses no legislative power? In the language of the decision of 
Goodrich vs. Moore, 2 Minnesota, p. 61, “A Constitutional Convention is 
the highest legislative assembly recognized by law, and has full control of 
its proceedings and may provide in any manner it sees fit for the perpetua¬ 
tion of the record of its proceedings.” U A constitution which fixes and de¬ 
fines a right may exercise legislative power in providing the means for its 
enforcement.” 

Schirlev vs. First National Bank, 47 Ill. Ap., 124. 

A Constitutional Convention exercises the highest legislative powers for 
it enacts, ordains and declares the fundamental law of the State; and the 
precedents conclusively show that such conventions have time and again 
exercised legislative powers in the enactment of ordinances, resolutions and 
schedules to provide for and against temporary contingencies and to meet 
the changed conditions necessitated by revisions, amendments and alterations 
in the existing Constitution, and of the necessity the Convention is the best 
judge and to its judgment and discretion it must ex necessitate be left. From 
the very necessity of the case and the uncertainty of the fact that existing 
laws can meet every contingency, or answer every condition and demand, a 
Constitutional Convention must have the power to enact laws required by 



CONSTITUTIONAL CONVENTION, 1901 


2563 


the duty imposed on it and to enable it to discharge the trust reposed and 
to provide for the very changes made in the fundamental law. The Con¬ 
stitution of 1875 passed a law and placed same in the schedule, changing the 
provision of the act providing for the call of the Convention by repealing 
in part and amending Section 12 of said act as to certain proclamations 
required to be made by the Governor and the publication of the copy of said 
Constitution which, by his proclamation was to be submitted to the people 
for ratification. The Constitution does not say that in pursuance of a sta¬ 
tute, or a law, but “in pursuance of law,” and when the Convention ordains 
or declares that anything shall be done within its power then this is a law, 
and any act directed to be performed thereunder is in pursuance of law. 

It is held, and it is admitted by the learned lawyers differing with me 
in this opinion, that when a Constitution declares the amount to be paid an 
officer, such declaration constitutes an appropriation made by law, and no 
subsequent act was necessary to its payment out of the treasury. 

(> Am. & Eng. Ency. of Law (2d Ed.), p 914 and note 7; State vs. Wes¬ 
ton, 4 Nebraska, p. 216; Thomas vs. Owen, 4 Maryland, p. 189. 

This settles the fact and law that the Convention has the vested power 
to make appropriations and that appropriations made by it is in pursuance 
of law, and the form and place—whether in the Constitution or in an ordi¬ 
nance, or in a resolution or declaration, must depend upon its character— 
whether fundamental, or permanent, or temporary, and upon custom and 
precedent and the rules of procedure adopted by the Convention. 

A resolution of this Convention requiring the Constitution to submit¬ 
ted to a vote of the people need not be placed in the Constitution, or the 
schedule thereof, and is a binding law, and it certainly is not required that 
this resolution should be submitted to the people for ratification. But it is 
insisted that such an ordinance must, under this resolution be submitted to 
the people for ratification before it can become a law and that such an ap¬ 
propriation would not be “in pursuance of law, until ratified by the people. 
The inherent power to enact a law, in the first instance is not dependent on 
a subsequent ratification. 

There is one case holding that when the Constitution must be ratified by 
the people an ordinance to be valid must be submitted to the people and 
ratified by them. 

89 Texas, p. 376. 

This is contrary to precedent and custom and, I think, is unsustained 
by reason and authority. It is the custom to submit only the Constitution 
for ratification, and it is the generally accepted doctrine that a ratification 
of the Constitution is a ratification of all ordinances, and that this is re¬ 
quired to validate only ordinances of a permanent and lasting character. 
This is not necessary to render valid as law, ordinances passed to meet 
exigencies, or that are simply temporarily required to anable the Convention 
to discharge its full duty, and the duration of which temporary law will 
terminate with the final adjournment of the Convention. Assured an ordi- 



2564 


OFFICIAL PROCKK DINGS 


nance providing for the publication, printing, 

stationery, stepographic report and payment for the same, and of the per 
diem compensation of members of the Convention is a valid enactment of 
a temporary nature, necessary to the existence of the Comention and to 
the enabling of the Convention lo discharge carefully and faithfully its 
duties. It cannot he insisted that such an ordinance must be subsequently 
ratified by the people either on special MihaiL-non or by ratification of the 

Constitution, after its vitality has been exhausted its life departed—a dead 

law—having expired with the final adjournment of the Convention. 

In this connection I desire to call vour attention to the able opinion of 
the court in the case of Commonwealth ex rel Likin vs. Griest 50 L. R. 
supra, where the doctrine is maintained that as the provisions of the Consti¬ 
tution for revisions and amendments of the Constitution are in an article sep¬ 
arate and distinct from that of “Legislative Department" that the provisions 
of the article under the head of “Legislative Department” are not extended, 
or referable to the article under the head <>f “Amendments of the Constitu¬ 
tion;” and that the revision and amendment of the Constitution is a sep¬ 
arate and independent work by a differently constituted body with higher 
and greater functions and powers and not governed or bound or limited by 
provisions of the article on “Legislative Department.” 


It is insisted that it is a dangerous precedent to lodge in the Convention 
the power to pay its own members and employes. In Luther vs. Borden 7 
Howard (U. S.) p. 44, Chief Justice Taney s a> s; "All power is liable to be 
abused when placed in unworthy hands.” It may he pertinently asked in 
what worthier hands, or rather in hands less liable to abuse it, could this 
power have been placed than those of the chosen and selected delegates and 
representatives of the people recently elected by them and subsequently to 
the time of election of members of the General Assembly, and charged by 
them with the high, great and responsible duty of revising and amending 
the Constitution of their State. The people have placed on every member 
of the Convention the “imprimatur” of their trust and confidence in his 
worthiness. It should not be even insinuated that these delegates will be¬ 
tray this trust, or abuse this power by fixing their compensation beyond a 
fair,, reasonable and just amount and contrary to precedent and custom reg¬ 
ulating the rate of such compensation. 


For the reasons given: It is my opinion that on the passage of a proper 
ord,nance by the Convention fixing a reasonable per-diem compensation of 
the members of the Convention for the time in excess of the fiftv days made 
payable out of the treasury, on proper certificates of the President and Secre- 
tary of the Convention to you as Auditor of the State, of the amounts ow- 
mg and due the respective members as such per diem compensation, you 

TJ Z y 7 Tr aS Audlt0r ° n the treasur >' Prefer, and payment 

adol to memhe'r ITT ° U ‘ ? f the trea8ur >- a<! Payment* of the compen¬ 

sation to members of the General Assembly to he made. 

the .yZinlir 110 " * ^ ‘° ^ f ° llowi, 'K additional authorities in which 
the principles enunciated support this opinion: 



CONSTITUTIONAL CONVENTION, 1901 


2505 


Sproule vs. Frederick 69 Miss., p. 898; Lomis vs. Jackson 6 W. Va., p. 
708; State vs. Neal 42 Missouri, p. 123; Goodwin vs. Neal 45 Ga., p. 109; 
Maloney vs. Roberts, 32 Texas, p. 136; in re Senate File 25 Neb. p. 864; opin¬ 
ion of Judges of the Supreme Court of New York, Appendix “D,” Jameson 
on Constitutional Conventions, p. 665. 

The New York Judges say in this opinion that such attempted restriction 
on the power of the Convention may operate by way of advice or recom¬ 
mendation only, and not as law. 

Permit me to say that I have come to this conclusion after careful 
examination, and with much hesitancy by reason of my first impression in 
favor of the correctness of the contrary view and the propound regard I have 
for the ability and learning of the eminent lawyers holding a different opinion. 

Most respectfully, 

Charles G. Brown, 

Attorney General. 

Dictated. 

MR. LONG (Walker)—I have a resolution, and I shall ask a 
suspension of the rules, and I respectfully invite the attention of 
the delegates to the reading of the resolution. 

THE PRESIDENT—Delegates will please give attention to 
the reading of the resolution offered by Mr. Long (Walker.) 

The Clerk read the resolution as follows: 

Resolution No. 262 by Mr. Long (Walker.) 

Whereas, from the action of this Constitutional Convention, 
it appears that any and all persons holding office of honor, trust 
or profit under the State of Alabama, are in the habit of accepting 
free passes from railroads, and are unduly influenced and corrupted 
thereby. 

And whereas, the members of this Convention, are holding 
their office as such member under this State, and may, by reason 
thereof, be liable to be influenced or corrupted by accepting free 
passes for themselves, friends and families, therefore. 

Be it resolved, That the secretary of this Convention be and 
he is hereby ordered immediately upon the passage of this resolu¬ 
tion to call the roll of the delegates of this Convention, and as 
his name is called, each member of this Convention shall rise in his 
seat and answer the following questions, which shall then and 
there in open session of this Convention be propounded to him 
by the secretary, the answers to which shall be recorded by the 
Secretary in the journal of this Convention, the questions to be as 
follows: 



2566 


OFFICIAL PR< ICEKD1 NOS 


First—Have you a pass nr pu>scs now in your possession, or 
under your control, or at your command. If so. then over what 
railroad company’s road? What is the consideration for which 
said passes was issued? 

Second—Since you were elected to this Constitutional Con¬ 
vention, have you accepted a pass for \ourself, or friend, or family 
or any member thereof, and if so. then state for whom and what 
was the consideration thereof? Why was such pass issued? What 
railroad company issued such pass or passes ? 

Third—Has the issuance or acceptance of >aid pass or passes, 
influenced you directly or indirectly in any \ote you have cast as 
a member of this Convention, or has it corrupted anv of your ac¬ 
tions during’ this Convention, or if not, would it corrupt the action 
of others, or influence their votes? 


Resolved further. That immediately after the replv to the above 
question, each delegate as he completes Ins answer shall hand to 
the Secretary any and all passes now in hi" possession, whether 
trip or annual. Such of said passes a> on their lace are shown to 
be issued to employee only shall be returned to the holder and all 
others shall be retained by the Secretary and placed among the 
archives of this Convention, and the journal shall >how from whom 
the same was obtained and the substance thereof. 


Resolved further. That all delegates who have accepted passes 
for themselves family or friends, not employes, shall surrender to 
the Secretary of this Convention, who shall pav it into the State 
treasury, enough ot their mileage and per diem as shall be suf¬ 
ficient to cover the passes issued based on 3 cents per mile. 

Resolved further, That as the Secretary interrogates each mem- 

truth Un H e / ‘Vfr 10 "' hc shaI! swear such member to tell the 

of said au^ti ^'T am n0thm f. ,Ult tlu ‘ trmh in answer to such 
ot said questions as member ot tins Convention niav propound to 

o^mlifrateTss tanCe ^ hy hhn - for 

resolution^? pS upon Us passL?!''j,nmeiliatelv’'an, 1 'I„ that th< * 
pension of the rules, and ell, for^an a^and nay voti. " * ^ 

The call for the ayes and noes was not sustained 

.he SE& “ *r ** r™*—« 

and .he resolu.Cn tJm "" The "°' 5 haVe il ' 

A division was called for. 

bers ^'inbroTof it*"* * <Iivision - 1 uam to see how many mem- 



CONSTITUTIONAL CONVENTION, 1901 


25<>7 


MR. HEFLIN (Chambers)—I rise to a point of order. Hie 
[’resident had announced the result. 

MR. LONG—I ask that it go to the Committee on Rules, and 
that they he requested to report it back here in some shape. 

THE PRESIDENT—The resolution will be referred to the 
Committee on Corporations. 

MR. MERRILL—I have an ordinance I desire to introduce. 

The Secretary read the ordinance as follows: 

Ordinace 428 by Mr. Merrill: 

He it ordained by the people of the State of Alabama in con¬ 
vention assembled. 

That no railroad or other transportation company nor officer 
nor employee thereof shall grant free passes or sell tickets or passes 
at a discount other than as sold to the public generally to any 
member of the Legislature or to any person holding office under 
this State, and anv railroad or other transportation company or 
officer or employe thereof who violates the provisions of this sec¬ 
tion shall be deemed guilty of a misdemeanor, and upon conviction 
shall be fined $500 one-half of which fine shall go to the informer, 
and the other half to the county in which the conviction is had. 

Referred to Committee on Corporations. 

MR. SLOAN—I have a petition which I desire to present to 
the Convention. 

THE PRESIDENT—Petitions under our rules are not read 
before the Convention unless the Convention directs. It will be 
referred to the proper committee. 

MR. SLOAN—I ask that the body of the petition be read. 

The Convention gave its assent to the reading of the petition 
and it was read by the Clerk as follows: 

Petition No. -by Mr. Sloan. 

To the Honorable Constitutional Convention. Montgomery. 
Alabama. 

Dear Sirs :—We respectfully represent that whereas the Rail¬ 
road Commission appointed by the Governor and paid by the rail¬ 
roads has proven an entire failure and whereas the shipper and 
consumer should have some representation in the naming of rates 
and making of rules by what is otherwise alien and arbitrary pow¬ 
ers. That whereas the express, telephone, telegraph and railroad 
franchises are given by the State. We therefore request vour hon¬ 
orable body that you will give us a commission, elected and paid by 



2568 


OFFICIAL PROCEEDINGS 


the people and place all franchises, which have power to tax. with¬ 
in their review. 

C. R. Sniith, fanner; John Membourn, VV. J. Beam, J. R. Cov¬ 
ington, teacher; J. A. Jackson, \V. J. Jackson, farmer; J. K. Bolden, 
farmer; J. B. Burnem, farmer; James Burton, farmer; J. M. Lowry, 
farmer; John Morgan, farmer; C. V. Burton, farmer; John C. Mor¬ 
ton. farmer; F. A. Binter, farmer; I). K. Cochran, farmer; \\ . 
Daden, attorney; \V. S. Miller, farmer; J. R. King, farmer; G. 1%. 
Crawford, farmer; J. C. King, farmer; M. R. McHlvina, farmer; 
R. F. Trowell, farmer; '1'. C. Whited, farmer; James Carnes, farm¬ 
er; W. L. McCorkle, merchant; \\ . M. Self. Superintendent Edu¬ 
cation; T. ('.. Whaley, teacher; B. Y. Todd, farmer; ('.. 1). [ones, 
farmer; I. R. Sparks, farmer; G. S. Weston, farmer; B. C. Clements, 
farmer; 1). A. Robertson, tanner; J. W. Snider, farmer; lames 
Kent, farmer: T. J. Murray, farmer; R. M. Townby, famer ; ('». 'I'. 
Read, farmer; J. T. Whitley, farmer; J. M. Hitt, farmer; |. 1). 
Hod. farmer; J. H. Donehoo. merchant; Johnson ('.unter, farmer; 
J. I. Collett, farmer; W. J. Norman, farmer; L. !•'. Wadsworth, 
farmer; J. W. Crawford, farmer; \V. F. Wilmont, farmer; F. M. 
Armstrong, farmer; John B. Armstrong, farmer; Joe H. Ashley, 
famer; Sam Sanders, ex-Sheriff; W. C. Howell, farmer; T. J. Wes¬ 
ton. farmer; W. J. Young, farmer; Fd Graves, Sheriff; ]. H. Vann, 
minister: E. B. Roberts, hotel keeper; F. J. Duke, farmer; M. M. 
Mucker, farmer; S. W. Bolton, J. R. Hatchcock. 

J. A. (Seiner, farmer: J. N. Bolton, attorney: A. A. Griffith, 
attorney: K. R. Daughdrill. attorney; K. W. Daughdrill, mechan¬ 
ic; Geo. I’. Dickinson, teacher; j\ B. Bynum, clerk; J. F. Kelton, 
clerk court; Emory C. Hall, attorney-at-law; J. C. Bynum, mill 
man; P. K. Murphree, farmer; W. R. Bynum, farmer; O. P. Wal¬ 
ker. miner; H. C. Barwich, miner; J. P.’ Tidwell, mill man; I). B. 
Wood, farmer; M. C. Murphree. postmaster; B. B. Cornelius, 
farmer; Alfred Iverson, farmer; J. M. Tyler, farmer; A. B. Dick¬ 
son, farmer; W. W. Bain, farmer; K. H. Smith, blacksmith; |. K. 
Bynum, retired merchant; C. M. Brown, farmer; W. K. Secrov. 
farmer; William Gurley, farmer; Louis Gurley, farmer; C. C. 
Newson, farmer; S. A. Johnson, farmer; M. M. Jones, photograph¬ 
er; H. J. Mases. farmer; YV. A. Hood, farmer; W. T. Kemp, city 
clerk; W. A. Taylor, teacher of public school; M. M. Gilbreath, 
farmer; L. T. Chitwood, farmer; '1'. B. Russell, attornev ; R. Na¬ 
tion. tax collector: W. D. Samuel, barber: M. M. Owens, farmer; 
Peter Clements, farmer; J. M. Saddler, farmer; S. G. Clement, 
farmer; W. M. Newson, farmer; L. Adcock, farmer: L. H. Brown, 
probate clerk; K. C. Alldredge, sheriff; Thus. B. Deerer, countv 
treasurer; J. B. Morris, farmer; W. L. Hendricks, minister; W. B. 
Tidwell, carpenter. 

To the same petition were added these names; 



CONSTITUTIONAL CONVENTION, 1901 


2569 


J. A. Brice, merchant; J. S. DeLucke & Co., merchants; C. C. 
Hullett, farmer; W. M. Morton, farmer; J. H. Gillie, farmer; Jno. 
Adams, farmer; E. S. Jones, farmer; W. Ii. Self, farmer; M. A. 
Walker, farmer; Olive Walker, farmer; J. T. Crumbley, farmer; 
Jo. F. Wilson, county solicitor, Blount County; G. D. Shelton, 
merchant; S. L. Tidwell, farmer; A. J. Pulrnan, farmer. 

Referred to Corporations Committee. 

I he next order of business was the call of the roll for reports 
of committees. 

MR. SMITH (Mobile)—1 desire on behalf of the Committee 
on Rules to return two resolutions, in order that they may be 
referred to the Committee on Engrossment. 

The Clerk read the resolution as follows: 

Resolution No. 195, by Mr. Carmichael of Colbert: 

Resolved, by the Convention that the Engrossing and Enroll¬ 
ing Clerk of the Convention be and the same is hereby authorized 
to employ such assistants as may be necessary to properly discharge 
the duties of that office. This resolution shall take effect on and 
after the 24th day of June. 

The Clerk read resolution 199, as follows: 

Resolution No. 199, by Mr. Howell: 

Resolved, That whatever clerical assistance may be necessary 
to be employed by the Enrolling and Engrossing Clerk of this Con¬ 
vention, it be paid for at the rate of fifteen cents per hundred words 
for such assistant clerical work. 

MR. SMITH (Mobile)—The Committee on Rules beg leave 
to report the following resolution. 

Resolution No. 255, by Rules Committee: 

Resolved, that the rules of the Convention limiting debate be 
suspended when the report of the Suffrage Committee is taken up 
for consideration, and that each delegate he allowed to speak once, 
and not longer than thirty minutes upon any proposition presented 
bv the report of the Committee or any amendment thereto, except 
that the Chairman of the Committee or mover of the amendment, 
or such delegate as such Chairman or mover may yield his time 
to, may, after the previous question has been ordered, close the 
debate, and in so doing may speak for a like period of thirty min¬ 
utes ; provided, that the time here limited may be extended by a 
majority of the delegates voting without a suspension of the rules. 

MR. JONES—I ask that that rule be printed and lie over 
until Monday, I cannot understand it. it was read so rapidly. 



2570 


OFFICI AL PR< K'HFIM XC»S 


MR. O’NEAL—At the rec|tte-i of rlu* Chairman <u tlu* Cum 
mittee, I presented that resolution on \esterda\. 

THE PRESIDENT—It is the recollection oi the Chair that 
it is the identical resolution. 

MR. SMITH—[ was informed that lie had not. I ask to with¬ 
draw the resolution. 

THE PRESIDENT The gnitlcnian a^C unanimous consent 
to withdraw the resolution. Is there objection: 'Flu* Chair hears 
none. 


MR. LOMAX — [ have an ordinance 1 doire to introduce. 

The Clerk read the ordinance as follows: 

Ordinance No. 429 by Mr. Lomax: 

An ordinance to repeal Section 5 of the Article on LegLkiti\e 
Department as reported to and adopted by this Convention. 

Be it ordained by the people of the State of Alabama in Con¬ 
vention assembled, that Section 5 of the ordinance reported by the 
Committee on Legislative Department, fixing the sessions of the 
legislature quadrennially be. and the same D herein repealed. 

Referred to Committee on Legislatee Department. 

on Military report 


MR. WILSON (Clarke)---The Committee 
the following article : 


1 he Clerk read the report of the Committee a> follows: 

a ^ ,e bodied, white male inhabitants of the State be- 
tween the ages of 18 years and 45 years, who are citizens of the 
Lnited States, or have declared their intention to become such 

a'liTtheT '\ al)le t ,° I n,ilitar - v <lut - v in the militia of the State; 
and the General Assembly may provide for the organization from 
among such citizens ot a State Naval Militia. 

2. — The General Assembly, in providing for the organization 

equipment, and discipline of the militia, shall conform as „earh T 
practicable to the regulations for the <>ovcrmnenf r t n • - 

the United States. h C """ ult nl tIu> armies <>t 

3. Each company and regiment shall r*1urf it 

ie« ffSSMS* : bUt '!, my v 

shall be appointed by th^GoUraoV'' i " C ' ri1 "'' 1 b - v la "' thev 

Volunteer organizations of infantrv. cavairv and -irtilb-rv 
may be formed in such manner, and undeV si cl r^t W 4 

w«h such privileges, as may be provbl™ V laly ™ ,rK,mn *- an<l 



CONSTITUTIONAL CONVENTION, 1901 


2571 


5. 1 he militia and volunteer forces shall, in all cases, except 
treason, felony and breach of the peace, be privileged from arrest 
during’ their attendance at musters, parades and elections, and in 
going to and returning from the same. 

6. — The Governor shall, except as otherwise provided herein, 
be commander-in-chief of the militia and volunteer forces of the 
State, except when in service of the United States, and shall, with 
the advice and consent of the Senate, appoint all general officers 
whose term of office shall be for four years. The Governor, the 
generals, and regimental and battalion commanders shall appoint 
their own staff, as may be provided by law. 

7. —The General Assembly shall provide for the safe keeping 
of the arms, ammunition, and accoutrements, military records, ban¬ 
ners and relics of the State. 

8. —The officers and men of the militia and volunteer forces 
shall not be entitled to, or receive any pay. rations or emoluments 
when not in active service. 

THE PRESIDENT—The ordinance reported by the Commit¬ 
tee will lie upon the table and printed under the rule. 

MR. CARMICHAEL (Colbert)—I move that so much of the 
Journal as relates to the action of the Convention on the amend¬ 
ment offered by the gentleman from Dallas be read. 

The motion was adopted. 

The Clerk read from the Journal as follows: 

“Mr. Burns offered the following amendment to Section 38: 

“Amend Section 38 by adding after the word 'reward’ in the 
third line, the words ‘free pass/ “ 

MR. GREER of Calhoun moved to table the amendment of¬ 
fered by Mr. Burns. 

The motion prevailed and the amendment of Mr. Burns was 
laid upon the table. 

Mr. Pillans made the point of order that before the vote was 
put to the Convention he was upon his feet demanding that a yea 
and nay vote be taken. 

THE PRESIDENT (Mr. Harrison in the Chair)—Stated to 
the gentleman from Mobile, Mr. Pillans. that he did not hear his 
demand owing to the confusion in the hall, but that he would ask 
unanimous consent of the Convention to order the yeas and nays 
taken upon the motion to table the amendment. 

Thereupon Mr. Cofer made the point of order that the matter 
and substance contained in the amendment was res adjudicata. 



2572 


O FFICIA L PROC E KD I\ T (i S 


having* been heretofore acted upon by the Convention, and that 
said amendment was therefore out of order. 

The point of order was sustained. 

Mr. Jones of Montgomery, appealed from the decision of the 
Chair. 

On motion the Convention decided to remain in session until 
the pending question, the appeal from the decision of the Chair, 
was disposed of. 

Mr. (Veer of Calhoun, raised the point of order that before 
the Convention could decide to remain in session, beyond the hour 
of adjournment, under the rules, the rules would have to be sus¬ 
pended. 

The President (Mr. Harrison) overruled the point of order. 

The question recurred upon the appeal from the decision of 
the Chair. 

The question being shall the Chair be sustained, the Chair 
was not sustained, by the following vote, years 30, nays 61. 

MR. LONG (Walker)—In the stenographic report of yester¬ 
day on the resolution introduced by myself, the stenographic report 
reads as follows: 

“THE PRESIDENT—The question before the Convention 
is the consideration of the report on journal. 

“MR. LONG—Before that is made, I want a correction in the 
journal, as well as the stenographic report, and make a motion with 
reference to it. 

“THE PRESIDENT—Does it relate to the part of the journal 
now read. 

"MR. LONG—Not that particular part. 

“THE PRESIDENT—The gentleman will proceed. 

“MR. LONG—The stenographic report on the resolution of¬ 
fered by myself said : ‘Mr. Long (Walker)—I ask that the resolu¬ 
tion be referred to Mr. White.’ I did not make any such statement. 

I asked that it be referred to the Committee on Preamble and 
Declaration of Rights. 

THE PRESIDENT—The official stenographer will make the 
correction. 

MR. CARMICHAEL (Colbert)—I move that the report of 
the Committee on Journal be adopted. 

MR. JONES (Montgomery)—I move to strike out that part of 
the minutes that show that the motion to table was adopted—that 



COXSTITCTIONAL CONVENTION. 1901 


2573 


part ot the journal which shows that the motion to table the amend¬ 
ment offered by the gentleman from Dallas was adopted. I want 
to say in support of that motion that there was a great deal of 
noise and confusion at the time the gentleman moved to table the 
proposition. 1 am satisfied that the chair, the temporary President, 
at that time, thought that the matter was a joke on the part of the 
gentleman from Dallas, and was paying no attention to it, and he 
stated that the motion was tabled. In the lightning rapidity with 
which he was going on at that time, without knowing what the 
facts were. The facts are members of this Convention w r ere on 
their feet, demanding an aye and no vote, and the chair, inconsid- 
eately. thinking it amounted to nothing, said it was laid upon the 
table, but afterwards, on demand of Mr. Pillans, and by consent of 
the House, the ayes and noes w r ere called on that after the motion 
was said to have been laid on the table, and the chair ruled on the 
point of order raised by the gentleman from Cullman that it was 
not germane and was res adjudicata. The chair ruled on that, 
that it was out of order, not on the ground that it was tabled, but 
oil the ground already stated. I am satisfied, from recollection, 
and I am further satisfied from what I have been informed, that 
the clerk made the entry, because the chair announced, in his rapid 
way, thinking the whole matter was a joke, that it was laid upon 
the table. A great many of us know that this House was over¬ 
whelmingly opposed to that, and we were surprised to find that 
the amendment had been laid upon the table. That is the reason 
1 move to strike out that part which show's it was laid upon the 
table. 

MR. CARMICHAEL (Colbert)—1 was present yesterday af¬ 
ternoon when this matter was up and I desire to state the recol¬ 
lection 1 and the other members of the journal Committee have 
as to what transpired at that time. Section 38 of the Legislative 
Department was under discussion. The member from Dallas pre¬ 
pared an amendment by which he proposed to insert “free passes’’ 
in this section. The amendment was sent to the Secretary’s desk, 
the amendment w'as read, and the President presiding put the mo¬ 
tion as to whether the amendment should be adopted or not. The 
gentleman from Calhoun, Mr. Greer, at that time moved to table 
the amendment of the gentleman from Dallas, and on that motion 
the House voted. The President presiding decided that the amend¬ 
ment was tabled. I think members who are here will remember 
that this is what happened. At that time the gentleman from 
Mobile, Mr. Pillans. was insisting that he was on the floor calling 
for an aye and no vote, but the fact is that the President pro tern, 
of the Convention had decided that the amendment was tabled 
at that time. When the gentleman from Mobile w'as insisting that 
he had occupied the floor calling the ayes and noes. the President, 
in an effort to conciliate the Convention, asked unanimous consent 
that an aye and no vote be taken, but unanimous consent was never 



2574 


OFFICIAL PROCEEDINGS 


given, and the President never decided that unanimous consent 
was given to the taking of an aye and no vote. Thereupon, as the 
Journal shows, the gentleman from Cullman, Mr. Cofer, raised the 
point of order that it was res adjudicata, and the President decided 
in favor of the point of order, and upon that the gentleman from 
Montgomery took his appeal. In support of that, if you will look 
at the stenographic report, you will see that the stenographic re¬ 
port supports the report of the clerk of this House. I read from the 
stenographic report—it is on the fourth page, the last column on 
the fourth page: “The secretary thereupon read the amendment 
offered by Mr. Burns of Dallas as follows: 'Amend Section 38 by 
adding after the word ‘reward' in the third line, the words ‘free 
pass.' " Now, the fact is, that the chairman never did recognize 
nor see Mr. Pillans, but he declared the motion to table carried. 
Mr. Pillans then said, “I call for the ayes and noes. The chair de¬ 
clared the motion to table carried." 

MR. JONES (Montgomery)—May I ask the gentleman a 
question? 

MR. CARMICHAEL—Certainly. 

MR. JONES—As I understand, the journal does not show that 
the temporary chairman, with the consent of the House, took an 
aye and no vote. 

MR. CARMICHAEL—No, sir, and the President never did. 

MR. JONES—I want to call the gentleman’s attention to it. 
At the head of the first column on the fifth page: ‘‘If the Chair 
had heard the gentleman he would have put the question over, and 
the Chair will ask now to be permitted to do so and that gentle¬ 
man be allowed to make the point he was about to make. There 
being no objection, the leave was given.” Then Mr. Pillans goes 
on to state that he was satisfied the Chair has not heard him, and 
some colloquy took place, but Mr. Pillans kept insisting that he 
had demanded the ayes and noes. While that question was pend¬ 
ing and the journal does not state it correctly, Mr. Cofer says 
“I rise to a point of order, that this is not germane and it has been 
defeated bv this House of different occasions, and has been settled. 
Then the President pro tern said : “The Chair rules the point of 
order is well taken." It seems to me, Mr. President, that the Jour¬ 
nal does not exactly describe what took place, when the President 
is put in the attitude of ruling a thing out of order which according 
to the Journal was on the table, when in the subsequent proceed¬ 
ings the consent of the House showed it was treated as a matter 
before the House. That is my objection to the Journal as it stands; 
it ought to be fuller about the tabling, or taken out altogether. 

MR. CARMICHAEL—The motion of the gentleman from 
Montgomery that that be stricken out—I say that it is not within 



CONSTITUTIONAL, CONVENTION, 1901 


2575 


IwnrT.t't!’?'"' °V hiS to strike out any- 

this amendment, ?he Pre^ideM of ™ e " dment -, th ' fotion to table 
or not deHnr^rl ti * en ^°f the Convention, whether rightly 

Lm was abled V bat r m °! ,on P revailed - and that that amend- 
was not ^ J W SUb " Ut ’ Mr ‘ P ^sident, that after that 
in h r’o tl tn ,C ?°u er ? f the Preside,lt this Convention 
to abromi' , t° r ,n f hls u de « ,re to conciliate this Convention. 
JVesidem nf th r ° f the Convention > and I submit that the 
Comen ion f - th C °,"Vu u " ever did subniit the question to the 

vote he take,, 1 U * wheth ^ r there was unanimous consent that this 
from * t ^ a >^s and noes. Now, the motion of the gentleman 

Th s con 3 T M Cry , ’ S t0 8trike ° Ut the aCtio " of this Convention. 
Pre^wlenl (' 1 ?e r 1°"® except Upon a mot ion to reconsider, and the 
I resident of this Convention, even if he undertook to do so, could 
no abrogate the action of this Convention. 


Mk. HEX I — I w ould like to ask a question. 

M R. C A RMI CH A KL—Yes. 

MR. DEN 1 What becomes of this part of the stenographic 
report that actually took place—it being next over the to the last 
column, before you strike the blank page : “President pro tern— 
i hat is the recollection of the present occupant of the Chair, and 
the Chair will state further that so far as the demand of the dele¬ 
gate from Mobile for the ayes and noes, the Chair did not hear 
him. If the Chair had heard the gentleman, he would have put 
the question over, and the Chair will ask now to be permitted to 
do so and that the gentleman be allowed to make the point he was 
about to make. There being no objection, the leave was given.” 

MR. CARMICHAEL—I will say that that was interpolated 
by the stenographer and was not correct. 


MR. PILLANS—I think he is wrong there. May I ask at 
whose instance it was interpolated? 

MR. CARMICHAEL—It was not interpolated at the instance 
of any delegate, and I did not say that, but the stenographer put 
that down in his notes, not as a matter that occurred, but simply 
wrote that in his notes. There was some confusion and the Presi¬ 
dent never did ask this Convention whether there was unanimous 
consent that the vote be taken by ayes and noes. I would have 
objected. 


MR. ASHCRAFT — May I interrupt the gentleman for the 
purpose of asking a question? 

MR. CARMICHAEL—Yes sir. 


MR. ASHCRAFT—Look next to the last column, you will see 
I rose to a point of order, and stated that when the President put 



2576 


OFFICIAI, PROC EE DIXGS 


the vote on the motion to table the amendment by the gentleman 
from Dallas, as soon as the question was announced, the gentle¬ 
man from Mobile began to demand the ayes and noes, but the 
Chairman, not hearing him, proceeded until, as the Clerk's records 
show, he had announced that the vote had carried, thereupon the 
gentleman from Mobile was heard by the Chair and the Chair by 
unanimous consent proposed to repeat the question, and thereupon 
the gentleman from Calhoun made the point of order that the ques¬ 
tion was res adjudicata, having been passed upon at a previous 
hour. The Chair sustained the point of order made by the gen¬ 
tleman from Montgomery appealed from the decision of the Chair. 
The President pro tern said: “That is the Chair's recollection of it." 

MR. CARMICHAEL—Yes. sir. 

MR. ASHCRAFT—Don’t that confirm that part that the gen¬ 
tleman from Mobile calls your attention to? 

MR. CARMICHAEL—No, sir; what I submit is this, that the 
President of this Convention never did submit the question to this 
Convention as to whether there was unanimous consent. Now. 
after he had declared that the amendment was laid upon the ta¬ 
ble, the President then presiding said that he would like to remedy 
the wrong if any was done, in substance that he had not seen the 
gentleman from Mobile, and that he would like unanimous con¬ 
sent to be given, but he never did ask is there unanimous consent? 
Shall the vote be put by ayes and noes, is there objection? I sub¬ 
mit that no man will insist that that motion was put in that man¬ 
ner. There are those here who would have objected to such a 
proposition. I wish to read further on, next to the last column in 
the last line. The Chair goes on to say: “The Chair did not hear 
him—having reference to the gentleman from Mobile. If the Chair 
had heard the gentleman, he would have put the question over, and 
the Chair will ask now to be permitted to do so and that the gentle¬ 
man be allowed to take the point he was about to make.” “There 
being no objection—these are the words of the stenographer, but 
the Chairman never stated that—there was no adjudication on the 
part of the President of the Convention that there was no objec¬ 
tion, and that unanimous consent was given. 

MR. HARRISON—Was there not at the time, half a dozen 
or more on the floor? 

MR. CARMICHAEL—There were a dozen on the floor. 

MR. PILLANS—I think perhaps you will recollect with me 
that the unanimous consent occurred in this wise. I was insist¬ 
ing upon the ayes and noes. and my insistence was not heard 
among the confusion, beyond a doubt by the acting President— 
stated there was an objection by the gentleman from Calhoun that 
I could not be heard from because I was not in my seat? 

MR. CARMICHAEL—Yes, sir. 



2577 


U>NS'1'lTITiONAI, CONVKNTION 


1901 


intereif of ? id . n>t the actin ^ President say in the 

the stenogranhic r ,’tin < 3 desi r c to ^ a ' r —I don’t know about 

tion to the Convpnfi f ut substantially he would put the ques- 
ent for he^entle,) m ?\ cy wouW unanimous con- 
the seat that K /t fr ° m Mob,Ie to insist upon the call from 
of uinnimo . <• JS f he " occu P.vinsr, and was not that the matter 

ste no^ntX- "r,, ( ; il r‘ nt u ^ ,0b< ‘ n of '«»w and perhaps in the 

, r j v ...A There >rt ‘ V V- Sn • 11 then tIlc nnanimous consent was 
hli there v "’ aS ob J ect,on aild the acting President declared 
unanimous consent that I should be heard from, or 

ai|>vi»g> r ° in M ° ),Ie be heani froni tll(> scat I was then oc- 


MR. CARM ICHAKl,—That 


is true. 


MR. I 11, LA NS 1 hen didn't the acting President announce 
that he would put the question upon the aves and noes, and just 
then there was an interruption from the gentleman from Calhoun 
with his point of order. Is not that the fact? 


MR. CARMICHAEL—-The facts are stated in the journal as 
they occurred. As to unanimous consent being given to make a 
point from where he was sitting is correct, but the point I make 
is this, that the amendment was tabled in fact by this House and 
so declared by the President, and that could not be abrogated ex¬ 
cept by reconsideration. The further fact is. and I insist upon 
this, that the President of this Convention never did submit the 
question as to whether there should be a vote taken by ayes and 
noes for unanimous consent of this house, and this house never 
did give unanimous consent for the passage of that amendment by 
ayes and noes. Now, I shall read from the stenographic report on 
the last page: “If the Chair had heard the gentleman (that is. 
the gentleman from Mobile) he would have put the question over, 
and the Chair will ask now to be permitted to do so and that the 
gentleman be allowed to make the point he was about to make.” 
The stenographic report says: “There being no objection, the 
leave was given.” but there was no adjudication bv the President 
of this Convention. 


MR. PILLANS—I respectfully say that I knew the Chair 
did not hear me”—that he knew that he did not hear him, but the 
instant the question was stated and he called for the ayes and noes. 
the President pro tern asked. “Upon what question ” Does that 
show that we had given permission, that the matter was adjudi¬ 
cated? He said he would have to put the question over again— 
that was a statement made by the President at that time. Fur¬ 
ther on. “Mr. Pillans—And I immediately demanded the ayes and 
noes upon that question.” He does not deny that the amendment 
was tabled. Now. the President says: “In order that no injustice 
may be done, the Chair asks that the call for the ayes and noes be 



2578 


OFFICIAL PROCEEDINGS 


put.” Now hadn’t it been adjudicated at that time? Why dues 
he ask that? I will read further: “Mr. Reese—I rise to a point of 
order. The gentleman from Dallas, my colleague, offered this 
amendment, and he never had surrendered the floor.” Mr. Reese 
says, Mr. Pillans never had been on the floor insisted that he had 
never occupied the floor for any purpose, he said Mr. Burns from 
Dallas had occupied the floor all the time. Then the report goes 
on down: “The Chair asks consent of this Convention that the 
Convention now act upon the call for the ayes and noes demanded 
by the delegate from Mobile.” Right there Mr. Gofer said: “I rise 
to a point of order, that this is not germane and it has been defeat¬ 
ed by this house on a different occasion and has been settled.” 
Then the President pro tern, said: “The Chair rules the point of 
order is well taken. 

MR. JONES—Could the Chair have ruled a thing out of order 
that was on the table if he had not considered the proceedings as 
tantamount to unanimous consent? 

MR. CARMICHAEL — The Chairman of the Convention, 
amidst the confusion that existed at the time, was endeavoring to 
get the Convention to allow an aye and no vote to be taken as 
requested by the gentleman from Mobile, but the Convention had 
never agreed to that, as all this will show. The lost statement 
made by the Chair is this: “The Chair asks consent of this Con¬ 
vention that the Convention now act upon the call for the ayes 
and noes demanded by the delegate from Mobile.” 

MR. O'NEAL—I rise to a point of order, the question before 
the Convention is the motion of the gentleman from Montgomery 
to amend the report of the Committee on the Journal. Under the 
rules of the house, the debate is limited to ten minutes, that is mv 
recollection of the rules. 

MR. PROCTOR—If the Chair recognizes the point of order 
of the gentleman from Lauderdale, I ask recognition to give mv 
time to the gentleman from Colbert. 

THE PRESIDENT—It seems to the Chair that the gentle¬ 
man’s time has expired. 

MR. PROCTOR—I move that his time be extended. 

The gentleman from Colbert yielded the floor to the gentleman 
from Jackson. 

MR. PROCTOR—Some gentleman in the Convention desire 
things in the Journal which are not acted upon by the house. 
Whenever a result is announced by the Chair, it is the duty of the 
Journal to show that result, but anything that the Chair may say 
without any action by the house is not the action of this Conven¬ 
tion, and consequently ought not to be in the Journal. When this 



O >NSTITI Tl< )\ AI. Ol.WKNTION, 




matter came u d when the gentleman from Dallas offered the 
amendment, the gentleman from Calhoun moved to lay that amend¬ 
ment upon the table. Thereupon the President pro tern, put that 
question to this body, a vote was taken, and the result was an¬ 
nounced by the ('hair—not a decision from the Chair, but a de¬ 
cision ot tln> Convention, consequently that was a matter that 
necessarily went into tin* Journal. Then whatever the* Chair might 
have said ot his own accord, without giving the Convention an 
opportunity to act on it, is not a question that should go into the 
Journal. I was present, and I was giving eye and ear to what was 
taking place, with no purpose to make any motion, and with no 
purpose to take any action but to vote when an opportunity pre¬ 
sentee! itself. The gentleman from Mobile, all the time during 1 the 
time the vote was being taken, when the motion was made, after 
the motion of the gentleman from Calhoun was made, was on his 
feel demanding’ tin* ayes and tines. The ('hair never recognized 
the gentleman from Mobile until after the result was announced. 
After the result was announced, some complaint being made to 

the Chair that the gentleman was on his feet before* the vote was 

put to the house, the Chair turned to the* gentleman and made 
some remarks a< it* lie would like to give an opportunity to vote on 
this question hv the ayes and noes and lu* said l>v a unanimous 
consent 1 would like to out this. Hut I maintain, Mr. President, 

that that never was put to this body. hour or five gentlemen 

arose, this gentleman here and that one o\er there rising to points 
of order amid great confusion. I was there ready to vote if the 
opportunity offered, but it never was put, and whatever the Chair¬ 
man announced without giving the Convention an opportunity ^to 
vote upon it. i> a matter that should not go into the Journal, for 
the join nal is there to record only what transpires hv the Conven¬ 
tion'and not hv individual member nor by the Chair himself. 1 do 
not think that anybody will contradict that unanimous consent was 
never asked this Convention. The Chair announced his willing¬ 
ness if unanimous consent were given to put it to an aye and no 
vote, but f maintain that he never did ask this Convention to give 
nn;minioiis consent. 

MU I.O.M \\ Dir! not temporary President say that lie did 
not liear the gentleman from Mobile, if’he had heard him he would 
have put tlnAuestion for the ayes and noes. and say I trust and 
I hope that this Convention will give its unanimous consent to do 
so? Didn't the Chair say that." 

MR PROCTOR—The Chair made some remark like that. 

MR LOMAX_Was there objection by anybody to that re¬ 

quest by the Chair? 

MR PROCTOR—That is the very point T am making. 



2580 


OFFICIAL PROCEEDINGS 


MR. LOMAX—If there was no objection and the Chair had 
gone on and put that motion, would you say that he did not have 
the consent of the Convention to the doing of that thing? That 
is what happened here yesterday. He asked for consent and no¬ 
body objected, and that is the whole contention of the gentle¬ 
man. 

MR. PROCTOR—That is where we differ. He never asked 
consent. He said I would like to put this question, and probably 
it could have been done by unanimous consent, but he never asked 
if the unanimous consent was given by the Convention. He made 
some sort of statement as the gentleman from Montgomery states, 
but he never did give the opportunity to the Convention to say 
whether or not unanimous consent was given, and that is the very 
point I am making, because f was .fitting there ready to vote when¬ 
ever it did come up. J will read from the stenographic report: 

Reese—I rise to a point of order. The gentleman from Dal¬ 
las, my colleague, offered this amendment, and he never surren¬ 
dered the floor. He was upon the floor and the motion was made 
to table, and immediately the gentleman from Mobile commenced 
demanding the ayes and noes, and he has had the floor ever since. 

‘THE PRESIDENT PRO TEM—The Chair has consented, 
and I believe the Convention will now consent, to put the call for 
the ayes and noes. The Chair does not agree with the last gen¬ 
tleman from Dallas, because there is a motion made by his col¬ 
league to refer the the amendment to the Committee on Corpora¬ 
tions. 


MR. LOMAX—Will you allow me? You commenced to read 
just four lines too low down. 

DOCTOR-! will read that: “Mr. Pillans—And I im¬ 
mediately demanded the ayes and noes upon the question. 

m PRO TEM—In order that no injustice 

puT”^ ^° ne ’ t ^ le ^h a, r as ^ s the call for the ayes and noes be 

I maintain that that does not show that unanimous consent 
was asked or given. 

the Jail? DkJ y0U ’ or any ot >'° u make any objection to 

MR. PROCTOR—No, sir, because it never was put to the 
House to give me an opportunity to do so, that is the reason I did 
not object. I was sitting here ready to object, and here are the 
remarks m the stenographic report: “The Chair has consented”— 
but the Convention did not give the consent, and I maintain that 
it would not be a part of the Journal. 



2581 


MR. 


O )HH 
k 


c0KSTI TUTI0NA1. C()NVKNTION, 1901 
Mr. 


to 1)0 in to know very 1 liuk' <l a| n )o li r J rT etinieS , '*■'* a f happy position 
law. Now, there weV - - boiit the mysteries of parliamentary 

and which no man <|A U \" )!. that ( , lid OCCUr y esterda Y> 

the time when it j< lU ! ( , o..,, .,' e of . those things was that after 

vailed this Hon , 1 1 ^ Inotlon to * a . v upon the table pre- 

amlhrr mr lr. i a VwU * tl,at 11 " ( * l > ld remain in session for 
made in the In T* 1 * l } | lr l >OM/ inconsistent with the statement 

ok • o U at that n, ° tiun was laid u P on the table. We 

sessi,;, 1 e e '"I" ! !u ‘ ‘! lu ‘ slu,n a * to whether we would remain in 
whether th t- *' " lat piirpo.-wr i-or the purpose of deciding; 
nVhtfullv un P'*r«tr\ 1 resident of this Convention had ruled 
the in i-,.,- U 7 mkrfu ' ly ., in snstainin f? the point of order made by 
;\| l , an . "" n ^ u ln ’ an ' ^ ?ow - when the appeal was made 
, ; k ‘ 0, 7 on uf tIu ‘ Shair, by the gentleman from Montgom- 
ery, and this Convention decided by solemn vote to remain in ses¬ 
sion until the question was decided, and when the Convention went 
■ m and entertained this appeal from the presiding- officer of the 
Momentum when it was put to the Convention and voted upon hx 
an aye and no vote, and nobody objected, is not that at least an 
indorsement of the action of the President in entertaining the mo¬ 
tion made by the gentleman from Cullman? Now, then, if that 
action made in the face of the House, made with the consent of the 
House, made by a solemn vote of the House, and sustained as 
correct, if it conflicts, which is to prevail? 

MR. HARRISON—I would like to ask a question? I will ask 
you if the Chair was not prevented from ever really submitting that 
matter to the House by the confusion that existed? 


MR- ( ORB—Yes, sir; that is true. The chair was prevented 
and before he put the motion to the House relative to the action 
proposed by the gentleman from Mobile, the gentleman from Cull¬ 
man interposed, and the point I make is the fact that he did not 
technically put that question to the House makes no difference. 
What lias parliamentary law to do here among a Convention of 
gentlemen framing a Constitution, who intend to do right in fram¬ 
ing it? Now, there is no use of shirking this question. It is be¬ 
fore this Convention, and the question is free passes or no free 
passes and if this Convention have a fair show, they will determine 
and strike down free passes forever. 


MR. OATES—I was in my seat and have in charge the section 
which was under discussion when the amendment was offered. 
I was necessarily a close observer of what transpired. During the 
confusion yesterday evening I tried three different times to get 
recognition to give what I saw and knew about it, which I thought 
would have some tendency to explain the situation. I will do so 
now, briefly. The amendment was offered by the delegate from 
Dallas, Mr. Burns, which has been stated, and it is not necessary 
to repeat it. At once there was a good deal of excitement, until 




2582 


O F FI CIA L PR OC E E l) IN tS 


a motion was made by the delegate from Cullman to table the 
amendment and the vote was taken upon tabling the amendment 
The presiding officer announced that it seemed to the chair that 
the ayes have it. That may not have been the precise language 
but that is the substance of it. He is too good a parliamentarian 
to announce at once a result without giving any opportunity. He 
announced, however, that it seemed to the chair that the aves had 
it, and just at that time the delegate from Mobile, who was occupv- 
ing a seat over here where Delegate White now sits, was, and 
had been from the very moment of the announcement, demand¬ 
ing the ayes and noes. The attention of the chair was then direct¬ 
ed to that part of the hall, several gentlemen being on their feet 
and the gentleman from Mobile, Mr. Pillans, repeated his demand 
time and again, until he gained recognition, and then it was that 
the delegate from Calhoun made the point—that he could not 
make this demand because he was not in his seat. After that ques¬ 
tion was canvassed for a short time, the chair agreed or submitted 
the question whether he could not do it. I am not sure about 
whether any vote was taken, but the chair entertained it; said that 
if he had heard the delegate from Mobile, he would have recog¬ 
nized his demand for the ayes and noes on that vote, hut that he 
had not been able to hear him, his attention was directed to so 
many occupants of the floor seeking recognition in another part 
ot the hall, and he said he had no intention to do an injustice to 
any delegate, and he was disposed to grant the demand of the 
delegate from Mobile, stating he was on the floor making a de¬ 
mand for ayes and noes from the very moment when the vote was 
taken, and just at that time the occupant of the chair said he had 
no disposition to do anybody any wrong, and the delegate from 
Mobtle sard certainly he did not. and the chair stated about that 

nf , a ? k r ' er ?' SS '°" tor unanimous consent that the de¬ 
mand of the delegate from Mobile for ayes and noes be put to the 

Point, before it was done, the dele- 
oosed hi? ,Snt f obtained recognition from the chair and inter- 
aShMm!l ° f T er W r hlCh the chair entertained, and decided 
as I wdtneJs? Z™ ^ from „ that decision - Those are the facts 

ill he dl .! ( M heni a,Kl u recol,ect them. and. without going into 
<1 the details, those are the essential facts of the case Now sir, 

hadTcUedTh,' ' a ,‘ Wh '" C J h ' v °" lM<l and The chair 

result had'1 h' S ' e . med ,0 .^ e ch “ ir thc had it. the final 

from Cullman who ’nt ’ cert f m *>' recognition of the delegate 
cal Question on 1» ' e . r P osed the P°>nt of order upon the identi- 

tnith U that°?he n mo r ti COn f ,d f r k tl0n ’ The "*"*ary had reported the 
ried and the choir ^ t ia , C u^ een to * av on the table had been car- 

result had not been put If iThTd been iT Ch ? ir /’, bu ‘ the final 
too late anrl th* i , , nacl t)een - the point of order came 

announced the final ^esuV re . ga . rded '*• but as he had not 

• the time had not passed, the oppor- 



O >NSTITl’TlON'Al. CON VKNTION, 1901 


2583 


tunity had not gone by, for demanding the ayes and noes; he was 
di>J>osed to recognize tile delegate from Mobile in that demand, and 
his recognition of the point made by the delegate from Cullman 
-howed that it was '-till in fieri and had not been fully determined. 

MR. WILSON—The Committee on Journal simply endeavor¬ 
ed to make the journal state what actually happened. If the dele¬ 
gates will leave out of their minds the question of what side they 
are on on this amendment proposed to this section, there would 
be very little trouble to settle the pending controversy. The propo¬ 
sition now is to strike from the journal the statement that the 
amendment was laid upon the table. As I understand the propo¬ 
sition - 


MR. |<)NI\S < Montgomery)--Will the gentleman allow me 
to make a proposition that may probably coincide with the differ¬ 
ent views expressed here? After stating about the motion to 
table, the chair announced that the motion was tabled, but upon 
insistence of the gentleman from Mobile, Mr. Lilians, that he was 
on his feet demanding the ayes and noes before the chair put the 
question, the chair announced he had no disposition to infringe 
upon the rights of any member, and would put the vote by yeas 
and noes. but before that was done, Mr. Cofer made a point of or¬ 
der. 1 think that covered the case. 


MR. WILSON (Clarke)—Mr. President, I do not think the 
journal should be encumbered with all that kind of stuff. As 1 
said the journal shows the motion was made to table, that was put 
to the house, the house voted, and the chair announced the decision. 
The stenographic report shows the same thing. I submit to the 
delegates that those two sources are the best sources from which 
we can get information on this subject. Now, if the question was 
nut to the Convention and the Convention voted upon it and the 
decision of the Convention was announced, why the gentlemen 
ought not to want to make the journal show that something else 
was done when that was done. 

MR CUNNINGHAM—Will the gentleman permit a ques¬ 
tion 5 Suppose the journal shows the manner in which it was ta- 
led that s bv a viva voce vote. No one will question it was 
tabled according to the decision of the chair by a viva voce vote. 

MR \V 11 SON (Clarke)—I will come to that proposition and 
i( vou wil wait until I get through and then want to ask anything 
V i:u Answer vou Mr President, I say the official stenographic 
I will an ', vv . y , ee on this proposition; the question was sub¬ 
report and journal a ree on P announced. Well, now, what do 

milted and voted on and deci. 10 ^ ision say> they say 

the gentlemen w io ™ : the vote was made. Suppose it 

\vU 6 They «• <*“ 

(he vote. Suppose i. was. No one will say ,t was vended and that 



2584 


OFFICIAL PROCEEDINGS 


the motion to table was not carried or was reversed. I submit 
you have no right to strike out the decision in the face of such a 
proposition as that. None of them will deny the proposition to 
table was carried. They say the demand for ayes and noes was 
made, there never was taken a vote on the question of ayes and 
noes; therefore, upon what do they predicate their desire to strike 
out the decision of the Convention and to attempt to make the 
journal show that something that was done was not done. I sub¬ 
mit that when this question comes up again, when this section is 
reached again, if unanimous consent has been given for a vote, 
for the ayes and noes, a vote can be taken. If, on yesterday after¬ 
noon, after the decision had been announced a delegate had asked 
for verification by aye and noes and unanimous consent was given 
for the certification, and the verification was never had, I think 
the Chair would hold that as unfinished business; if on the other 
hand, the Chair should hold that unanimous consent was not given 
for the vote by ayes and noes, but that that motion stands to table, 
why, then, I anticipate the Chair would entertain a motion to take 
from the table. So far as I am concerned I will vote for the journal 
as it stands, because that is the best evidence of what was actually 
done. I have no objection to the amendment, will vote for the 
amendment and tried to say so yesterday on the decision from the 
appeal of the Chair, when I was going to vote to sustain the Chair, 
because I believe the Chair was ruling honestly as he thought the 
President of the Convention had established a precedent, but the 
gentleman cut me off and would not permit me. therefore, I take 
this occasion to do it. I say we ought not because we happen to 
be on one side or the other of this question to try to make the 
jurnal show what did take place, did not take place. 

I move the previous question on this matter. On the amend¬ 
ment and on the adoption of the report of the Committee on the 
Journal. 

THE PRESIDENT—The question is on the motion of— 

MR. JONES (Montgomery)—Mr. President, who has the con¬ 
clusion on that? I made the motion. 

THE PRESIDENT—The Chair will rule upon that question 
so soon as it submits the motion. 

MR. JONES (Montgomery)—The reason I ask is— 

THE PRESIDENT—The gentleman is not in order. 

MR. JONES—But I can state a parliamentary inquiry. 

THE PRESIDENT—The gentleman is not in order. 

MR. JONES—I take an appeal from the decision of the Chair, 
if you will permit me. 



2585 


CONSTITUTIONAL CONVENTION, 1901 

THE PRESIDENT—The gentleman will please be seated. 

MR. JONES—Now I am seated, and I now rise to take an 
appeal from the decision of the Chair. 

I HE I RESIDENT I he gentleman will please resume his 

seat. 

M IE JONES I have taken my seat in obedience to the orders 
of the Con\ ention and then I have risen to respectfully take an 
appeal fiom the decision of the Chair to the members of this Con¬ 
vention. 

MR. W 1LLE1 f—1 rise to a point of order. The gentleman 
from Montgomery is out of order. The Chair has not stated the 
question that is before the Convention. 

MR. JONES—My appeal is before the House. Does the Chair 
say that he will not put an appeal? 

THE PRESIDENT — Is the gentleman from Montgomery 
the Chairman of the Convention or the occupant of the Chair? 

MR. JONES—The gentleman from Montgomery is the peer 
of the Chairman of this Convention and will insist upon his rights. 

THE PRESIDENT—The gentleman will please resume his 

seat. 

MR. JONES—The gentleman from Montgomery declines to 
resume his seat until the Chair decides whether he will put an ap¬ 
peal which he took from the ruling of the Chair. 

THE PRESIDENT—Unless the gentleman from Montgom¬ 
ery will resume his seat the Chair, under the rules, will have to 
request the Sergeant-At-Arms to require the gentleman to be 
seated. 

MR. JONES—I understand that, but now do not let us have 
any unnecessary heat about this. I want to ask the Chairman of 
this Convention if a delegate on this floor has not the right to ap¬ 
peal from a decision of the Chair. 

THE PRESIDENT—Certainly, Certainly he has hut the gen¬ 
tleman has no right to defy the Chair, and the Chair requests him 
to be seated in order that the Chair may make a ruling. The gen¬ 
tleman has no right to defy the Chair and stand, in violation of the 
rules of this Convention, occupying the floor, after the Chair re¬ 
quests him to be seated. 

MR JONES—I respectfully ask if, after the Chair called me 
to order. I did not sit down and then respectfully rise in my place? 

THE PRESIDENT—But the gentleman is now out of order, 
as the Chair has ruled he is out of order, and the Chair will request 
him to be seated. 



2586 


OFFICIAL PROCEEDINGS 


MR. JONES—What becomes of my appeal? 

THE PRESIDENT—The Sergeant at Arms will require the 
gentleman to be seated. 

MR. JONES—I rise to a question of personal privilege. I 
have taken an appeal from the decision of the Chair, and I ask to 
have it put, and if the Sergeant at Arms or anybody else tries to 
make me take my seat when as a member of this Convention I 
have a right to take an appeal, why he only does it over my dead 
body. 

MR. SANDERS—I move we adjourn. 

MR. WILLIAMS (Marengo)—Point of order. 

MR. BULGER—I as a delegate of this Convention, demand 
that the Sergeant at Arms discharge his duty. 

MR. JONES—Suppose you try to do it, 

THE PRESIDENT—The Sergeant at Arms will remove the 
gentleman from the Convention. 

MR. JONES—I have a right to be heard, and I want to know 
if the Chair declined to put an appeal. 

THE PRESIDENT—The Chair does not decline to put an 
appeal, but the Sergeant at Arms will require the gentleman to 
be seated. 

MR. JONES—That is all I want. I want the Chair to put 
my appeal. Now, Mr. President- 

THE PRESIDENT—The gentleman will resume his seat. 

MR. JONES—T think if the Chair will hold its temper a lit¬ 
tle— 


THE PRESIDENT—It seems to the Chair that it is the gen¬ 
tleman from Montgomery. The gentleman from Montgomery will 
please be seated. 

MR. JONES—I was about to state—— 

THE PRESIDENT—The Sergeant at Arms will remove the 
gentleman- 

MR. JONES—I rise to a question of privilege. 

MR. FLETCHER—I do not think that one delegate in this 
Convention- 

THE PRESIDENT—The Sergeant at Arms will exercise his 
duty or the Chair will appoint a Sergeant at Arms- 



2587 


V < INSTITUTIONAL CONVENTION, 1901 

Mlv^ I* LE l CHhR (continuing)—should usurp the privilege 
<»f this Convention. 

MR. J< )NES.1 was about to state a question of privilege. 

MR. HJ‘. 1 CHER—1 have said nothing in regard to this mat¬ 
ter, but I do not think that any one man has the right to usurp the 
privileges of this Convention and to retain the floor in this man¬ 
ner, and 1 think the member ought to be silenced. 

MR. HI RXS 1 rise to a point of information. What is the 
question before the house? 

I llK PRESIDENT—The gentleman will please resume his 
seat. The Secretary will please state the question from which the 
gentleman from Montgomery appealed from the decision of the 
Chair. 


’Phe Secretary stated the question as follows: 


Mr. W ilson of Clarke moves the previous question upon the 
adoption of the journal and the pending amendment. Mr. Jones 
of Montgomery rises and asks that he be allowed to conclude the 
remarks being the mover of the amendment. 


Till'. PRESIDENT—The Chair stated he would rule upon 
the privilege of the gentleman after submitting the question on 
the motion for the previous question to the Convention. There¬ 
upon the gentleman from Montgomery appealed from the ruling 
of the Chair. The question is, shall the Chair be sustained? 


MR. JONES—I do not think the Chair exactly states 


The gentleman was interrupted by vociferous calls for the 
question. 

MR. JONES—I withdraw the appeal rather than be the oc¬ 
casion of disorder in this Convention. 


There were loud cries for the question. 

THE PRESIDENT—The Sergeant at Arinas will remove the 
gentleman unless he resumes his seat. 

MR. JONES—Haven’t I the right to withdraw an appeal. 

There were cries of “objection.” 

MR. JONES—I withdraw my appeal. 

THE* PRESIDENT — The gentleman cannot withdraw a 
Question that has been submitted to the Convention. The question 
will be shall the decision of the Chair stand as the ruling of this 

Convention? 

By a viva voce the decision of the Chair was unanimously sus¬ 

tained. 



2588 


OFFICIAL PROCEEDINGS 


THE PRESIDENT—The question recurs upon the motion of 
the gentleman from Clarke for the previous question. The ques¬ 
tion is shall the main question now be put? 

Upon a vote being taken the main question was ordered. 

THE PRESIDENT—The question is upon the amendment of¬ 
fered by the gentleman from Montgomery to the report of the 
Committee on Journal. 

MR. BULGER — I would like to hear the reading of tin* 
amendment. 

THE PRESIDENT—It is not in writing. The motion, how¬ 
ever, is to strike from the Journal so much of the Journal as shows 
that the amendment of the gentleman from Dallas was laid upon 
the table. As many as favor the amendment will say aye. 

Upon a vote being taken the amendment was lost. 

The question recurring upon the adoption of the report of the 
Committee on Journal, upon a vote being taken the report was 
adopted. 

Mr. Dent obtained recognition. 

MR. JONES—Will the gentleman yield? 

MR. DENT—I yield to the gentleman from Montgomery. 

MR. JONES—I desire, if the President will hear me, to state 
that, perhaps, from a misapprehension of what the attitude of the 
Chair was, I took action and probably said words, which, if 1 had 
not been under such misapprehension, I would not have done. I 
further desire to state to this Convention and the Chair that I en¬ 
deavored to say this five or six minutes ago and the Chair would 
not permit it, and ruled that I was out of order. This was the pur¬ 
pose for which I rose the last time. I am the last man that would 
treat this House or its President, or any one with disrespect, and 
I am the last man, if I know that my rights are being violated to 
permit that it shall be done. 

THE PRESIDENT — When the gentleman rises and ad¬ 
dresses the Chair and makes a motion, the Chair will always enter¬ 
tain the motion and submit it to the Convention, but after the gen¬ 
tleman makes a motion or makes a point of order, or moves any 
question, it is in order for him to resume his seat, and to permit the 
Chair to state the question to the Convention. After the Chair 
calls the attention of the gentleman to the fact that he is out of 
order and requests him to resume his seat it seems to the Chair, 
that the gentleman is altogether out of order when he insists on 
maintaining his position on the floor while the President is pro¬ 
ceeding to submit the question to the Convention. Therefore, the 



2589 


I’ONS'riTlTlONAi. 


CONVENTION, 


1901 


K h “''| requested the gentleman from Montgomery to 
‘ ,h f Chair ..tight proceed to submit his 

A A * OMNtntlon , but the Chair cannot submit questions 

'' h l Wllen one or m °re or a half dozen gentlemen 

\ / ] \ \ { ( , uniormg for recognition, or interrupting the pro- 

i <. (( mg (• >< omention. 1 his is a Convention of delegates of 

t k ^o\cu jgn people of Alabama, and it is becoming that we should 
act with decorum and with dignity. The gentleman from Barbour. 

Mk. DhX I W lien the Convention had Section 35 under con¬ 
sideration. of the Article on Legislative Department— 


Mk. WALKER—I will ask the gentleman from Barbour to 
excuse me i<»r one moment while I enter a motion. I move, Mr. 
President-- 


Mk. DENI I yield to the gentleman from Madison. 

Mk. \\ ALKldv -f move, Mr. President, that what has occur¬ 
red in this Molise subsequent to the motion of the gentleman from 
Clarke tor the previous question he expunged from the steno¬ 
graphic report. 

MR. EA STKR--I move to table the motion. 

Lpon a vote being taken, a division was called for. 

MR HEREIN (Chambers)—I make the point of order that 
vou have in suspend the rules before a motion of this character can 
be* put. 

MR. SPRACG INS—I make the point of order that the gen¬ 
tleman’s point of order comes too late. 

THK PRESIDENT—The question which the Chair submitted 
to the Convention was a motion to table. The question of the con¬ 
sideration of the resolution is not before the Convention at this 
t ime. 

And l>v a vote of 40 aves and 45 noes, the motion to table was 

lost. 

MR. HEREIN (Chambers)—I make the point of order that 
in order to present the motion of the gentleman from Madison, 
the rules will have to be suspended, and that will-require a two- 
thirds vote. 

THE PRESIDENT—It seems to the Chair that the point of 
order is well taken. 

MR. GRAHAM (Montgomery)—I move that the rules he 
suspended, in order that the motion made by the gentleman from 
Madison may he adopted. 



2590 


OFFICIAL PROCEEDINGS 


Upon a vote being taken a division was called for and by vote 
of 49 ayes and 38 noes, the motion to suspend the rules was lost. 

THE PRESIDENT—The special order before the Convention 
this morning will be the consideration of the report of the Com¬ 
mittee on Legislative Department. When the Convention ad¬ 
journed it had under consideration Section 28. 

MR. DENT—When Section 35 was under consideration yes¬ 
terday, the gentleman from Pike, who is unfortunately absent this 
morning, offered an amendment to the amendment offered by the 
gentleman from Montgomery. The amendment offered by the 
gentleman from Pike was to limit the special session to thirty 
days. That was adopted by the Convention, but being an amend¬ 
ment to the amendment offered by the gentleman from Mont¬ 
gomery and that amendment being lost the amendment offered 
by the gentleman from Pike was also lost. He gave notice at the 
time that he would move this morning for a reconsideration of the 
vote by which Section 35 was adopted, in its present shape, in order 
that he might amend by adding at the end of the section, ‘‘and 
special session shall be limited to thirty days.” At his request 
I make the motion now that the action of the Convention in adopt¬ 
ing Section 35 may be reconsidered in order that this amendment 
may be adopted. 

MR. O'NEAL—I rise to a point of order. Under Rule 27 , 
which reads as follows: 

Rule 27 — When a vote has passed, except on the previous 
question, or on motion to lay on the table, or to take from the 
table, it shall be in order for any delegate who voted with the ma¬ 
jority to move for a reconsideration thereof on the same day, or 
within the morning session of the succeeding day, and such mo¬ 
tion, if made on the same day— 

Now, the gentleman from Pike made this motion on yester¬ 
day and under the rules it should have been considered directly 
after the approval of the journal. 

MR. OATES—I am in charge of the measure and witnessed 
just what transpired, and the delegate from Pike offered that 
amendment— 

THE PRESIDENT—The Chair will be compelled to be gov¬ 
erned by the journal, if the journal deals with the subject. 

The journal entry was read as follows: 

“Mr. Samford moved to reconsider the vote by which Section 
35 was adopted, which motion under the rules went over until 
tomorrow. 

MR. OATES—I was proceeding to say that the gentleman 
offered that amendment when an amendment was pending. His 



2591 


CONSTITUTIONAL CONVENTION, 1901 


'* 1 ’ then^Mr^Q 4 a ! n !" dment *° w ^' c ^ ^ was attached was lost, 
,W ,k S ? m l° rd 1 ,d K ive noti « th « he would move to re- 
j , • e \° e by w l Jlc h the section was adopted today. He 

(C - 1 1 no in . sis on reconsideration at that time on account, he said, 
or sickness in his family, and he had to go away. 


HE I RESIDENT— It seems to the Chair as the journal 
shows that the gentleman from Pike entered his motion to recon¬ 
sider the vote whereby Section 35 was adopted, that it is in order 
at this time. 


* V * NEAL My point of order was that after the approval 
of the journal a motion was made by the gentleman from Madi¬ 
son and the other business has intervened since the approval of 
the journal. 

1 Hh. PRESIDENT—The opinion of the Chair is that the 
motion may be made at any time during the morning session. 

MR. O’NEAL —No, it shall be considered immediately after 
the approval of the journal on the day succeeding that on which 
it is made, but if it is first moved on such succeeding day, it shall 
be forthwith considered. He had the option yesterday of making 
the motion then, to be considered immediately after the approval 
of tlu* Journal, or of making it this morning. 

THE PRESIDENT—The Chair ruled on that question the 
other day to this effect, that if he entered his motion on yesterdav. 
it was a special order this morning immediately after the reading 
of the Journal, and it was the duty of the Chair to submit the mo¬ 
tion to the Convention; but if, by the over-sight of the Chair, other 
business was allowed to intervene, it ought not to cut off the gen¬ 
tleman’s right to have his motion considered, and the Chair as soon 
as it was called to his attention, submitted the question to the 
Convention The motion now is to reconsider the vote whereby 
Section 35 was adopted. 

MR. deC/RAEFENRElD—T move to lay that motion upon 
the table. 

MR. JENKINS—I ask the gentleman to withdraw that for a 
moment. 

MR deGRAFFENREID—I do not like to be discourteous to 
any one. Will you renew it? 

MR. JENKINS—I will. The gentleman from Pike offered 
an amendment which provided that the session of the Legislature, 
if called in extra session, should be limited to thirty days. By 
mistake on yesterday, he offered the amendment to another amend¬ 
ment, and while his amendment was adopted, the amendment he 
had amended was defeated, and the House did not carry out its 
wishes on yesterday, and this reconsideration will give the Con- 



2592 


OFFICIAL PROCFFDINOS 


vention an opportunity to do in fact what it wanted to do on yes¬ 
terday, and I want to state clearly to the Convention that it acted 
on this proposition affirmatively. 

MR. deGRAFFENREID—I just want to state that my at¬ 
tention having been called to this matter, I withdraw the motion 
to table, and do not require that you shall renew it. 

THE PRESIDENT—Unanimous consent is asked to with¬ 
draw the motion. 

To this objection was made. 

MR. CUNNINGHAM—I rise to a point of order. The gen¬ 
tleman from Hale withdrew the motion to lay on the table and 
yielded the floor to the gentleman from Wilcox. 

THE PRESIDENT—The gentleman from Hale has no power 
to withdraw a motion which has been submitted to the Convention 
without the consent of the Convention. 

MR. JENKINS—I rise to a point of order. I have the floor. 

THE PRESIDENT—The Chair will state that it is in tin- 
power of the Convention to authorize the withdrawal of the motion 
if it is so desired. 

MR. BROOKS—I make a motion to withdraw. 

MR. JENKINS—I make the point of order that the gentle¬ 
man cannot make a motion while I have the floor. 

THE PRESIDENT—He is making a motion to withdraw the 
motion you are speaking against. 

MR. JENKINS—He may do so after I get through. 

THE PRESIDENT—The gentleman will proceed. 

MR. CUNNINGHAM—I rise to a question of inquiry. Under 
what rule does the gentleman from Wilcox discuss the question 
when a motion to table is pending? 

THE PRESIDENT—The Chair has not submitted the mo¬ 
tion of the gentleman from Hale to the Convention. The gentle¬ 
man from Wilcox is in order. 

MR. JENKINS—Now, this Convention on yesterday acted 
affirmatively, as I said, on the proposition of the gentleman from 
Pike, that is, when the Legislature meets in special session they 
shall be limited to thirty days. Now I think we acted right in 
passing that amendment. The Governor can call the Legislature 
here and by a two-thirds vote they can take up any proposition 
that they desire, and it would be possible for them to remain in 
session for twelve months. 



Oi\M I T [ 'i io.VM. 0»N\'l-:\Tlit.\. 1<»|| 


259.? 

M K. () N HA L I dc>irc to call the gentleman’.- attention to 
Section winch li«i> alrcacly been adopted. '\ hat Section pro- 
\ ide> that the Legislature .•'hall not remain in session longer than 
>i\ty days at the first session after the adoption of the Constitu¬ 
tion. or longer than fifty days at any subsequent session. Does 
that not embrace am session after that and include special ses¬ 
sion ? 

M K. J 1\X KINS — 1 think not. That applies to the regular 
stated session. 1 he first session after the adoption of the Consti¬ 
tution may remain in session sixty days, and every four years 
thereafter they may remain in session fifty days, hut this Section 
says that at any time the Governor, when he sees fit, can call the 
Legislature in special session, and it fails to say how long they 
shall remain in session, and from my experience w'ith legislative 
bodies. I believe that there ought to be a limit put upon them, for 
when they have the power to remain in session they will stay in 
session until they accomplish what they want to. That is nothing 
but natural and right, and for the people to he confronted with the 
Constitution to he voted upon, and when our opponents will get 
on the stump. “Will vou vote for this Constitution, when the Gov¬ 
ernor may call this Legislature in extra session and it may remain 
in session for twelve months.” Such an argument would have 
great weight against the ratification of the Constitution. 

THE PRKS1DKNT—The time of the gentleman has expired. 

MR. OATHS—J merely rise for the purpose of saying that, as 
Chairman of the Committee. 1 favor a reconsideration, and am in 
favor of the amendment, and I believe that I have not heard any 
dissent from the members of the Committee. I believe the Section 
ought to be reconsidered and amended. 

Upon a vote being taken, the motion to reconsider prevailed. 

MR. DENT—I offer an amendment. 

The amendment was read as follows: 

Amend Section 35 by adding at the end of the Section the 
following words: “And special sessions shall be limited to thirty 
days.” 

MR. DENT—I move the adoption of that amendment, and 
upon the amendment and Section I call the previous question. 

Upon a vote being taken the main question was ordered, and 
upon a further vote the amendment was adopted. 

The question recurring upon the Section as amended, upon a 
vote being taken, it was adopted. 

THE PRESIDENT—The question will he upon the adoption 
of Section 38 as amended. 



25<M 


OFFiC1AL PR< >CKKD1 SOS 


Sec. 38. A member of the Legislature who shall solicit, de¬ 
mand, or receive, or consent to receive, directly or indirectly for 
himself or for another, from any company, corporation or person, 
any money, office, appointment, employment, reward, thing of 
value, or enjoyment, or personal advantage, or promise thereof, 
for his vote, or influence or for withholding the same, or with an 
understanding expressed or implied, that his vote or his official 
action shall in any way he influenced thereby; or who shall solicit 
or demand any such money or other advantage, matter or thing 
aforesaid, for another, as the consideration of his vote or influence, 
or for withholding the same; or shall give or withhold his vote or 
influence in consideration of the payment or promise of such mon¬ 
ey, advantage or thing to another shall he guilty of bribery within 
the meaning of this Constitution, and shall incur the disabilities 
provided thereby for such offense and such additional punishment 
as is or shall he provided by law. 

A vote being taken, the section as amended was adopted. 

The secretary read Section 39 as follows : 

Sec. 39. Any person who shall directly or indirectly offer, 
give or promise any money, or thing of value, testimonial, privi¬ 
lege or personal advantage, to any executive or judicial officer or 
member of the Legislature to influence him in the performance of 
any of his public or official duties, shall he guilty of bribery, and 
he punished in such manner as shall be provided by law. 

MR. OATES—I promised to yield to the delegate from Mo¬ 
bile. 


MR. BROOKS—Mr. President, after the storm that we have 
just had in the Convention, hope the atmosphere is clarified suf¬ 
ficiently for us to give some attention to what I consider an im¬ 
portant matter. This Section 39 is, I believe, the same section 
as found in the present Constitution. The men who put that in 
the Constitution are entitled to credit for good intentions, and 
some degree of discernment, but good intentions are not always 
effective. Dr. Johnson once said that “hell is paved with good 
intentions,” or as the poet has said. 

“So Dr. Johnson once did say. 

That hell is paved that very way/' 

Now, the purpose of this section is to protect the members of 
the General Assembly, and the officers generally of the State from 
corrupting influences, but it does not go far enough, because 
practically speaking, it does not take into consideration, or bring 
within the purview of this section certain insidious influences 
that are at work all the time. Now, Mr. President, and gentle¬ 
men of the Convention, to show you what the State has done, and 



CONSTITUTIONAL CONVENTION, 1901 


2595 


how far the State thinks that its officers ought to be protected 
from the demoralizing influences that may be brought to bear upon 
their servants, in the discharge of their duties, I want to call your 
attention to a section in the Act of 1897, on the subject of the Con¬ 
vict Inspectors, where it provides that no inspector, physician of 
convicts, State, county or municipal officer, or any officer or 
guard, who has charge, control or direction of convicts, must be 
in any manner whatsoever interested in the w'ork or profit of the 
labor of any convict, nor shall receive any gift, gratuity or favor 
of a valuable character from any person interested in such labor. 
Now% the Legislature was in a mood at that time to protect the 
State against undue influences that might be brought to bear upon 
their servants in the discharge of their duties, and they very prop¬ 
erly put that upon the statute book. Well, an inspector may have 
dealings with contractors, and he may receive a gift without there 
being the slightest desire on the one side or the other of giving 
or receiving in a corrupt manner, but in order to protect both 
parties from engaging in a corrupt contract, or corrupt action, 
this statute was adopted. Now, the same thing pertains to the 
government of railroads. A first-class railroad, for instance, if it 
ever found a purchasing agent accepting a gift or gratuity, or a 
rebate of any kind from a merchant or manufacturer or producer 
from whom they bought their supplies, it would not be five min¬ 
utes before he would be decapitated. Why? Because it is a dan¬ 
gerous thing to allow' the disbursing officers or agents employed in 
purchasing, to be under an undue influence that may in time cost 
the railroad a great deal of money, and, therefore, I say every 
first-class railroad would, as soon as they found that such a thing 
existed, they would apply the remedy in short order. Now, Mr. 
President, I hold in my hand document No. 259. It is the testi- 
mon}' of Mr. Milton H. Smith, the able President of the Louisville 
and Nashville Railroad. It was taken before the Committee on 
Interstate Commerce. Mr. Morrison was the chairman of that 
committee in 1897. Now, I shall read a very short extract, only 
a few lines, but I wish to state, first, the circumstances under 
which this testimony was taken. As is well known. Congress pass¬ 
ed some years ago a law requiring the railroads to adopt certain 
safety appliances for the protection of their employes, and of pas¬ 
sengers. It was a long time before many railroads complied wdth 
that, and Mr. Smith was summoned before this committee, and 
the inquiry was made of him why he had not complied wdth that 
law. In giving his reasons, Mr. Smith alleged, as other railroads 
had alleged, that that was a very expensive thing and required a 
great deal of money, and that latterly the railroad had not been 
making much money; its revenues had been somewhat reduced, 
and Mr. Morrison finally asked him how' it was. He said a good 
deal of it was done in the way of rebates, etc., and then he comes 
to the question as issue. “As a matter of fact,” said Mr. Morrison, 



2596 


OFFICIAL FKOCKKDINC.S 


“you do have a large free list.'" 'V,-. >tr. Made up ol Sen¬ 
ators and Representatives?" "Vi- made up ..t Senators and Rep- 
resentativesT “To what extent lines the judiciary figure in that, 
if at all?' 1 1 want tr show \ < < 11 h«»w pi t'cu.nii iu> an-wvi is, with¬ 
drawing' insinuation-. In di.-cu-.-uig tin- question I want to say 
that the railroads are not all to Maine, neithei are their officers 
always to blame, and I propose to di-cu-- this thing dispassion¬ 
ately, without am prejudice with a \in\ > n getting at the influ¬ 
ences that I say are insidiouslv at work, whether intended cor¬ 
ruptly or not. Mr. Smith says: “1 wall have to retrr > < > n to our 
attorney, judge Baxter ot Xaslnilh-. nid "i the hot lawyers the 
country has ever produced. I think Mr. Baxter has been ot the 
opinion, and I fear most of mir attorney nave heen of the same 
opinion, that it is well not to appear hetore a Judge unless he has 
a pass if he wants one. In other words, the\ proceed on the idea 
that if the judge can afford to take a pa--, they can ailord to give 
it to him. I believe that does u- harm. I believe many a judge 
leans backward for fear he will he aeeu-ed <>i laxoritisin, and for 
that reason he leans the other wax. ami -o decidedly as to show 
it.” Then he goes on again, and speaking- .a Judges, says: “If 
they w r ant a pass, and a.-k for it, we give it. W e don’t |)i*ess them 
on them. They may not ask direct!) for themselves, but thev 
have some friend that does so, and that (he im>de which i- ver\ 
frequently employed. Some friend <!<>e- 


Now, I want to call the attent:• *n <•' the President and the 
gentlemen of the Convention to what I consider a just interpre¬ 
tation of this statement of Mr. Smith, lie -a\ - that a fudge with 
a pass in his pocket frequently lean- on dm other -ide against the 
railroad. In other words he become- a coward to his conscience. 
His conscience makes a coward of him. and he i- so afraid that lii.- 
integrity will be affected by the pos.-e-.-ion of the pass, or that lie 
may be criticised, that he leans again-t the railroad and fails to do 
them justice. Now, I ask what is that but a pollution of the very 
fountains of justice. Here is a man who leans so far on the other 
side, under the influence of the pass in his pocket, that he cannot 
give the railroad justice. Is that not a fair conclusion or inference 
to draw from that statement of Mr. Smith? Take the other side 
of the case. Mr. Baxter thinks and always felt verv much more 
comfortable it he appeared before a court that had a pass. He says 
Mr. Baxter and I fear most of our attorneys have been of the same 
opinion—it is not well to appear before a judge unless he has a 
pass, it he wants one. 1 lie meaning is. he expects the fudge, bv 
reason of the obligation which exists to the railroad by being the 
recipient of the pass will warn his judicial decision in favor of the 
railroad and against the other party. Take whatever view you 
please, the result is corruption. Therefore, Mr President I *av 

not" X St,t nt t!0n P T Visi ° n d ° es not far enough because'it doe; 
not take into consideration practically the insidious influences 



CONSTITUTIONAL COWKNTION. 1001 


2507 


that are going on all the time in that respect, and I ask you gen¬ 
tlemen of the Convention—I do not charge anybody ; I do not 
charge any railroad official with having in his mind any corrupting 
scheme, nor do I charge any gentleman who occupies a position 
of honor or trust under this State of being influenced by anv cor¬ 
rupt influence when he accepts a pass, but 1 ask you in candor and 
frankness if, in the last analysis, and if the fundamental character 
of that transaction, it is not tainted with the element of corruption, 
therefore I ask, Mr. President, that mv amendment or addition t<> 
that section be* read. 

The amendment was read as follows: 

No railroad or other transportation company shall grant free 
passes, or shall at reduced rates not common to the public, sell 
tickets for transportation to any person holding any office of honor, 
trust or profit in this State, and the acceptance of such pass or 
ticket by a member of the Legislature or any officer shall work a 
forfeiture of his office, at the suit of the Attorney General. 

Any railroad or other transportation company or officer or 
agent thereof who shall grant a free pass, or shall at reduced rates 
not common to the public, sell tickets for transportation to anv 
such person shall be deemed guilty of a misdemeanor and is liable 
to punishment, except as herein provided. 

No person or officer or agent of a corporation who gives anv 
such free pass, free transportation or sells tickets for transporta¬ 
tion at reduced rates hereby prohibited shall be privileged from tes¬ 
tifying in relation thereto, and he shall not be liable to civil or 
criminal prosecution therefor if he shall testify to the giving or 
selling of the same. Rut this shall not prohibit the Legislature 
from authorizing the State to contract with any such railroad or 
other transportation company for the transportation at reduced 
rates of State officers while traveling in the discharge of their of¬ 
ficial duties. 

Any solicitor who shall fail faithfully to prosecute a person 
charged with the violation in his county or circuit of any provision 
of this section which may come to his knowledge, shall be removed 
from office by the Governor, after due notice, and an opportunity 
of being heard in his defense. 

MR. BROOKS—Now, Mr. President, the only provision we 
have in the Constitution under the article of Corporations has been 
a dead letter ever since the Constitution was adopted, and the ob¬ 
ject of that is to galvanize that provision into life. If the Conven¬ 
tion will notice, this amendment affects not only the acceptors of 
passes, but the railroads or transportation companies who give the 
pass. It goes on and provides also that railroad officials shall be 
excused in testifying, and if they testify against themselves they 



2598 


OFFICIAL PROCKKDI NOS 


shall not be subject to criminal or civil prosecution if they testify 
to the giving- of passes, and that is the only way in which the evi¬ 
dence can be adduced, as to whether a man has received a pass 
or not, through the testimony of railroad officials, and those of¬ 
ficials giving that testimony are exempted from the provision of 
the law under which they might he prosecuted, civilly or crim¬ 
inally. Another provision is that the State may be authorized un¬ 
der authority of the Legislature to contract at reduced rates with 
a railroad from time to time for the transportation of the officers 
of the State while those officers are engaged in the discharge of 
their official duties. That is all f care to say on the subject, I sub¬ 
mit that amendment, and call for the previous question on the 
section and the amendment, and call for the ayes and noes. 

MR. JACKSON—I would like to suggest to the gentleman 
that he amend his amendment by striking out the words General 
Assembly and inserting in lieu thereof Legislature. 

MR. BROOKS—If I have a right to do so. I will do it. 

Unanimous consent was given, and the amendment allowed. 

MR. BROOKS—I call for the ayes and noes. 

The call was not sustained. 

THE PRESIDENT—The question is on the call for the pre¬ 
vious question, on the section and the amendment. The question 
is, shall the main question be now put? 

Upon a vote being taken, a division was called for. 

MR. WHITE—I rise to a point of order. The ayes and noes 
were ordered. 

THE PRESIDENT—The call was not sustained. 

Upon the division by a vote of fifty noes and thirty-two ayes, 
the motion for the previous question was lost. 

MR. COLEMAN (Greene)—If it is not out of order, I wish 
to say when a question of this importance is introduced before 
this Convention and discussed in a tone of voice that all of us can¬ 
not hear, and we do not know what we are voting upon, to move 
the previous question under such circumstances, does great in¬ 
justice to the members of this Convention who desire to know and 
understand the questions they are voting upon. An important 
question like this ought to be examined, and we ought to have 
an opportunity to read it. I sent up to the Secretary to try and 
get the amendment to ascertain what was in it, but under the cir¬ 
cumstances he could not let me have it. I move, if it is in order, 
that this question be postponed, to be taken up and considered in 
connection with the ordinance that was introduced this morning 
and referred to the committees. 



CONSTITUTIONAL CONVENTION, 1001 


2599 


THE PRESIDENT—Does the gentleman from Greene direct 
his motion to the amendment offered by the gentleman from Mo¬ 
bile? 

MR. COLEMAN (Greene)—Yes, sir. 

Upon a vote being taken, the motion to postpone considera¬ 
tion was carried. 

MR. OATES—I move the adoption of the section. 

A vote was taken, and Section 30 was adopted. 

Section 40 was read as follows: 

Sec. 40. The offense of corrupt solicitation of members of 
the Legislature or of public officers of this State or of any mu¬ 
nicipal division thereof and any occupation or practice of solicita¬ 
tion of such members or officers to influence their official action, 
shall he defined by law, and shall be punished bv fine and im¬ 
prisonment in the penitentiary, and the Legislature shall provide 
for the trial and punishment of the offenses enumerated in the two 
preceding sections, and shall require the judges to give the same 
specially in charge to the grand juries in all the counties of this 
State. 

MR. OATES—The amendments to the section as it stands in 
the present Constitution are plain, and I presume that every one 
who has read it understand it, and I move the adoption of the 
section. 

A vote was taken and the section adopted. 

MR. LONG (Walker)—I ask permission to introduce a short 
resolution, to be referred to the proper committee. 

Objection was made to the resolution. 

MR. LONG (Walker)—I move that the rules be suspended 
and that the resolution be read. 

Upon a vote being taken, the rules were suspended and the 
resolution read as follows: 

Resolution by Mr. Long (Walker) : 

Various threatening sulphuric fumes have arisen in this Con¬ 
vention to such an extent as to make conservative and thoughtful 
members apprehensive of their safety in the future, therefore be it 

Resolved, That immediately after the passage of this resolu¬ 
tion. the Sergeant-at-Arms be. and he is hereby, ordered to close 
the doors of this hall, and to search the person, desk and room of 
each delegate for railroad passes pistols, dirks, brass-knucks and 
razors, and to deliver them forthwith to the secretary; all such 



2600 


OFFICIAL P ROC KK DINGS 


articles so found to be sold by the secretary to the highest bidder 
the proceeds of the same to be paid into the State treasury, in the 
interest of harmony and good government. 

MR. OATES—Just now, when Section 40 was adopted, it es¬ 
caped me that an amendment, which was adopted, in the first line 
of Section 38, struck out the words corruptly, which is repeated 
in Section 40, and, in order that they may correspond, I move to 
reconsider the vote by which Section 40 was adopted with a view 
of striking out that word. \ move a suspension of the rules for 
the reconsideration. 

The rules were suspended, and the motion to reconsider pre¬ 
vailed. 

MR. OATES—I move to amend by striking out the word 
“corrupt" in the first line of Section 40. to correspond with Sec¬ 
tion 38. 


MR. COLEMAN (Greene)--! think we should move with 
more care on this matter. Read that section: "The offense of cor¬ 
rupt solicitation." Read it without the word "corrupt” and you 
have the offense of solicitation. What does that mean, to solicit 
or to ask, members of the legislature or public officers of this State 
or of any municipal division thereof, and any occupation or prac¬ 
tice of solicitation of such members or officers to influence their 
official action. \ on cannot ask a member ot a board of a town, 
or of the legislature, and you cannot solicit him in any way. When 
you ask him to do anything it is for the purpose of influencing 
his action. \ ou cannot approach him with argument or reason, 
and it seems to me we are going too far in this matter. Now ev¬ 
erything that ought to be covered has been considered and we 
have gone as far as it is right and proper to go in the adoption of 
Section 38, but you could not under this amendment even advo¬ 
cate the measure before a Committee, or a member of a board, 
without subjecting yourself to prosecution. I therefore move to 
lay the amendment upon the table. 

MR. OATES—I merely want to suv with the permission of 
the Convention— 


THE PRESIDENT—The motion is 

is not debatable. 


to lay on the table, and it 


MR. OATES—-I am aware it is 
say one word in explanation. 

The gentleman asks unanimous 

tion. 


not debatable but I want to 
consent to make an explana- 


The consent was given. 



CONSTITUTIONAL CONVENTION, 1901 


2601 


MR. OATES—My attention was called to it when Section 38 
was tinder consideration, which reads: “Who shall corruptly 
solicit.” Corruptly was stricken out, as to members of the legis¬ 
lature, and in Section 40, this is “the offense of corrupt solicita¬ 
tion of members of legislature, etc/' I made the motion only be¬ 
cause the word has been stricken out in Section 38. The two sec¬ 
tions seemed to be in conflict and therefore I made the motion, I 
have not examined it as to its effect. 

Upon a vote being taken the motion to table was carried. 

The question recurred upon the adoption of the section, and 
upon a vote being taken the section was adopted. 

Section 41 was read as follows: 

Sec. 41. A member of the legislature who has a personal or 
private interest in any measure or bill, proposed or pending before 
the legislature, shall disclose the fact to the House of which he is a 
member, and shall not vote thereon. 

MR. OATES—That is the present Constitution and I move 
its adoption. 

MR. BURNS—I desire to offer this amendment at the request 
of my colleague, Mr. Reese. 

The amendment was read as follows: 

Amend Section 41 Article on the Legislative Department, by 
inserting after the word “legislature” in the second line the words 
“or who is an officer, agent or attorney of any corporation or as¬ 
sociation, or person having such interest” and by inserting after 
the word “committee” in the third line the words “or house.” 

MR. OATES—I see the operation of the amendment. This 
section is a declaration that any member of either House having 
any personal or private interest in any measure or bill proposed 
or pending before the legislature shall disclose the fact to the 
House of which he is a member and shall not vote thereon. This 
amendment is to exclude any member who is also the attorney 
of any corporation from voting. It seems to me as it now stands 
it is broad enough. If members are interested, personally or pri¬ 
vately, he would have to disclose his interest under it, as it now 
stands. Therefore, I move to lay the amendment on the table. 

Upon a vote being taken, a division was called for, by a vote 
of 38 ayes and 24 noes the motion to table prevailed. 

MR. BURNS—I regret to do so, but I give notice to the Chair 
there is not a quorum voting. 

THE PRESIDENT—The Chair will proceed to ascertain and 
count a quorum. 



2602 


OF FICI AI, PROC K K 01N CS 


The Chair declared that a quorum was present, and the ques¬ 
tion recurred upon the adoption of the Section. 

MR. BROOKS—I would suggest that the Clerk be instructed 
to read the section as it would be with the amendment. 

THE PRESIDENT — The amendment has been lost. The 
question is on the section. 

MR. DENT—The Secretary read it “house" in the second line 
and the printed copy is “committee” I would like to know which 
is correct. 

THE SECRETARY—To the House of which he is a mem¬ 
ber." 

MR. CUNNINGHAM- -This is a very serious question. 1 will 
briefly call to the attention of the Convention that in 1896, I had 
the honor to be a member of the Senate of this State and prepared 
and introduced a bill in the Senate which had for its purpose a 
revolution of the convict system of the State of Alabama. I do 
not know what delegates here may think of my sincerity or what 
my constituents at home or anybody else may think, but l was in 
earnest. No man was ever more so, and yet had I known this sec¬ 
tion was in the Constitution I could not have voted upon my own 
measure. I, therefore, move to amend, Mr. President, after the 
words- 

MR. DENT—I think if the gentleman will examine, he will 
find this section in the old Constitution. 

MR. CUNNINGHAM—I say if I had known it was there I 
could not have voted upon my own measure. I, therefore, move 
to amend after the word “thereon unless permission is authorized 
by the house.” That is, that he may submit the question as to 
whether or not he has an interest to the house and let the house 
determine the matter. 

THE PRESIDENT—“Unless authorized by a vote of the 
house” is the amendment. 

MR. ROGERS (Sumter)—What would be the good of that 
provision? If you were on the winning side you would vote, and if 
you were on the losing side you would not be allowed to. 

MR. CUNNINGHAM—Add that at the end of the section “un¬ 
less permission is authorized by the vote of the house.” I will 
answer the question of the gentleman from Sumter if he will state 
it again. 

MR. ROGERS (Sumter)—I ask what would be the good of 
thi^ amendment? If a man were with the majority of the house, 
they would give him permission to vote, and if he were with the 



CONSTITUTIONAL CONVENTION, 1901 


2603 


minority, he would not he given permission to vote on the question, 
so what would be the good of the provision in the Constitution? 

MR. CUNNINGHAM—In answering the question, I will say 
that under this provision of the Constitution as it now stands the 
Representatives in the House or Senate might have an interest 
as I had on that occasion. It killed for me the goose that laid the 
golden egg, straight out without doubt, and, therefore, I had an 
interest in it, but I was more interested in the passage of the bill 
and in its becoming a law than I was in any personal interest that 
I may have had in the matter and therefore I would have been 
compelled under this provision to have announced that fact and not 
voted upon the question. Under this amendment I could have sub¬ 
mitted the problem to the Senate and if they had said that my per¬ 
sonal interest was not controlling me, then I could have voted. 

MR. PILLANS—Would not the desired object be reached by 
using some such expression as this: “No member who has a per¬ 
sonal or private beneficial interest/’ As T understand the difficulty 
presented in the case of the gentleman from Jefferson, he wanted 
to have a measure passed which injuriously affected his interests, 
and vet he feels that this section would have affected his voting 
on it. Can’t you frame a clause, which will provide that where 
vou are interested beneficially in a measure that you cannot vote? 
If so, I shall offer the amendment. 

MR. CUNNINGHAM—1 am not quite astute enough to catch 
whether that meets the object I have to the section or not. I 
would like to be in a position should I ever have the honor again 
to sit in either house of the General Assembly of the State, to he 
permitted to vote up a question that I honestly and conscientious¬ 
ly believe to be right although if it should become a law it would 
be to my detriment. That is all I ask. 

MR. COBB—Will the gentleman allow a question? 

MR. CUNNINGHAM—Yes. 

MR. COBB—Does the gentleman think he has a personal or 
private interest in such a measure when he proposes to vote for it, 
and it injures him, in the contemplation of this law, he has no per¬ 
sonal or private interest. 

MR. CUNNINGHAM —I will say that, suppose some one 
else were to propose the measure and the question came up and 
vou wanted to vote no. what would he your status? 

MR. COBB—I say if you want to vote for a measure that 
will inure to your interest, then you ought not to vote, but if you 
are voting for a measure which injures you personally and does 
not benefit you. you are not prohibited by the language of the law. 



2604 


OFFICIAL PROCEEDINGS 


MR. CUNNINGHAM—I cannot see it ‘‘Pending before the 
Legislature shall disclose that fact to the house of which he is a 
member and shall not vote thereon.” There is no question about 
that proposition. He shall not vote either way, whether he is bene- 
fitted or whether he is injured. I hope the amendment will be 
adopted. 

MR. OATES—There is no necessity for the amendment offer¬ 
ed by the delegate from Jefferson, and he will see when he consid¬ 
ers this section a little more closely. “A member of the Legisla¬ 
ture who has a personal or private interest in a private bill pending 
before the Legislature shall disclose the fact to the house of which 
he is a member and shall not vote thereon/' In the first place, 
it is a question for the member, and for his conscience to decide 
whether it is a matter in which he has a private or personal interest, 
and if he is in doubt as to whether it be such or not it is his duty 
to disclose the fact to the house and secure action by that house 
as the section now stands and the house can vote on the question 
as to whether when he states the fact of his connection, whether 
it is a personal interest, or such interest as should properly bar 
him from voting or exclude him from voting. The section is right 
as it is, and I, therefore, move to lay the amendment on the table. 

Upon a vote being taken the motion to table was carried. 

Leaves of absence were granted as follows: 

Mr. Reynolds of Chilton, Mr. Weatherly, Mr, Reynolds of 
Henry, Mr. Smith ©f Autauga, Mr. Espy for today. Mr, Pillans, 
Mr. Fitts, Mr. Sentell, Mr. Graham of Talladega, Mr. Parker of 
Elmore, Mr. Williams of Elmore, Mr. Kirkland for Monday, Mr. 
Browne for Monday, Tuesday and Wednesday, Mr. Robinson for 
Monday, Tuesday and Wednesday, Mr. O’Rear for Saturday and 
Monday. 

MR. DENT—I rise to a question of privilege. 

THE PRESIDENT—The gentleman will state the question 
of privilege. 

MR. DENT—This morning when I introduced the resolution 
in reference to the ordinance introduced by the gentleman from 
Greene- 

THE PRESIDENT—Will the gentleman suspend one mom¬ 
ent. 

MR. BURNS—In deference to my colleague of Dallas, I give 
notice that I may make a motion to reconsider the vote by which 
the Convention refused to accept the amendment offered by me. 

THE PRESIDENT—The Chair will state, for the informa¬ 
tion of the gentleman from Dallas, that the question would be up¬ 
on the adoption of the Section. 



CONSTITUTIONAL CONVENTION, 1901 2605 

MR. BURNS—I voted aye for the adoption of the Section. 

MR. DENT—I was going to state that this morning when I 
offered the resolution and asked its reference to the Committee on 
Rules, it was referred to the Committee on Corporations by the 
Chair. I desire to read Rule 28, because I think the Chair, possibly 
without due consideration, made an error in its ruling. 

The rule says: “All resolutions before voted on shall be re¬ 
ferred to and reported from the Committee on Rules, except—” 

I don’t think my resolution comes within the exception, and I 
thought under the rules it ought to have gone to the Rules Com¬ 
mittee. 

THE PRESIDENT—The gentleman did not call the rule to 
the attention of the Chair at the time. 

MR. DENT—I could not find it at the time. 

THE PRESIDENT—If the gentleman had done so, the ruling 
pf the Chair would have been different. The Chair is of the opin¬ 
ion that if the gentleman had called the attention of the Chair to 
the rule the ruling would have been otherwise. The reasoning that 
prevailed with the Chair was that it affected the report of a Com¬ 
mittee, and it seemed to the Chair at that time it was proper to go 
to the Committee as expressive of the sense of the House that an 
early report should be made. 

MR. DENT—Well, all I desire is to get a report. It seems 
to me, by implication, a resolution requesting a committee to re¬ 
port should go to the same Committee. 

MR. MALONE—That would apply to resolutions before the 
appointment of committees and the Chair has so held heretofore. 

THE PRESIDENT—That has been the line of construction 
of this rule. The Chair remembers since the gentleman calls at¬ 
tention to the rule, it has been the practice to refer resolutions as 
well as ordinances to the respective committees having in charge 
the subject as to which they were submitted, but had in charge 
the subject as to which they were submitted, but had the gentle¬ 
man called the attention of the Chair to this rule, it might have 
induced the Chair to rule differently. 

Thereupon the Convention adjourned until Monday morning 
at 11 o’clock. 


CORRECTIONS 

In forty-seventh day’s proceedings the remarks of Mr. de- 
Graffenreid, explanatory of his amendment to Section 24 of the 
Article on Legislative Department should read as follows: 



2606 


OFFICIAL PROCEEDINGS 


MR. deGRAFFENREID — I do not care to discuss that 
amendment. I call the attention of the Committee, however, to 
the fact that it strikes from the Section under consideration the 
provision that two-thirds of the House may dispense with the 
reading of the bill at length when it is to he signed by the presid¬ 
ing officer of such House. Heretofore the law has recpiired the 
presiding officer of each House to sign all bills in the presence of 
the House, hut. as the law only required such signature after bills 
had been read by their titles merely, this Convention knows that 
frauds have been perpetrated upon the General Assembly. As we 
have already declared that the Journals of each House shall be 
presumed to be absolutely true, I think that everything that can 
be done by this Convention to prevent a fraud being perpetuated 
upon the General Assembly should be done. For that reason 1 
offer the amendment and move the previous question. 


In Colonel Sanford’s speech on Friday, the report makes him 
say or “suggesting alone.” It should have been or “suggesting 
a loan.” 

And he is made to say, “For instance, Sir Robert Peel’s budget 
when he introduced an income tax in 1842, and on repealing the 
corn laws in 1846, or in reducing the wine duties in 1860.” 

Colonel Sanford said in discussing the 29th Section of the re¬ 
port : “For instance, Sir Robert Peel’s budget introduced the in¬ 
come tax in 1842, and the repeal of the corn laws in 1845 and the 
budget of Mr. Gladstone by which he reduced the duties on wine in 
1860.” 


FIFTY-FIRST DAY 

MONTGOMERY. ALA.. 

Monday, July 22. 1901. 

The Convention met pursuant to adjournment, was called to 
order by the President, and opened with prayer by Rev. Dr. A. L. 
Andrews, as follows: 

We give Thee thanks, O Lord God. our Father, for Thy 
watchful care which Thou hast exercised over us since we last 
met together. We thank Thee that all the days of our lives have 
been attended with Thy kindness and mercy and love. We thank 
Thee that, with a Father’s care, Thou has ever been watchful of 
us, and Thou hast ever provided for our every want, and we praise 
Thee this morning that during all the days of our past Thy mercy 



2607 


CONSTITUTIONAL CONVENTION, 1901 

aiid 1 In love have been boundless and free; and we are before 
1 bee tms morning, () Lord, with our hearts filled with gratitude 
toi 1 hy fatherly care and for Thy tender mercies. We do sin- 
teielv repent of all of our sins. Forgive us, O Lord, that we have 
grieved 1 hy Holy Spirit, or that we have gone aside from Thy 
Holv \\ ord, and grant that we may each in our hearts this morn¬ 
ing repent of our sins, and feel the presence of God's Holy Spirit 
bearing witness with ours that we are His children. Impress upon 
us, O Lord, that there is no safe course in life, in any department 
of our great hie, save in the Lord, our Master, and that if we will 
trust Him and be guided by Him in all things, then we shall make 
ol life a success in whatever sphere we live and move; but that 
with God out of our lives, ignoring Him in all we do, and in all 
that we plan, our lives, in the end, can but result in failure. Help 
us. therefore, O Lord, to realize this dependence upon Thee, and 
this morning to consecrate ourselves anew, soul and body, to Thy 
service. We pray that Thou wilt especially bless this assembly, 
( ) Lord. We thank Thee that the health and strength of Thy ser¬ 
vants has been dead in Thy sight. No death, no disaster, has be¬ 
fallen and, and we pray Thee this morning as they assemble for 
another week’s duties, that Thou wilt be with them and direct them 
in all that they say, in all that they do, in all that they plan, and 
niav their work, O Father, redound to Thine everlasting glory, and 
to the good of our entire people. May the Lord bless their fami¬ 
lies at home, and keep them from harm of every kind and may 
our Father greatly bless our State; bless our Nation; bless those 
who are in authority over us, and may the Lord help us in all of 
the walks of life, to honor God, and to live worthy of our divine 
origin, and of the great calling wherewith we have been called, in 
Christ Jesus, our Lord. We pray, again, our Father for this Con¬ 
vention. May it be a day of great good ; may the results accom¬ 
plished be acceptable unto Thee, and to the people, and may the 
Lord be with His servants in all the work that lies before them, 
and when Thy work is completed, may they have the approval of 
a good conscience, the approval of a Heavenly Father, and hear 
the plaudits of a grateful people, saying “well done, good and 
faithful servants.” Hear us, O Lord, in these, our prayers; answer 
us in great mercy and when we are done serving Thee below, and 
sleep with our fathers, gather us to Thyself in heaven, and there 
we will praise Thee forever, through Christ our Redeemer. Amen. 

Upon the call of the roll 80 delegates responded to their names. 

Leaves of absence were granted as follows: 

To Mr. Cardon, called home on account of sickness; Mr. 
Burnett for today; to Mr. Jackson of Lee, for today; to Mr. Hen¬ 
derson of Pike for today. 

MR. BROOKS—I want to call attention to an error in the 
stenographic report in relation to the amendment I offered to the 



2608 


OFFICIAL PROCEEDINGS 


ordinance as amended which I submitted on the question of free 
passes. 

It contains eight lines which does not belong to the amend¬ 
ment at all. The stenographic reporter came to me Saturday 
night and said that the clerk’s office was locked up and he had 
gotten all the papers from him except that particular amendment, 
and asked for a copy of it, and I happened to have the original 
from which the copy was taken and on that amendment was eight 
lines which I had erased in his presence. By mistake of the printer, 
I suppose, that is incorporated as a part of the amendment, and I 
wish to have that corrected by the reporter. 

There is another matter in quoting from the statement of Mr. 
Smith, the president of the L. & N. R. R. Co., where I made one or 
two remarks, by way of parenthis, or by way of comment, and it 
is put down as a part of the quotations. I desire to have that also 
corrected. 

(Mr. Brook’s correction appear at the close of today’s report). 

The Committee on Journal reported that they had examined 
the Journal for the fiftieth day of the Convention, and found the 
same to be correct, and upon motion it was adopted. 

THE PRESIDENT — The Secretary will call the roll on 
Standing Committees. The roll of delegates will not be called for 
ordinances, resolutions, etc., the time of 10:30 has expired. 

MR. TAYLOR—I ask unanimous consent to have a petition 
read and have it referred. 

Unanimous consent was given, and the clerk read the petition 
as follows: 

To the Honorable President and Members of the Constitution 
Convention, now in session at Montgomery. Ala.: 

Gentlemen—We, the business men and citizens of the city of 
Uniontown, do most respectfully petition your honorable body to 
insert in the new Constitution a clause giving plenary powers to 
the Railroad Commission, and having them elected by the people 
and not appointed by the Governor, as the law now exists. 

Signed by the Mayor, Councilmen, and many others. 

Referred to Committee on Corporations. 

MR. REYNOLDS (Chilton)—I ask unanimous consent to 
introduce an ordinance. 

Unanimous consent was given and the Clerk read as follows: 

Ordinance No. 430, by Mr. Reynolds of Chilton. 



2609 


CONSTITUTIONAL CONVENTION, 1901 


Be it ordained by the people in Convention assembled. 

holdim C tbe^ei f n t !hail’l° 1 'I' n i, C , r ?' "S' ’"^orporated bank, the stock- 
holders therein shall be liable for the full amount of the stock held 

subscribed !or"said S stocr' y ' additi °" *° ,h ' arao,,nt orisinall) ' 


Referred to Committee on Banks and Banking. 

aMR. KYLE I ask unanimous consent to introduce a resolu- 


Unanimous consent was given, and the Clerk read the resolu¬ 
tion as follows: 

Resolution No. 263 by Mr. Kyle: 

Resolved that after the expiration of the fifty day limit fixed 
by the Legislature in calling this Convention, no member shall re* 
ceive per diem, except for such time as the Journal shows him to 
have been present, and that the Secretary of this Convention be 
instructed that this provision applies to all officers and employes 
as well as to members of this Convention. 

MR. KYLE—I ask that that resolution be referred to the Com¬ 
mittee on Rules, and ask a report not later than Wednesday. 

THE PRESIDENT—Does the gentleman move that the com¬ 
mittee lie instructed to report? 

MR. KYLE—Yes, sir. 

A vote being taken, the motion to instruct the committee to 
report on Wednesday was lost, and the resolution was referred to 
the Committee on Rules. 

MR. ROGERS (Lowndes)—I ask unanimous consent to in¬ 
troduce a resolution. 

Unanimous consent was given, and the resolution was read 
by the Secretary as follows: 

Resolution No. 264 by Mr. Rogers of Lowndes: 

Resolution to change Rule 36. 

Resolved. That ayes and noes shall only be ordered when the 
call therefor is sustained by forty delegates. 

Referred to Committee on Rules. 

MR. BULGER—I ask unanimous consent to introduce a reso¬ 
lution. 

There being no objection, the Secretary read the resolution as 
follows: 



2610 


OFFICIAL PROCEEDINGS 


Resolution No. 265 by Mr. Bulger: 

That whereas this Convention has been in session fifty <lavs. 

That whereas during said time the weather has been oppres¬ 
sively hot, and many confusions and complications have arisen, 
which were calculated to confuse and entangle, not only the Sec¬ 
retary in making his Journal, but the reading clerk in taking the 
vote and calculating the same. 

That whereas, during all this confusion and complications, 
both the Secretary and Reading Clerk, by their energy, industry 
and honesty of purpose, have kept not only the Journal, but the 
official call and count absolutely correct, 

That whereas, in every test of the Journal and in every veri¬ 
fication of the vote, perfect accuracy has been demonstrated. 

Therefore, be it resolved by the people of Alabama in Conven¬ 
tion assembled, that commendation and thanks are hereby ten¬ 
dered to both the Secretary and Reading Clerk of the Convention, 
for the faithful, energetic and accurate manner in which they have 
and are discharging the duties of their respective offices. 

Referred to the Committee on Rules. 

THE PRESIDENT—The special order for this morning is 
the report of the Committee on Legislative Department The Sec¬ 
retary will read Section 42. 

The Secretary read Section 42 as follows: 

Sec. 44. In all elections by the Legislature the members shall 
vote viva voce, and the votes shall be entered on the Journals. 

MR. OATES—I move its adoption. 

A vote being taken, the section was adopted. 

The Secretary read Section 43 as follows: 

Sec. 43. It shall be the duty of the Legislature to pass such 
laws as may be necessary and proper to decide differences by arbi¬ 
trators, to be appointed by the parties, who may choose that mode 
of adjustment. 

MR. OATES—It is the same as in the present Constitution. 
I move its adoption. 

A vote being taken, the section was adopted. 

The Secretary read Section 44, as follows: 

Sec. 44. It shall be the duty of the Legislature, at its first 
session after the ratification of this Constitution, and within every 
subsequent period of twelve years, to make provision by law for 



2611 


OXSTITl-TIOXA,. COXVKNTIOX. 190 , 

trevision, diire^tinn .v-,. i 

,hi> Slate, of , n'SiWSM “ <* 

cm section is Itv'insertlne^we'l 11311 ^ ma , de ln tliat from the pres¬ 
ent provision Intt as hi /vn Vl ', mS ‘ e u d ° f te " Te " is ">* l>"»- 
sesstons once i„ onr eari h , “"t h,u ‘ ", rovi,lc '' ** 'Wahtive 

..- . . - ,hat 

tl.itt“Vin"iraatfc,’~], d p r o"a^“J the «£ «»- 

Tr'J'T;:: m,< ! «>•«>• •'>-4^"&.«r c 

itclv ifter the r-iiifirV 16 f'\ S - ^ t0 * K> codified again immedi- 
a ■ alttr t,u r.itification of this Constitution? 

..... I : , ^ ^ ^ a * a ^ ■ •* •nakes a law or codification, in- 

' t,a, l <,? u " y™* apart, it will ho twelve. 

,. iq - MR ' ASHCRAFT-Ought it not to lie twelve years after the 


MK < )ATKS—I think that is left to the Legislature. I think 
it would he. instead of providing for it to he ten vears from that 
tnne. I hat left, however, with the Legislature. 


-\lk. ASHCRAhI It seems, Mr. President, that the provi- 
>i..n here is mandatory that it should he made immediately after 
the ratification and twelve years thereafter, not twelve years after 
IS'*'., hut twelve years after the meeting of the Legislature—after 
tilt 1 ratification of this Constitution. 


MR. OATKS -It floes not matter that a law he made in ad¬ 
vance this i- simply to regulate the period of time that should 
elapse between the different codifications of statutes. The first 
Legislature after the ratification of this Constitution passes a law 
and fixes a time. 


MR. COLL MAN (Greene) — May J ask the gentleman a 
question ? 

THK PRESIDENT— Will the gentleman permit an inter¬ 
ruption ? 

MR. OATES—Certainly. 

MR. COLEMAN—Suppose it read this way: It shall be the 
duty of the Legislature after a period of twelve years to make pro¬ 
vision by law for the revision, digesting and promulgation of the 
public statutes of this State. What would you say that meant? 

MR. OATES—I would say that would mean they could not 
make provisions until twelve years after the ratification of this 
Constitution. 

MR. COLEMAN—And then it must do it? 



2612 


OFFICIAL PROCEEDINGS 


MR. OATES—Yes, sir. 

MR. COLEMAN—If that construction is correct, it necessari¬ 
ly follows that at the first session after the ratification of this Con¬ 
stitution, the Legislature is compelled to do precisely what it says; 
it must do twelve years after, because it says “At its first session 
after the ratification of this Constitution,’’ the very thing which 
you say it should do twelve years afterwards. 

MR. OATES—The Legislature should provide for the codifi¬ 
cation twelve years apart. I have no objection to striking out. “At 
its first session after the ratification of this Constitution.” 

MR. COLEMAN—I think perhaps if it would say that it is 
the duty of the Legislature that it shall make provision for the 
revision, digesting and promulgation of the public statutes every 
twelve years, it would be all right. 

MR. OATES—I have no objection; that is what is aimed at; 
it is a copy of the present Constitution. 

THE PRESIDENT—The chair will ask the gentleman to re¬ 
duce his amendment to writing. 

MR. HARRISON—I would ask the chairman of the commit- 
tee if the amendment should read such codification be made in 1906 
and every twelve years thereafter would it meet his approval? 

MR. OATES—It would, but is unnecessarily long. The idea 
of the committee was to change the length of time to elapse be¬ 
tween codifications. I am willing for it to be changed so as to 
meet the views of the gentleman, preserving, of course, that one 
object. 

MR. O’NEAL—Is not this section in the exact language of 
the Constitution of 1875? 

MR. OATES—I think it is, with the-exception of striking out 
ten and inserting twelve. 

MR. O’NEAL—Did that section ever give any trouble? 

MR. OATES—Not at all; but when we changed the time of 
the Legislature to once in four years, we thought it best to length¬ 
en the time for the codification of the statutes. 

Amendment by Mr. Walker (Madison) : “It shall be the duty 
of the Legislature to make provision by law for the revision, di¬ 
gesting and promulgation of the public statutes of the State of a 
general nature, both civic and criminal, every twelve years.” 

MR. WATTS—I wish to offer a substitute. 

The Secretary read the substitute as follows: 



CONSTITUTIONAL CONVENTION, 1901 


2613 


“It shall he the duty of the Legislature in 1006, and within 
every sub>cqiu*nt period of twelve years, to make provision by law 
for the revision, digesting and promulgation of the public statutes 
of this State of a general nature both civil and criminal.” 

THK 1 *RLSI1 )KN'J'---The question will he upon the adoption 
of the substitute by amendment of the gentleman from the gentle¬ 
man trom Montgomery to tin* Madison. 

MR. ASHCRAFT - The objection to the substitute is that it 
requires tin* Legislature to make that provision in 1906, whereas 
there mav not be a session o{ the Legislature in that particular 
year. 

MR. WATTS-- There is the amendment offeree! by the gen¬ 
tleman from Madison will leave it elastic, so that within a period 
of twelve years from 18% they make the codification and adjust 
it to the particular year in which the Legislature may meet. 1 he 
last codification of the laws of this State was in 1896. 1 he Legis¬ 

lature will meet in LXX), which will be ten years from the last, 
and the Legislature will thereafter meet every four years. It thus 
provides for a codification in 1906, ten years from the last order of 
codification; thereafter it will he twelve years. 


'Pin; RRKS1 DKNT—The question is on the substitute of the 
gentleman irom Montgomery. 

MR SHNTKLL—I do not know what the purpose of the 
Committee wa<. hut it strikes me that it would be very necessary 
after the adoption of this Constitution to have a revision and a 
codification of the laws, for certainly this Constitution is going to 
change a good many laws, and if that is so, it don t matter whether 
ten years has elapsed since the last revision or not. It would be 
very roper thing, it seems to me, for the first legislature after 
the adoption <>f this Constitution, to do that work, and then every 
wclv • vea " il necessary, thereafter. This Const,tut,on ,s going 
to make a rood many changes in the laws of Alabama, new laws 
will he made and old ones changed to fit this Constitution, and it 
would h” very in convenient if we had to wait until 1906 before we 
i i Tf raf tliMf in the new code, so I think it would he 
got the benefit o . legislature after the ratification 

oMWs"'const!? ion'Should attend to*.his matter and then let us 
have the benefit of H in the new code, and every twelve years there- 

after. 

MR HYSTKR—I move the previous question upon the sec¬ 
tion and amendments. 

THF PRESIDENT—The gentleman from Morgan moves the 
previous question upon the pending amendment and substttttte. 
The question is, shall the main quest,on be now put? 



2614 


OFFICIAL PROCEEDINGS 


The main question was ordered. 

MR. OATES—I only wish to add to what I have said a cor¬ 
rection of the apprehension of some of the delegates. Now, my 
colleague from Montgomery speaks of the meeting of the legisla¬ 
ture in!906, and having a new code right away. That is imprac¬ 
ticable. It takes after the act is passed through the General As¬ 
sembly, a good active years work, and it is frequently extended to 
two years, and I know that under the last act of 1894-1895, just 
after I had the honor of being installed as Governor, the duty 
devolved upon me to name a codifier, and I named, I am glad to 
say, a very efficient one, who did his work thoroughly, but though 
he worked faithfully, and had efficient assistants, it was only ready 
to be passed upon, and accepted by the next legislature. If we 
wait until 1906, and the legislature then passes an act, as it would 
under this substitute, why it would be later and it would take a 
special session of the legislature—and with four years sessions, 
before the new code could go into operation and therefore I am 
inclined to think that the section had better remain as reported. 

MR. O'NEAL—Allow me to ask a question? 

THE PRESIDENT—Will the gentleman yield? 

MR. OATES—Certainly. 

MR. O’NEAL—Isn’t there really more necessity for codifica¬ 
tion after the ratification of the present Constitution than there 
was after the ratification of the Constitution of 1875? 

MR. OATES—I don’t think there is, but there may be neces¬ 
sity, it is true. 

MR. O’NEAL—Isn’t it a fact we are making more changes 
in this Constitution than that made in the Constitution of 1875? 

MR. OATES—Yes. Greater number. 

MR. O’NEAL—And if a necessity existed then, I see no reason 
why the necessity is not greater now than it was then. 

MR. OATES—In view of the fact that it will take probablv 
two years, or the better part of it, to complete the work after the 
act is passed, I think that delegates need not apprehend a two 
speedy production of the codification under this section as report¬ 
ed, and therefore I am inclined to think that it is better to report 
it, although I am not wedded to it, to any particular idea* except 
to carry out the main one, which is that once in every twelve years, 
there shall be a codification of the statutes. It was thought by 
your Committee that with that simple amendment, striking out 
ten, and substituting twelve, that the object would be accomplished. 

MR. O’NEAL—I move to lay both the amendment and sub¬ 
stitute on the table. 



CONSTITUTIONAL CONVENTION, 1901 


2015 


] 11 E PRESIDENT—The gentleman is not in order, the pre¬ 
vious question has been ordered. 

MR. HARRISON—I wish to ask the Chairman of the Com¬ 
mittee one question. 

THE PRESIDENT—Will the gentleman yield? 

MR. OATES—Certainly. 


MR. HARRISON—You provide in this, at its first session 
after the ratification of this Constitution, will there be a session 
of the legislature just twelve years from then? 

MR. OATES—There certainly would not be. if the Constitu¬ 
tion stands as so far adopted. 

MR. HARRISON—Then your proposition would not work. 

MR. OATES—It would work very well in this way. The 
legislature to be elected next year would make provision for the 
work to be done, and I presume as now. that the Governor would 
appoint a codifier, and he would go on with his work. It would 
take four years before it would be ratified, and promulgated, that 
would reach 1906, unless an extra session of the legislature was 
called, it would reach the very time that my colleague from Mont¬ 
gomery endeavors to effect, by postponing until 1906. 

THE PRESIDENT—The question will be upon the adoption 
of the substitute offered by the gentleman from Montgomery for 
the gentleman from Montgomery for the section reported by the 
Committee and the pending amendments. 

A vote being taken tbe substitute was lost, and the question 
then recurred upon the amendment, and a vote being taken, it also 
was lost, and the question then recurring upon the section as re¬ 
ported by the Committee, the same was adopted. 

The Secretary read Section 45 as follows: 

Sec. 45. The legislature shall pass such penal laws as they 
may deem expedient to suppress the evil practice of duelling. 

MR. MURPHREE—I desire to offer an amendment. 


The Secretary read the amendment as follows: 

“Add at the end of the section, the words ‘and carrying con¬ 
cealed pistols.’ 


MR MURPHREE—I do not propose to make a speech, but 
hope the amendment will be adopted. All the delegates to this 
Convention know that the carrying of concealed pistols is a great 
, v ii a nd gives to our courts more trouble than any other crime 

mown to onr land. 



2616 


OFFICIAL PROCEEDINGS 


MR. CARMICHAEL (Colbert)—I move to lay the amend¬ 
ment on the table. 

A vote being- taken, the amendment was tabled by a vote of 
52 ayes and 21 noes, on a division. 

The question then recurred on the Section as reported by the 
Committee, and a vote being taken the same was adopted. 

The Secretary read Section 46 as follows, 

Sec. 46. It shall be the duty of the Legislature to regulate by 
law the cases in which deduction shall be made from the salaries 
of public officers for neglect of duty in their official capacities, and 
the amount of such deduction. 

MR. OATES—I move the adoption of the Section. 

A vote being taken the Section was adopted. 

The Secretary read Section 47 as follows: 

Sec. 47. It shall be the duty of the Legislature to require the 
several counties of this State to make adequate provision for the 
maintenance of the poor indigent idiots and insane persons. 

MR. SAMFORD (Pike)—I have an amendment I desire to 
offer, by striking out all after the word “poor” in the second line 
of the Section. 

THE PRESIDENT—The question will be upon the adoption 
of the amendment offered by the gentleman from Pike. 

MR. SAMFORD—The Section as amended, or as I offer to 
amend the Section, would leave it just as it is in the old Constitu¬ 
tion, which would require the counties to make adequate provision 
for the poor of the county. As it is reported by the Committee, 
it has the effect to require the different counties in the State to 
make adequate provision for all the insane persons, whereas the 
burden is now borne by the State, and we have adequate provision, 
as I understand, for that at the insane hospital at Tuscaloosa. 

MR. FOSTER—May I ask the gentleman a question? 

THE PRESIDENT—Will the gentleman consent to the in¬ 
terruption? 

MR. SAMFORD—Yes sir. 

MR. FOSTER—I was going to ask the gentleman if it would 
not be well to amend his amendment by leaving it so that counties 
would be required to make provision for the care of idiots, thev are 
not received in the hospital. 

MR. SAMFORD—I have no objection. 



2617 


CONSTITUTIONAL CONVENTION, 1901 

MR. I OS 1ER With that addition, 1 think the amendment 
is good. 

MR. SAM LORD I will ask the gentleman to prepare an 
amendment to the amendment so it will have in the word “idiots.” 

1 HK I RESIDENT—The gentleman asks unanimous consent 
to add the word “idiots.” 

MR. SAM LORD—In order to get it in better shape, I will ask 
unanimous consent for the gentleman from Tuscaloosa to frame 
an amendment, while I am making my remarks that will meet 
that part of it. 

MR. ()A 1 ES The gentleman from Pike took the floor away 
from jne before I had an opportunity of explaining the action of 
the Committee, which I intended to do, and intended to ask for 
the elimination from this proposition of insane and indigent idiots. 
There is no law, as I understand it, for them to be sent to the 
Lunatic Asylum, whereas, there is a law for the insane persons to 
be sent there, and indigent idiots should be provided for in the 
counties as well as poor people. 

MR. SAM FORD—Indigent idiots? 

MR. OATKS-—-And indigent idiots, by striking out insane 
persons. 

MR. SAM FORD—I will ask unanimous consent to introduce 
this amendment: “It shall be the duty of the Legislature to require 
the several counties in this State to make adequate provision for 
the maintenance of the poor and indigent idiots? 

MR. DUKE—May I ask the gentleman a question? 

MR. SAM FORD—Yes. 

MR. DUKE—What is the necessity of putting in the Section 
“indigent idiots?” Docs not poor cover idiots as well as insane 
persons ? 

MR. SAM FORD—Poor does not cover it. I have known some 
people who were poor and not idiots. (Laughter.) 

MR. DUKE—Perhaps so, but I will ask the gentleman if an 
indigent idiot is not a poor person? 

MR. SAMFORD—Yes sir, I think so. 

MR. DUKE—Would not poor cover indigent idiots? 

MR. SAMFORD—The word poor is a relative term, as I un¬ 
derstand it, and it has not the same meaning or the same effect as 
the word indigent. 

MR. DUKE—Would it not cover the word indigent? 



2618 


OFFICIAL PROCEEDINGS 


MR. SAMFORD—I don’t think it would, and if it did, I don’t 
see the objection to having both in there. 

MR. DUKE Don’t you think poor would cover indigent? 

MR. SAMFORD—I think an indigent person is poor ordi* 
narily. 

MR. HARRISON—I will ask the gentleman from Pike if his 
amendment would include any person except poor and indigent 
persons? 

MR. SAMFORD—Yes, I think it would. 

THE PRESIDENT—The time of the gentleman from Pike 
has expired. 

MR. OATES—The question propounded bv the delegate from 
Chambers is easily answered. The poor are spoken of in this Sec- 
t '.° 1 n meaning the poor people of the county who have to be pro¬ 
vided for by the county. That is well understood in our laws, and 
practice now. There are idiots in the State who are not indigent 
or who have property in the hands of guardians, etc., and could not 
be considered indigent, but where an idiot is indigent, and has no 
property, that is the class intended to be provided for. 

MR. DUKE—-I will ask the gentleman if that word idiot would 
not be provided for under the Section that says the poor shall be 
provided for? ‘ 


MR. OATES—My answer to that is, that they have not been 
and, furthermore, I am informed that a good many idiots have 
been sent to the insane asylum where there is no law for it and 
they ought to be provided for by the county. 

MR. DUKE—Isn’t it your construction of the law that they 
ought to be provided for, where it says the poor, and that would 
under the law, include indigent idiots? 

MR. OATES -It is susceptible of such construction, but it has 
not received it, and it makes clear the intention of the Constitution 
when we make use of the words “Poor and indigent idiots.” 

MR. O’NEAL—I desire to offer a substitute 

F r ^“ :NT - The ^ -oSn.ee, the 


MR. HARRISON—If I understand the intent of the com¬ 
mittee, and that clause, wouldn’t it be better expressed so as to 

indigent ^ ^ maintenance of the P° or and idiots who are 

MR OATES—H means the same thing, putting in that word 
afterwards and I am pleased to say in this connection, in justice 



CONSTITUTIONAL CONVENTION, 1901 2619 

to the committee, the way it came to be reported as it is, “insane 
persons, was a knowledge upon the part of some of the delegates 
composing that committee that insane persons were sometimes in¬ 
carcerated in a jail, and during the delay, incident to obtaining the 
proper papers, sent them to the lunatic asylum for they intended 
to provide for, but it seems to me that if idiots of the indigent 
character, are provided for as well as the poor, that it sufficiently 
meets the evil now. It will largely relieve, as I am informed, the 
lunatic asylum of these people, who are sent there as idiots, and 
give more room for insame, requiring the counties to provide for 
indigent idiots. 

MR. ROSIER I was going to suggest that the suggestion 
1 made in line with the amendment of the gentleman from Pike, 
was that it provide for the poor, and also for idiots without regard 
to whether indigent or not. 

MR. OATES—I do not understand. 

MR. FOSTER—To provide for the poor, and also idiots with¬ 
out regard to whether they are indigent or not. 

MR. OATES—That would be objectionable. 

MR. FOSTER—The reason is that there might be a class of 
persons who are not indigent, but the care of an idiot member of a 
family is a great burden, and tends to produce pauperism among 
them. There is no provision as the gentleman stated, for the care 
of idiots in the Insane Hospitals. Now, there will be ample pro¬ 
vision as the gentleman stated, for the care of idiots in the Insane 
Hospital. Now, there will be ample provision for the insane, just 
as soon as the property at Mount Vernon is put in shape to receive 
patients, there will be no trouble, but under the law, the hospital 
cannot take idiots although there is always applications for them. 
The point I make is this, that the county ought to provide the 
place where the idiots can be taken care of. You take a family 
of ordinary circumstances, the care of an idiot member of a family 
is a very great burden to them, and just as insane are received in a 
hospital, there ought to be some provision for the idiots, and that 
was the reason I made the suggestion to the gentleman from Pike. 

MR. OATES—I do not know just how the amendment reads, 
but I think that this should be made to read “the poor and indigent 
idiots,” and striking out “and insane persons.” 

THE PRESIDENT—The time of the gentleman from Mont¬ 
gomery has expired. 

MR. O’NEAL (Lauderdale)—I offer a substitute for the 
amendment. 

The Clerk read the substitute as follows: 



2620 


OFFICIAL PK( )CF.F.ni\(;S 


“It shall be the duty of the Legislature torequire the several 
counties of the State to make adequate provision for the main¬ 
tenance of poor and indigent idiots. The Legislature shall also 
make adequate provision for the care and maintenance by the State 
of insane persons. 

MR. O’NEAL- M v reason tor doing that wa> the information 
that I had that in almost every jail in the State insane persons are 
confined on account of the fact that accommodations cannot be 
secured at the asylum. If that is true, the State ought to l>e re¬ 
quired to make ample provision for all insane persons. 

MR. OATES —It is during the proceeding." to secure an order 
to have them admitted into the asylum that they have been incar¬ 
cerated in the jails. The asylum, however, is the proper place fur 
them, and the laws provide for that now, but I am informed there 
are a good many idiots there who. a> >oon ih the Legislature could 
act under this provision would require the countie- to provide for 
the maintenance and the care of indigent idinu as well as of the 
poor. I suppose they would be translerred from the Insane Hos¬ 
pital to the counties. 


MR. O’NEAL—Will the gentleman call my attention to the 
section which provides for the maintenance of insane by the State? 

OA1 ES It is in every piece of legislation touching the 
Bryce Insane Hospital. 


MR. O NEAL—It is in the code, hut not in the Constitution. 

MR OATES You don't want to put it in the Constitution 
any further than that. I have no objection, however, if the Con¬ 
vention sees proper to put it in. 


MR. SMITH (Mobile)—As I understand it, there is no ample 
provision for taking- care of the insane at the Insane Asylum. As 
1 understand it when an application is made to the asylum, they 
are admitted whenever there is accommodation for them and they 
are admitted in a certain order and it very frequently occurs that 
there ,s no accommodation and that an insane patient is not re¬ 
ceived, and they must be either taken care of by the county or bv 
f for ' er - v considerable periods of time. I know as a 

fact that there are quite a number of insane patients today in the 
poorhouse of the county of Mobile, and have been there for a very 
considerable period. I do not remember anv period when there 
were not quite a number of insane patients in the poor house being 
cared for in our county, and in each ami every i„ h„L r ' ^ 
has been made for admittance of th " C, n f ., f T? ,t PI>l ' Ca '° n 
and they have failed of admittance ""° ,he asvk,,n 


It seems to me that there ought to be «nme • • 
the counties under some limitation to c^XT pe^fo 



roXSTITL’TIONAL CONVENTION, 1901 


2621 


Xow, there art* in addition to these in the poor house some few in- 
>ane pcrMUi.s, palpably so, anyone meeting them can see it, who 
■ u c not eoniined in the poor house or the asylum and I suppose the 
>amr conditions prevail elsewhere, it is certainly so in our county 
and it look> to me that there should be provision to remedy it. I 
Mippose sometimes they could be forced upon the asylum, but as a 
matter ni tact they are very frequently declined. 

Mr. J,omax here took the Chair. 

.MR. O'NEAL—The purpose of my substitute was to require 
the counties to take care of the poor, and of indigent idiots, but 
to require llu* State to make provision for the care and maintenance 
• n insane persons. It would then be the duty of the Legislature to 
provide that, pending admission into the asylum at Tuscaloosa, the 
State should provide for the care and maintenance of insane per- 
but the duty of the county, under this substitute, is confined 
to the maintenance* of the poor of the county and of indigent idiots. 
1 think the State itself ought to care for the insane. The burden 
ought not to he imposed upon counties to keep insane people in 
the county jail at the expense of the county. 

MR. OATES—I have not prepared any amendment, but your 
amendment goes to the extent of authorizing the Legislature or 
requiring them to make provision for the care of indigent idiots 
at the State Asylum. If it required an additional building and 
the Legislature would have the power to require the parents of 
such, or the guardians, wherever they owned any property, to pay 
fur it. some provision of that kind, I think a very humane one. 

M R. ( )'NEAL—My amendment followed the Section as offered 
by vou to require the county to provide for poor and indigent 
idiots. Is it your idea now that the State should care for idiots in 
each county that are indigent? 

MR. OATES—No, the county. 

MR. O’NEAL—'Well, that is the substitute that 1 offered, but 
1 go further than you by providing that the State shall take care of 
all insane people, whether before their admission to the asylum or 
after their admission. As the gentleman from Mobile has correctly 
stated, nearly every jail in this State has indigent insane people 
who are poor who are kept there because there is no room in the 
asvhim for them, and I think it the duty of the State to build addi¬ 
tional accommodations, if necessary. 

MR. OATES—The provision make by the last Legislature 
converting Mount Vernon into an insane hospital for the negro 
insane will give much more room, I am told, and greatly relieve 
the pressure upon the asylum, but what the Committee wanted to 
do was to relieve the State of the temporary care of the insane, it 
that could be provided for by requiring the counties to do it. 



20 22 


OFFICIAL PROCEEDINGS 


MR. O'NEAL—i think the State ought to do it even tempor¬ 
arily. 

MR. FOSTER—1 want to ask this question, if indigent idiots 
would not come within the class of poor without stating indigent? 

MR. O’NEAL—J don’t think they would, because every county 
lias a poor house for the poor and needy, but it doesn’t follow, as 
the gentleman from Pike stated, that every poor man is an idiot. 

MR. POSTER—Hut it follows in most cases that every idiot 
is poor and indigent. 

MR. ASHCRAFT—The amendment offered by the gentleman 
from Lauderdale to the Section as reported by the Committee, 
would require the State of Alabama to care for insane persons 
evidently at the expense of the State, no matter what estate those 
insane persons might possess. The Section as reported by the 
Committee provides that it shall be the duty of the Legislature to 
require the several counties of this State to make adequate provi¬ 
sion for the maintenance of poor and insane persons. It does not 
say “temporarily it does not say “for one yearit does not say 
for “poor insane persons,’ it says the county shall be required to 
make adequate provision for the maintenance of insane persons, 
and I am quite sure we don’t want to impose any such burden as 
that upon the counties. Now, the amendment offered bv the gen¬ 
tleman from Lauderdale provides that the State shall make ade¬ 
quate provision for the maintenance of insane persons. It does not 
say that the State shall require insane persons to have property to 
contribute to the expenses of their maintenance at all. and 1 am 
quite sure this Convention does not want to adopt either of these 
provisions, and J think the amendment offered originally by the 
gentleman from Pike, striking out the words “indigent idiots and 
insane persons’’ is the thing we ought to adopt. It leaves it clear, 
and the Legislature will still have authority to provide for insane 
persons under such rules and regulations as it in.iv from time to 
time think respond to the demands that humanity made upon the 
State of Alabama. 

MR. COLLMAN (Greene)—1 prefer the amendment offered 
by the gentleman from Pike to any amendment that has been sug¬ 
gested. It seems to me, however, that we should keep the Legis¬ 
lature in full authority over this question so far as ; t is limited by 
the Constitution. If any gentleman will consult his Code lving be¬ 
fore him, Sections 2549 and 2550 he will see that there have been 
regular provisions made not only for the insane, but for idiots also, 
and the order in which they shall be received. Now, it seems to 
me. if you insert a provision here imposing the duty upon the coun¬ 
ty, you will relieve the authorities at Tuscaloosa, Mr. Vernon, or 
elsewhere, from a great deal of the duty imposed upon them by the 
law already, and which they ought to bear. When wc leave the 



CONSTITUTIONAL CONVENTION, 1901 


2623 


organic law and enter the domain of legislation, we should be very 
careful. I am sure if you will consult the sections to which I have 
referred, you will see that the whole question has been covered, and 
the only reasons why the insane persons are not received is because 
of want of provision or appropriation already made. At this time, 
with the additional provision which the State would enjoy at Mt. 
Vernon, there is no necessity, and it would be a manifest injustice, 
as pointed out by the gentleman who last addressed you, to impose 
this burden upon the counties, when we are making large appropria¬ 
tions every year for the protection of this class of people by the 
asylum at Tuscaloosa and Mt. Vernon. I have been requested to 
read Section 2550, 

Section 2550: In order of admission into the hospital, when its 
means of accommodation are crowded, preference shall be given 
the recent curable cases over chronic or incurable. Among those 
to whom preference shall be last given, shall be idiots, or any who 
have been imbecile and weak-minded from childhood; to those who 
are subject to epileptic convulsions: and to those who temporary 
insanity is produced by the injurious use of alcoholic drinks or 
opiates. 

I, therefore, move to lay the amendment offered by the gentle¬ 
man from Lauderdale on the table. 

MR. FOSTER—Will the gentleman withdraw his motion for 
a moment? 

MR. COLEMAN—Yes, sir. 

MR. FOSTER-—It is true, as the gentleman from Greene has 
said, that that section does make provision for the acceptance into 
the insane hospitals of idiots, but practically it is of no value. There 
are at present about 1,600 patients in the Alabama Hospital. The 
superintendent of the hospital estimates that there are over 3,000 
persons in the State of Alabama who ought to be cared for either 
as insane or idiots. It is true that it is a mere matter of appropria¬ 
tion—a mere matter of providing means for taking these people in, 
but the means now provided do not admit of taking all those people 
who ought to be under the care of experts in that line of business 
into the Alabama hospital as the law now is. 

MR. SOLLIE—Is it not a fact that the Legislature now has 
ample authority to deal with the proposition and to make all neces¬ 
sary provisions? 

MR. FOSTER—I think that is unquestionable. 

MR. SOLLIE—Have they been so derelict in their duty as to 
make it necessary for us to go aside in the Constitution to direct 
their actions in the matter? 



? 624 


OFFICIAL PROCEEDINGS 


MR. FOSTER—My view of these mandatory provisions as to 
legislation is this: That if the framers of the Constitution think 
it is so important, they ought to make it incumbent upon the Leg¬ 
islature—make it their duty to provide for this; then it is for the 
Legislature, and, so far as I am concerned I do not care whether 
that provision is here or not. I think the Legislature will always 
take care of these people to the best of their ability, but when we 
attempted to put the provision in there in its present shape, I was 
opposed to it, because I did not want to see a mad house established 
in each county in this State, without the means of caring for them. 
That would create in a few years the greatest scandal the State of 
Alabama has ever heard. I believe if the true history of the poor 
houses of this State was made public today, that the facts would 
shock the State of Alabama from one end to the other. I do not 
believe in counties caring for any class except the poor, and I think 
there ought to be a State officer—not a county officer, but a State 
officer—whose duty it would be to go around and inspect these 
poor houses. My objection to that section was that it would be an 
attempt to establish mad houses in each county, but I am willing to 
see the whole thing stricken out and leave it with the Legislature. 

MR. OATES—The statute provides for idiots as well as in¬ 
sane. I had not examined it and I was under the impression it did 
not and I am very willing to see the addition proposed by the com¬ 
mittee stricken out. 

A vote being taken upon the substitute offered by the gentle¬ 
man from Lauderdale, the same was lost. 

MR. LONG ( Walker)—I have a substitute. 

The substitute was read as follows: “Amend Section 47 by 
striking out all the words after the word 'poor’ in the second line/’ 

MR. LONG (Walker)—That leaves the section just exactly 
as it was in the old Constitution, under Section 49, and I think that 
i^ far enough to go. I think it is a good compromise to leave it 
like it is in the old Constituton. 

MR. OATES—That is acceptable. 

Upon a vote being taken, the substitute of the gentleman from 
Walker was adopted, and by a further vote the amendment as 
amended by the substitute was adopted. A vote being taken, the 
section as amended was thereupon adopted. 

Section 48 was read as follows: 

Sec. 48. The Legislature shall not have power to authorize 
any municipal corporations to pass any laws inconsisent with the 
general laws of this State. 

MR. OATES—I move its adoption. 



COXSTITl’TIONAL CON VKNTK )\\ 1901 


2025 


MR. WAITS ] would like to ask the chairman of the com¬ 
mittee a question. Does this language as used here prevent the 
Legislature from granting municipalities the right to pass laws 
for the local government of such municipalities? 

MR. OATHS—It is just as it has been in the Constitution of 
1875—all the time. 

MR. WATTS—I understand that. 

MR. OATES—It certainly would not, then. It has never been 
so construed. 

MR. WATTS—But we have passed a lot of provisions in ref¬ 
erence to local legislation, and I call attention to that and ask 
whether or not it will interfere with those provisions. 

MR. OATES—I do not think there would be any conflict. I 
move the adoption of the section. 

And upon a vote being taken the section was adopted. 

Section 49 was read as follows : 

Sec. 49. In the event of annexation of any foreign territory to 
this State the Legislature shall enact laws extending to the inhabi¬ 
tants of the acquired territory, all the rights and privileges which 
may be required by the terms of the acquisition, anything in this 
Constitution to the contrary notwithstanding. 

MR. JONES (Wilcox)—I have an amendment. 

The amendment was read as follows: 

Amend Section 48 by striking out in lines three and four 
“anything in this Constitution to the contrary notwithstanding” 
and add “should the State purchase such foreign territory, the 
legislature, with the approval of the Governor, shall be authorized 
to expend any money in the treasury not otherwise appropriated, 
and if necessary to provide also for the issuance of State bonds 
to pay for the purchase of said foreign territory, anything in this 
Constitution to the contrary notwithstanding.” 

MR. JONES (Wilcox)—The last legislature passed an act in 
reference to the annexation of West Florida to the State of Ala¬ 
bama. 

I examined the Constitution of 1875, and I saw that there was 
no provision made in that Constitution for the payment for any 
territory that might be annexed to the State of Alabama. I found 
the identical provision that appears in the report of the Committee 
in all the Constitutions of this State, 1819, '61, '56, ’68 and 1873, but 
in none of those Constitutions is there anything said about how 
such territory shall be paid for if annexed. 



2626 


OFFICIAL PROCEEDINGS 


Now I offered an ordinance about ten or twelve days ago in 
reference to this matter, and the Committee on Legislation did not 
succeed in getting a quorum, and this amendment is offered at the 
instance of the members of the Committee who were present and 
at the suggestion of the Chairman, so that if we find it possible 
which is very remote to annex territory to the State of Alabama 
during the existence of the Constitution which we are now framing, 
that the legislature will have the right to provide for the payment 
of the foreign territory that may be annexed. It is for that purpose 
that I offer the amendment. 

MR. OATES—There is a remote probability I will <av of 
the annexation of West Florida to the State of Alabama. I do not 
think that there is any very great probability of it at an early 
date, but in the event that it should be done, this provision may 
be quite necessary and if such annexation is not accomplished the 
provision will hurt nothing. It is harmless, and therefore it seems 
to me that the amendment ought to be adopted. It is quite true 
that the ordinance was referred to the Committee on Legislative 
Department, but not succeeding in getting a quorum the delegate 
from Wilcox was informed of that fact and advised he had better 
present it as an amendment in the shape in which it is now pre¬ 
sented. Unless some gentleman desires to discuss it further I 
move the previous question on the adoption of the section and 
amendment. 

MR. SMITH (Mobile)—I would like to ask the gentleman— 

THE PRESIDENT PRO TEM—Does the gentleman yield? 

MR. OATES—Yes, sir. 

MR. SMITH (Mobile)—What is your construction of the 
provision as to rights and privileges? Is it not intended to extend 
to citizens brought in by annexation, privileges and rights different 
from those which other citizens of Alabama enjoy? 

MR. OATES I think not. I think it is intended to extend 
to them any rights they may have under the law as it existed when 
citizens of another State, but all of that would be adjustable bv 
the legislature. It is intended to authorize the protection of the 
inhabitants of such acquired territory in all the rights and privi¬ 
leges which they have in respect to contracts and otherwise, while 
in another State and under the laws of that State. 

MR. SMITH (Mobile)—It seems to me that under the Federal 
Constitution, as well as under the provisions of our own Constitu¬ 
tion all of the contract and property rights of those who may be¬ 
come citizens of Alabama by annexation of territory, are fullv and 
entirely preserved. I do not know what authority the legislature 
would have to annex territory to the State of Alabama and stipu- 



CONSTITUTIONAL CONVENTION, 1901 


2627 


late for any special right or special privileges to the citizens brought 
in by annexation. 

MR, COLEMAN (Greene)—I would like to ask the gentle¬ 
man whether in his opinion, in the event Alabama acquires terri¬ 
tory, the Constitution of the State follows the flag? 

MR. SMITH (Mobile)—I am not as familiar with the flag 
of the State, and do not know where the flag of the State may go, 
but I believe the constitutional provisions of the State of Alabama 
would apply to anybody who became a citizen of the State of Ala¬ 
bama, whether by annexation or otherwise. 

Now, Mr. President, as I was saying, this provision, it seems 
to me, authorizes the legislature to acquire territory and stipulate 
in that acquisition for rights and privileges that are forbidden to 
the citizens of Alabama by this Constitution. It expressly pro¬ 
vides that the legislature “shall extend to the inhabitants of the 
acquired territory all the rights and privileges which may be re¬ 
quired by the terms of the acquisition, anything in this Constitu¬ 
tion to the contrary notwithstanding.’’ Now, I do not know what 
the purpose of that is, but it is certainly broad enough to justify 
the legislature in stipulating in the articles of acquisition that per¬ 
sons may have superior rights and privileges, and different from 
other citizens of this State. That seems to me to be the effect of 
it, and unless there is some other explanation of it that can be 
made, and maintained I shall be opposed to it. I am opposed to 
putting any class of citizenship upon a different basis and to be 
governed bv a different law and different Constitution from the 
balance of the citizens of the State. 

MR. OATES—I should think that is intended to maintain 
rights and privileges which are in the nature of vested rights. Of 
course if they become citizens of Alabama, they would have to 
conform to the laws of Alabama, and they would not have any 
extra rights or privileges extended to them. It would be only such 
as they had up to the time of the acquisition just like any other 
law that is declared not to be retroactive. It is for the preserva¬ 
tion of the rights and privileges they had up to the time of the ac¬ 
quisition. I do not see anything in conflict, and this section is in 
the present Constitution, and was adopted no doubt in view of 
the same thing that is now spoken of, the probable acquisition of 
West Florida. It was deemed by that Convention to be sufficiently 
broad, and not to present the difficulty referred to, and I cannot see 
that it does now. The inquiry of the delegate from Mobile is not 
positively asserted, but he is rather speculative in his argument. 
He says nothing against the amendment offered by the delegate 
from Wilcox, and I move the previous question on the section and 
amendment. 



2628 


OFFICIAL PROCEEDINGS 


I will withdraw that for a moment, for the gentleman from 
Barbour. 


MR. DENT—It seems to me there is something in the criti¬ 
cism made by the gentleman from Mobile, and I propose to strike 
out the latter part of the Section the following words: “Anything 
in this Constitution to the contrary notwithstanding.’’ and add the 
following in their place: “Not inconsistent with this Constitution.” 

THE PRESIDENT-—The gentleman from Barbour will please 
send up the amendment. 


Hie Secrctat \ read the amendment to the amendment l>v Mr 
Dent: "Strike out all the words in this Section after the word 
"acquisition,” and add the following: ‘Not inconsistent with the 
Constitution.’ ” 


MR. SOLLIK (Dale)—Mr. President, l think, too, there is a 
great deal in the suggestion of the gentleman from Mobile, and that 
in the language to which he objects there is the possibility of a con¬ 
dition arising which might lead to considerable difficulty. 

MR. OA I ES -\\ ill the gentleman allow an interruption? 

THE PRESIDENT—Does the gentleman consent to be in¬ 
terrupted? 

MR. SOLLIE—Yes sir. 

MR ‘ OATES—The amendment offered by the gentleman from 
Vv ilcox strikes out these words of the Section as reported, and adds 
them at the end, and I presume that the amendment offered here 
will strike them out at the end and insert the words suggested at 
the end of the amendment. K 

THE PRESIDENT At the end of the amendment of the 
gentleman from Wilcox? 

MR. OATES—Yes sir. 

MR. SOLLIE—And in either case, Mr. President, it still occurs 
to me that now is a good time to cure the defect and avoid any 
possible difficulty which might arise under the Section as it stands 
in the present Constitution, and is proposed in the one we are 
making. While it is true that any arrangement which might be 
made between Alabama and any other State in ceding to us terri- 
tory by which some of the citizens would enjoy any civil rights not 
enjoyed by all the other citizens of the state would be unconstitu¬ 
tional and void under the Fourteenth Amendment to the Federal 
Constitution, which specifically protects all the privileges and im¬ 
munities of the citizens and secures to them the equal benefits of 
the laws, we are acting here in several matters upon the assump¬ 
tion that the political rights of citizens are not thus secured and 



CONSTITUTIONAL CONVENTION, 1901 


2o J9 


protected by the Federal Constitution, and it is iny opinion that 
they are not. And, if not, it is possible, and might come about 
that in the great eagerness to acquire new territory in some cases 
the Legislature would enter into arrangement in its acquisition by 
which the equal political rights of all the people would be over¬ 
looked and special privileges given. I admit that it is not probable 
that such would be the case; but it might happen. Political rights 
might be claimed and an attempt made to preserve them to persons 
coming in with new territory, as a part of the arrangement by 
which the territory would be ceded, which all the other people 
would not have, and which would be very objectionable and hurt¬ 
ful to us as a people. 1 admit that it is not very probable; but if 
there is no probability whatever of it, if there is no danger of it, 
and it cannot arise, or if it could not be lawfully done, and there 
can be no political privileges enjoyed by a portion of our people 
which all the others do not enjoy, and if such an attempt in prac¬ 
tice or such a provision in our Constitution would be unconstitu¬ 
tional under the Federal Constitution then we are remitted to the 
other proposition that there is no need or use for the provision 
leaving the suggestion open to invite action. Being a thing which 
cannot be done it simply cumbers our Constitution and should be 
stricken from it. Let’s strike it from it, and not leave to our Leg¬ 
islature an invitation to attempt to do something which under the 
Federal Constitution they cannot do, and not seem to make wav 
for the conferring on any part of the people any privileges or im¬ 
munities of anv kind which all the others do not enjoy. 

It occurs to me that the amendment offered by the gentleman 
from Barbour is timely and good, and will take from the Constitu¬ 
tion as it now stands a provision which is very useless, because it 
cannot be executed, or, if it can be executed, might become harmful 
and hurtful. I, therefore, support the amendment offered bv the 
gentleman from Barbour. 

MR. OATES—I now move the previous question on the sec¬ 
tion and the amendment. 

The main question was ordered. 

MR. SANFORD (Montgomery)—I call for the reading of 
the amendment. 

The Secretary read the amendment as follows: “Strike out 
the amendment submitted by the delegate from Wilcox the word 
'anything in this Constitution to the contrary notwithstanding’ and 
add the following: 'Not inconsistent with this Constitution/” 

Upon a vote being taken the amendment was adopted. 

The question recurring upon the adoption of the amendment 
offered by the gentleman from Wilcox, as amended, the same was 
adopted. 



2630 


OFFICIA f. P K( )C K H DI N(S 


The question recurred upon the adoption of the section as 
amended. 

MR. SANDERS (Limestone)—! ask that the section he read 
as amended. 

The Secretary read Section as amended as follows: ”ln 
the event of annexation of any foreign territory to this State, the 
legislature shall enact laws extending to the inhabitants of the 
acquired, territory, all the rights and privileges which may he re¬ 
quired by the terms of acquisition not inconsistent with this Con¬ 
stitution. Should the State purchase such foreign territory, the 
legislature, with the approval of the Coventor, shall he authorized 
to expend any money in the treasury not otherwise appropriated 
and if necessary, to provide also for the issuance of State bonds to 
pay for the purchase of such foreign territory, anything in this 
Constitution to the contrary notwithstanding." 

A vote being taken, the section as amended was adopted. 

Section 50 was read as follows: 

Sec. 50. The legislature shall not tax the property, real or 
personal, of the State, counties or other municipal corporations, or 
cemeteries; nor lots in incorporated cities or towns, or within one 
mde of any city or town, to the extent of one acre, nor lots one 
mile or more distant from such cities or towns to the extent of five 
acres, with the buildings thereon, when the same are used exclu¬ 
sively for religious worship, for public schools or for purposes 
purely charitable. 


MR. WATTS—I offer an amendment to Section 50. "Strike 
out all after ‘cemeteries’ in the second line." 

THE I RRSIDRN 1 — 1 he question is upon the amendment 
ottered by the gentleman from Montgomery to Section 50. 

MR. WATTS The object of the amendment is because in the 
taxation report, there is a provision the same as contained in the 
old Constitution: frovtded this section >hall not apply to insti- 

r,W?''' ,PnSB <levote.I exclusively „.|i K i, )lls . educational 
charitable purposes, and the provision 1 propose to strike out 

move , wA" ,C , < r' StCn ‘, " ith ''" n,ler «*«. an,l therefore I 

cT« Ll l ,I he 'J 0r<l ‘ ollt 01 thi< vvctiiui. It seems to he ill- 
consistent with our former action. 

hist °:^ LS af llS >ect ' on ,s reported hv your Committee 
The exemotions 1" Constitution with one exception, 

grounds fair as nr at*' lXa 'T' ar ° 0t ctrta,n institutions, fair 
ftricken out of rM ? an(I I^Dcrty used for private schools, 
the present Cons^ LT :t, ° n T an(l otherwise reported as it stands in 

aturm " A* ?' T- Strickcn °«t so that the legis- 

may deal with them and subject them to taxation as it sees 



CONSTITUTIONAL CONVENTION, 1901 


2631 


proper. I think, sir. this section as reported, is right and the 
amendment offered by iny colleague, to strike all of the latter part, 
because he thinks that it has been provided for in some other sec¬ 
tion, I do not thing it necessary. If there should be a conflict 
between them, that is reconcilable hereafter, we have a Committee 
to pass on such matters and I hope, therefore, that the amend¬ 
ment will be voted down. I move the previous question on the 
section and the amendment. 

The main question was ordered and upon a vote being taken, 
the amendment offered by the gentleman from Montgomery was 
lost, and the section as reported by the Committee was adopted. 

The Secretary read Section 51 as follows: 

Sec. 51. The legislature shall, by law, prescribe such rules 
and regulations as may be necessary to ascertain the value of per¬ 
sonal and real property, exempted from sale under legal process 
bv this Constitution, and to secure the same to the claimant there¬ 
of as selected. 

MR. OATES—That is the same as in the present Constitution, 
and I move its adoption. 

Upon a vote being taken, the section was adopted. 

The Secretary read Section 52 as follows: 

Sec. 52. The State may construct and own works of internal 
improvement, having for their object the conveyance or transpor¬ 
tation of passengers and freight, but shall not sell or mortgage such 
improvement, nor lend its money or credit in aid of such ; nor shall 
the State be interested in any private or corporate enterprise, or 
lend money or its credit to any individual, association or corpora¬ 
tion. 

MR. HANDLEY (Randolph)—I have a substitute for this 
Section 52. “The State of Alabama shall not engage in internal 
improvements nor be interested in any private or corporate en¬ 
terprise, nor lend its money or credit to any individual, association 
or corporation. 

THE PRESIDENT—The question is upon the adoption of 
the substitute offered by the gentleman from Randolph. 

MR. HANDLEY—Mr. President and gentleman of the Con¬ 
vention. I regard this section the most dangerous section that I 
have met during this Convention. What do we propose to do in 
this section? We propose to go into internal improvements, and 
that means, sir, to build street railways, to construct narrowgauge 
railways, to construct, erect and build standard gauge railways, 
steamboats, clean out rivers, navigate rivers, build canals, and a 
whole lot of internal improvements that I think are unwise. I have 



2632 


OFFICIAL PR< ICKKDIW.S 


been thinking over the matter, and I do not see how this Consti¬ 
tution can afford to spend the people’s monev by going into in¬ 
ternal improvements—a subject that has been'laid upon the table 
tor fifty years. Now. Mr. President, we have a grand State and 
to have a section in this new Constitution to build public works 
and to go into internal improvements, will be a great mistake in 
n, y opinion. We do not need—the State of Alabama does not 
need, to go into any business. We have been in business a few 
times, during her existence, and we always lost money. Now, Mr. 
President, suppose that we go into this business and spend the 
taxes collected from the people, to build these various enterprises 
m Alabama, and to have it in their Constitution that will perhaps 
stand for twenty-tive or fifty years, or perhaps a hundred years. 
\\ hy. Sir. It would be a very dangerous enterprise for the State of 
Alabama to go into. I trust this Convention will not undertake 
this job. It is the most objectionable section that f have met 
during our session here. What we need is to collect enough monev 
from the people to detray the expenses of this government, and 1 
want to do that, and if necessary have a hundred thousand dollars 
in the treasury in case of emergency, but to collect anv more 
money from the people ot Alabama is unnecessary and undemo- 
cratic. I trust this Convention will consider this matter Now 
sir. we have a grand State that is divided into three subdivisions' 
you might say—the lumber region, the agricultural region and the 
mineral region. Hut a few years ago lumber was down to five or 
six dollars a thousand; today it is worth from nine to twelve dollars 
a thousand. 1 he State is prosperous, the agricultural region is 
prosperous, and the mineral region is prosperous, but at no time is 
it necessary for this Constitution to have a section in it for the 
Mate ot Alabama to go into internal improvements. Now that 
means a great deal. 

- py™al improvements, pu,)lK ' works. To belong to the State 
ot Alabama. Why some wise men. some great men, some enter¬ 
prising citizens might say that we will turn the Tennessee River 
through Alabama, that we will Imild a canal that will bring it bv 
Birmingham and by Montgomery and put it into our rivers here 
and carry it on to Mobile, and I will tell vou, .Mr. President it 
would be a grand enterprise, and would have a great many friends 
in Birmingham. Montgomery and Mobile and all along the route 
and you might destroy the credit of the State bv going into some’ 
of these grand enterprises, which has been done. Alabama loaned 
her credit a few years ago and she came out minus by main- mil¬ 
lions of dollars, and she opened the State treasure wav back yonder 
and went into the banking business and came out minus again, and 
I tell you, it is bad policy, it is bad judgment for this Convention 
to insert a clause in the Constitution of the State of Alabama that 
the Mate officers may go into internal improvements. 



CONSTITUTIONAL CONVENTION. 1901 


2633 


The question, sir, was settled in Henry Clay’s day and time. 
Now, sir, I have been somewhat enterprising myself, and I have 
struck a great many enterprises that did not pay worth a cent, and 
1 tell you it is dangerous for the State of Alabama to undertake a 
tiling of this sort, and I trust that my amendment, where it says 
the State of Alabama shall not go into any of these enterprises, 
will be adopted, and that she shall not loan her credit, nor open 
the vaults of her treasury to anybody. She has enough business 
to attend to in looking after her own interests, and hence it is 
dangerous—it is wild cat—to go into business of this character by 
this State. Why, it a very dangerous thing, in my opinion, and 
hence I trust this section will not be adopted. I have never been 
able to find out who the author was. (Laughter). 

MR. SANFORD (Montgomery)—I am the author of it. 

MR. HANDLEY—And you want to go into internal im¬ 
provements? 

MR. SANFORD—T do. 

MR. HANDLEY—Why, that is a question passed years ago, 
and it is a thing that Alabama will never do, in my opinion, estab¬ 
lish public works and improvements, by the State; spend the peo¬ 
ple’s money to build canals and to build railroads, and to build 
furnaces. Why, 1 would not be surprised if you should go on into 
the mining business, and into the furnace business, and into the 
cotton mill business, and bore for oil. (Great laughter). 

It is a dangerous precedent. Let individuals do all this sort 
of work. Keep your State clean and let her have a credit that is 
unimpeachable bv anybody. That is my doctrine, and 1 think it 
is the doctrine of the Democratic party, that we leave out internal 
improvements by this State. It was set aside fifty years ago, in a 
national election for President, and I trust that my distinguished 
friend will not urge this matter, and if it is urged, I trust the Con¬ 
vention will vote it down. 

MR. SANFORD—When I introduced that section. I had in 
my memory the great works and internal improvements in other 
States, that have been of great benefit to the people. My long time 
and much esteemed friend from Randolph was entirely mistaken 
in his history. Alabama never entered into a scheme of internal 
improvements since it was a State of this Union. It did indorse 
bonds under the radical rule and administration, which did plunge 
it into large indebtedness—thirty millions of dollars, nearly—but 
no where in the United States has any party e\er said that a State 
could not go make internal improvements. My friend says it was 
settled in the days of Henry Clay. He is entirely mistaken. The 
question did arise in the general parties of America, but it was 
internal improvements by the general government, to which I am 



2634 


OFFICIAL PROCEEDINGS 


most strenuously opposed, and to which the people of America 
have been opposed, except in making navigable streams more navi¬ 
gable by removing obstructions. It is opposed to canals 
being constructed by the general government, but 1 never 
heard of the people of a State being against the construction 
of canals by itself. Who does not remember the famous 
canal in New York, built by one of the Clintons, to develop the 
State, so as to make it the empire—common wealth of the Union, 
and decrease the taxes of the people by the income derived from 
it? No man except my friend from Randolph ever thought internal 
improvements would mean a steamboat or an ox cart. No man 
ever thought it meant mines, because Alabama owns no mines. It 
owns nothing except this square upon which this Capitol is built, 
and the asylum and one or two elymosynary establishments. It 
owns no mines, no marble quarries, nor granite ledges nor coal 
measures, nor iron fields nor furnaces. It would be absolutely 
absurd for such a construction of the proposition to be made. But 
that it should have the right of constructing roads, within its own 
dominion, is another question. As I have just mentioned, the Erie 
Canal of New York State—that glorified that State, and placed it 
in advance of all in this confederation. Look at Georgia with 138 
miles of Western and Atlantic Road running from Atlanta to Chat¬ 
tanooga, that for years and years contributed to the support of the 
State of Georgia by its income—one of the most prosperous States 
in all of this Southern country- 

THE PRESIDENT—Will the gentleman please suspend for 
a moment? 

MR. SANFORD—Certainly. 

THE PRESIDENT—The gentleman from Montgomery will 
be entitled to the floor on the afternoon session. He has consumed 
one-half of his time. 

Leaves of absence were granted as follows: Mr. Kirk of Col¬ 
bert; Mr. Searcy for today; Mr. Stoddard for today. 

The Convention adjourned until 3:30 p. m. 


AFTERNOON, SESSION. 

The Convention was called to order by the President, and the 
roll being called showed the presence of eighty-eight delegates. 

MR. HANDLEY—I rise for the purpose of offering a substi¬ 
tute for my substitute, which is the wording of the old Constitution, 
and I have left out a few words in my other substitute. 

The Secretary read the substitute as follows: 



CONSTITUTIONAL CONVENTION, 1901 2635 

I he State shall not engage in works of internal improvement 
nor lend money nor its credit in aid of such, nor shall the State be 
interested in any private or corporate enterprise or lend money to 
any individual, association or corporation.” 

THh, PRESIDENT—The gentleman asks unanimous consent 
to amend his substitute. Is there objection? The Chair hears 
one. It is so ordered. 

MR. HARRISON—Before proceeding with the regular order, 
1 desire unanimous consent of the Convention for the Committee 
on Corporations to sit during the afternoon session. 

Consent was given. 

MR. BROOKS—I wish to move to reconsider the vote by 
which Section 47 was passed. Let it go over until tomorrow 
morning. 

I HE PRESIDENT—The special order for this afternoon is 
consideration of the report of the Legislative Department. 

MR. SAN LORD (Montgomery)—Mr. President, when I an¬ 
nounced that I had prepared an ordinance containing the substance 
oi this and more besides, my estimable friend from Randolph was 
very much shocked. He knew that I was, if I had any distinction, 
a thorough-going States rights man, an Arab of the Arabs on this 
subject, and he therefore could not understand how I should favor 
internal improvements. The error was in my friend’s confusion of 
the two systems. One is by the general government and the other 
is by the States. I am utterly opposed to internal improvements 
by the Federal, and I am just as earnestly in favor of it by the 
State Government. If my friend will take the pains to read Mon¬ 
roe’s veto message upon the Cumberland Road in 1822, he will see 
the two systems of internal improvement thoroughly discussed; 
he will see why the general government has no power to make 
improvements in the State, and why the State has that power. To 
go forward, Mr. President, w ith this argument, I w r as about saying 
that the benefit to the people of Alabama w ill be almost incalcu¬ 
lable. I had called attention to the great benefits of the Erie Canal 
to the people of New' York, and suggested the number of towns 
that had come out of the woods and stood by its banks, full ) of 
enterprise, intelligence and thrift and prosperity. Now, Mr. Presi¬ 
dent, the same remarks would apply to the State of Georgia. Many 
years ago Georgia built a road known as the Western and Atlantic 
Road, a distance of 138 miles from Atlanta towards Chattanooga 
in Tennessee. For many years it paid a very large part of the ex¬ 
penses of the State Government of Georgia, and even in 1899 its 
income w r as $582,732.33, clear of all expenses, that is quite one- 
fourth of the income which Alabama derived from its taxes. Such 
a road as that would greatly relieve the people of Alabama from 



2636 


(.)FI‘IC[Af, PKOC'l’KDIXr.S 


burden.'. Has she not persons convicted of crime.'' W e have todav 
1,763 convicts. Why could they not he so employed? If the threat 
corporations of Alabama can hire them at an average of $ ( ) per 
month, feed, clothe, shelter, guard them and give medical at¬ 
tendance and still make it profitable, could not Alabama do the 
same thing when it has no hire to pay, which would amount to 
one hundred and eighty odd thousand dollar.': and if that is so, whv 
not employ them in works of internal improvement. The treat¬ 
ment of them would be more humane, brum time to time reports 
of vour examiners show the utmost cruelly in some prison camps 
where they are hired, that might he compared to Siberia. Mr 
President. were this system to he adopted, the camps in Alabama 
would he as clean as an icicle as compared to those prison camps, 
and as innocent and harmless a> a dove cot'. To adopt this police 
is a matter of humanity, and see the advantage of it. For in¬ 
stance. you employ them for the construction of a railroad running 
north from this point to Chattanooga on the eastern bank of the 
Coosa River, which runs through a country of great fertility, of 
marvelous variety of productions, both vegetable and mineral. It 
is estimated that 100,0C0,U(J0 feet of longleaf pine could be supplied 
tor 100 years, annually, and not exhaust the forests. It would 
open mines of coal, iron, limestone, marble and all the other 
products that contribute to the wealth of a State. You would find 
little towns growing up along its line as it rushed from here north¬ 
ward just as \ ou have seen toatn halls lodge bv the side of rapid 
flowing streams. They would he full of'intelligence and thrift, 
and of every kind of useful employment. What objection can he 
made to it? Let me revert to the fact that Alabama has no property 
except this square, where the State House rests, and some elee¬ 
mosynary institutions. It holds property as a trustee, and what 
would prevent it then, pav ing so much royaltv to the Cniversitv of 
Alabama, for its coal mines, and after it paid 5 or 10 cents or what¬ 
ever the Legislature might have determined upon, for digging coal 
to put the residue, after the royaltv was paid, into the Treasury of 
the State, and thereby relieve the people of Alabama of fixes 


THK PRESIDENT The time of the gentleman has expired. 

MR. SANFORD I thought I had half an hour from the be¬ 
ginning. excepting on an amendment. 1 am „,»t speaking on the 
amendment, but on the article itself. I offered no amendment. 

, P ^SIDENT—There is an amendment pending, and 

the gentleman is supposed to be speaking to the amendment offered 
by the gentleman from Randolph. 

MR. SANFORD [ was speaking upon the original I don’t 

Zl ho: 1 " 6 " r n ^ beCaU - C U,at is 111 old Constitution. 
I was only showing why this section should he adopted. 



CONSTITUTIONAL CONVENTION. 1901 


2637 


MR. O’NEAL—1 was going to suggest as the Chairman yield¬ 
ed his time to the gentleman, would he not he entitled to thirty 
minutes ? 

THE PRESIDENT—The Chairman himself would not be en¬ 
titled to hut ten minutes under discussion of the amendment. 

MR. BROOKS—1 move that the gentleman he allowed ten 
minutes more. 

THE PRESIDENT-The question will he upon the suspen¬ 
sion of the rules. 

MR. SANFORD—1 only want to say that we could build a 
canal from Birmingham to the Warrior River and from Gadsden 
to the Tennessee. 

THE PRESIDENT—Possibly the gentleman from Macon 
might yield a minute to the gentleman from Montgomery. 

MR. COBB—I will yield five minutes to the gentleman. 

MR. SANFORD—I am very much obliged to you. it accords 
with your chivalrous character. I was going on to say you could 
build the canal from Birmingham to the Warrior River and the 
tolls upon the canal as the fare upon the railroad would abundantly 
pay all expenses and contribute to the welfare and wealth of the 
State. You could dig this canal from Gadsden across to the Ten¬ 
nessee River, a project that has been agitating Alabama for more 
than forty years. It would bring water into the Coosa that would 
hear all of its freight over the many shoals and obstructions in 
that river, bring down iron, timber, marble to Montgomery and 
on to Mobile and thus enable our people to compete still more 
successfully with the iron foundries in Pittsburg. Ohio, Illinois 
and other portions of the United States. It would be a great bless¬ 
ing to our people, it would give employment to them, it would 
increase the value of taxable property along the country through 
which these rivers flow, it would help in every particular, and 
enable the schools to be more prosperous by the greater income 
of the State, 'fake it all in all the wisest thing for Alabama today, 
imitating New \ ork many years ago, in its great achievement of 
the Erie Canal, which was opened in 1823; and imitating Georgia, 
which built its railway many years ago. and thus became one of 
the leading States is to adopt this section proposed by the Com¬ 
mittee of able men. 

MR. COBB—I suppose the gentlemen present have made up 
their minds, and I therefore move the previous question on the 
original proposition and amendments. 

MR. OATES—I hope the gentleman will not do that because 
the Committee has not been heard from. 



2638 


OFFICIAL PROCEEDINGS 


THE PRESIDENT PRO TEM—The question is on the pre¬ 
vious question, the original section of the Committee and amend¬ 
ment. Shall the main question be now put? 

A vote being taken, the previous question was ordered. 

MR. OATES—I yield my time to the delegate from Sumter, 
a member of the Committee, to speak for the Committee. 

MR. ROGERS (Sumter)—Mr. President and gentlemen of the 
Convention, I ask your indulgence this evening, because I feel that 
I am speaking in favor of a proposition to many who are preju¬ 
diced against its adoption. It will be sneered at and laughed at as 
being mothered in the Ocala platform by men who have been closer 
to it and therefore have more reason to be familiar with the Ocala 
platform than the speaker, but Mr. President, I want to say to 
you that the truth is always true and falsehood always false, no 
matter whether it be spoken by the President of the United States 
or by the sorriest tramp within the confines of its territory. The 
words spoken upon the Sea of Gennessaret by the Man of Calvary, 
would have been no less true had they been spoken by the lowliest 
fisherman who ever cast a net into the sea of Galilee. We are here 
to propose to you what is supposed to be an innovation. The doc¬ 
trine of internal improvement has been sneered at by the gentleman 
from Roanoke, who. I am told, has the reputation of having made 
some money. The man who has made money is entitled to that 
consideration, which the possession of money gives him, but against 
that opinion T want to hold aloft the colossal figure in the United 
States Senate from Alabama, the Hon. John T. Morgan, who is as 
poor today as when he entered the service of his State forty years 
ago, and whose opinion on matters of that sort are entitled to as 
much consideration as that of Croesus. What would we do with 
the question of internal improvement if we denied this to the United 
States Government? What would become of appropriations for 
the opening of harbors and ports in the United States? That is 
simply one form of internal improvement. Another question. Mr. 
President, what would we do about the Nicaragua Canal, if we 
denied the right of internal improvement?—a right so ably fought 
for on the floor of the Senate of the United States that the Govern¬ 
ment has the right to own and build without the consent of any 
nation on earth. 

MR. VAUGHN—Where are you going to get the money to 
do all that business? 

MR. ROGERS—I will answer that remark. A few days ago 
there was an ordinance introduced looking to the convict system 
of Alabama. We will take the convicts of the State of Alabama 
and will prepare roads throughout the State; we will dig canals 
throughout the State, that will stand for future prosperity of our 



CONSTITUTIONAL CONVENTION, 1901 


2639 


people, and in that way. and only that way, can you use the Con¬ 
victs of the State of Alabama and not come in conflict with free 
labor. It would be one of the greatest movements ever made in 
this State. I want to call attention to an evil that is growing in 
this country, and which if not stopped is going to result in one of 
the greatest oppressions that has ever been placed upon any people. 
The greatest consolidation of transportation companies is going to 
result in le>s than thirty years from now, in the ownership through¬ 
out the United States by not more than four men, of all the trans¬ 
portation companies in the United States. This power placed in 
the hands of one President, consolidating this immense influence— 
thi> President appointing sub-Presidents and managers throughout 
the United States, and the thousands and thousands of employes 


employed, will dominate legislation. The power of the President 
of the United States in comparison with this vast patronage will 
sink into utter significance. The way of that syndicate is being 
pointed out by J. Pierpont Morgan in the purchase of shipping lines 
across the sea and the buying or breaking down of railroad com¬ 
petitors. Mr. President, later on in this Convention, there will be 
introduced here ineffectual, faulty and vicious legislation against 
trusts, but this ordinance, which will be rejected, is the one way in 
which we can confront trusts. No matter what sort of law you 
may place upon the statute books, unless you give power to the 
State to enforce the statute, it is absolutely worthless. You may 
place all the law you wish on the statute book to suppress crime, 
and with no officer there to enforce the law, it falls to the ground. 
We may never have to use this power, but it will stand in the 


Constitution of Alabama as a menace to those corporations who 
may attempt to coerce the people of the State of Alabama. They 
will know that the people of the State of Alabama can engage in 
the building of railroads to thwart their efforts. This is not dan¬ 
gerous legislation, except to greedy corporations. The gentleman 
from Roanoke says it is dangerous, but so is a mule, but we don’t 
dispense with a mule because he is dangerous. We do not propose 
to put men in charge of the affairs of the State of Alabama whom 
we cannot trust. We do not propose to put fools in charge of Ala¬ 
bama and we expect some times that the wise men of Alabama 
will be in control of its affairs. I have heard no argument urged 
against this measure, except that it is undemocratic and except 
that it is dangerous. Let us take up the undemocratic part of it. 
The word “democrat” or “democracy” is a relative term. It gets 
its life and definition everv four years in this country. When we 
meet in national convention that which we put in our platform is 
democracy. I have heard men talking about Thomas Jefferson, 
and I wondered if his homes did not turn over and rattle m his 
grave. Whv, Mr. President, the power of the Democratic party 
and the duty’ of the party is to rise up in its might and majesty 
and meet issues as they come, and not be circumscribed by what 



2640 


OFFICIAL PROCEEDINGS 


some man said one hundred or two hundred years ago. If there is 
a fundamental principle in the Democratic party it is that people 
should rule, and it is the only fundamental principle at the founda¬ 
tion of any party in a fair government; the right of the majority 
to rule. I knew that we were going to be met on this floor by the 
argument that it is undemocratic and dangerous. Now, why dan¬ 
gerous? Because the gentleman from Roanoke says so? He says 
this State has been in business and lost money. I want to say that 
individuals at that time in business in Alabama lost money. There 
was at that time a financial crisis that rocked this country from 
California to New York and prostrated every bank in the State of 
Alabama except one bank in Mobile. 

Suppose a man said, I was in business once and lost my money 
and therefore, I am not going back into business any more. What 
sort of a man would you consider him to be? Mr. President and 
gentlemen, we must profit by the mistakes we have made, not that 
we should confine ourselves to legitimate rules of business. I can¬ 
not see why men should object to this provision unless they are 
afraid to trust the people of the State of Alabama. 

MR. VAUGHAN—Suppose the State should build a railroad 
and it proved a bad investment, under the section “but shall not 
sell or mortgage such improvement’’—then what becomes of the 
investment? 

MR. ROGERS—The State of Alabama would own the invest¬ 
ment. Did you ever buy a mule that was a losing investment? 
That provision is put in there for the purpose of preventing the 
State from selling it or mortgaging it to outside parties, lending 
its aid to outside individuals. The argument, because a man might 
go into a business and find it a losing one might apply to any 
business on earth. How can you tell whether you will win or lose 
until you go fnto it. 

MR. DUKE—I would ask the gentleman if this does not pre¬ 
vent the selling of the improvement? 

MR. ROGERS—As a matter of course yes, sir. 

MR. DUKE—If the State owned a road under this provision, 
it could not sell it. 

MR. ROGERS—It could not sell it, no sir. 

MR. DUKE—Even if it had an opportunity to sell it, so as to 
get out of a bad investment it could not sell it. 

MR. ROGERS—It can lease it, but not sell it. The reason 
is whenever there is a necessity to build a line of this sort it is for 
the purpose of meeting competition, for the purpose of keeping 
down freight rates, and even if the State should run it at a loss it 


CONSTITUTIONAL CONVENTION, 1901 


2041 


would be a great benefit to the State of Alabama in keeping down 
freight charge> and unjust discriminations. 

MR. K'l LE I will ask you if it is not a fact that the Western 
and Atlantic Railroad is owned by the State of Georgia and has 
never been a failure but has made money from the dav that it was 
built ? 

MR. ROGERS—Such is my information. 

MR. KYLE—And is it not a fact that the Cincinnati Southern 
was built by a city of 250,000 people at an expense of $20,000,000 
and it has done more to develop that city than anything in the 
world. 

MR. ROGERS—I am much obliged to the gentleman for 
calling my attention to this further argument in favor of internal 
improvements. We grant to the counties of the State the right to 
make internal improvement. They tell me the right of internal 
improvement is undemocratic—tell me that it is foolish to grant 
to the greatest political division the right which is given to the 
smallest subdvisions of it. Tell me why the father should not have 
the right to do the thing that he permits to his daughter or to his 
son, and then 1 will tell you why the State of Alabama should not 
go into a business which is permitted to the counties and to the 
cities of the State of Alabama. We should not prevent the people 
of the State defending themselves against the unjust aggression of 
corporate greed in the only possible manner in which it is prac¬ 
ticable; combining the whole resources of the State in a common 
defense We should not put foolish laws upon our statute books 
against monopolies and throw away the one weapon which we 
have to enforce justice at the hands of the transportation com¬ 
panies. 

Mr. Pettus took the chair. 

MR. EYSTER -I call for the ayes and noes. 

THE PRESIDENT PRO TEM.—The ayes and noes are de¬ 
manded on the substitute. Is the call sustained. 

The call was sustained. 

MR. WILSON (Washington)--! was absent from the hall 
when the substitute was offered. 1 would like to hear it read. 

MR. SPEARS—I move to lay the substitute on the table. 

THE PRESIDENT PRO TEM—The previous question has 
been ordered and a motion to table is out of order. 

The substitute was read and upon call of the roll the vote re¬ 
sulted as follows; 



2642 


OFFICIAL PROCEEDINGS 


Almon, 

Altman, 

Banks, 

Barefield, 

Bethune, 

Blackwell, 

Brooks, 

Carmichael, of Colbert, 
Chapman, 

Cobb, 

Cofer, 

Coleman, of Greene, 
Craig, 

Davis, of DeKalb, 

1 )avis, of Etowah, 

deGraffenreid, 

Duke, 

Fley, 

Kyster, 

Kspy, 

Foster, 

Glover, 

(Graham, of Montgomery, 
Handley, 

Total—70. 


AYES. 

Harrison, 

Heflin, of Chambers, 
Heflin, of Randolph, 
Hodges, 

Hood, 

Howell, 

Hovvze, 

Dige, 

J enkins, 

Jones, of Wilcox, 
Ledbetter, 

Locklin, 

Lowe, of Jefferson, 
McMillan, of Baldwin, 
McMillan (Wilcox), 
Malone, 

Martin, 

Maxwell, 

Merrill, 

Moody, 

Murphree, 

Norman, 

Norwood, 

O’Neal (Lauderdale), 


Opp, 

Palmer, 

Parker (Cullman), 
Pitts, 

Rogers (Lowndes), 
Samford, 

Sanders, 

Smith (Mobile), 
Smith, Mac. A., 
Smith, Morgan M., 
Sol lie, 

Sorrell, 

Spragins, 

Stewart, 

Tayloe, 

Vaughan, 

Waddell, 

Walker, 

Watts, 

Weatherly, 

Williams (Barbour), 
Williams (Marengo), 


Ashcraft, 

Beddow, 

Dent, 

Foshee, 

Freeman, 

Grant, 

Knight, 

Total—19. 


NOES. 

Kyle, 

Macdonald, 

Mulkey, 

Oates, 

Pettus, 

Reynolds (Chilton), 
Rogers (Sumter), 


Sanford, 

Sloan, 

Spears, 

White, 

Wilson (Wash’gton), 


ABSENT OR NOT VOTING. 


Messrs. President, 
Bartlett, 

Beavers, 

Boone, 

Browne, 

Bulger, 

Burnett, 

Burns, 

Byars, 

Cardon, 


Carmichael, of Coffee, 
Carnathon, 

Case, 

Coleman, of Walker, 
Cornwall, 
Cunningham, 
Ferguson, 

Fitts, 

Fletcher, 

Gilmore, 


Graham, of Talladega, 
Grayson, 

Greer, of Calhoun, 
Greer, of Perry, 

Haley, 

Henderson, 

Hinson, 

Jackson, 

Jones, of Bibb, 

Jones, of Hale, 



CONSTITUTIONAL CONVENTION, 1901 


2643 


Jones, of Montgomery, 
King, 

Kirk, 

Kirkland. 

Keigh, 

Lomax, 

1 .ong, of Butler, 

Long, of Walker, 
Lowe, of Lawrence, 
Miller (Marengo), 
Miller (Wilcox), 

M orrisettc, 


NeSinith, 

O’Neill, of Jefferson, 
O’Rear, 

] J arker (Llmore), 
Pearce, 

Phillips, 

Lilians, 

Porter, 

Proctor, 

Reese, 

Renfro, 

Reynolds, of Henry, 


Robinson, 

Searcy, 

Selheimer, 

Sentell, 

Stoddard, 

Thompson, 

Weakley, 

W hiteside. 

Willet. 

Williams ( Llmore), 
Wilson (Clarke), 
Winn, 


So the substitute was adopted. The question then recurred 
upon the adoption of Section 52 as amended, and the same was 
adopted. 

The Secretary read Section 53 as follows: 


Sec. 53. The Legislature shall have no power to authorize 
any county, city, town or other subdivision of this State to lend its 
credit, or to grant public money or thing of value, in aid of or to 
any individual, association, or corporation whatsoever; or to be¬ 
come a stockholder in any such corporation, association or com¬ 
pany by issuing bonds or otherwise. 

MR. OATKS—I move its adoption. It is the same as in the 
present Constitution. 

A vote being taken. Section 53 was adopted. 


The Secretary read Section 54 as follows: 


Sec. 54. There can be no law of this State impairing the oh- 
ligations of contracts by destroying or impairing the remedy for 
their enforcement; and the legislature shall have no power to re¬ 
vive any right or remedy which may have become barred by lapse 
of time, or by any statute of this State. 

MR. OATKS—There is no change in that section except in 
the number. It is as in the present Constitution, and I move its 
adoption. 

A vote being taken, the section was adopted. 


The Secretary read Section 55 as follows: 


Sec 55 The legislature shall not enact any law for one or 
more counties not applicable to all the counties in the State, in¬ 
creasing the uniform charge for the registration of deeds and con¬ 
veyances or regulating costs and charges of courts, or fees, com¬ 
missions or allowances of public officers. 



2644 


OFFICIAL PROCEEDINGS 


M R . OATES—Mr. President, I think that the sense of that 
section which is new would be greatly improved by amending it 
in the first line, and I make that motion. After the word “law” 
to strike out the words “for one or more counties” and in the second 
line after the word “State” strike out the words increasing the uni¬ 
form charge for this registration of deeds.” 

THE PRESIDENT PRO TEM—The gentleman from Mont¬ 
gomery is requested to reduce the amendment to writing. 

MR. WEATHERLY Is not that section covered by a pro¬ 
vision in the ordinance reported bv the Committee on Local I ecds 
lation. awc^is- 

it is OATES- j don't know. I am not sure, I scarcely think 

MR. W_EATHERLY I am under the impression that it is 
and it it is, I don t see the necessity for this provision. 

the s^cdon°? ATES "“ That ' S Strikinff * ° ut by * uess - Have you 

mili^with W it EATHERLY - 1 haVC n0t ’ 1 th ° U * ht yOU — ^ 

MR. OATES I am not familiar enough to say, we have 
adopted so many I can t say. 

MR. WALKER (Madison)—The 26th section on Article of 
Local Legislation provides against any special or local act creat- 
ing increasing or decreasing the fees, percentage, or allowance of 
public officers. 

MR. WEATHERLY-That is the one I refer to. 

MR. WATTS—The article adopted by the Committee on 
Local Legislation does not prescribe as much. 

MR. OATES—No, sir. 

MR. WATTS—Therefore, if this is adopted the Committee on 
Harmony can reconcile the two? 

ly pid R ogeth YES ~ YeS ’ 1 think S °' 1 think the tWO may be P ro ‘ )ei - 

MR. OA1 ES I offer this amendment in writing: 

,, A .? iend S ^ ct , 1 ° n 55 by strikin g out in line one, after the word 
J w *J he W ° 1 i ds < ,. for one or more counties” and in lines two and 

o“ a7dtonveS’ the Ch “* ^ the re * istratio " 

THE PRESIDENT pro TEM-The question is upon the 
amendment of the gentleman from Montgomery. 



CONSTITUTIONAL CONVENTION, 1901 


2645 


MR. CHAPMAN—Do you mean to strike out or at the 
end of conveyances on the third line? 

MR. OATES—Yes. 

PRESIDENT PRO TEM—The gentleman asks unanimous 
consent to strike out the word “or.” 

Unanimous consent was given. 

MR. JENKINS—In the last line the word “allowances of 
public officers.” Here is the proposition I want to submit to the 
gentleman from Montgomery. Suppose the legislature should de¬ 
sire to enact a law saying that the cost of feeding the prisoners in 
the larger counties, Jefferson, Montgomery and Mobile, should be 
less than in the smaller counties, could they pass a law with this 
provision in the Constitution, in other words is feeding prisoners 
covered by the term allowance? 

MR. OATES—I think in the general law they can regulate 
that and make provision, in counties where it is more expensive, 
but not by a special local act. 

MR. JENKINS—They can do it by general law? 

MR. OATES—Yes, no doubt about that. I ask that a vote 
be taken on the adoption of the amendment. 

MR. MALONE—I want to ask my same old question: Would 
this be construed as prohibiting a local law on the whiskey ques¬ 
tion? 

MR. OATES—Oh, no, I do not think it has anything to do 
with that at all. 

A vote being taken, the amendment was adopted. 

A further vote being taken the original Section as amended 
was adopted. 

The Secretary read Section 56 as follows: 

Sec. 56. The Legislature shall not authorize payment to any 
person of the salary of a deceased officer beyond the date of his 

death. 

MR. OATES—That is entirely new but plain, and entirely 
proper. I move its adoption. 

A vote being taken, the Section was adopted. 

The Secretary read Section 57 as follows: 

Sec. 57. The Legislature shall not retire any officer on pay¬ 
or part pay, or make any grant to such retiring officer. 



2646 


OFFICIAL PROCEEDINGS 


MR. OATES—It prevents any civil pension list. I move its 
adoption. 

A vote being taken, the Section was adopted. 

The Secretary read Section 58 as follows: 

Sec. 58. Lands belonging to or under the control of the State, 
shall never be donated directly or indirectly, to private corpora¬ 
tions or individuals, or railroad companies; nor shall such lands be 
sold to corporations or associations for a less price than that for 
which it is subject to sale to individuals; provided, that nothing 
contained in this Section shall prevent the Legislature from grant¬ 
ing a right of way, not exceeding 100 feet in width, as a mere 
easement, to railroads across State lands, and the Legislature shall 
never dispose of the land covered by said rights of wav except 
subject to said easement. 

Mr. Lowe (Jefferson) offered the following amendment: “Bv 
mserting on the sixth line thereof, immediately after the word 
railroad’ the words ‘telegraph or telephone lines.’ ” 

THE PRESIDENT—The question is on the adoption of the 
amendment. 


MR. OATES—So far as I am concerned I am willing to ac 
cept that amendment. s 


A vote being taken, the amendment was adopted. 

MR. SAM FORD (Pike)—I have an amendment: “Amend 
by making one hundred feet’ read ‘one hundred and fifty feet.’ ” 

THE PRESIDENT PRO TEM—The question is on the 
adoption ot the amendment proposed by the gentleman from Pike. 


SAMI,QRD — 1 desire simply to state to the Convention 
that there are cases where in the construction of a railroad on 
account of the height of an embankment or the depth of a cut. that 
lllore , an 100 ^ eet * s absolutely required for the cut or the fill. 
I have known that to be the case in several instances. If vou put 
this clause limiting this to 100 feet, a grant of the State land could 
never be made in excess of 100 feet, an easement on it, and I make 
it 150 feet because it is sometimes absolutely necessary that a 
railroad company in constructing its line should have more than 


MR. CHAPMAN—Can you limit that 150 feet to the special 
case in your amendment? 

MR. SAMFORD (Pike)—I don’t see how you well could be¬ 
cause it says not in excess, and they have got a mere easement 
m the property and the property that is not used remains the 
property of the State anyway. 



CONSTITUTIONAL CONVENTION, 1901 


2647 


MR. CHAPMAN—Wouldn’t the railroads always get 150 
feet then? 

MR. SAM FORD—Not necessarily so. 

MR. CHAPMAN—Not necessarily, hut practically wouldn’t 
the railroads always get 150 feet? 

MR. SAM FORD—No; as a matter of fact a railroad company 
does not want more than is actually necessary for the operation of 
its road, because it requires time and money to keep up the right 
of way of a road as well as the roadbed, and the law charges them 
with the duty of keeping up the right of way as well as the roadbed 
-not in the same condition, perhaps, but it costs something to keep 
up the right of way. There are instances in my knowledge where 
serious complications have arisen with regard to obtaining the 
right of way on account of the fact that they required actually more 
than 100 feet in order to dig their cut or to build their embank¬ 
ment. 1 will ask unanimous consent to make it 125 instead of 150 
feet. 


There being no objection the leave was granted. 

MR. O’NEAL (Lauderdale)—You have amended this section 
1>v adding the words “telegraph or telephone lines.” Would it not 
be proper to grant a right-of-way to telegraph and telephone lines 
as well as to railroads? 

MR. OATES—It is not necessary when it is allowed already 
in the next. 

MR. O’NEAL—Why not grant it to telephone and telegraph 
lines, too? My contention is that I did not see any justice in ex¬ 
cluding one and not the other. 

The amendment was again read. 

MR. O’NEAL—I misunderstood the amendment offered by 
the gentleman from Jefferson. 

MR. OATES— That is all right; I have no objection of the 
section as amended. 

MR. SOLLIE—I offer this amendment: 


The amendment was read as follows: “To amend the section 
as amended by inserting in the fifth line after the word ‘way’ the 
words ‘on payment of just compensation therefor. 


MR SOLLIE_I simply offer that amendment on this propo¬ 

sition that I can see no reason why the State of Alabama should 
donate to railroad companies or other public enterprises a r.ght-of- 
wav over its lands more than individuals should. I admit the 
amendment is in the nature of a negative of the original section 



2648 


OFFICIAL PROCEEDINGS 


rather than an amendment of it. If it is the sense of the Conven¬ 
tion that we should give rights-of-way over lines belonging to the 
State, then I have no objection. I have no serious insistence to 
make in regard to the amendment. I simply offer it as my idea 
that we should not give rights-of-way over our lands any more 
than individuals should. 

MR. FOSTER—I want to ask the gentleman if it would be 
a donation if paid for? 

MR. SOLLIE—I think not. And in the hurry of drawing the 
amendment, without having carefully read the section, I have 
failed to catch the connection and the thought has occurred to me 
just as I undertook to send up the amendment that it is in the 
nature of an objection to the section, as drawn rather than in the 
nature of a proper amendment to it, and after thinking of it, I 
would ask unanimous consent to withdraw the amendment. 

Consent was given to withdraw and the amendment with¬ 
drawn. 

MR. SOLLIE—Then I have this to say: So far as I am in¬ 
dividually concerned, I object to giving railroads rights-of-way. 
That simply amounts to the proposition that I object to the sec¬ 
tion. 


Upon a vote being taken, the amendment was adopted. 

MR. OATH S—I see an error next to the last word. It reads, 
“except subject to said easement” strike out “said” and insert 
“such.” 

Upon unanimous consent being given, the alteration as sug¬ 
gested by Mr. Oates was made. 

MR. OATES—I move the adoption of the section as amended. 

Upon a vote being taken, the section as amended was adopted. 

Section 59 was read as follows: 

Sec. 59. No obligation or liability of any person, asssociation 
or corporation held or owned by this State, or by any county, or 
other municipality thereof, shall ever be remitted, released or post¬ 
poned or in any way diminished, by the Legislature; nor shall such 
liability or obligation be extinguished except by pavment thereof 
into the proper treasury; nor shall such liability or'obligation be 
exchanged or transferred except upon payment of its face value; 
provided, that this section shall not prevent the Legislature from 
providing by general law for the compromise of doubtful claims. 

MR. OATES—I move the adoption of that section. 

Upon a vote being taken, the section was adopted. 



CONSTITUTIONAL CONVENTION, 1901 


2049 


Sec. 60 was read as follows: 

Sec. 60. 1 he Legislature shall provide, by general laws, for 

the location or removal of county seats by a vote of the people of 
the county to be affected. 

MR. OA1RS—A similar section was adopted, I think, in the 
Article on State and County Boundaries, but I presume there will 
be no difficulty in it if this be adopted, too, and reconciled, and. 
therefore, I move its adoption. 

Lpon a vote being taken, the section was adopted. 

Section 61 was then read as follows : 

Sec. 61. No State or county official shall, at any time, during 
his term of office, accept, either directly or indirectly, any fee, 
money, office, appointment, employment, reward or thing of value, 
or of personal advantage, or the promise thereof, lobby for or 
against anv measure pending before the Legislature, or to give or 
withhold his influence to secure the passage or defeat of any such 
measure. 


MR. OATES.-I move the adoption of the section. 

Upon a vote being taken, the section was adopted. 

MR. COLEMAN (Greene)—I rise to move the reconsidera¬ 
tion of Section 60, which was just adopted. 

THE PRESIDENT PRO TEM.—Does the gentleman desire 
immediate reconsideration? 


MR. COLEMAN—If the Convention desires to act on it at 
once, thev can do so, 1 simply wish to point out an objection. 

THE PRESIDENT PRO TEM.—Under the rule, the mo¬ 
tion will go over until tomorrow morning. 

MR. SAM FORD (Pike)—I move that the rules be suspended. 

THE PRESIDENT PRO TEM.—The gentleman from Greene 
has the floor. Does the gentleman from Greene move the suspen¬ 
sion of the rules? 


MR. COLEMAN—Yes, sir. 

Upon a vote being taken, the rules were suspended. 

MR COLEMAN—Mr. President and delegates of the Con¬ 
vention, it savs “the Legislature shall provide, by general laws, 
for the location or removal of county seats by a vote of the people. 
That oueht to he bv a “vote of the qualified voters. People 
embrace? more than “voters.” It ought to be qualified electors 
It ought to read so as to he consistent with what we have adopted 



2650 


OFFICIAL I‘R( 'CFFOINGS 


already. This says by a vote of the people," and it ought to be by 
a “vote of the qualified electors.” That i> the purpose of my call¬ 
ing attention to it. You can remedy it in a minute if you want it 
done. 

MR. OATES—When it was adopted just now. I called atten¬ 
tion to the fact, as I thought, that some provision of the kind had 
been adopted elsewhere, but as it was not before me I moved the 
adoption of this. If you have the other and will read it, there 
will probably be no trouble at all about knocking this out. 

MR. COLEMAN—The provision already adopted says “a ma¬ 
jority of the qualified electors,” this says “by a vote of the peo¬ 
ple.” They are not in harmony with each other, and I don’t know 
that the Committee on Harmony really would be authorized to do 
any thing but to bring in the two and let you vote over again, and 
let you select which you will have. We can remedy it at once. 

MR. OATES — We might do it, but I am opposed to the 
change unless I knew what the Convention had already adopted. 

MR. PARKER (Cullman)—[ can read what the Convention 
had already adopted: “No county site shall be removed except by 
a majority vote of the qualified electors of such county voting 
at an election to be held for such purpose, and when an election 
has once been held for such purpose, no other election can be held 
for such purpose until the expiration of four years.” 

MR. COLEMAN (Greene) — I move that it be considered 
right now. 

Upon a vote being taken the motion to reconsider was carried. 
MR. COLEMAN—I move to strike out Section 60. 

Upon a vote being taken Section 60 was stricken out. 

Section 62 was read as follows: 


Sec. 62. The Legislature shall never pass anv law to au¬ 
thorize or legalize any marriage of any white person and negro, or 
the descendant of a negro, to the third generation inclusive, though 
one ancestor of each generation be a white person. 

MR. VAUGHAN—I have an amendment to offer. 

The amendment was read as follows: 


t amen ^ Section 62 by striking out ail words after the word 

negro where it occurs the second time in the second line.” 

MR VAUGHAN The amendment is simplv to prevent ne¬ 
groes and white people from marrying at all. A negro as defined 
m the Code, the term negro within the meaning of this Code in¬ 
cludes mulatto. The term mulatto, a person of color, within the 



2651 


o.xstiti-tioxa,. convention m , 

meaning of this Cwb. ; 

part of the father or rnothetOnm ° f n,Ixe(J ,)lo0(1 descended on the 
eration inclusive, so one ante t ’ . an . cestrv to the third gen- 

person. " ancestor the third generation be a white 

ment? K C()IJ * MAN -What would be the effect of the amend- 


THK PRESIDENT pro TPM 'PI -r 

lhe Secretary read the Section as follows: 


I hi‘ legislature 
I■ c \Ua I i/ e any mar r ia^e 
scendant <>i a ni*<*To/’ 


s ^all never pass am 
(, 1 any white person 


la \v 
and 


to authorize or 
a negro, or de- 


>y the Committee is 
It is the law of the 


Mk. ()A 1 ]\S- -1 he Section as reported 
the language employed in the penal Code. JX ls tne law of th. 

Itiupion \[n']yt?Y t" '* ■ T ' U ' ,,uttin £ of jt int <> the Con- 

y u >'\ *>ut one operation or effect and that is for all 

[/im™ t,,1U t0 pr0VC , nt any Le ^ islat ure from authorizing or legal- 

scemhn? "7,7^ bet ' m ‘ n , tht white and negro races or the de¬ 
scendants ot the negro to the third generation inclusive, though 

yiu ancestor oi each generation he a white person. Now. that is 
te penal statute ot the State, and has been for a long time. Whv 
go beyond ,t in the Constitution? If it is properlv in the Consti¬ 
tution and I think it is and it may he of use possibly some time in 
te u tire. t is a declaration of the policy against miscegenation 
and in lavor ot race separateness, and ought we to go further in 
tins Constitution than our penal laws have ever gone? Or why 
not go the same length.-' You see if you leave it as it would be 
with the amendment adopted, it is an open cpiestion then as to 
how far the descendents might be traced, and how many genera¬ 
tions. leaving the thing in a state of uncertainty, as it is an inhi¬ 
bition upon the Legislature from authorizing marriage or legaliz¬ 
ing marriage between these races and is in my judgment ample 
in its provision and as far as we ought to go. It is the law we have 
lived hv for manv years. 


MR. COLKMAN (Greene)—With the amendment, does not 
the law provide that there shall never he a legal marriage between 
a white person and the descendant of a negro? Without the 
amendment you could legalize a marriage between a white person 
and the descendant of a negro of the fourth generation. 

MR. OATES—Exactly. I am in favor of the statute as it has 
been ever since it was enacted soon after the ratification of the 
present Constitution. We have lived by it about a quarter of a 
century. I haven't known or heard of any marriages in this State 



2652 


OFFICIAL PROCEEDINGS 


between a white person and a descendant of a negro, and if the 
principles of the law were enforced I believe it would be better 
for the community. Rut this is going far enough. There is no 
use in going wild upon a proposition. W e have the people among 
us here, an inferior race, and the laws we have had for a quarter 
of a century and lived under, I think is going far enough in our 
Constitution, and T therefore move to lay the amendment on the 
table. 

MR. SAMFORD—I cal! for the ayes and noes. 

The call was not sustained. 

A vote being taken upon the motion to table the amendment, 
a division was called for. and by a vote of 11 ayes and 51 noes the 
motion to table was lost. 

Upon a vote being taken as to the adoption of the amendment 
the amendment was adopted. 

MR. LONG (Walker)—I have an amendment to offer. 

Amendment by Mr. Long was read as follows : “To amend 
Section 62 by adding after the word ‘negro’ in the second line the 
words “Chinese and Indian/ ” 

MR. LONG—I don’t desire to make a speech on that. I think 
Indians and Chinese are sorrier than negroes, and I think they 
ought to be included in there. 

MR. JENKINS (Wilcox)—The proudest blood that flows in 
white veins in Alabama is Indian blood, and if we adopt that 
amendment we would insult some of the proudest and best people 
of the State. I move to lay on the table the amendment offered 
by Mr. Long of Walker. 

Upon a vote being taken the amendment was laid on the table. 

THE CHAIR—-The question recurs on the adoption of Sec¬ 
tion 62 as amended. 

MR. CHAPMAN—I have an amendment to offer. 

The amendment by Mr. Chapman was read as follows: “To 
amend Section 62 by striking out the word ‘of’ at the end of the 
first line and in lieu thereof insert the word ‘between.’ ” 

MR. CHAPMAN—It reads then instead of “legalizing any 
marriage of any white person and negro,” legalizing any marriage 
between any white person and negro.” 

Upon a vote being taken the amendment was adopted. 

On further vote the section as amended was adopted. 



2653 


l ONSTITlTlONAb CONVENTION, 1901 
Section 63 was read as follows: 

S( c. 63. 1 Ik* legislature shall provide by law for the regulation 

and reasonable restraint of trusts, monopolies and combinations 
ot tapital so as to prevent them from making, by such artificial 
mt aits artules ot necessity, trade or commerce scarce, or by in¬ 
ti easing the cost thereof to the consumer, or by preventing rea¬ 
sonable competition in any calling, trade or business. 

.MR. <).\ l LS--1 desire to make a statement. I want to state 
llie reason lor the action of the Committee on this is substantially 
is | .'lated. \t tlie time the report was submitted I think it but 
jii't to m\s( lt and the delegate from Mobile (Mr. Brooks) that 
1 make this statement. He had offered an ordinance which ap¬ 
pears pliuted right after the report along with it and that was by 
the aetioti ot the Committee on Legislative Department adopted 
O' a section, but it was tentative, and at a subsequent meeting it 
wa> allowed to be reconsidered. We had a rule which did not re¬ 
quire any particular form for the reconsideration of any matter 
but any matter which had been passed upon might be called up at 
a subsequent stage and reconsidered. That was the case with 
respect to the ordinance offered by the delegate from Mobile, and 
which had been adopted. At that meeting it met with considerable 
opposition. Some other gentleman moved a reconsideration of it 
and after it was discussed for a time a vote was taken and the Com¬ 
mittee was very much divided upon it. I made a statement to the 
delegate from Mobile that it was not in such form that I could 
support it. but I was not disposed to vote against this proposition 
and would vote for it provided I could he allowed to restate it or 
reduce it. to such language as I thought would be proper to go into 
the Constitution. That was agreed to and 1 voted against striking 
it out. I afterwards, in a hurry, did not draft this section until the 
evening before the report was made the next morning. While 
hurrying to get the report in I failed of the opportunity to present 
it to the delegate from Mobile for him to confirm it before the re¬ 
port was made. The gentleman will see that it is not near so broad 
as bis proposition, and when I came to examine it I could not go 
further in substance than the one I drafted as a substitute, but I 
do not wish mv action which was not acceptable to the delegate 
from Mobile, to prejudice him at all. and I hope that the Conven¬ 
tion will allow him to offer his proposition as a substitute for this 
and jrive him a full and fair hearing upon it. 

MR. BROOKS—Mr. President, the accoustic properties of this 
hall are not what thev are in the winter time, when for the most 
part the windows are closed and the doors are closed, and the at¬ 
mosphere is not disturbed and whipped into eddies by these elec¬ 
tric fans, and I find it very difficult to be heard here, a thing I 
never found before in inv experience in this Legislative Hall. I 



2654 


OFFICIAL PROCEEDINGS 


find also that on this side of the house it is a very difficult matter 
to hear gentlemen on the other side whom I have heard repeatedly 
in halls with great ease. I am suffering this afternoon with hoarse¬ 
ness, and I therefore ask the indulgence of the delegates and ask 
them to keep quiet so that I may be heard. 

I am much obliged to my friend from Montgomery, Governor 
Oates, the chairman of the committee, for the kind permission 
that he has given for me to introduce my ordinance, or the ordi¬ 
nance introduced by me as a substitute. I would have that right 
any way. It, however, puts me to this disadvantage and it puts 
to disadvantage the friends of the measure that they are support¬ 
ing an amendment instead of the original proposition which was 
adopted by the committee. If the Convention will remember I felt 
called upon when the chairman of the committee made his report 
to challenge the correctness of this Article 63 as the work of the 
committee. The gentleman explained then as he does now that he 
said something about offering a substitute because he said he 
thought he could improve it. But I could not agree to his offering 
a substitute as the work of the committee. Nor could I speak for 
the committee on that subject. A vote was taken after consider¬ 
able discussion, as the chairman of the committee has very well 
said, and the result was a vote of nine to six in favor of what I 
have been graciously permitted to have as a part of this report a 
printed copy of what was actually the work of the committee. 

Now. sir, I am reminded of a story of ancient history, because 
I cannot very well help looking at the humorous phase of it some¬ 
what. In olden times the Grecian philosophers worried themselves 
a great deal to formulate a scientific definition of man. After a 
great deal of trouble old Plato finally formulated a definition of 
man, which seemed to satisfy him. He defined man to be a biped 
without feathers. A few days afterward old Diogenes appeared 
among the school of philosophers with an old rooster in his arms 
with all the feathers plucked out and he threw it on the floor and 
said behold Plato’s man.” and that was the finishing of the defini¬ 
tion Plato had given. And so the chairman of the committee comes 
m here with a substitute without head or tail or feathers and savs 
“behold my improvement on the ordinance, adopted bv the com¬ 
mittee; it is so much briefer,” and so. Mr. President, it is so much 
briefer, and the great objection that I have to the substitute the 
gentleman brings in as the report of the committee is that it is 
colorless and inconsequential. It is very difficult to tell from the 
construction of it exactly what it means, but there is no doubt 
about it that the effect is simply to perpetuate trusts in this State. 

Now the ordinance which I had the honor to submit to this 
Convention, and which was adopted even without the vote of the 
chairman of the committee, by a vote of eight to seven, is taken 
from an Ohio statute and is one of the best pieces of definition 



CONSTITUTIONAL CONVENTION, 1901 


2655 


which I have read. The very object I had was to define in the 
Constitution what was meant by a trust. 

MR. WALKER (Madison)—I will ask you if a definition of 
that kind has operated to stop trusts in Ohio? 

MR. BROOKS—I will come to that in a moment. That law 
has been passed upon by the Supreme Court of Ohio. I read it 
some time ago rather cursorily, I haven’t got it now. It did not 
go to the whole extent but it did decide that it was constitutional 
and that there were no obiter dicta against its constitutionality 
in any respect. It was reported in the papers not long ago where 
a case arose under that very statute and one plaintiff in the case, 
a woman, got all the damages and satisfaction she wanted. It had 
the effect of driving out from the State of Ohio the Standard Oil 
Company, having that as its place of business, and it is asserted, 
and I have heard it from a gentleman who got it from Mr. Mon- 
nette, the Attorney General himself, that that corporation offered 
him $300,000 to stop his prosecution. 

I have been very much amused at the criticisms that have been 
passed on this ordinance. Why, I heard that a banker said that 
you could not have any bank clearances—that you could not have 
such a thing as a clearing house. It has no more to do with a bank 
clearing house than with the diurnal revolution of the earth. It 
would have no more power to affect bank clearances than it would 
have to “bind the sweet influences of the pleides, or loose the bands 
of Orion.” One gentleman said it would break up labor organiza¬ 
tions. It has nothing in the world to do with labor organizations. 

The whole essence of the thing is directed to affecting prices 
of articles or commodity of trade or manufacture or production. 
A man’s skill or a man’s labor comes under neither head. 

MR. WEATHERLY—I do not know whether I ought to rise 
to a point of order or not. The gentleman is addressing himself 
apparently to the ordinance which he introduced and which is not 
a part of the report. He has not offered it as a substitute. I would 
like to know the parliamentary status of this ordinance. 

THE PRESIDENT—The pending question is on Section 63, 
as reported by the committee, and the chair understood the gentle¬ 
man from Mobile to be addressing himself to that question. 

MR. WEATHERLY—I understood he was addressing him¬ 
self to something else. 

THE CHAIR—That is the pending question. If the gentle¬ 
man rises to a point of order that the gentleman is not confining 
himself to a reasonable limit of the debate, the chair will under¬ 
take to see that he does. 



2656 


OFFICIAL PROCEEDINGS 


MR. BROOKS—I like a fair light, Mr. President, and I don’t 
think I am over-stepping freedom of the debate. I confine myself 
to the questions involved both in the substitute quoted by the 
chairman of the committee and the ordinance adopted by the com¬ 
mittee ; both are on the same line. Then another gentleman made 
this objection. He said, “Suppose the lawyers in a given place 
were to enter into an agreement that they would charge so much?” 
I said, “I understand you—you mean a fee bill?” “Yes.” Well, 
I said that it would not affect them at all. In the first place, there 
are not a dozen lawyers who will get together and formulate a fee 
bill they will stick up to, and, further, it does not affect the out¬ 
side lawyers not in the combine, and. therefore, it will not destroy 
competition. Another objection is, that it will injure capital; that 
capital is timid. Well, Mr. President, I deny that capital is timid. 
That is one of these fallacies that have gained circulation, and al¬ 
most belief, through time, and it ought to be among those popular 
fallacies that are treated of by Charles Lamb is one of his essays. 
They are popular fallacies and that is a popular fallacy. Capital is 
not timid. It is cautious, but it is alert; it is remorseless, and it 
is untiring when it has the power. No man has any less desire to 
restrict capital, or to affect it injuriously in any way than myself. 
All of my lifetime and my manhood has been engaged in efforts to 
bring capital to this State, in efforts to encourage everything that 
capital entered into, and no man would do more and go farther than 
I would to encourage it in legitimate enterprises and give to it 
all the protection it needs, but those are some of the arguments 
that are brought against the idea of incorporating a trust provision 
in this Constitution. Another gentleman says: “You cannot stop 
it. Three or four men might get together in a room at night and 
fix up a combination of which you will know nothing, and vou can¬ 
not stop it.” Mr. President, that is the gospel of despair, and those 
who preach the gospel of greed are men who use the gospel of 
despair most. They are trying to lull the pcpole to apathv, and it 
is apathy that results from commercial greed and supremaev that 
has run riot over the land in the last few years that we are to fear 
the most. Now, sir, I do not desire to go into anv elaborate dis¬ 
cussion of this thing. I can show vou that if the platform of po¬ 
litical parties is worth anything as the expression of public opinion. 

I can show’ you, by reading you short extracts from the platform 
of every party that took part in the last Presidential election, that 
the trust idea was condemned, and everyone of them promised 
that they would do what they could to stop it. Whv, one gentle¬ 
man I heard say he doubted very much whether there was such a 
thing as trusts, and that is what Mark Hanna said for a long time, 
until he finally said they were a good thing. The Democratic 
party, the Republican party, the Silver-Republican partv and the 
Middle-of-the-Road Populists everyone had a clause in its plat¬ 
form aganist trusts, and only the other party, the Democratic plat- 



2657 


CONSTITUTIONAL CONVENTION, 1901 


he!en r'!ll#»V^'°*u 0nta i' ,1 r^ an ant '* trust platform. Attention has 
bien caMeci to that platform. The action of the Democratic Party 

: * r f C e< a ^°° ( * C ^ ea ^ °f attention. They not only declared 
offer V p pas ; ses - but also against trusts. Now, 1 am going to 
('moro t^ resident, not the ordinance which I brought before the 
Committee, and which the Committee adopted, but I am going to 

r I* i u d ord,nance ’ "'hich I would like to read as part of my 
t mar >. have drawn an ordinance, at least an amendment on 
tne line ol that ordinance, which is more than half as short. 

'riie substitute was read as follows: 


It shall be the duty of the General Assembly by appropriate 
e$,is at ion, to prohibit combinations by two or more persons, cor¬ 
porations or associations to enter into or carry out any contract or 
agreement bv which they shall bind or have bound themselves to 
, t,ie P nce s of any article, commodity or transportation between 
them, or between themselves and others, so as to directly or indi¬ 
rectly preclude a free and unrestricted competition among them- 
sehes or the purchaser or consumer of any commodity in this 
State, or transportation of any such article or commodity, by which 
they shall agree to pool or combine directly or indirectly any in¬ 
terest they may have connected with the sale or transportation of 
any such article or commodity that its price might in any manner 
be effected.^ Every such combination is a trust within the mean¬ 
ing of the Constitution and is hereby declared to be in derogation 
of the rights of the people, unlawful, against public policy, and 
void and of no effect. 


Now. Mr. President. I do not care about going into the hair¬ 
splitting interpretations, or substitutes of construction, but I wish 
to say that the object and purpose of that amendment is simply 
to provide against any combination that will affect the prices of 
any articles or commodity of commerce or production or manufac¬ 
ture. etc. That is the sole purpose, and now I offer this as a sub¬ 
stitute for Section 63 reported by the Chairman of the Committee. 

MR. EYSTER—I have a substitute for that. 

The Secretary read the substitute as follows: 

“Amend line two of Section 63 by adding after the word “capi¬ 
tal" and before the word “so” the words “or labor.” 

MR. MACDONALD (Montgomery)—Mr. President, I was a 
member of the Committee on Legislative Department, and the 
occurrences in that Committee as stated by Mr. Brooks are ab¬ 
solutely correct. The ordinance which the Chairman of the Com¬ 
mittee now kindly consents he shall offer as a substitute was 
adopted by a vote of 9 to 6 in that committee, and the distinguish¬ 
ed Chairman voted for it. He stated after his vote that it was rath- 



2658 


OFFICIAL PROCEEDINGS 


er broad and that he might have a substitute for it, but never sug¬ 
gested, as I understood it, to the committee or to Mr. Brooks that 
he should introduce this substitute himself in the Committee and 
adopt it himself. 

So my friend from Mobile has been put in a very unfortunate 
position. Fie was entitled, before this Convention, to have his sub¬ 
stitute, his ordinance, come is as the ordinance approved of and 
favorably reported by the committee, but he is now put in a posi- 
iton where it seems he will either have to amend the section hv an 
independent amendment or introduce an ordinance which was the 
work of a majority of the committee, to this Convention, handi¬ 
capped, apparently by an adverse vote, and I am not surprised that 
Mr. Brooks should have been somewhat taken aback when tins 
Convention heard the majority report read, and I think his condi¬ 
tion was somewhat similar to the old darkey who, the story says, 
caught a large channel cat, and, satisfied with the result of his 
fishing, went to sleep, and while slumbering, two or three small 
negro bovs came along and substituted for that channel cat a little 
mud cat, and when he woke and went after the fish to carry it 
home and found that it was so small, he says, “O Lord, how this 
fish have shrunk,” and it did shrink. Well, examine the ordinance 
introduced by the gentleman from Mobile and then the one report¬ 
ed by the committee—let them examine the innocuous, meaning¬ 
less statement of the committee. I won’t read the ordinance of Mr. 
Brooks as I suppose the gentlemen on the floor have read it. Xow. 
Mr. President and gentlemen of the Convention, that is brutum 
fulmen of the first variety. What does it mean? Simply advice 
by the Convention to the Legislature to try and see if they can¬ 
not keep pace with the ingenuity of trusts, and we all know that 
it requires considerably more learning and experience and ability 
than one legislator or a hundred legislators have, to do it. It is 
wise and democratic, and in pursuance of what was always under¬ 
stood to be democratic principles, for every Democratic party, 
whenever it assembles, it endeavors to restrict, as far as possible, 
these unlawful combinations, and my friend from Mobile has clone 
so, and perhaps has gone too far for the present day, but he has 
gone no further than a Democrat should go who is prepared to 
follow to its legitimate results the policies of his party. And I— 
and I suppose every other Democrat—am willing to do it. No man 
should adopt any principle, no man should elect to pursue any 
course, unless he is willing to go to the every farthest extreme, 
to the end of the row. My friend, Mr. Brooks, has said the expres¬ 
sion was indulged in, and it was not to my surprise, in the com¬ 
mittee that it was said and the argument used that there were no 
trusts, and there, before that committee, and here before this Con¬ 
vention, I express n\y surprise that any member of the Democracy 
should take it as the next of his remarks, a statement made hv Mr. 



CONSTITUTIONAL CONVENTION, 1901 


2659 


Mark Hanna, and which, when made, excited comment from the 
Lakes to the Rio Grande. There are no trusts! What has the 
Democracy been fighting all this time? Is it a mere shadow? 
What have been the results? Let every men that has got a gro¬ 
cery bill to pay answer it, and we will see, from year to year, the 
necessities of life increased in price, although we are always met 
by the statement that trusts are beneficial and that the cost of the 
necessities and luxuries of life are reduced by them. It occurs to 
me whenever a proposition is. submitted to Democratic party, they 
will carefully consider it and act as far as possible in restricting 
these unlawful combinations—not saying generally that unlawful 
combinations shall be restricted — everybody knows that — but 
pointing out as far as possible by specific statements what trusts 
are unlawful, so that all contracts and actions they take in regard 
to consummating their nefarious designs are promptly met with 
by being stamped with illegality by the courts of the country. 
That is what Mr. Brooks asks for from this Convention, and that 
is what I ask for, and that is all any Democrat contended to follow 
—one of the main principles of his party—should ask for. 

MR. LONG (Walker)—I think that this is a mere legislative 
duty. It puts a new section into the Constitution, and I doubt the 
wisdom of it. I move to lay the original section and the pending 
amendment upon the table. 

MR. BROOKS—On that I call for the ayes and noes. 

MR. deGRAFFENREID—I ask for a division of the question. 

THE PRESIDENT PRO TEM.—In the opinion of the chair, 
the question can be divided. The question recurs on the motion 
to lay the amendment offered by the gentleman from Morgan on 
the table. 

Upon the call of the roll, the vote resulted as follows: 

AYES 


Almon, 

Coleman, of Greene, 

Heflin, of 

Chambers, 

Ashcraft, 

Craig, 

Heflin, of 

Randolph, 

Banks, 

Davis, of DeKalb, 

Hodges, 


Barefield, 

Davis, of Etowah, 

Hood, 


Beddow, 

Dent, 

Howell, 


Bethune, 

deGraffenreid, 

Howze, 


Blackwell, 

Duke, 

Inge, 


Bulger, 

Eley, 

Jones, of 

Wilcox, 

Brooks, 

Espy, 

Knight, 


Burns, 

Glover, 

Kyle, 


Carmichael, of Colbert, 

Graham, of Montgomery, 

Leigh, 


Cobb, 

Handley, 

Locklin, 


Cofer, 

Harrison, 

Long, of Walker, 



2660 


OFFICIAL PROCFKDISC.S 


Lowe, of Jefferson, 
Macdonald, 

McMillan (Baldwin), 
McMillan, of Wilcox. 
Malone, 

Martin, 

Maxwell, 

Merrill, 

Moody, 

Mulkey, 

Murphree, 

Norwood, 

Oates, 

O’Neal, of Lauderdale. 


Foshee, 


Opp, 

Painter. 

Parker, of Cullman, 
Pettus, 

Pitts, 

Rcvnolds, of Chilton, 
Rogers, of Lou nde-, 
Rogers, of Sumter. 
Sam ford. 

Sanders. 

Sloan, 

Smith, of Mobile. 
Smith. Mac A.. 

Smith. Morgan M., 

NOES 

I enkins. 


Stdiie, 

Spears. 

Spragitis, 

S t e \v art, 

( a> lot*. 

Vaughan. 

Waddell. 

W alkei*. 

Walt*. 

Weather'1>. 

Wiiite. 

William-, of Barbour, 
William**, of Marengo. 
\\ IImhi, «>f W ushiugton. 

TOT AL—81 


TOT A 1.-2 


ABSENT OR NOT V<)T1X< 


Messrs. President, 
Altman, 

Bartlett, 

Beavers, 

Boone, 

Browne, 

Burnett, 

Byars, 

Cardon, 

Carmichael, of Coffee, 
Carnathon, 

Case, 

Chapman, 

Coleman, of Walker, 
Cornwall, 

Cunningham, 

Eyster, 

Ferguson, 

Fitts, 

Fletcher, 

Foster, 

Freeman, 

Gilmore, 

Graham, of Talladega, 

And by a vote 
carried. 


Grant, 

(/ray son, 

Greer, of Calhoun, 
(ireer. of Perry, 

Haley, 

Henderson, 

Hinson, 

Jackson. 

Jones, of Bibb, 

Jones, of Hale, 

Jones, of Montgomery, 
King. 

Kirk. 

Kirkland, 

Ledbetter, 

Lomax, 

Long, of Butler. 

Lowe, of Lawrence. 
Miller, of Marengo, 
Miller, of Wilcox, 
Morrissettc, 

XeSmith, 

Norman, 

O’Neill (Jefferson), 

of 81 ayes to 2 noe 


( >’ Rear. 

Parker, of Elmore, 

\ Viree. 

I hillip-. 

Lilian-. 

! 'or ter. 

Proctor. 

Reese, 

Renfro, 

Reynold- ( Henry). 
Robinson. 

Santonl. 

Searcy, 

Selheimcr, 

Sentell. 

Sorrell, 

Studdani, 

Thompson. 

Weakley. 

Whiteside, 

Willet. 

Williams, of Elmore, 
Wilson, of Clarke. 
Winn. 

the motion to table was 



2661 


CONSTITUTIONAL CONVENTION, 1901 


The question recurred upon the substitute offered bv the 
tleman from Mobile (Mr. Brooks). C * en ~ 

Upon a call of the roll, the vote resulted as follows: 


AYF.S 


Altman, 

Almon, 

Ashcraft, 

Barefield, 

Blackwell, 

Bulger, 

Carmichael, of Colbert, 
Chapman, 

Coleman, of Greene, 
Dent, 

deGraffenreid, 

Duke, 

Kiev, 

Kyster, 

Foshee, 

Graham, of Montgomery, 
Harrison, 


Banks, 

Beddow, 

Bethune, 

Brooks, 

Burns, 

Cobh, 

Cofer, 

Craig, 

Davis, of DeKalb, 
Davis, of Etowah, 
Espy, 

Glover, 

Handley, 


Hood, 

Howze, 

Inge, 

J enkins, 

Jones, of Montgomery, 
Jones, of Wilcox, 
Knight, 

Long (Walker), 

Lowe (Jefferson), 
Martin, 

Maxwell, 

Mulkey, 

Murphree, 

Norman, 

Oates, 

O’Neal (Lauderdale), 
Opp, 


NOES 

Heflin, of Chambers, 
Heflin, of Randolph, 
Howell, 

Kyle, 

Leigh, 

Locklin, 

Macdonald, 

McMillan (Baldwin), 
McMillan (Wilcox), 
Malone, 

Merrill, 

M oody, 

Norwood, 


Rainier. 

Barker (Cullman), 
Pitts, 

Rogers (Sumter), 
Samford, 

Sanders, 

Smith (Mobile), 
Tayloe, 

Vaughan. 

Waddell, 

Walker, 

Watts, 

Weatherly, 

Williams (Barbour), 
Williams (Marengo), 
Wilson (Clarke), 
Wilson (Washington), 
TOTAL—51 


Pettus, 

Reynolds (Chilton), 
Rogers (Lowndes), 
Sloan, 

Smith, Mac A., 
Smith, Morgan M., 
Sollie, 

Spears, 

Spragins. 

Stewart. 

White, 


Messrs. President, 
Bartlett, 

Beavers, 

Boone, 

Browne, 

Burnett, 

Byars, 


TOTAL—37 

ABSENT OR NOT VOTING 


Cardon, 

Carmichael, of Coffee, 
Carnathon, 

Case, 

Coleman, of Walker, 
Cornwall, 

Cunningham, 


Ferguson, 

Fitts, 

Fletcher, 

Foster, 

Freeman, 

Gilmore, 

Graham, of Talladega, 



2662 


OFFICIAL PROCEEDINGS 


Grant, 

Long (Butler), 

Reynolds (Henry), 

Grayson, 

Lowe (Lawrence), 

Robinson, 

Greer, of Calhoun, 

Miller (Marengo), 

Sanford, 

Greer, of Perry, 

Miller (Wilcox), 

Searcy, 

Haley, 

Morrisette, 

Selheimer, 

Henderson, 

NeSmith, 

Sentell, 

Hinson, 

O’Neill (Jefferson), 

Sorrell, 

Hodges, 

O’Rear, 

Stoddard, 

Jackson, 

Parker (Elmore). 

Thompson, 

Jones, of Bibb, 

Pearce, 

Weakley, 

Jones, of Hale, 

Phillips, 

Whiteside, 

King, 

Lilians, 

Willet. 

Kirk, 

Porter, 

Williams (Elmore), 

Kirkland, 

Proctor, 

Winn. 

Ledbetter, 

Reese, 


Lomax, 

Renfro, 



So the motion to table was carried. 

MR. COLEMAN (Greene)—I desire to offer an amendment to 
Section 63. 

THE PRESIDENT PRO TEM.—The gentleman is out of or¬ 
der. The question is upon the adoption of the section. The ayes 
and noes have been called for, and the call has been sustained. 

Upon a call of the roll the vote resulted as follows: 

AYES 

Brooks, Long (Walker), Norman, 

Foshee, Mulkey, Walker, 

Hood, 

TOTAL—7 


NOES 


Ashcraft, 

Almon, 

Banks, 

Barefield, 

Beddow, 

Bethune, 

Blackwell, 

Bulger, 

Carmichael, of Colbert, 
Chapman, 

Cobb, 

Cofer, 

Coleman, of Greene, 
Craig, 

Davis, of DeKalb, 


Davis, of Etowah, 

Dent, 

deGraffenreid, 

Duke, 

Eley, 

Eyster, 

Espy, 

Glover, 

Graham, of Montgomery, 
Handley, 

Harrison, 

Heflin, of Chambers, 
Heflin, of Randolph, 
Howell, 

Howze, 


I nge, 

J enkins, 

Jones, of Montgomery, 
Jones, of Wilcox, 
Knight, 

Kyle, 

Leigh, 

Lowe (Jefferson), 
Macdonald, 

McMillan (Baldwin), 
McMillan (Wilcox), 
Malone, 

Martin, 

Maxwell, 

Merrill, 



CONSTITUTIONAL CONVENTION, 1901 


2663 


Moody, 

M urphree, 

Norwood, 

( )ates, 

O’Neal (Lauderdale) 
Opp, 

Palmer, 

Parker (Cullman), 
Pettus, 

Pitts, 

Reynolds (Chilton), 


Rogers (Lowndes), 
Rogers (Sumter), 
Samford, 

Sanders, 

Sloan, 

Smith (Mobile), 
Smith, Mac. A., 
Smith, Morgan M., 
Sollie, 

Spears, 

Spragins, 


Stewart, 

Tavloe, 

Vaughan, 

Waddell, 

Watts, 

Weatherly, 

White, 

Williams (Barbour), 
Williams (Marengo). 
Wilson (Clarke), 
Wilson (Washington), 
TOTAL—79 


ABSENT OR NOT VOTING 


Messrs. President, 
Altman, 

Bartlett, 

Beavers, 

Boone, 

Browne, 

Burnett, 

Burns. 

Byars, 

Cardon, 

Carmichael, of Coffee. 
Carnathon, 

Case, 

Coleman, of Walker, 
Cornwall, 

Cunningham, 

Ferguson, 

Fitts, 

Fletcher, 

Foster, 

Freeman, 

Gilmore, 

Graham, of Talladega, 
Grant, 


Grayson, 

Greer, of Calhoun, 
Greer, of Perry, 
Haley, 

Henderson, 

Hinson, 

Hodges. 

Jackson, 

Jones, of Bibb, 
Jones, of Hale, 
King. 

Kirk, 

Kirkland, 

Ledbetter, 

Locklin, 

Lomax, 

Long (Butler), 
Lowe (Lawrence), 
Miller (Marengo), 
Miller (Wilcox), 
Morrisette, 

NeSmith, 

O’Neill (Jefferson), 
O’Rear, 


Parker (Elmore), 
Pearce, 

Phillips, 

Lilians, 

Porter, 

Proctor, 

Reese, 

Renfro, 

Reynolds (Henry), 
Robinson, 

Sanford, 

Searcy, 

Selheimer, 

Sentell, 

Sorrell, 

Studdard, 

Thompson, 

Weakley, 

Whiteside, 

Willet, 

Williams (Elmore), 
Wind. 


MR. COLEMAN (Greene)—If it is in order, I move that the 
Convention remain in session until we dispose of this argument. 

Upon a vote being taken the rules were suspended, and upon 
a further vote the motion was carried. 


MR. COLEMAN (Greene)—I have an amendment which I 
desire to offer to Section 63. The amendment was read as follows: 

Move to amend Section 63 so that it shall read as follows : 



2664 


OFFICIAL PROCEEDINGS 


'‘The legislature shall provide by law for the regulation and 
reasonable restraint of common carriers, partnerships and associa¬ 
tions, trusts, monopolies and combinations of capital, so as to pre¬ 
vent them or either of them from making the articles of necessity, 
trade or commerce scarce, or from increasing unreasonably the 
cost thereof to the consumer or preventing reasonable competition 
in any calling, trade or business. 

MR. BROOKS—I rise to a point of order. The previous ques¬ 
tion was called, upon the amendment, substitute ami section. 

THE PRESDIENT PRO TEM—The Chair’s recollection is 
that the motion was to table the section and amendment, and the 
Convention has refused to table the section, and the amendment 
is therefore in order. 

MR. COLEMAN (Greene) — That amendment defines by set¬ 
ting out by names those subjects that should be interfered with 
by legislation. So far as I am concerned I think all these matters 
belong to the legislature, but if the Convention is determined to 
adopt any provisions looking to the end sought to be obtained by 
Section 63, then I offer that as a substitute, or as an amendment 
to take the place of it. The difference between the original Section 
63 and the amendment is that is the second line, after the words 
“of common carriers, partnerships and associations” are inserted, 
then it includes “trusts, monopolies and combinations of capital.” 
so as to prevent them from making, in the original section it saws 
by artificial means, and I do not know exactly what that is, but 
it reads so as to prevent them or either of them from making the 
articles of necessity, trade or commerce scarce, or prevent them 
from unreasonably increasing the cost thereof to the consumer, or 
to prevent reasonable competition in any trade or calling. I used 
the word unreasonable, because articles of the character included 
here could not be transported without some cost, that is the purpose 
of using the word unreasonable. I think it meets the purpose in¬ 
tended by the gentleman of Mobile, and has none of these combina¬ 
tions and confusions. It is easily understood, if the Convention 
sees proper to adopt any amendment upon that line. 

MR. LOWE (Jefferson)—f have an amendment. 

The amendment was read as follows: 

Amend Section 63 of Article IV by inserting before the word 
‘“regulation” the words “prohibition or” and striking out the word 
“and” immediately after the word “regulation” in first line. 

MR. LOWE (Jefferson)—If the members will consider the 
language that is employed in this provision as follows: “The legis¬ 
lature shall provide by law for the regulation and reasonable re¬ 
straint of trusts, monopolies and combinations of capital so as to 
prevent them, etc. That provision would seem to take away from 



CONSTITUTIONAL CONVENTION, 1901 


2665 


the General Assembly the power to prohibit the combination of 
capital for the purposes stated. I do not believe that that was the 
purpose of the Committee. I do not believe it was the intention of 
the Committee to take away from the legislature of Alabama the 
power to prohibit trusts and combinations of capital, and therefore 
I move the adoption of the amendment which has been sent to the 
desk. 

MR. BROOKS—I ask to have the section as amended by that 
substitute read so we may understand it. 

The Secretary read as follows: 

“The legislature shall provide by law for the prohibition or 
regulation or reasonable restraint of trusts, monopolies and com¬ 
binations of capital, so as to prevent them from making by such 
artificial means, articles of trade, or commerce scarce or by in¬ 
creasing the costs thereof to the consumer, or by preventing rea¬ 
sonable competition in any calling, trade or business. 

Upon a vote being taken a division was called for. 

MR. LOWE (Jefferson)—If it is not too late I will call for 
the ayes and noes. 

The call was not sustained. 

MR. HOWZE—What is the effect of the amendment offered 
by the gentleman from Jefferson upon the substitute offered by the 
gentleman from Greene? 

MR. COLEMAN (Greene)—I will state that the gentleman 
from Greene is perfectly willing to accept that so far as he is con¬ 
cerned. 

MR. WATTS—I withdraw my call for a division. 

The amendment offered by the gentleman from Jefferson by 
a viva voce vote was adopted 

THE PRESIDENT—The question recurs upon the amend¬ 
ment offered by the gentleman from Greene. 

MR. SOLLIE—Before voting on the amendment I am not sure 
that I understand what the effect of the adoption of the amend¬ 
ment offered by the gentleman from Jefferson will be. I don’t know 
whether the word “prohibit” was substituted for the word “regu¬ 
lation” or merely added to the Section. 

A DELEGATE—It was added to it. 

A reading of the Section as amended was again called for, and 
upon a vote being taken the amendment offered by the gentleman 
from Greene as amended by the amendment of the gentleman from 



2666 


OFFICIAL PROCKFDINCS 


Jefferson was adopted, thereupon Section f>3 as amended was 
adopted 

Section 64 was read as follows: 

Sec. 64. The Senators and Representatives shall, before en¬ 
tering on their official duties, take the following oath, to wit: **l, 
, do solemnly swear (or affirm, as the case may be.) 
that l will support the Constitution of the United States and of 
the State of Alabama, and particularly observe and obey all the 
provisions of the latter relating to the Legislative Department, to 
the best of my ability, so help me God.” 

MR. BLACKWELL—I desire to offer an amendment. 

The amendment was read as follows: 

Amend Section 64, report of the Committee on Legislative 
Department, by striking out all after the word '‘Alabama” in the 
fourth line 

MR. BLACKWELL—That is merely for the purpose of strik¬ 
ing out what seems to me to be a ridiculous statement. It reads 
as if we should observe one part of the oath more than the other, 
and it is simply to remove that apparent distinction which we ap¬ 
pear to make in the observance of this oath. 

MR. COLEMAN (Greene)—I think I have an amendment 
which will meet your views, and some other defects. 

The amendment was read as follows: 

Amend Section 64 of the Legislative Department by inserting 
after the word “and” in the third line the words “the Constitution.” 
and to further amend said Section by striking out all of the fourth 
line after the word “Alabama,” and strike out the words “Legisla¬ 
tive Department” in the fifth line. 

MR. COLEMAN (Greene)—The Section would read, if the 
substitute was adopted: “Solemnly swear (or affirm, as the case 
may be) that I will support the Constitution of the United States, 
and of the State of Alabama to the best of mv ability, so help me 
God.” 

Upon a vote being taken the substitute was adopted, and upon 
a further vote, the amendment offered by the gentleman from Mor¬ 
gan as amended by the substitute of the gentleman from Greene 
was adopted 

Thereupon Section 64 as amended was adopted. 

Mr. Burns sought recognition. 

MR. WADDELL—I move that this Convention do now ad¬ 

journ. 



CONSTITUTIONAL CONVENTION, 1901 


2667 


THE PRESIDENT PRO TEM—The Chair had recognized 
the gentleman from Dallas to offer an amendment to the Article. 

MR. WEATHERLY—I rise to a point of order. The hour 
of adjournment has arrived. The rules were suspended, and we 
determined to remain in session until this article was disposed of. 

THE PRESIDENT PRO TEM—Until this article was com¬ 
pleted, and the Chair would be disposed to hold that the Article is 
not complete while an amendment to it is in order, and an amend¬ 
ment is in order at this time. 

MR. BURNS—Read the amendment, and if there is any ob¬ 
jection to it I will withdraw it. 

The amendment was read as follows : 

Strike out all of Section 64 and insert: 

That the President of the Senate and Speaker of the House 
shall receive $6 per diem and 10 cents mileage. 

MR. BL T RNS—You will recollect that no salary has been fixed 
for the President of the Senate or the Speaker of the House. They 
ought to have more than four dollars per diem. 

MR. ASHCRAFT—I move that the amendment be laid upon 
the table. 

Upon a vote being taken the amendment was laid upon the 
table 

MR. BROOKS'—I move we adjourn. 

MR. SMITH—I have an amendment 1 desire to offer to the 
article. 

Amend the article reported by the Committee on Legislation 
bv adding thereto the following, as a separate section : 

If at any time it should become impossible or dangerous for 
the Legislature to meet or remain at the Capitol, or for the Senate 
to meet or remain in the Senate Chamber, or for the Representa¬ 
tives to meet or remain in the Hall of the Representatives, the 
Governor mav convene the Legislature or remove it after it has 
convened, to some other place, or may designate some other place 
for the sitting of the respective houses or either of them, as neces¬ 
sity may require. 

MR. OATES—That is already provided for in the article. 

MR. HEFLIN (Chambers)—I understood the gentleman 
from Mobile was willing to withdraw the amendment if there was 
a section in the article which covered the point. 



2668 


OFFICIAL PROCEEDINGS 


MR. SMITH (Mobile) — I don’t know where the gentleman 
got his understanding from. The gentleman from Mobile has not 
said a word about it. 

MR. HEFLIN I rise to a question of personal privilege. 

THE PRESIDENT PRO TEM.—The gentle,,,an fro,,, Mo- 
bile has the floor. 

MR. SMITH (Mobile) When we adopted Section 5. I tried 
to set in the amendment, and also when Section 15 was under con¬ 
sideration. I his Con vention has made the following provision, in 
Section 5, that the Convention shall meet quadrennially at the 
Capitol in the Senate Chamber and in Hall of the House of Repre- 
sentatives except in the case of the destruction of the Capitol or 
epidemics. .Now it may be that this portion of the Capitol might 
become dangerous, so that it cannot be occupied, and yet it is not 
destroyed or it may occur as it did in Kentucky that bv riot or 
an armed force it would be impossible to sit at the Capitol' without 
there being an epidemic at all and there is no power in that section 

ha^Trl i U r tUrC t0 S j t elsewhere - The Chairman suggests 
that I read the balance of the section, “when the Governor mav 

™ them f at , SUch P' ac ^ in the State as he may deem best on 
the day specified in this Constitution, or on such other day as 
may be prescribed by law; and shall not remain in session longer 
than sixty days at the first session held under this Constitution 
nor longer than fifty days at any subsequent session.” 

I hen in Section 15 the Convention will find this provision: 

Neither house shall without the consent of the other, adjourn 
or more than three days, nor to any other place than that in which 
they may be sitting If anything should occur between the ad- 

TbroTen up"” ^ ^ retUrned the Legislature would 

tn in-in' }° therefore there ought to be a provision per- 

mitting them to sit elsewhere whenever it becomes impossible for 
em to sit in the Capitol, or is dangerous for them to do so 
irrespective of what causes that impossibility, or what the causes 
bar L m i y be ' L add this as an additional section, in orde? 

proper secti^ ^ Harm ° ny n,ay niake the correction in the 

MR. BURNS—I offer an amendment to the amendment. 

of th <A T? end S p C Vi° n 64 - : TH - e Preside nt of the Senate and Speaker 
of the House shall receive six dollars per diem.” 

MR. ROGERS (Sumter)—That has just been voted down. 

MR. BURNS—I have the floor, and I will ask the distinguished 
Chairman ,f there ,s any provision for paying the Speaker of the 



2669 


CONSTITUTIONAL CONVENTION, 1901 


House and the President of the Senate 
member. 


any more than an ordinary 


does^that ^fot^thp- N fr '"i the 9 onstitution > but the Legislature 
member - c f tl °^ lc,a J services - Li addition to their being 

hen* E J 1 !v ho “ se n an<1 ^tting the regular pay as members, 

it best to ( -I 0 " 3 U ° WanCe f ° r their official work - and 1 think 

it best to leave it as it is. 

Or. or R ; NS—The Legislature might make it twenty-five dol- 

‘ ' vo ( °. a ^ s and a half. I insist on the amendment, and 
tne\ may vote it down. 


„ m A^HCRAt 1—1 rise to the point of order that the same 

amendment has been voted on before and has been tabled, and this 
amendment is not germane to the amendment offered by the gen¬ 
tleman from Mobile. 

THE PRESIDENT PRO TEM.—The point of order is sus¬ 
tained. lhe amendment is out of order. 


MR. BURNS- I rise to a point of order. The other article I 
sent up there, or instrument, was an independent section, and not 
an amendment, and this is not verbatim. 


UK PRESIDENT PRO TEM—The Chair has ruled on the 
point of order. 


MR. OATES—The amendment offered by the delegate from 
Mobile, as a separate section, I think, might be well taken in con¬ 
nection with Section 5, which has already been passed upon, and 
I presume the Committee of Harmonics can do that. It ought not 
to be scattered about, but ought to be a part of Section 5, if adopted 
at all. I shall interpose no objection to it, if the Convention de¬ 
sires to adopt it. 

MR. HEFLIN (Chambers)—I move its adoption, Mr. Presi¬ 
dent. 


Upon a vote being taken the amendment offered by the gen¬ 
tleman from Mobile (Mr. Smith) was adopted. 

MR. SMITH (Mobile)—I desire to move to reconsider the 
vote whereby Section 59 was adopted. I endeavored to offer an 
amendment to the section at the time as was under consideration, 
but did not catch the eye of the Chair. 

THE PRESIDENT PRO TEM—Under the rule of the Con¬ 
vention the motion will go over until tomorrow. 

MR. BEDDOW—I have an amendment. 

MR. BURNS—That motion to reconsider will have to go over 
until tomorrow morning. 



2670 


OFFICIAL PROCEEDINGS 


THE PRESIDENT PRO TEM—The Chair has just made 
that announcement. 

The amendment offered by Mr. Beddovv was read as follows: 

Section 66. All printing and stationery furnished under Sec¬ 
tion 28 of this article shall bear the union label of the Typographi¬ 
cal Union, provided the printing establishment having in their em¬ 
ployment union labor is the lowest responsible bidder, at the low¬ 
est prices. 

MR. BEDDOW—If the Convention desires to adjourn. I will 
address myself to that amendment in the morning. 

MR. HEFLIN (Chambers)—I move that we adjourn. 

THE PRESIDENT PRO TEM—The gentleman from Jeffer¬ 
son has the floor. 

MR. BEDDOW—That amendment is one that I have been 
making an effort to get before this Convention in some shape or 
other for the last twenty days. i. offered a resolution on that sub¬ 
ject, that was assigned to a certain hole, from which it can never 
recover, if left to stand as it is. I did this at the request of numer¬ 
ous citizens and voters of the State of Alabama, those whose in¬ 
terests we were sent here to look after, and who are looking to this 
Convention for some aid and some support along the lines of union 
labor. We have had numerous petitions from the Typographical 
Unions of Huntsville, of Birmingham, of Mobile and of Montgom¬ 
ery, from the United Iron Workers of America, the leading Trade 
Councils all over the State, and in the aggregate I do not think it 
is an exaggeration to say that this request comes from twenty-five 
to thirty thousand white voters in the State of Alabama. Matters 
like this cannot be turned lightly down, and I must say that I have 
been surprised that on every occasion that I have attempted to get 
this question before this house, a manner little short of ridicule has 
met my effort, but I am glad to say that I have got it before the 
house at last, and if there are thirty men in this house who favor 
this class of our citizens, I want to call for an aye and no vote, to 
show how we stand upon this proposition. In every department 
of this life where success is attained, there must be a union of 
action. The great capitalists all over the country, when they seek 
to decrease their expenses and increase their field of operation, unite 
their capital and their intellect. All things are unsuccessful, unless 
they have a head under whom they can work together as one man. 
In other words in union there is strength, and in division there is 
weakness. 

The leading newspapers of this State, with but one exception, 
I believe, carry at their mastheads the union label of the Typo¬ 
graphical Union, The Age-Herald at Birmingham. Birmingham 
News, Birmingham Ledger, The Mobile Register and The Mont- 



CONSTITUTIONAL CONVENTION, 1901 


2671 


gomery Journal, all carry at their mastheads this union label, and 
they are the leading newspapers of the State of Alabama. The 
object of the organization is not for the purposes that some people 
charge to them. They are not a set of Nihilists, they are not a set 
of Anarchists. They are men that are bound together for upbuild¬ 
ing the rights of labor in this country, not by illegal means, but 
just along the same lines that bind other organizations together for 
the good of all. You can look over the whole field, and among 
these men are not those who fill the poor houses and the jails of 
your country. They are the men who do the best work along the 
lines of business that thev are engaged in. In my county it has 
worked wonders. Ten vears ago in Jefferson County the man 
dared not let it be known that he belonged to a union organization; 
today a man is proud to say that he is a member of such an organi¬ 
zation. They meet with their employers, and they consult with 
them, and thev demand and command their respect. '1 he result is 
that it has been proven to be for the benefit of the employer and 
employe. It has brought them into closer relation with each other. 
It has decreased the number of strikes, and has benefited thousands 
of members in my county, and I have seen the good results of its 

work. 


Now we have tried this printing business outside of the State 
and in every instance it has been a failure. The poorest book that 
] have in liiv library is 118 Alabama, which was sent out of the 
State to he printed.' It will be better to pay these men who are 
good workmen, better prices, and keep it within our State and give 
the advantage to those who are banded together for the benefit 
of themselves and benefit of their families, than to go beyond the 
confines of the State and give it to other people Now some people 
might say it would be wrong to discriminate, that there are others 
"hat do not belong to unions. I can say of my personal knowledge 
that these men do not desire to break down the organization, but 
thev work on the outside for they know there are those who will 
not' give employment to men who belong to a labor orgamzatio . 
You pass this law. and those same parties will be glad to employ 
the same class of men. and those men who are non-union men will 
be glad to join the ranks of union labor, and join in the effort for 
the\ir>buildin <r of the common good. At the opening of this ses 
the , t j a V erv beautiful piece of poetry about 

Tunn BenAdhem He went on to speak of the angel writing m 
the book And Aboil waked and asked what he was doing, and he 
PI he was writing the names of those who loved the Lord, and 
S M L,l in,;, name was written there, and the angel answered 

Aboil a.-ked • ^ who loves his fellow- 

tHat "The angel wro e and vanished, and when he returned and 

ennobling sent,men. for the embellishment 



2672 


OFFICIAL PROCEEDINGS 


of our speeches, but let us show by our actions that we are in deed 
and in truth men who love our fellow-men. 

MR. OATES—The provision already adopted, and which has 
been in force for more than twenty-five years, requires the printing- 
to be let to the lowest responsible bidder, requiring that it should 
bear the stamp of a labor organization or a printers’ union has no 
place in a Constitution. If any establishment in which labor union 
is employed should be the lowest responsible bidder for the work 
they ought to have it, and there is nothing in the provision already 
to exclude them from it or discriminate against them. It is com¬ 
mitted to the officers of the State to let out the printing to the 
lowest responsible bidder, without discrimination, sometimes it 
may be that the officer or officers whose duty it is may let out the 
printing, as has been alleged, to irresponsible parties outside of the 
State, but in that they do not discharge the trust committed to 
them properly. We cannot assume that it will be uniformly thus. 
If it should be the lowest responsible who will do the work well. 
I do not think that the amendment offered by the gentleman from 
Jefferson has any proper place at this time. I will say that I have, 
and no doubt the Convention has, as much respect for the honest 
labor of those in the union as those who are not. That is not the 
question. The printing of the State must be let out to the lowest 
responsible bidder, and it does not include any one who does not 
belong to a labor union or a printer’s union, and therefore I move 
to lay the amendment upon the table. 

MR. BEDDOW—On that I call for the ayes and noes. 

The call was not sustained, and upon a viva voce vote the mo¬ 
tion to table was carried. 

THE PRESIDENT PRO TEM—Under the suspension of the 
rules the Convention must remain in session until this Article is 
completed. The Article now having been completed, the Conven¬ 
tion will stand adjourned until 9:30 o’clock tomorrow morning. 


CORRECTIONS 

In proceedings of the forty-ninth day, first column, second 
page, Mr. Foster is recorded as voting no on adoption of Article 
on Local Legislation. Mr. Foster was absent on that day, and con¬ 
sequently did not vote. 


In proceedings of the fiftieth day Mr. Brook’s amendment 
should read as follows: 

No railroad or other transportation company shall grant free 
passes, or shall at reduced rates not common to the public, sell 



CONSTITUTIONAL CONVENTION, 1901 


2673 


tickets for transportation to any person holding’ any office of honor, 
trust or profit in this State, and the acceptance of such pass or 
ticket by a member of the Legislature or any public officer shall 
work a forfeiture of his office, at the suit of the Attorney General, 

Any railroad or other transportation company or officer or 
agent thereof who shall grant a free pass, or shall at reduced rates 
not common to the public, sell tickets for transportation to any 
such person, shall be deemed guilty of a misdemeanor and is liable 
to punishment, except as herein provided. 

No person or officer or agent of a corporation who gives any 
such free pass, free transportation or sells tickets for transporta¬ 
tion at reduced rates hereby prohibited, shall be privileged from 
testifying in relation thereto, and he shall not be liable to civil or 
criminal prosecution therefor if he shall testify to the giving or 
selling of the same. But this shall not prohibit the Legislature 
from authorizing the State to contract with any such railroad or 
other transportation company for the transportation at reduced 
rates of State officers while traveling in the discharge of their offi¬ 
cial duties. 

And in the sixth column, thirty-fourth line, should read “with 
damaging insinuations.” 

In column 6, page 3, should read: They may not ask directly 
for themselves, but may have some friend that does so (and that 
is the mode which is very frequently employed. Some friend does 
so.) 

In column 6, page 3, should read: ‘ I will have to refer you to 
our attorney (Judge Baxter of Nashville, one of the best lawyers 
the country has ever produced.) 


FIFTY-SECOND DAY 


MONTGOMERY, ALA., 


Tuesday, July 23, 1901. 


The Convention met pursuant to adjournment, was called to 
order by the President, and opened with prayer by Rev. Dr. A. L. 
Andrews, as follows: 


“O Lord our Lord, how excellent is Thy name in all the 
earth. How worthy Thou art of the praise and worship of all of 
Thv creatures Our Father we would this morning praise Thee, 
and worship Thee from the very depths of our hearts, ascribing 



2674 


OFFICIAL PROCEEDINGS 


to Thee the thanksgiving which wells up from our hearts for Thv 
mercies and for all of Thy kindness. We thank Thee for a night's 
refreshing sleep. We thank Thee that we are again in our places 
ot duty, face to face with the responsibilities of a new dav, and we 
pause upon the threshold this morning-, our Father, to ask Thv 
presence with us, and Thy blessing upon us. Give this convention 
tt, H 'Vr h ? blessing. Bless the presiding officer, and help him in 
the delicate, difficult and responsible work that devolves upon him. 
.Help him that he may have the sympathy and help of everv dele- 
1,1 thls , hall; am !>. () - Lord, may this day’s proceedings be 

man S"n 7 Y P "'“ “ fra,er i’ al lovc "I"" •'>' Part of each 

man and, O, Lord, may the work that is done be not onlv ac- 

renresented t0 1 ’' blU be serviceable tu the people who are here 
presented ana grant, our gracious Father, that in the difficult 

work that this convention shall undertake this morning, thev mav 

devL SP bnt ( d T t , 10n fr ° m ° n High ' °’ Lord ’ men may 

dewse, but God alone can give us the solution of that difficult 

question upon which this convention is to enter, and we look to 

lliee O, Father, praying that Thou wilt guide Thv servants Oh 

help them, that they may enter soberly upon the work that lies 

before them and pity the man who enters lightlv upon the task 

that !s now to be taken up; but O, Lord, may each one, reali/hm 

the responsible work that rests upon him. realizing the importance 

ot his vote, and of his influence, and of his stand, „.av each o ie 

t?te S th° kinR wu 1 ^- d ° fa,thfl,ll y a * bl - conscience shall dic- 

Tho, Vn rk Hat ,S ? lven hiin to (1 °- ° Lord, we pray that 
Ihou wilt bless our entire people; bless them of everv tvpe - bless 

them ot every nationality; and, O Lord, God, our Lather, n!av pros- 

ptrit} .-.mile upon °ur people and may success attend them in all 

tit rn r T° rk ' ^ pray Thee that Thou wilt rule the e en ents 
that the temporal interests of our people mav prosper that the 

harvest and Vh^t • gr ° Win K g StatC ma - v bri '^ ^rth an’abundant 
section ' We prav Thee^I I T °, f pr ° Sperity to our entire 
people Thy 

and may the Lord graciously hold in His keeping every soiiUhTt 
calls upon Him for help. Again we prav Thee to bless this Con 
vent,on; guide them in their deliberations today; bless them in 

ulTv r (TwoT'.lST’ °" r Fa ! lRT ' tha f aaa '' "f - nia - do i, " 
tullv the work that is assigned us to do. and during all the dnvs 

hat he out before us in life, and when we can serve Thee no 
onger lere, grant that w'e may die in the faith of the Christian’s 
hope, and may an abundant entrance be accorded us in the ever¬ 
lasting home of the good, in the house not made with hands eternal 
n the heavens, and in that better land we will praise Thee forever 
through Christ, our Lord and Redeemer, Amen. Ce t0re ' e ’ ’ 

names. P ° n ^ ° f ^ ^ 101 de,e S ates responded to their 



CONSTITUTIONAL CONVENTION, 1901 2675 

Indefinite leave of absence was granted to Mr. Greer of Cal¬ 
houn. 

\1K. 1*1% 1 ILS—I desire to call attention to an error in the 
stenographic report, on the third page, bottom of fifth column: 

PRESIDEN I PRO TEM—The question is upon the adoption of 
the section. '1 he question was upon tabling of the section, and 
the chair so stated. The correction should be made. 

1 HE PRESIDENT—The correction will be made. 

The report of the Committee on Journal was as follows: The 
Committee on the Journal beg leave to report they have examined 
the journal for the fifty-first day of the Convention, and the same 
is correct.” 


The report of the Committee on the Journal was adopted. 


MR. LOMAX—I rise to a question of personal privilege. On 
yesterday afternoon 1 was compelled to be in court, and I requested 
the gentleman from Lauderdale to pair me on the adoption of the 
amendment offered by the gentleman from Randolph to a certain 
section of the Legislative Department, in reference to internal im¬ 
provements. Inadvertently the member omitted to do it. If I had 
been here I should have voted for that amendment, and as to be 
paired in that way. 

THE PRESIDENT—The Secretary will call the roll of dele¬ 
gates. 

MR. SMITH (Mobile)—There is a motion for re-consideration 
pending. 

THE PRESIDENT—There was a motion to re-consider the 
vote whereby this convention adopted Section 59. There was no¬ 
tice given with reference to another section, but the motion was not 
formally entered. 

MR. BROOKS—I desire to say that I do not care to press 
the motion to re-consider. 

THE PRESIDENT—The question will be upon the motion to 
re-consider Section 59. 

MR. GRANT—I don’t really know- 

THE PRESIDENT—The gentleman from Mobile has the 


floor. 


MR SMITH (Mobile)—Section 59 provides, in the first 
nlace that no obligation or liability of any person, association or 
corporation held or owned by this State, or by any county or other 
municipality thereof, shall ever be remitted, released or postponed 
or in any way diminished by the Legislature.” That is a provision. 



2676 


OFFICIAL PROCEEDINGS 


it seems to me, unsafe. “Nor shall such liability or obligation be 
exchanged or transferred except by payment thereof into the proper 
treasury.” There may be, and frequently is, the enforcement of 
liability through the courts, and in their enforcement through the 
courts, property is sold and money of the debtor realized upon the 
judgment; that under our law is, and should be, an extinguishment 
of the liability; but under this provision, it would not, until the 
officer collecting that money, paid it into the proper treasury, mak¬ 
ing the debtor to the State, county or city, responsible for the 
official acts of the Sheriff or clerk of the court, into whose hands 
the money that was realized had been paid. It is practically the 
same provision that insurance companies undertake to make in 
regard to their premiums. That is, they authorize an officer to 
collect the money, but make the assured responsible for the faithful 
performance of his duties to the company in paying it into the 
treasury. I have no idea that was the purpose of the committee, 
but it seems to me to be plainly the operation of that portion of 
the section, and I think therefore it should be stricken out. As to 
the provision : “Nor shall such liability or obligation be exchanged 
or transferred except upon payment of its face value.” I have not 
been able to call to mind the evil that is sought to be redressed. I 
do not quite understand that provision. It may have some opera¬ 
tion, or some force; there may be some evil that it seeks to reach, 
but I cannot call it to mind, and therefore I include that in the 
motion. Then it is provided that “this section shall not prohibit 
the Legislature from providing by general law for the compromise 
of doubtful claims.” It seems to me that the word “doubtful” 
ought to be stricken out. There is in the administration of gov¬ 
ernmental affairs frequently a policy or reason for adjusting con¬ 
troversies with its citizens, that is not dependent entirely upon the 
doubtful character of the claim. There be matter of public policy. 
Now I do recall one instance in which I personally am interested, 
but not interested upon the side for which I am now making the 
motion, because really it is an effort being made to compromise 
what I do not consider a doubtful claim, or the effort to compro¬ 
mise come up when the claim will not be doubtful, and that it 
would not be to my interest for them to be able to compromise, 
but greatly to the interest of the city. It is a matter of this charac¬ 
ter, and there may be other cities in the same position, where the 
city of Mobile claims to own certain waterfront and there are ad¬ 
verse claims by the citizens. 

If the city established that claim, it would have on its hands 
a large amount of waterfront that it would not have money to 
improve. The improvement of that water front would be beneficial 
to commerce, and the business of the place, yet the claim would 
not be doubtful: If the city could settle that claim with the in¬ 
dividuals the individual could improve it and enhance its value to 
the commerce of the place, and create a large class of paying proper- 



CONSTITUTIONAL CONVENTION, 1901 


2677 


ty. I here would be no question as to the claim itself. It would 
not be a doubtful claim, but it would be one where it would be both 
to the interest of the city and the citizens, that an adjustment of 
some sort should be made. 1 merely call attention to that not 
that 1 am interested in this particular section because of that matter 
but it is only one instance of many that might exist where a muni¬ 
cipality should adjust a controversy which does not depend entirely 
on whether the claim is of a doubtful character. 1 think the word 
"doubtful" ought to be stricken out, and 1 ask the reconsideration 
of this section tor the purpose ot introducing amendment such as I 
have suggested. 1 will say to members of the Convention that it 
was not a matter of oversight, or carelessness on my part in not 
amending the section when it was presented. I was on my feet 
just before it was read, and stood there until it was passed, but 
did not catch the eye of the Chair, and the Chair submitted the 
question, and a vote on the section was taken. 

MR. GRANT—Mr. Chairman, that is what I tried to get the 
floor for the other day when this section was under consideration. 
My voting friend from Limestone thought I was after another ar¬ 
ticle’ Now. this is what I wanted. 1 want to raise the same ob¬ 
jection that the gentleman from Mobile has to the proposition. In 
cases like this vou cannot provide by a general law for various 
cases that arise under a proposition of the gentleman from Mobile, 
to reconsider this section. 


MR. ()ATKS--Mr. President, the purpose of the committee 
in reporting this section is plain, the phraseology may be a little 
doubtful. It is perfectly plain what is meant by the language: 
“No obligation or liability of any person, association or a corpora¬ 
tion held or owned bv this State, or by any county, or other muni¬ 
cipality thereof, shall ever be remitted, released or postponed or in 
any way diminished bv the legislature.” That is a clear proposi¬ 
tion “Nor shall such liability or obligation be extinguished except 
bv payment thereof into the proper treasury.” i here is probably 
no necessity for those words “into the proper treasury. Payment 
thereof" would meet the wishes of the committee and the pur¬ 
poses of the gentleman. I do not know but that in the event of the 
Legislature, in legislating on it, might suppose that it so directed 
them that they would have to provide there would be no release 
until the money was paid into the treasury. ' Nor shall such ha¬ 
il ty or obligation be exchanged or transferred except upon pay¬ 
ment «f its face value.” Of course that is to prevent any officer 
rom trafficing in claims in favor of the State, and in favor of mum- 
nalities etc “Provided, that this section shal not prevent the 
legislature from providing by general law for the compromise of 
dcfLbtfu claims.” Now. mark you, that is a limitation upon the 
nrohib on that nothnig herein shall prevent or restrict the Legis- 
fature from providing by law for the compromise of doubtful 




2678 


OFFICIAL PROCEEDINGS 


claims. Now, it may be doubtful in the sense that it may not be 
considered entirely just or due, or it may be in the sense that it is 
doubtful of collection, but does not restrict the Legislature that it 
cannot enact proper legislation, and effectuate the clear intention 
to be gathered from the language of this section? I think not. 

MR. GRANT—May I ask the gentleman a question? 

THE PRESIDENT—Does the gentleman yield to the gentle¬ 
man from Calhoun? 

MR. OATES—Yes, sir. 

MR. GRANT—Do you think in that sort of a case that you 
can enact a general law that will apply to all cases that will rise 
in the various counties? 

MR. OATES—There is a law now in regard to such things. 
I don’t remember the extent to which it goes, which authorizes 
the Governor and some of the State officers to compromise. 

MR. GRANT—But I am talking about the counties. 

MR. OATES—I have no doubt it is just as easy to embrace 
in that general law the power to compromise as to counties as well 
as to the State, and I do not think there is any difficulty about 
that. 


In the use of the language “compromise of doubtful claims,” 
evidently the purpose of the Committee was in not striking out 
“doubtful,” and saying for the compromise of claims, not to allow 
the persons charged with the compromise, too much latitude. We 
all know, gentleman, that one who is liable to the State or county 
or municipality, is generally very persistent and persuades those 
who have power to compromise to yield to them, to make com¬ 
promises quite favorable to them, through sympathy. Now if you 
strike out doubtful and leave it for the compromise of claims that 
destroys in effect the preceding portion of the section so as to say 
in substance that the Legislature may have power to authorize the 
compromise of claims of the county or municipality, to compromise 
all claims authorized to be compromised. It seems there would be 
no limit whatever. That word was used, no doubt by the Com¬ 
mittee, to indicate the class or kind of claims which might be com¬ 
promised, and much less taken for them, than is demanded or sup¬ 
posed to be due. Now, I do not see that there is anything in this 
section which may be feared as going to the extent or anything 
like it indicated by the delegate from Mobile. There might be 
possibly in this fourth line where the language used is, “except by 
payment thereof into the proper treasury,” such a difficulty, I can 
conceive of a case where an execution might be in the hands of 
the sheriff, if he should collect the money on that and not pay 
it into the treasury, embezzle it, how can you know whether the 



2679 


CON ST IT L’TIONA L CONVENTION 


, 1901 


IV l>t , h ir;I l mt um \ er ^ le su ' )s<J< l' K 'nt provision, gathering 

the >p . ot it. from the w hole language, 1 do not think there would 
he an> difficulty even in that case in adjusting it. It is only my 
( u \ m iin vonneition to represent the committee and to present 
uir k \n n. ha\ c done that probably in not such an elaborate 
manner as it might Ik* done. Having discharged that duty, it is 
\\ith the C on\ention whether they reconsider and amend it or not. 
J am satisfied with it, myself. 

1 H 1\ 1 khSl 1 >KN 1 - 1 he question will )>e upon the motion 
(U the gentleman from Mobile to reconsider the vote whereby this 
Convention adopted Section 59. Is the Convention ready for the 
question? 


( hi a vote being taken, there were 54 ayes and 19 noes, and 
tin* motion to reconsider was adopted on division. 

MK. COBB -I would like to ask the gentleman from Mobile 
a question if he pleases. If you strike out the word doubtful, what 
remains of that section? 


MK. SMITH—'1'he power of the Legislature to define what 
class of claims can he compromised without limitation. 

MR. COBB—Does it not utterly destroy the inhibition at¬ 
tempted to he placed by this section upon the power of the Legis¬ 
lature, to dispose of claims due the State? 

MK. SMITH — I think not, I do not think the power of the 
Legislature to dispose of anything has anything to do with the 
power to authorize municipal authorities to dispose of it. 

The Secretary proceeded, for the introduction of ordinances, 
resolutions, etc., to call the roll. 

MR. GRAHAM (Talladega)—I have two petitions, one of 
which is very short, and I ask permission to have the body of the 
petition read. 

The Secretary read the petition as follows: 

To the Honorable Constitutional Convention, sitting at Montgom¬ 
ery, Alabama: 

Dear Sirs—We respectfully represent, that whereas, the Rail¬ 
road Commission appointed by the Governor and paid by the rail¬ 
roads has proven an entire failure, and whereas, the shipper and 
consumer should have some representation in the naming of rates 
and making of rules by what is otherwise alien and arbitrary 

power. 

That whereas, the Express, Telephone, telegraph and railroad 
franchises are given by the State, the power of these franchises to 
tax should be limited by the State. 



2680 


OFFICIAL PROCEEDINGS 


We therefore request that your honorable body will give us a 
commission elected by the people and place all franchises, which 
have power to tax, within their review. 


Wellington Vandiver, C. W. Vandiver, J. W. Hubbard P J 
Williams, J. B. Woodward, R. H. Woodward. T. 13. Boynton R 
Thomas, B. Anderson, T. B. Best. Me Alpine & Son. R. L. Sanger! 
J. H. Samuel, F. R. \\ illiams, S. I). Kvser, J. A. Woodward fohn 
Smith, A. T. Smith, J. W. Treadwell, S. D. Treadwell W \ 
Speer, E. O. Hobbs, R. H. McMullen, L. W. Chardv. S. a’ Austin’ 
Otis Cook, J. R. Pullen, B. W. Linden, J. S. McMillan. M. Jackson’ 
R. J. Cunningham. P. L. Howard. J. W. Cowen, E. M Burr I p’ 
Wanorck, J. T. Adams, Jr., J. W. Hurt, W. F. Handley, W.'m! 
Graham, W. R. Thompson. R. B. Baxter, Geo. P. Kyser, R. T. 
Hicks, H. M. Burt. J. W. Bowman, C. S. Weaver, j' M Long 
George M. Thornton. O. R. Grey, A. (). Riser, G. T. McElderv! 
H L. Sims, W. B. Castleberry. James H. Havden. L'llinan Bros 
Z. Katzenstein, L. L. Williams, J. A. Edwins. E. R. Hurston, News 
Reporter, Talladega Mercantile Co., by W. L. Miller. General 
Manager; Talladega Hosiery Mills, W. T. Billue, W. E Dickin¬ 
son, B. B. Simms. W. M. Franks, M. G. McCargo. T. T Elliott 
John C. W illiams, C. C. \\ hilson, J. A. Powers & Co D P Mc- 
Diarmid, George W. Chambers, J. D. Davis. 

Io the Honorable Constitution Convention, sitting at Mont°-om- 
ery, Alabama: M 


Dear Sirs—W e respectfully represent, that whereas, the Rail¬ 
road Commission appointed by the Governor, and paid by the rail¬ 
roads has proven an entire failure, and whereas, the shipper and 
consumer should have some representation in the naming of rates 
and making of rules by what is otherwise alien and arbitrary power. 


f^t,T hat vvhere . as ’ t I le express, telephone, telegraph and railroad 
franchises are given by the State, the power of these franchises to 
tax should be limited by the State. 


We therefore request that your honorable body will give us a 
commission elected by the people and place all franchises, which 
have power to tax, within their review. 

- A ? an ^ he " der & Sharpe, J. B. Robertson, J. T. Barnes W. C. 
McMillan T. H. White, H. H. Kyser, James M. Thornton, Jr.! 
Gohlherz & Lewis, N. Lewis, A. W. Anchors, John M. Jones, J. G. 
S° Wle c £ Tj Ad ams, J. H. Conway, D. R. Van Pelt, W. R. Mc- 
S k H S -° n ’ J i ^ Whatley, E. F. Haynes & Co., C. W. 

Lokey, F. H. Manning J F. Klein l P. A. Stamps, W. R. Bishop, 

P H ‘ r D -p ’t S d R ' V ' /h ^ le J’’ W - T aylor, George Banorlin, J. A. 

MonH r m w ' w ?f n nett ’ 1 Hend erson, G. A. Mattison, W. H. 

Moody W H Dillon, S. Witkarskt. Goldstein Bros., R. Heine 

W. J. Hubbard. V . B. Hubbard, F. B. Bowie, J. D. Lewis J W 



2681 


CONSTITUTIONAL CONVENTION, 1901 

f n Cn X T,,l' , G ° ,d r n ' L ' McElderry, A. E. Bartlett, Rowland 

\lill- I H j j e ^ a ^ rt, J Izer W. H. Boynton. Highland City 
Mills, J. H. Hicks, H. Stark Bon. 

The resolutions were referred to the Committee on Corpora- 
tions. ^ 


Mr. Heflin (Randolph) introduced the following resolution: 

Resolution No. 266, by Mr. Heflin of Randolph: 

Kesoh ed. that Capt. John h. Burns, who is the quartermaster 
of the State Cayalry, and who has seryed the State faithfully for 
years w ithotit pay, he granted leave of absence for a few days dur¬ 
ing the encampment that he may perform the duties of his position. 

MR. HE MMX I move that the rules be suspended and the 
resolution be placed upon its immediate passage. 

A vote being taken, the rules were suspended, and on a fur¬ 
ther vote being taken, the resolution was adopted. 

Leave of absence was granted to Mr. Bulger for today. 

Mr. Lowe (Jefferson) introduced the following ordinance: 

Be it ordained by the people of Alabama in Convention as¬ 
sembled : 

Section 1. Every male citizen of the United States, and every 
male citizen of foreign birth who may have legally declared his 
intention to become a citizen of the United States before he offers 
to vote, who is not under 21 years of age, possessing the following 
qualifications, shall be an elector, and shall be entitled to vote at 
any election by the people except as hereinafter provided. 

hirst—He shall have resided in the State at least two years, 
in the county one year and in the precinct or ward three months 
immcdiatelv preceding the election at which he offers to vote; 
provided, that any elector who within three months next preceding 
the date of election at which he offers to vote, has removed from 
one precinct or ward in the same county shall have the right to 
vote in the precinct or ward from which he has so removed, if he 
would have been entitled to vote in such precinct or ward but for 
such removal; and provided also, that no soldier, sailor or marine 
in the military or naval service of the United States shall acquire a 
residence bv being stationed in this State. 

Second—He shall have made a contribution to the public 
schools of $3. bv all electors under 45 years of age. and $1.50 by all 
electors over 45 years of age, by paying that amount to the Tax 
Collector of the county during the months of January, February 
or March of each year subsequent to the last general election and 
the year in which the election is held at w hich he shall 



2682 


OFFICIAL PROCEEDINGS 


offer to vote. The contribution herein provided for shall be called 
“the school contribution/’ and the amount received therefrom, less 
the commission allowed by law to the collector, shall be applied to 
the public schools of the State; provided, however, that the General 
Assembly may by law provide that the school contribution made 
by the residents of the several precincts may be used for the support 
of and maintenance of the public schools in such precincts. It 
shall be the duty of the Tax Collector of the county to issue to 
each person who shall make the school contribution a receipt show¬ 
ing correctly the date of payment, the name of the said person and 
the precinct and county of his residence, and immediately upon said 
payment being made, the Tax Collector shall enter the name of 
the person contributing in a well-bound book to be kept for the 
purpose, or allow such person to write his own name in said book, 
which shall be ruled and marked to show the date of payment of 
the school contribution, age, color and precinct of residence of the 
persons who make the same. And on or before the 15th day of 
April of each year the Tax Collector shall certify under oath and 
file in the office of the Judge of Probate of his county an accurate 
list of all persons who during the next preceding month of January. 
February and March have made the school contribution, and the 
Judge of Probate shall within ten days from its filing cause said 
list to be recorded in a well-bound book to be kept for the purpose 
and designated Registration of Electors. The list as certified bv 
the Tax Collector and as recorded in the probate office shall desig¬ 
nate the name, age. color and precinct of residence of the persons 
whose names appear thereon. The Judge of Probate shall give 
notice by posting at some convenient place at the court house and 
by publication in one or more newspapers of general circulation, 
if any be published in the county, once a week for three successive 
weeks, that the list has been filed in his office, and that said notice 
shall be given, or the first insertion thereof, be made within ten 
days from the date of said filing of the list by the Tax Collector, 
and any citizen whose name does not appear on said list may before 
the 31st day of May of each year have the right to apply to the 
Judge of Probate to enter his name thereon, and upon due proof 
that the school contribution was made by such person within the 
time allowed therefor, it shall be the duty of the Judge of Probate 
to enter his name as an elector at the foot of said list as recorded 
with appropriate remarks indicating that said person’s name had 
been improperly omitted; and upon the refusal of the Judge of 
Probate to enter the name of any applicant as an elector the latter 
may appeal from the judgment or decision of the Judge of Probate 
to the Circuit Court of his county, and the judgment of the Circuit 
Court upon such matter shall be final. The General Assembly 
shall provide by law a method for expunging from the Registra¬ 
tion of Electors any name or names improperly placed on the list 
certified by the Tax Collector or recorded by the Judge of Probate 



COXSTm'TJOXAJ. COXVKNTION. 1901 


2683 


or added to cither of said lists l>v any person. The Tax Collectors 
of the several counties shall remit to the State Auditor within the 
first fifteen days of April of each year the amount received by them 
respectively upon the school contribution, less their commission. 
It shall be unlawful for any Tax Collector to receive any school 
contribution for any year after the 31st day of March of that year, 
and any Tax Collector who wilfully or intentionally adds to or 
omits from the list herein required to be certified and any Judge of 
Probate who wilfully or intentionally fails to accurately record the 
list certified, shall be guilty of a felony. Xo person whose name 
does not appear on the said certified list and registration of electors 
for the vear next preceding that on which the election is held, shall 
be entitled to vote, except that in case of application by a citizen to 
have hi' name added and the judgment favorable thereto of the 
Judge of Probate or Circuit Court, such person may vote, as though 
his name were on said list; provided, that nothing herein shall be 
construed to exclude from voting any soldier or sailor who has 
fought or was actually enlisted on either side of the war between 
the States, or who has fought or was actually enlisted in any war 
to which the United States was a party, but all such soldiers and 
sailors otherwise qualified may vote without having made the school 
contribution. 


Sec. 2. All elections by the people shall be bv ballot, and all 
elections by persons in a representative capacity shall be viva voce. 

Sec. 3. The following persons shall be disqualified both from 
registration and from voting, namely; 

•Ml idiots and insane persons; those who shall by reason of 
conv iction of crime be disqualified from voting at the time of the 
ratification of this Constitution; and those who shall be convicted 
of treason murder, arson, embezzlement, malfeasance in office, 
larcenv. receiving stolen property, obtaining property or money 
under false pretense, perjury, subornation of perjury, robbery, as¬ 
sault and battery on the wife, bigamy, living m adultery, sodomy, 
incest rape, miscegenation, crime against nature, or any crime 
punishable bv imprisonment in the penitentiary or of any 
infamous crime or crimes involving moral turpitude; also any 
uerson who shall be convicted as a vagrant or a tramp, or of 
selling or offering to sell his vote or the vote of another, or buy¬ 
ing or offering to buv the vote of another in any election by the 
people or in anv primary election, or to procure the nomination 
or election of anv person to any office, or of suborning any wit¬ 
ness or registrar to secure the regulation of any person as an 

elector. 

s - 4 "s&zrX 

me y .h«l'oTparty action of any political party or faction, who .shall 



2684 


OFFICIAL PROCEEDINGS 


not possess the qualifications prescribed in this Article for an 
elector or who shall be disqualified under the provisions of this 
Article from voting. 

Sec. 5. No person not registered and qualified as an elector 
under the provisions of this Article shall vote at any State, county 
or municipal election, general, local or special, held subsequent to 
the general election in 1902; but the provisions of this Article shall 
not apply to any election held prior to the general election in 1902, 
and all electors who shall comply with the provisions hereof in 
the year 1902 shall be entitled to vote in said elections. 

Sec. 6. Any elector whose right to vote shall be challenged 
for any legal cause before an election officer shall be required to 
swear or affirm, that the matter of the challenge is untrue before 
his vote shall be received, and any one who willfully swears, or 
affirms falsely thereto shall be guilty of perjury. 

Sec. 7. In the trial of any contested election, and in proceed¬ 
ings to investigate any election, no person other than a defendant, 
shall be allowed to withhold his testimony on the ground that he 
may criminate himself, or subject himself to public infamv; but 
such person shall not be prosecuted for any offense arising out of 
the transaction concerning which he testifies, but may be prose¬ 
cuted for perjury committed on such examination. 

Sec. 8. The General Assembly shall pass laws not inconsistent 
with this Constitution, to regulate and govern elections, and all 
such laws, shall be uniform throughout the State, and shall provide 
by law for the manner of holding elections and of ascertaining the 
result of the same, and shall provide general registration laws, not 
inconsistent with the provisions of this Article, for the registration 
of all qualified electors from and after the first day of January. 
1903. The General Assembly shall also make provisions by law. 
not inconsistent with this Article for the regulation of primary elec¬ 
tions, and for punishing frauds at the same, but shall not make 
primary elections compulsory. 

Sec. 9. It shall be the duty of the General Assembly- to pass 
adequate laws giving protection against the evils arising from the 
use of intoxicating liquors at all elections. 

Sec. 10. Elections shall in all cases, except treason, felony or 
breach of the peace, be privileged from arrest during their at¬ 
tendance at elections, or while going to or returning therefrom. 

Sec. 11. Returns of elections for all civil officers who are to 
be commissioned by the Governor, except Secretary of State, Au¬ 
ditor, Treasurer, Commissioner of Agriculture and Industries, At¬ 
torney General and Superintendent of Education, and for members 
of the General Assembly, shall be made to the Secretary of State. 



CONSTITUTIONAL CONVENTION, 1901 


2685 


Referred to Committee on Suffrage and Elections. 

MR. MERRILL (Barbour)—I have a petition to offer. I ask 
that the body of it be read, and that the petition be referred to the 
proper Committee: 

To the Honorable Constitutional Convention, Montgomery, Ala.: 


Dear Sirs—We respectfully represent that whereas the Rail¬ 
road Commission appointed by the Governor and paid by the rail¬ 
roads has proven an entire failure and whereas, the shipper and 
consumer should have some representation in the naming of rates 
and making of rules by what is otherwise alien and arbitrary 
power. That, whereas, the express, telephone, telegraph and rail¬ 
road franchises are given by the State, the power of these fran¬ 
chises to tax should be limited by the State. We therefore request 
that your honorable body will give the State a commission elected 
and paid bv the people and place all franchises, which have power 
to tax. within their review. 


|. T. Rov, R. A. Ballowe, H. R. Shorter, E. H. Graves, J. 
Clato. G. W. Whitlock, Shelly & Co.. J. E. Capp, Hiram Hawkins, 
B. B. McKenzie. C. A. Sentrey, Henry H. Parker, W. M. Stokes, 
j. A. Davis. Ch. S. McDowell, W. Petry, C. G. Caldwell, A. M. 
McLendon, C. R. Spurlock, J. D. Holmes, J. D. Schwab, Theo. 
Pruden, L. V. Dean & Son, A. Scheuer, M. Scheuer, Henry Bloom, 
T Stern. J. H. Watkins. C. M. Thompson, H. Schloss, Thos. L. 
Moore C. S. McDowell, Jr., Geo. C. McCormick, W. L. McCor¬ 
mick E. L. Brown, E. B. Powers, Geo. N. Hancock, W. C. Dunna- 
wav. R. F. Nance, J. B. Searcy, J. W. Hurdbut, J. P. Foy, J. M. 
Johnson, S. M. Carroll, W. S. Goldsbee, J. E. Engram, J L. Ross 
A F Peak M. W. Sanders. W. C. Standifer, R. F. Bradley, L. W. 
Troy. T. J. Ramser, C. A. Martin. B. C. Bell, C. P. Roberts, E. M. 
Jones, J. B. Garland. 

Mr. Sanford (Montgomery) introduced the following ordin¬ 


ances: 

Ordinance 432, by Mr. John W. A. Sanford. 

An ordinance to empower the legislature to construct a canal 
from the city of Birmingham to the Warrior River by the employ¬ 
ment of convicts on such work. 

Be it ordained by the people of Alabama in Convention as¬ 
sembled That the legislature shall have power to authorize the 
construction of a canal from the city of Birmingham to the Warrior 
river by the employment of persons convicted of crime, on such 
work, and to provide for the collection of tolls on freight and fares 
from passengers, for the benefit of the State. 

Referred to Committee on Legislative Department. 



2686 


OFFICIAL PROCEEDINGS 


Ordinance 433, by Mr. Jno. W. A. Sanford: 

An ordinance to limit corporations in the holding of lands in 
Alabama. 

Whereas, the growth, power and influence of corporations are 
a menace to the rights and welfare of the people. 

Therefore, Be it ordained by the people of Alabama in Con¬ 
vention assembled, That no corporation, domestic or foreign, or 
any combination of such corporations, shall purchase, own or hold 
in any manner, more than a thousand acres of land in Alabama, 
without the permission of the legislature of the State. 

MR. SANFORD (Montgomery)—I ask that that ordinance be 
referred to the Committee on Amendment of the Constitution and 
Miscellaneous Matter. 

THE PRESIDENT—It seems to the Chair that the proper 
reference would be to the Committee on Corporations. 

MR. SANFORD—That Committee has not been heard from 
any more than the searchers for the north pole, and if referred to it 
will not be heard from any more than we do of the chariots of 
Pharaoh. 

THE PRESIDENT—Does the gentleman wish to enter a mo¬ 
tion to refer the ordinance. In the opinion of the Chair, the proper 
reference would be to the committee on Corporations. The gen¬ 
tleman may enter a motion, and it is within the power of the Con¬ 
vention to give a different reference if it sees fit. 

MR. SANFORD—Then I move Mr. President, that it be re¬ 
ferred to the Committee on Amendment of the Constitution and 
Miscellaneous Matters. 

Upon a vote being taken, the motion to refer to the Committee 
on Amendment of Constitution and Miscellaneous Matters was 
lost. 


THE PRESIDENT—The ordinance is referred to the Com¬ 
mittee on Corporations. 

When Mr. SentelFs name was reached on roll call, he yielded 
to Mr. Weatherly of Jefferson. 

MR. WEATHERLY—I have a petition to offer, which I in¬ 
troduce by request. 

THE PRESIDENT—Does the gentleman desire to submit a 
motion that the petition be read before the Convention? Without 
a motion, the rules do not provide for the reading of petitions. 

MR. WEATHERLY—I ask that it be referred to the Com¬ 
mittee on Suffrage and Elections. 



CONSTITUTIONAL CONVENTION, 1901 


2687 


THE PRESIDENT—The petition will be referred on request 
of the gentleman to the Committee on Suffrage and Elections. 

Does the gentleman desire the petition included in the steno¬ 
graphic report? 

MR. WEATHERLY—Yes, sir. 

THE PRESIDENT—The stenographers will be requested to 
take note of the petition. 

Anniston, Ala., July 20, 1901. 

To the Constitutional Convention of Alabama: 

Gentlemen—Being deeply interested in the work of the Con¬ 
vention, especially in the suffrage plan, proposed by the Suffrage 
Committee, and having been requested by several members of your 
body to make such suggestions as might seem to be pertinent, I 
have taken the liberty to prepare, with some care, certain amend¬ 
ments, which seem to me to be necessary to properly safeguard 
the registration under the plan proposed by the committee, in order 
to secure a complete and perfect registration of the qualified elec¬ 
tors in the State. 

The suggestions I make relate alone to the regislation of the 
life electors, as provided in the report of the committee. The en¬ 
tire plan for such registration is contained in Section 10 as reported 
by the committee. (See page 9 of Report, Section 10). This seq- 
tion provides: “The General Assembly shall provide by law for 
the registration, after the first day of January, 1903, of all qualified 
electors. Until the first day of January, 1903, all electors shall be 
registered under and in accordance with the requirements of this 
section, as follows/’ Then follows seven subdivisions of Section 
10, setting forth the plan of registration, which the committee pro¬ 
posed. 

It is provided in one of said subdivisions that “unless he shall 
become disqualified—any one who shall register prior to the first 
day of January, 1903, shall remain an elector during life, and shall 
be required to re-register only in case of a change of residence, on 
production of his certificate/' (Report, p. 13, line 13). It will be 
noted therefore, first. That the persons registered under the plan 
proposed in Section 10 will be voters for life—will constitute a life 
electorate whose status as such will be beyond the control of the 
Legislature. 

Second—If there is a defect in the plan proposed by the com¬ 
mittee, it will be beyond remedy after the ratification of the Con¬ 
stitution, because that section purports to be complete in itself; 
to set forth all that it is proposed shall be enacted on the subject 
embraced in said section. It is self-executing. The Legislature 
cannot change it. This being true, gives to this section an in- 



2688 


OFFICIAL PROCKI'.DIXGS 


creased importance. Any plan of registration, which may fix the 
status of every voter in the entire State during life, should he well 
hedged about to prevent fraud in the registration. No plan of 
ballot reform based upon a fraudulent registration, or based upon 
a plan of registration under which fraud i> possible, is deserving' 
of a name. These considerations make it necessary that the plan 
of registration should be hedged about with proper safeguards, so 
as. to provide not only for a full and fair registration, but also to 
prevent any fraud in its execution. Unless proper safeguards are 
thrown around the registration, the Convention will discredit itself 
before the thoughtful men of the State. The greatest argument 
made in favor of the calling of the Convention was to purifv the 
ballot. If the plan proposed by the committee admits of greater 
fraud than now epcists or if it admits of any fraud whatever, it 
should be amended so as to prevent it. No man who really desires 
the purification of the ballot can object to any amendment of the 
plan proposed, which will insure the people of the State a full, 
correct, and honest registration. And no man who is appointed 
Registrar, and who intends faithfully and honestly to perform the 
duties devolving upon him as such can or will object to any reason¬ 
able amendment, which will insure the proper performance of that 
duty, by fixing penalties for any failure on his part honestlv to 
perform those duties. No Registrar should be held, or sought to 
be held liable for any mistake of judgment on his part, but lie 
should be held liable criminally for a dishonest or corrupt perfor¬ 
mance of his duties. The plan proposed by the committee does 
not do this. I, therefore, suggest the following amendment: 

First—The first amendment I suggest is to provide that no 
name can be registered except on the personal application of the 
voter, and that no one man can register for another. If the Regis¬ 
trars can register a man without his knowledge, they can register 
a name without their being any voter of that name, and they can 
register a man against his will: and they can register one man for 
another. Unless it is provided that no registration shall be made 
except on the personal application of the voter, and that one man 
cannot register for another, the flood gates of fraud and corruption 
will be open wide, and our State will be more than ever at the 
mercy of those who are willing to commit fraud at the ballot box. 
The danger of such a course, it seems would be apparent. That a 
life electorate of this State can be registered without the personal 
application of the voter would be revolutionary. The report of 
the committee does not require a personal application by the voter 
before his name can be registered on the list of life voters. It does 
not even require an application under oath to register. Section 5, 
page 12, line 62, simply gives the Board of Registers “power to 
examine under oath or affirmation all applicants for registration.” 
It does not require the application to register to be made under 



2689 


CONSTITUTIONAL CONVENTION, 1901 

but^loefnnt B ° anl P ° Wer to examine the applicant under oath, 

unde oath lL| X T S t , erms \ eq "} rt the app,ication to he made 
can ride alon ^ th f ,,lan embodied in the report, the registrars 
° ^e roac l or sit in their office, and register anv name 

itV'i’^hTr, 'T ,heir "r'f Th '>' 

registered y ’ n ° ne ° f whom nee(i know that they are being 

. J he -V Ca " re b ri; ; ter every man who ever did live in the countv 

not lei H ' Vin ;1 ° r dea<L 11 may be replied that th « Registrars will’ 
ot do this that is not the question, can they? If they can the 

plan should we amended so they cannot. I therefore suggest as an 
amendment, the following: ' a 

" Inser t between line 61 and 62 on page 12, the following: No 

umk'l oith t bt ;, re ^ stere , d - . excep t on his own personal application, 
uncki oath to the Board of Registrars, upon a blank furnished by 

the Secretary ot State, and prepared under the advice of the At- 
toney (.eneral, with the view to testing fully the qualifications of 
each applicant for registration, and to furnish full and accurate 
evidence afterwards as to his personal identity. The Board of 
Registrars shall endorse on each application its correct date and 
whether registration is granted or denied to the applicant.” 

“Second—The second amendment pertains to the purging of 
the list of registered voters filed by the Board of Registrars The 
plan as reported has no such provisions. Under it there is no wav 
provided tor getting a name off the list after it once gets on - nor is 
there a way to revise the registration list at anv time. This it 
seems to me to be absolutely necessary. It is true the plan provides 
toi an appeal in favor of one who is denied the right to register 
I here can be no reasonable objection to that provision. But an 
appeal should also be given to any citizen of the State who desires 
to contest the right of any voter to register. Means should be pro¬ 
vided for purging the list of names of dead men. and men removed 
and those who become insane, and those convicted of crime or 
otherwise disqualified. It seems to me that the necessity of some 
such provision as this would be so apparent as to render argument 
unnecessary. I would suggest therefore, the following amendment: 

First Insert after the words “qualified electors" in line ? 
on page 9, the following: 

“For purging the registration lists of names illegally entered 
thereon and of persons illegally registered, and of those who may 
die. become insane, convicted of crime, or otherwise disqualified 
as an elector under the provisions of this Constitution, and for 
keeping in proper form the list of male idiots and insane persons 
and all males convicted of crime/ 4 

Second—Insert after the words “of the board,” in line 74 on 
page 12 the following: 



2690 


OFFICIAL lM^OCKKIMNV.S 


“Any citizen of the State may at any time have a list of regis¬ 
tered voters purged of any names or names illegally entered there¬ 
on, or the name of any person who. at the time of registration, 
is qualified under the provisions of thi> Constitution, or who after¬ 
wards become so disqualified.” 

Third—The third amendment i> intended to >ecitre absolute 
fairness and accuracy in the registration. \o citizen w ho hone>t- 
ly favors the purity of the ballot, can object to this amendment. 
And no registrar who intends honestly and faithfully to perform 
his duties wall object. It does not in any way hamper the Regis¬ 
trar in the honest discharge of his dtitv, nor seek to hold him 
liable in any way for any mistake of judgment oil his part. It dues 
not in any way affect him in the honest discharge of hi> <lutv. This 
amendment is as follows: 

‘‘Insert between lines 91 and 1, on page Id. a new section to 
read as follows: Any elector who registers for another, or who 
registers more than once; and any registrar who enters the name 
of any elector on the list of registered voters, without such elector 
makes application in person and under oath on a form provided 
for that purpose to be registered as hereinbefore provided, or who 
knowingly registers any person more than once, or wdio know¬ 
ingly enters a name upon the registration list as a registered 
voter when no one of that name applied to register, shall be guiltv 
of a felony.” 

Fourth—The fourth amendment requires all application* ami 
testimony offered before the Board or against the application to 
be returned by the Board for or against application, to be returned 
by the Board of Registrars along with the list. It will take two 
amendments to properly provide for this. I have prepared said 
amendments as follows: 

First—‘Insert after the word ‘person’ in line 4. on mme Id 
the following: ^ 

“Together with all applications to register, which were filed 
betore them, and all evidence introduced before them for all evi¬ 
dence introduced before them for or against each application.” 

Second—“Insert between lines 10 and 11 after the word ‘orig¬ 
inal , and before the word ‘list,’ on page 13, the follow dug: 

“Applications for registration, and all papers relating- thereto 
and the. 

It will be noticed that none of the amendments which I sug¬ 
gest will in any way embarrass the Registrars in the honest dis- 
charge of their duty. These amendments all seem to me to he 
necessary in order to perfect the plan of registration proposed bv 
the Committee. If the suffrage is to he regulated so as to secure 



CONSTITUTIONAL CONVKNTION. 1901 


2691 


honest elections, and remove any excuse for pretext for fraud, on 
account of the presence of the large number of ignorant and vicious 
voters, we cannot be too careful in providing a system of regis¬ 
tration. If we would eliminate the class of voters in whose hands 
the right to vote is a menace to good government and good morals, 
proper safeguards must be placed around the plan of registration, 
and stringent penalties provided for the corrupt registration of 
any voter. If the Convention does that, its work will command 
the respect of patriotic and thoughtful men everywhere. If it fails 
to do that, it will discredit itself before the people of the State. I 
cannot believe that the intelligent and patriotic members of the 
Convention will object to any amendment of the plan proposed by 
the Suffrage Committee that will secure to the people of the State 
a full and honest registration of the qualified voters of the State. 

None of the amendments herein suggested are offered in the 
interest of any man or set of men, nor in the interest of any sec¬ 
tion. The only object sought to be accomplished is to provide 
safeguards around the plan of registration, affecting all the peo¬ 
ple of the State, which will result in the registration being had ac¬ 
cording to the purpose intended by the Committee. Not being a 
member of the Convention and there being but a very short time 
until the Convention will begin the consideration of the suffrage 
plan as proposed by the Committee, I am under the necessity of 
availing myself of this method of presenting these suggestions. 
If there is an} 7 merit in any of them, I feel very sure that they 
will receive the consideration they deserve. With great respect, 

I am very truly, 

Richard B. Kelly. 

Referred to Committee on Suffrage. 

THE PRESIDENT—The next order is unfinished business. 

MR. SMITH (Mobile) — I desire to offer an amendment to 
Section 59 of the report of the Committee on Legislative Depart¬ 
ment. 

THE PRESIDENT—The present order is unfinished busi¬ 
ness. The next order will be the special order, the consideration 
of the report on Legislative Department. This report was con¬ 
cluded on yesterday, but this morning there was one Section re¬ 
considered. It seems to the Chair that it would be in order to pro¬ 
ceed with the consideration of that Section at this time. 

MR. OATES—There was notice given on yesterday that there 
would be a motion this morning to reconsider another Section. I 
do not know whether that Avill be insisted on or not. 

THE PRESIDENT—Was that Section 47? 



2692 


OFFICIAL PROCEEDIN'!IS 


MR. OATES—I believe so. 

THE PRESIDENT — The gentleman from Mobile (Mr. 
Brooks) indicated that he did not care to press the question to re¬ 
consider Section 47. The special order will now l>e consideration 
of the report of the Committee on Legislative Department having 
under consideration Section 5*). which wa- reconsidered In the 
Convention this morning. The gentleman from Mobile offers an 
amendment, the Secretarv will read the amendment. 

The Secretarv read the amendment as follows : 

“Amend Section 50 of the Article of the report bv the Com¬ 
mittee on Legislative Department by striking therefrom all of the 
Section after the words ‘by the Legislature/ in line 3 of the Sec¬ 
tion, and preceding the word ‘provided* in the sixth line, and bv 
striking out the word ‘doubtful’ in the seventh line. 

MR. SMITH—I have no argument to make. 1 have stated 
the purpose of the amendment, and it is the amendment to which 
I referred at the time 1 moved to reconsider. 

MR. JONES (Wilcox)—I wish to otter an amendment to the 
amendment of the gentleman from Mobile. 

The Clerk read the amendment as follows: 

Strike out in the fourth, fifth and sixth lines the words ‘into 
the proper Treasury; nor shall such liability or obligation be ex¬ 
changed or transferred except upon payment of its face value.’ 
and add the word ‘the’ before ‘payment’’ in the fourth line: also 
strike out in the seventh line ‘for the compromise of doubtful 
claims, and add ‘for adjusting, compromising or settling claims 
such items as may be just and reasonable.’ 

THE PRESIDENT—The on „i]l l,e on the ado,,,,,,,, 

ot the amendment to the amendment offered In the L'emleinan 
from Wilcox. 


MR. JONES (Wilcox)—In Code 3753. there is a provision 
made for the compromise of claims in favor of the State There 
is nothing said about whether claims be doubtful or not. It reads 
in this way: The Governor, Attorney General and Auditor have 
authority to adjust, compromise, and settle on such terms as thev 
may seem just and reasonable, any claim of the State against anv 
person or any public officer or bis surety or because of the negli¬ 
gence or default in the safe-keeping, collection, or disbursement 
ot public monies, or funds or propertv bv anv officer having charge 
or custody thereof. 1 ’ ' * * 


Now the amendment to the amendment uses the language of 
that statute leaving out the word “doubtful," and substituting the 
language of the Statute, “authorizing the adjustment, compromis- 



CONSTITUTIONAL CONVENTION, 1901 


2693 


ing an<l settling of claims.” In line 4, the words “into the proper 
Treasury” are stricken out, leaving it so it will read in this way: 
“Nor shall such liability or obligation be extinguished except In¬ 
payment thereof.” 

MR. PITTS (Dallas)—I would like to ask the gentleman a 
(| nest ion. 

THE PRESIDENT—Does the gentleman yield? 

MR. JONES—Yes sir. 

MR. PITTS—You propose to leave it. “nor shall such liabili¬ 
ty or obligation be extinguished except by payment thereof.” I 
would like to ask this question : Suppose a bond is forfeited, and 
the Judge has good reason to believe that the bond ought to be 
reduced, would this prohibit him from reducing the bond.' 

MR. JONES—I think not. 

MR. PITTS—A bond for the appearance of a defendant, and 
that bond is forfeited, and he has a good excuse, and it ought not 
to be made final for the full amount, does it prohibit the Judge 
from reducing that bond to a less amount? 

MR. JONES—No sir, it would be merged in the judgment 
and the payment of the judgment would be the extinguishment of 
the claim for the full amount. 

MR. PITTS—It says “No obligation or liability of any person, 
association or corporation held or owned by this State, or by any 
county, or other municipality thereof, shall ever be remitted, re¬ 
leased or postponed or in any way diminished by the Legislature: 
nor shall such liability or obligation be extinguished, except In¬ 
payment thereof.” Wouldn’t that entirely prohibit it. 

MR. JONES—No, T think not. The claim would be merged 
in the judgment, and the payment of the judgment would be set¬ 
tlement of the claim in any Court. 

MR. SMITH (Mobile)—I have no objection to the amend¬ 
ment offered by the gentleman from Wilcox. It is perfectly agree¬ 
able: I don’t know that I am at liberty to accept it personally. 
There is nothing between the two views that appeals to me at all. 
One does for me just as well as another. 

MR. FEROUSON—If I am in order. I have an amendment 
which I wish to offer. 

THE PRESIDENT—The subject that the Convention has 
under consideration now is Section 59. The gentleman may with¬ 
hold his amendment and offer it at a later period. 

MR. FERGUSON—I will do so. 



2694 


OFFICIAL PROCEEDINGS 


MR. MERRILL—The introduction of Section 51 by the Com¬ 
mittee in this Article is what 1 regard as a departure from the 
policy of the State established by the laws now in existence, and it 
is an encroachment or entry upon the Legislative powers that lias 
no place in the Constitution. 'The Code, Sections 3753-54, pre¬ 
scribes and creates a Board of Compromise in the State whose duty 
it is to take charge of all these claims in favor of the State, and 
arrange and settle them as to the board seems proper. It gives 
them almost plenary power over these matters, and if the State 
should possess the power of compromising its debt, why not allow 
counties and municipalities the same right and power. Why is it 
we want to go into these matters. Has any evil arisen? I know 
of none, and I know of no reason why the policy of the State 
should be changed by the incorporation of this article into the Con¬ 
stitution. I therefore move that the section and all amendments 
to it be laid upon the table. 

MR. OATHS—I will ask the delegate from Barbour to w ith¬ 
hold that motion for a moment. I will yield the floor to him. 

THE PRESIDENT—Does the gentleman from Harbour w ith¬ 
hold temporarily his motion. 

MR. MERRILL—Yes. sir. 

MR. OATES—I want to say on behalf of the committee, that 
some of the members of it- 

MR. GRANT—The gentleman is not in order, the motion is 
to lay upon the table. 

MR. OATES—It was withdrawn. 

MR. MERRILL—I withdrew the motion for the purpose of 
giving the chairman of the committee an opportunity. 

MR. OATES—Some members of the committee seem to have 
had a wider scope of information than the gentleman from Har¬ 
bour, and the object and purpose of this section was in the minds 
of the committee who reported it. to put a limitation and restric¬ 
tion upon that plenary power which he says the statute gives the 
State Hoard and those of municipalities and counties, because it 
had come to the knowledge of some of the members of that com¬ 
mittee that this plenary power had been abused, and that compro¬ 
mises had been made which were unnecessary and were sacrifices 
of just demand and demands which have been made available to 
the State, counties and municipalities, and it was an effort on the 
part of the committee- 

MR. MERRILL—Will you permit an inquiry. Under this 
section as you have it, allowing the compromise of doubtful claims, 
is it not a fact that if a compromise is effected on that idea, that 
it is a settlement of it and the end of it? 



CONSTITUTIONAL CONVENTION, 1901 


2695 


MR. OATES*—-As a matter of course. It is first a denial to 
the Legislature to dispose of these claims—“No obligation or lia¬ 
bility of any person, association or corporation held or owned by 
this State, or by any county or municipality thereof, shall ever be 
remitted, released or postponed or in any way diminished by the 
Legislature.” 'The Legislature shall not do it, “nor shall such lia¬ 
bility or obligation be extinguished except by payment thereof, 
into the proper treasury.” 1 admit that “into the proper treasury" 
are unnecessary and they may as well be stricken out: “nor shall 
>ueh liability or obligation be exchanged or transferred except upon 
payment ot its face value; provided, that this section shall not pre¬ 
vent the Legislature from providing by general law for the com¬ 
promise of doubtful claims.” That is entirely proper. The Legis¬ 
lature should have that power, but under the law as it stands, 
boards have a right to compromise any claim whether doubtful 
or not. Their sympathies may be worked upon, and in a govern¬ 
ment like ours, by the people in which all officers are candidates 
for re-election to the same office, or for some other office, it is very 
easy to persuade them that a claim between the citizen and the 
State or county or municipality should be compromised. 

MR. GRANT—Is the motion to table? And is not the gentle¬ 
man speaking to that motion? 

THE PRESIDENT—It was withdrawn temporarily in order 
tlicit the chairman might discuss the question. 

MR. OATES—I am doing this in justice to the committee 
that the Convention may see exactly what was aimed at. The lan¬ 
guage may not be perfectly apt all through, but I insist that the 
idea is a good one. There ought to he a restriction upon this 
power, and for the reasons I have already stated, you invest men, 
a board, representative of the county or municipality with authori¬ 
ty, and it may be that the liability is a hard one in some respects, 
but a just one to the county. State or municipality, and yet against 
some person or persons who are of great influence, and may appeal 
to those who have the right to compromise, and they say. Oh, well, 
it is a pretty hard case on him, and the State, county or municipali¬ 
ty can stand it, and they are disposed to compromise and do com¬ 
promise some claims every clay, which ought to he paid, and it is 
to remedy this evil and put a proper restriction upon those who 
have the authority to compromise and settle, that the word “doubt¬ 
ful” was used so as to indicate to the Legislature in carrying out 
this provision, that it was not for the compromise of liabilities 
which are collectable and just, but such as were doubtful, in some 
sense. Therefore, I do not think the amendment should be adopt¬ 
ed. Now the amendment offered by my friend, the delegate from 
Wilcox, if that be substituted, following the statute, it is no re¬ 
striction, and you may just as well strike out all after the word 



2696 


OFFICIAL PROCEEDINGS 


“Legislature,” as is the amendment of the delegate from Mobile. 
I think it is much better to perfect the language of this section so 
as to effectuate the object of the committee in making the report 
which was a good one. I now renew the motion of the gentleman 
from Barbour to table the section and the pending amendments. 

A vote being taken, the motion to table was lost. 

THE PRESIDENT—The question will be upon the amend¬ 
ment offered by the gentleman from Wilcox to amendment offered 
by the delegate from Mobile. Is the Convention ready for the 
question ? 

MR. DUKE—I ask for the reading of the amendment. 1 
would like to have the original section read as amended with all 
the amendments, as it will read when amended. 

THE PRESIDENT—There are two amendments. It is very 
difficult for the Secretary to just place the amendment as the sec¬ 
tion would read amended. 

MR. DUKE—Then just read the two amendments. 

THE PRESIDENT—The gentleman has the section before 
him. The Secretary will read the section. 

MR. JONES (Wilcox)—As f understand the gentleman from 
Mobile, the amendment offered was accepted by him and therefore 
there is but one before the house. 

MR. SMITH—I did not understand that I could accept; I 
was perfectly willing to accept ; I thought it was the property of 
the Convention and I had no right to accept it. 

THE PRESIDENT—The gentleman can obtain unanimous 
consent, perhaps, to accept the amendment. 

MR. SMITH—Very well, sir. 

THE PRESIDENT *— The gentleman asks unanimous con¬ 
sent. 


MR. PITTS (Dallas)—I object. 

MR. OATES—Probably 1 have authority of the Committee 
and I ask unanimous consent to amend in the fourth line, bv strik¬ 
ing out the words “into the proper Treasury.“ 

There being no objection the amendment was allowed. 

MR. GRANT—I want to ask the gentleman a question. Will 
the gentleman strike out the word ’‘general?” 

MR. OATES—I think that would destroy largely the pur¬ 
pose of the section. 



CONSTITUTIONAL, CONVENTION, 1901 2697 

PRESIDENT—-The question would be upon the adon- 

modi«L a„,r’: e " ll "l e 1 , , 0tf T‘ l * he gentleman from Mobfle L 

modified and accepted by the gentleman from Wilcox. 

liive^hesS?ii iB ~ T , he gent , le ; nan fro,n Chambers has asked to 
man from Wilcox!" ^ ni ° <i,f,e<1 hy the amendment of the gentle- 

of the^JnH RKSI ? EN T~. The Secretarv u i, l read the amendment 
reVdln * entI .‘; nian from Wilcox, and if the members will follow the 
reading of it and compare with the original section thev will be 
able to understand. 


I lie amendment was again read. 

T move to lay the amendment on the 


MR. BLACKWKLI 

table. 


J HR PRESIDEN1—There was a motion to lay the section 
and the amendment on the table voted down. The question will 
be upon the amendment offered by the gentleman from Wilcox, 
which the gentleman from Mobile has obtained unanimous con¬ 
sent to accept. 

MR. OATES—As I understand the motion of the gentleman 
irom Morgan is to lay the section and the amendment on the table. 

1 HE PRESIDENT—To lay the amendment 

MR. PITTS—I objected to the acceptance of the amendment 
offered by the gentleman from Wilcox. 

THE PRESIDENT—I thank the gentleman for calling the at¬ 
tention of the Chair, the Chair overlooked that fact. So the ques¬ 
tion will be upon the amendment offered by the gentleman from 
Wilcox. As many as favor the adoption of that amendment will 
say ave. 

A vote being taken the amendment was lost. 

1 HE PRESIDENT ^ he question will be upon the adoption 
of the amendment offered by the gentleman from Mobile. The 
Secretary will read the amendment. 

The Secretary read the amendment as follows: “Amend Sec¬ 
tion 59 by striking therefrom all of the Section after the words “by 
the legislature" in line three of the section, and preceding the word 
“provided’" in the sixth line, and by striking out the word “doubt- 
fur’ in the seventh line.” 

THE PRESIDENT—Is the Convention ready for the ques¬ 
tion? 


A vote being taken the amendment was lost, on a division, by 
a vote of 35 ayes and 44 noes. 



2698 


OFFICIAL PROCEEDINGS 


MR. OATES—I move the previous question on the adoption 
of the section as amended. 

A vote being taken the previous quest ion was ordered, and 
a further vote being taken the section was adopted. 

MR. FERGUSON—1 have an amendment to offer. 

The Clerk read the amendment as follows: “Amend the Ar¬ 
ticle on Legislative Department by adding the following section : 
The legislature mav dispense with the necessity of indictment in 
cases of grand larceny, but justices of the Peace shall have onlv 
preliminary jurisdiction in such cases." 

THE PRESIDENT—The question will be on the amendment 
offered by the gentleman from Jefferson, to add a section to tin* 
article. 

MR. FERGUSON — There are no politics whatever in the 
amendment proposed. There is no play to the gallery in it, there is 
not a vote in it, Mr President. 1 simply offer it as a means of se¬ 
curing speedy trials in that class of cases in this State, a class of 
cases that predominates all other crimes in the State of Alabama. 
There is an average of 1,200 cases of that character in the State 
of Alabama year by year. 1 have had occasion when the Article 
on Preamble and Declaration of Rights was under consideration, 
to offer in substance the same amendment to Section 0 of that 
article. I understood from a number of delegates, Mr. President, 
that they opposed it upon the ground that it gave jurisdiction to 
justices of the Peace in that class of cases. 1 have so amended 
it in the proposed section here so as to cut off any idea that justices 
could have jurisdiction in cases of grand larceny. Now, Mr. Presi¬ 
dent, I desire to present it again for the consideration of this Con¬ 
vention in order to save the State of Alabama a great deal of 
money in the feed of prisoners, and to give speedy trials to manv 
that are accused of crime. As 1 had occasion to say before, when 
the matter was under consideration, there are many cases where 
a party accused of grand larceny who has been committed by a 
justice of the peace ior the offense of grand larcenv, has to lav in 
jail five or six months before he can ever get a trial. Now, gen¬ 
tlemen of the Convention, the proposed amendment simply gives 
the legislature the power to dispense with the necessity of indict¬ 
ment in that class of cases. It does not say that they must do it, 
it leaves it to the sound judgment and discretion of the legisla¬ 
ture as to whether they will do it or not. If they exercise that 
discretion and that sound judgment, it will enable many a man 
that has to lay in jail perhaps five or six months to go before some 
court of competent jurisdiction and enter his plea of guilty where 
a warrant is sworn out in the case, or if he does not desire to plead 
guilty he may be tried before some court of competent jurisdic¬ 
tion under the warrant which may be sworn- out in that particular 



CONSTITUTIONAL CONVENTION, 1901 2699 

Uhen ! he ,natter was «n<Ier consideration, 
shadow^ ! chi " !! U r en ,^ ra " d a "<>, Petit larceny is of the most 
cases The • ’ <ih ° n, f X \ en s hado\vy and indistinct in some 
nrd labor b ’ pena ‘V' f ° r pett >‘ larcen >' twelve months 

crJt on o the ‘ , C ° Unty and U fine of $50 ° in addition, at the dis- 
( “ 1( ^ r ,An'-; try ,'” S the sanie : the minimum penalty 

morisonmenT A.'* $ !°°’ ha - r<1 lahor . fw the county or one year’s 
t > . . 111 * ie pemtentiarv. It is rare, indeed, Mr. President. 

•men '^"7 "'*| )Umshl ”ent is ever given in a case of grand 
f • U 0r these reasons, gentlemen, I merely ask vou to 

Iheir power 'toT ° f ^ Lt f is ! ature <>* thi * State to put it within 

ch's < f e-.se If’r l ! 1C necessit - v of indictment in that 

* <-ascs. As the Constitution now stands, and as it will stand 

} on do not adopt this Section, it will never he within the power 

b £ T' A ' abam , a *° ' h “*' '<• i« "'ill have to remain 
n,„ , V, “ man ls l, " ul1 ' 1 for grand larceny that he 

y ln ) a| l , al the expense of the State anti be deprived o( the 
vans of a speedy tnal. and i, is f„, these reasons that' I a'k vou to 
pass this amendment. 

MR OATHS—I most heartily concur with the views express- 

Hut ’th J'% K T nt l ' 1 I 1,an lroin Jcffe.son, and the purpose aimed at. 

t the Section has no proper place in the Legislative Depart- 
ment, it belongs in the Judicial Department, and I am not only in 
, °.r of . h,s Proposition as he presents it, but I am in favor of en¬ 

larging it. and would, if I had an opportunity to amend it invself 
M , tliat V ie courts n, ay dispense with an indictment bv a grand' iurv 
where they cannot get them in cases of outrageous' murders, be- 
cause you cannot suppress crime of that kind in any other wav in 
the State of Alabama. 1 herefore I will move to lay the amend¬ 
ment offered on the table, and will co-operate with my friend to 
take it from the table and put it in the Judicial Department when 
that comes up. 

FERGUSON—Am I in order to reply? 

THE PRESIDENT-The motion to table is not debatable. 

MR. FERGUSON—I will ask the gentleman from Montgom- 
erv to withdraw his motion to table the amendment. 

MIv. OA rivS I am not disposed to cut off a delegate from 
anything he wishes to say, but I am greatly desirous of finishing 
this report. 

1 HE PRESIDENT—The gentleman from Jefferson is not in 
order, as no delegate can speak more than once except the Chair¬ 
man of a Committee. 

MR. FERGUSON—May I ask the gentleman from Montgom¬ 
ery a question, then? 



2700 


OFFICIAL PROCEEDINGS 


THE PRESIDENT—Does the gentlem an from Montgomery 
yield ? 

MR. OATES—I will yield. 

MR. FERGUSON—Wouldn't that have the effect of weight¬ 
ing* down this amendment that I propose. I want it to go through 
on its individual merits. 


MR. OATES It tends to do that, to weigh it down, but 
vote for your proposition—I will vote to insist on 
ment. 


will 

your amend- 


MR. MACDONALD—I rise to a point of order. There is a 
motion to table. 

THE PRESIDENT—The Chair will call the attention of the 
delegate from Jefferson to Rule 14. No delegate shall speak more 
than once to the same question. The question is on the motion 
of the gentleman from Montgomery to lay on the table the amend- 
ment oLered by the gentleman from Jefferson. 

Upon a vote being taken, the motion to table was carried. 

MR. \\ HITESIDE— I have an amendment to offer. 

The Secretary read the amendment as follows: 

Mo amend the Article on Legislative Department by adding 
Section - as follow,: "The Legislature shall have no power h, 
take ai\a\ any right of action or destroy any defense to am suit 
after such suit has been commenced/ v 

MR. WHITESIDE—I move the adoption of the amendment. 

MR. OAI ES I ask that it be read. 

The amendment as offered by Mr. Whiteside was read. 

MR. OAJES That is already provided for and is whollv nn- 
necessaiy, and therefore I move to lay it on the table. 

On a vote being taken, a division was called for and the mo¬ 
tion to lav on the table was carried, 78 ayes to 13 noes. 

partment— TES ^' ” OV * Artide °» Legislative l)c 

until J^offer^n'amendment. 1 "* S "’" en,an ■' »« ™ 

There were expressions of dissent. 

amen“ment R0 ° KS ~ I ‘ hink ' °“ Rht to hav< ’ thc to offer an 
The amendment by Mr. Brooks was read as follows: 



CONSTITUTIONAL CONVENTION, 1901 


2701 


Section-. 

Any person holding office under this State who shall directly 
or indirectly ask, demand, accept, receive or consent to receive 
for his own use or benefit, or for the use or benefit of another, any 
free pass or transportation, or pass or ticket at a discount, other 
than is sold to the public generally, shall he guilty of a misde¬ 
meanor, and upon conviction shall be fined in a sum not exceeding 
two hundred and fifty dollars ($250) and at the discretion of the 
court trying the same, in addition to such fine, may be imprisoned 
for a term not exceeding two months, and upon such conviction 
shall be subject to impeachment and removal from office. 

Any railroad or transportation company, or officer or agent 
thereof who shall grant a free pass or shall at reduced rates not 
common to the public, sell tickets for transportation to any such 
person, shall be deemed guilty of a misdemeanor, and is liable to 
punishment, except as herein provided. 

No person or officer or agent of a corporation who gives any 
such free pass, free transportation or sells ticket for transporta¬ 
tion at rates hereby prohibited, shall be privileged from testifying 
in relation thereto, and he shall not be liable to civil or criminal 
prosecution therefor if lie shall testify to the giving or selling of 
the same. But this shall not prohibit the Legislature from author¬ 
izing the State to contract with any such railroad or transporta¬ 
tion company for the transportation at reduced rates of State of¬ 
ficers while traveling in the discharge of their official duties. 

Anv solicitor who shall tail faithfully to prosecute a person 
charged with the violation in his county or circuit of any provision 
of this Section which may come to his knowledge, shall be re¬ 
moved from office by the Governor, after an opportunity of being 
heard in his defense. 

MR. deORAFFENREID—I rise to a point of order. On yes¬ 
terday. just before the hour of 6 arrived, a motion was introduced 
and passed the Convention to the effect that this Convention re¬ 
main in session until the Article on Legislative Department had 
been concluded. The Article on Legislative Department was con¬ 
cluded on yesterday, and notice was given that a motion to re- 
considei a section would be made this morning, under the rules of 
the Convention, that motion would have to be heard this mora¬ 
lly but as the Article was concluded on yesteida}, the amend¬ 
ment offered by the gentleman is not now in order. 

MR. BROOKS—It is a little singular that two other gentle¬ 
men were allowed to offer amendments this morning and I should 
not be allowed. 

THE PRESIDENT—It seems to the chair that the motion 
to reconsider the section which was passed upon this morning 



2702 


OFFICIAL PROCEEDINGS 


brought the Article on the Legislative Department back before the 
Convention and that it would be in order while the Article is up 
for consideration, for the Convention to amend it and add addi¬ 
tional sections if they see fit so to do. 1 he Chair will overrule 
the point of order. 

MR. BROOKS—I have very little to say on this subject. I 
simply wish to call the attention of the Convention to the fact that 
this ordinance affects both parties to the contract or to the agree¬ 
ment by which a pass is issued or accepted. I here is an ordinance 
now pending before this Convention which makes no provision for 
a penalty against a railroad that grants a pas> or >ells a ticket at 
rates below those common to the public. i'hi> proposition refers 
to both sides of the contract by providing a penalty against the 
issuing of a pass or sale of a ticket below the usual rates on the 
part of a railroad or by the acceptance ot the same on the part 
of an officer of this State. It goes further than that. It provides 
some means of getting the ev idence which i> necessary to success¬ 
fully prosecute and convict the parties who accept the pass. Ac¬ 
cording to the present resolution or ordinance a> it is now pend¬ 
ing, there is nothing of that sort, and it would be difficult to get 
the evidence necessary to convict. Then it reduces the penalty 
from $1,000 as an outside penalty to $250 and. instead of allowing 
the court, upon conviction, to imprison for >i\ months, it limits 
the time of imprisonment to two month-. It aKo provides that 
the State may have authority to contract for a special rate for all 
officers of the State while engaged in the discharge of their dutv. 
Then it provides that the solicitor >hall Ik* dealt with who does 
not faithfully discharge his duty. .Vow. all I have to say is that 
I hope the friends of the measure will not allow this to be laid 
upon the table, [f it is desired that it be amended in any particu¬ 
lar. come forward with your amendments, and let us make it such 
an ordinance as will be acceptable to this Conviction at large, but 
I pray you that you do not put it on the table. Let Us ^decide 
the question now while we are on this Article on Legislative De¬ 
partment. Vow is an acceptable time, and now i> as good a time 
as any. 


MR. SAM b( )R I)— 1 desire to state to the Convention what 
nearly every member ot the Convention alrea.lv know>-that is. 
that this matter has been referred to the Committee on Corpora¬ 
tions—a committee composed ot honorable delegate- of this Con¬ 
vention -with mstrnctions to report an ord,nance alon , is \Z 
Everybody or every member of tin- Convent,on. and everv ne 
T ° IS famthar wtth the proceeding of this hodv. know n,v atli- 
tude upon this question. and. therefore, thev will understand tint 

fore the Convention dnrm, 



2703 


CONSTITUTIONAL CONVENTION, 1901 


and it ha* been thoroughly discussed. The members know what 
they want upon the subject. The Committee on Corporations, 
a ‘ s is genera v known amongst the members, is preparing an ordi¬ 
nance a ong that line, to be considered with the report from the 
Committee on Corporations. 

MR. BROOKS—Will the gentleman from Pike allow me to 
interrupt him a moment? 


MR. SAM FORD (Pike)—No, sir. 

1 H h PRESIDENT—The gentleman from 
vield. 


Pike decline to 


M R. SAM FORD (Pike)—For that reason, and to enable this 
question to be taken up decently and in order, and at the time it 
should be taken up and incorporated in the proper place in the 
Constitution, and that it shall be well considered at the time, along 
with the proper Article in the Constitution I move that this amend¬ 
ment be laid upon the table, to be taken up and considered with 
the report of the Committee on Corporations. 

MR. BROOKS—I desire to say that I accept that; that was 
the purpose of my asking the gentleman to allow me to interrupt 
him. 


Upon a vote being taken, the motion to lay the amendment on 
the table was carried. 

MR. OATES—I move that the Article on the Legislative De¬ 
partment be engrossed and ordered to a third reading and be print¬ 
ed. 


MR. SAM FORD—I will inquire if he wants it printed before 
it is read the third time? 

THE PRESIDENT—The rule provides for its printing after 
it is passed on the third reading. 

Upon a vote being taken, the motion of Mr. Oates was carried. 

THE PRESIDENT—The special order this morning will be 
the consideration of the report of the Committee on Suffrage and 
Elections. 

MR. WHITESIDE—Before that matter is taken up, I ask 
unanimous consent to have a petition read and referred to the 
proper committee. 

The petition was read as follows : 

To the Honorable Constitutional Convention, Montgomery, Ala.: 

Dear Sirs—We respectfully represent that whereas, the Rail¬ 
road Commission appointed by the Governor and paid by the Rail¬ 
roads has proven an entire failure; and, whereas, the shipper and 



2704 


OFFICIAL PROCKFIHNC.S 


consumer should have some representation in the naming of rate* 
and making of rules bv what is otherwise alien and arbitrary pow¬ 
er; that whereas, the express telephone, telegraph and railroad 
franchises are given bv the State, the power ot these lranchises 
to tag should he limited bv the State. We. therefore request that 
your honorable bodv will give us a commission, elected by the 
people, and place all franchises, which base the power to tax. with- 
in their review. 

R. N. Warnock & son. I>. I’, flavin- A I’.ro . I. M. Ragan. I>. 
M.; C. J. Dodd. \Y. !•'. McCullv. \\ . < >. Turnipseed. Miller X: Sons. 
Thos. H. Barry. '1'. A. Howie X Co.. I’.hie Spring Mills. Thus. 
Sprinkle, Burton A Co.. X. 11. Bagiev. ( Lxtord < >il Co.. W . h. Han¬ 
na. J. M. Mims. A. \Y. Ligon. |. S. Kells. S. W. Hingson X Son. 
Draper X Co.. J. F. Smith. Jno. H. Ingram. J R. Drafper. \V. C. 
Gray, Gunels Bros.. Humphries A Co.. K. A. Walker A Co., \\ . F. 
Higgins, F. C. M oorefield, C. S. Phillips P IP Privett N Co.. A. ( ). 
Humphries, A. Harrison. J. H. ^ nc, Thad M. ^ .win. 

Referred to Committee on Corporation-. 

THE PRESIDENT—The special order this morning will he 
the consideration of the report ot tin* Committee <>n Suffrage and 
Elections. 

MR. COLEMAN (Freene)- sought recognition. 

MR. OATES—I rise for the purpose <>f making an inquire in 
regard to this discussion. 

THE PRESIDENT-—Does ihe gentleman from C,reene vield? 

MR. COLEMAN-—If I knew what hi- inquiry would he. 

MR. OATES—Prom the rule which 1 umlerstand was adopt¬ 
ed in regard to it, I do not understand whether tln*re is to he a 
preliminary general discussion before taking up the measure for 
consideration section by section. The eoiir-e in the progress of 
the consideration of bills and ordinance- o to agree upon a time 
for general discussion and when that end-, to consider the measure 
by sections under a more limited and restricted time for speeches, 
r would like to hear from the delegate from Oreene and to have 
the ruling of the Chair on that proposition. | think we would not 
lose time, but would probably save time t<> have a general discus¬ 
sion say of an hour and a half or tu*> hours, or less as the case 
ma\ he, preceding the taking up ot it bv sections. I make that 
suggestion in the interest of fair di>cu--ion. and I think it is in tin- 
interest of economy of time. I believe we will -ave time bv it. 

MR. COLEMAN—I had thought that this question would be 
considered differently from the rule which we have adopted in the 
consideration of other articles. [ do not know where a general 



CONSTITUTIONAL CONVENTION, 1901 


2705 


di>cussion v\i>vild lead to. So far as the committee knows, the 
agreement of the committee was unanimous except upon one or 
two question. < M course, the whole Convention will have an op¬ 
portunity to present its views as it sees proper, hut I had supposed 
that the article* on Suffrage and Elections would he treated as the 
other articles; that there would he a statement hy the chairman— 
a mere statement—and that we would then proceed to consider it 
section hy section. 1 have no objection myself personally. 

MR. OATES—I make the suggestion because of the universal 
interest in the measure and its importance. It may he that time 
would he saved in this way to have a general discussion. Of course, 
a limit of thirtv minutes has been fixed by the order of the Con¬ 
vention. Hut if we have a general discussion, some delegates who 
have not served upon this committee and have not heard the <1 is- 
cu>sion of the various questions might from a general discussion 
get more fully into it, and probably less time would he consumed 
in amendments to sections as we proceed than would be if no such 
general discussion proceeded. 

MR. COLEMAN—I believe if we undertake to pursue that 
course, we will he discussing this report for a week or ten (lavs 
without making any progress at all. With the number of dele¬ 
gates here having different views upon the wording and principles 
involved all the way through, there would be no end to the discus¬ 
sion. 

MR. OATES' —My suggestion was made hoping that the dele¬ 
gate would make a motion to put a limit upon it, to have a general 
discussion not to go beyond a certain time, and not to turn the 
Convention loose on it as a general debating society. 

MR. COLEMAN—I will ask then, who shall engage in this 
discussion? Is the Chair to pick out certain men to discuss it, 
or the chairman or the whole Convention? How could we make 
any progress at alL 

MR. OATES—I will state that the course pursued. I know 
in the Congress of the United States (a pretty good authority) is 
that where there is a difference of opinion and gentlemen desire to 
discuss the question, thev give their names to the presiding officer 
and he will take a list of'them. Of course a good many get in, hut 
thev cannot run beyond the time fixed. 

MR. B EH HOW — I make the point of order that there is 
nothing before the House. 

MR COLEMAN—This is the hour appointed for the consid¬ 
eration of the report of the Committee on Suffrage and Elections. 

MR SMITH (Mobile)— There has been some discussion be¬ 
tween one or two gentlemen and myself as a member of the Rules 



2706 


OFFICIA h FROCK KOIN(hS 


Committee. Conferring*, however, with the chairman ot this com¬ 
mittee with the view of determining* what will he the proper time 
for the consideration of substitutes for tlie entire article that will 
be presented, and thereby preventing interruptions, I understood 
under the rule that the proper time to introduce a substitute for 
the entire article would be after the article had been passed upon 
section by section, and was offered to the Convention for adoption 
as a whole, but gentlemen interested in substitutes desire that 
question be presented, so there would he no contusion, and these 
substitutes would not be offered during* the discussion, and if per¬ 
missible to ask the Chair whether my understanding* to the rule 
is not a correct one? 

THE PRESIDENT—The rule on that question, as the Chair 
understands it, is that the friends of the measure will have a right 
to perfect it, amend it and put it in whatever shape they desire be¬ 
fore the Convention would entertain a substitute to the entire arti¬ 
cle. After the Convention has considered the article and put it in 
such shape as desired, a substitute would then he in order to the 
entire article. 

MR. COLEMAN—That. Mr. President, is my understanding 
of the rule. 


MR. BANKS—After an article or ordinance has been com¬ 
pleted. would it then be necessarv to reconsider the whole ordi¬ 
nance before a substitute for it could be introduced? 


1HE PRESIDENT—The Chair think> not. The attention 
of the Convention is called to the fact that the substitute would 
be offered. I he Chair will try to conduct the proceedings in such 
a way that a motion to reconsider will not he necessarv. 


MR. LOWE (Jefferson) -That was about the question 1 was 
rising to. I introduced this morning an ordinance covering this 
matter with the view* that it might appear in the stenographic re¬ 
port, and in order that each member might have an opportunity 
of considering it this morning. In this report, as I understand it. 
it will be practically impossible to amend it Section l>v Section l>e- 

SIT , S , eV ! ral S T C | t, ,° nS , ap,)Iy to and cnv( ‘ r ‘he same matter and I 
thought it would be better that the Convention should have the 

advantage of the discussion coming from the members of the Coni- 

^Stmn ATh"; f T 1 Cart ' fU ! ,V and palU ' mh - -nsi<lere<lthL 
question and that alter having t | ie benefit of that discussion a 

subst'tute mig.it then he offered without requiring a suspension 

in orfe^uhTcW , 1 «* <** -l.Oi.utv win,M e 

upon tLe reoor of I'S ' 1 an ‘ l l !“’ ““ion of the Convention 
rates’Committee ivithom a suspension of the 


THE PRESIDENT—Yes, 



CONSTITUTIONAL CONVENTION, 1901 


2707 


MK. JONES (Montgomery) — If a substitute were offered, 
would that be treated as an amendment so as to limit the debate 
to ten minutes? 

1 Ml', PRESIDENT—Under the rule as reported in this case, 
the debate has been extended to thirty minutes and a substitute 
would he regarded as an amendment. 


MR. LOWE—The thirty minutes rule? 

THE PRESIDENT-—Yes sir. The Chair does not see how 
we can avoid a motion to reconsider, unless there is a special rule 
brought in on the subject, except by pursuing this course; that a 
Section of the report would be read and amendments would be 
entertained and either accepted or rejected and when the Conven¬ 
tion has offered and considered such amendments as it may desire, 
without finally adopting the Section proceeding to the next Sec¬ 
tion, and so on through the Article, and then the question would 
be upon the adoption of the Article as read. 

MR. SAMKORD-—It occurs to me in that connection that 
with a matter so important as this and so lengthy, it is going to 
result in endless confusion, because, if you go through this Article 
without adopting it. Section by Section, when it comes to the of¬ 
fering of a substitute for the entire Article. I fail to see how it can 
be confined to a substitute to the entire article. Put why would 
not every Section be open to any substitute or any amendment 
that the Convention might see fit to propose ' And it occurs to 
me that we are going to get among the breakers along this line 
if we do not make some special preparation for it, if special prepa¬ 
ration is necessarv. T make that merely as a suggestion. 

THE PRESIDENT—It might be well to adopt some special 
rule on the subject. The Committee on Rules might bring in some 
rule to the effect that the adoption of this Article Section by Sec¬ 
tion would not cut off a motion for a substitute for the entire Ar¬ 
ticle. 


MR. LOWE ( lefferson)—It was in view of that parliamentary 
difficulty as I understood it that in that consultation the gentle¬ 
man from Mobile, from the Committee on Rules, suggested an 
agreement If the Convention unanimously agree, there need be 
no report from the Committee on Rules. The gentleman from 
Mobile suggested that it would be agreeable to the different con¬ 
tending interests here that upon the conclusion of the consideration 
of the report of the Committee, that then the substitute might be 
offered to the report of the Committee as amended, as it stands, 
upon the conclusion of the consideration of the report. Of course, 
that substitute would be open to amendment. If this Convention 
now agrees to that proposition, there is no necessity for a report 
from the Committee on Rules: however, I have no objection to the 



2708 


OFFICIAL PROCEEDINGS 


matter being referred to the Committee on Rules, I simply desire to 
reserve the right to myself to offer a substitute to the report of 
this Committee, it being absolutely impossible to amend it Section 
by Section, because there are many Sections bearing upon the same 
subject, and if the Convention now agrees to the proposition as 
stated by the gentleman from Mobile, from the Committee on 
Rules, it will be the order of business as I understand it. 

THE PRESIDENT—It seems to the Chair some provision 
should be made on that subject. The Chair will entertain a mo¬ 
tion. 

MR. COLEMAN—If the President and the Convention will 
consent, I move that we dispense with business for five minutes 
and a rule can be prepared and presented to the Convention which 
will meet the end and difficulty suggested, and I move that we 
suspend if necessary for five minutes. 

MR. FITTS—I offer this resolution. 

THE PRESIDENT—The gentleman from Greene moves that 
business be suspended for five minutes, in order that some rule be 
prepared to cover the question. 

Upon a vote being taken, the motion to suspend was carried, 
and a recess taken for five minutes. 

MR. SMITH (Mobile)—I desire to notify the members of the 
Rules Committee that the Committee will meet in the Senate 
Chamber immediately. 

MR. FITTS—I offer that resolution and ask that it be re¬ 
ferred to the Committee on Rules. 

The resolution was handed to the Committee on Rules, but 
not read. 

The Committee returned at the end of the recess. 

MR. SMITH (Mobile)—I am instructed by the Rules Com¬ 
mittee to offer the following resolution: 

The Clerk read the resolution as follows: 

Resolved that the article reported by the Committee on Suf¬ 
frage and Elections be considered, adopted or rejected section by 
section and after every section has been so considered and adopted 
substitutes for the entire article may be offered and acted upon 
without any motion to reconsider the prior action of the Conven¬ 
tion.” 


MR. SMITH (Mobile)—I move the adoption of the resolution 
as reported by the Rules Committee. 

Upon a vote being taken the resolution was adopted. 



CONSTITUTIONAL CONVENTION. 1901 


2709 


MK. O >LhMAN (Creene)—Mr. President and delegates of 
the Convention ; it is not my purpose to undertake to make a strict¬ 
ly legal argument at this time upon the various provisions con¬ 
tained in the report of the Committee on Suffrage and Election, 
hut rather to state the conditions which confront 11 s, the circum- 
stances which 1 e* 1 to the calling of this Convention, and the wav 
in our opinion to relieve the people of the State of Alabama from 
the great burden that now rests upon it. 1 think it pertinent in 
this connection, in order that our conditions may be understood, 
not only at home but abroad, to review, by a statement of facts, 
which transpired many years ago, that the people who were dis¬ 
posed to criticise u< in our conduct may better understand what 
we ha\e pas>ed through and the end which we aim to attain. That 


this Convention was called by the Democratic party cannot he de¬ 
nied and that it \va> made a party measure, and as such, sustained 
by the part). 'The duty rested with ib to construct an organic 
law which will operate fairly and justly to every inhabitant in this 
State without regard to party or previous condition. I do not be¬ 
lieve that the article prepared is properly understood. There has 
been an effort made to impress the people of Alabama that the 


delegates of this Convention were under no obligations or pledges 
to the people of Alabama. It should be remembered that the three 
Conventions of Alabama which last assembled as a Convention 
of the Democratic partv, declared that no white man should be 
disfranchised except for crime. Mr. President and delegates of 
the Convention, it has been said that this provision was hastily 
adopted, without deliberation. 1 cannot conceive how three Con¬ 
ventions. successive Conventions, could unanimously adopt the 
* a me provision without having attention called to it. this provision, 
or the charge made that action was without due consideration. It 
may not he improper to state here that the platform adopted by 
the Convention which last assembled in Montgomery was not 
framed without consideration and deliberation. Present at that 
time were two members, one a member of Congress, and an ex- 
member, a distinguished editor of a leading paper in this State 
and leading delegates from various sections of the State. It mat 
not be improper to state here that the Chairman of the committee, 
instead of writing the word “white man. wrote the words quali¬ 
fied voted." in order to obviate some of the difficulties and troubles 
which teemed to have arisen since that time, and it was after due 
t'onside rat ion. due .ldil.cra«,o„. .ha. the Co—= on Ha form 
inserted the words “white man. 1 hose are the tacts in legard 

to the preparation of the platform which was presented to the Con- 
to tne prtparauo* * , . M President, at a time when it 

Committee^ssued a circular to^ery nmmber^andjhey^met^i^n^pur^ 

suance to that call in Lirmingnam, ami resenting- voice 

the State might be assured thereof without a dissenting %oice. 



2710 


OFFICIAL PROCEEDINGS 


pledged themselves to stand by the pledges made to the people in 
Convention assembled, and it was, I have no doubt, that assurance 
which succeeded in calling together the Convention that is now as¬ 
sembled. Under these circumstances, Mr. President and gentle¬ 
men of the Convention, I cannot see. myself, how any man can 
claim exemption from these obligations, except he be convinced 
in his own mind that to stand by them would involve his honor 
under the oath he has taken to support the Constitution of the 
United States. I would ask no man to violate his oath, but if he 
can comply with the oath that he has taken, and perform his 
pledges to the people of Alabama, I see no escape from the duty 
imposed upon him, not only by the successive meetings of the 
Democratic party in Convention assembled, but by reason of his 
personal pledge to carry them out. And I think, Mr. President 
and delegates of the Convention, that a delegate should examine, 
impartially, without bias or preference of opinion, desiring to ar¬ 
rive at the truth, and the truth only, as to whether or not he can 
comply with these pledges and at the same time not violate his 
oath. I do not think that he should consider it in any other light 
but simply the light is arriving at the truth, and the truth only. 
If, therefore, the Committee on Suffrage and Elections has present¬ 
ed to this Convention a system upon the subject of franchise which 
will enable it to comply with the pledges and at the same time not 
violate our oaths, it seems to me it is our bounden duty to do so. 
Mr. President and delegates of the Convention, this government 
was founded by white people. Its institutions have been pre¬ 
served and enforced by the white race of this country, and it is 
within the past few years that the negro became a qualified voter, 
and citizen of the United States. In most of the States of this 
Union the proportion of such voters is so small that their influence 
is not felt in the general election. It is only in the Southern States 
that he has become an important factor, and under the present 
laws is a menace to our civilization, our happiness and prosperity. 

I would not violate any provision of the Constitution, but it is mv 
opinion that we should go to the utmost limit allowed us to con¬ 
tinue in control of this State and its political interests, that race 
of people which so long has preserved its institutions and brought 
us through so much trouble, to our present prosperous condition. 
(Applause.) I hope the Convention will bear with me as I pro¬ 
ceed to show that this conclusion is not reached by any prejudice 
against the negro. There are but few, comparatively, of the old 
slave-holders who are alive at this time, and who are present in 
these deliberations. Mr. President, I am not ashamed to sav that 
I was among those few. Not only myself, but my ancestors be¬ 
fore me were slave-owners in this State. The third generation 
back was one who in his feeble way undertook and put at stake 
his life in order to give validity to the Declaration of Independence, 
and which resulted in the framing of the Constitution of the United 



CONSTITUTIONAL CONVENTION, 1901 


2711 


States. Protected in his rights, as others were, no man, read in 
the history of his country, will undertake to say that without such 
provision the Constitution of the United States would ever have 
been adopted. We felt sure, and so did they, that they had a right 
to regard these persons as property, and that it was secured by the 
organic law of the country. So far as the moral question arises, 
1 am one of those old fogy men who believe in the inspiration of 
ihe Scriptures, and we are told that Abraham was a friend of God, 
and Moses was an inspired law-giver, and until some higher au¬ 
thority than the Creator and omniscient God Himself shall arise 
and declare a different code of morals, 1 am one prepared to stand 
justified by the record of that book. Now, Mr. President and dele¬ 
gates of this Convention, bear with me a few moments. Born 
on a plantation, raised up with the negro, 1 have had an oppor¬ 
tunity to know his weak points and his good traits. Mine may 
have been the history of others, but I remember well during the 


Civil W ar, or the war between the States, sending my negro man 
from V icksburg, surrounded as it was, with Federal troops, with 
a letter to mv wife, and he carried it safely home, and 1 never 
doubted that lie would do so. 1 wish to say in behalf of this race 
that at the battle of Missionary Ridge, when I had the misfortune 
to be >hot down, he was inside of the federal lines for two or three 
days, and he worked himself out. and found me in the hospital, 
and waited upon me for three months, and accompanied me home. 

1 wish to sav, moreover, for these people that upon my plantation 
for the great part of the time there was no white man but a negro 
wa< in command as superintendent, and my wife and children ap¬ 
prehended no trouble or danger whatever from our slaves. He was 
as loval as a man could be. This is the history of the negro as a 
Ma\V In 1865 the year that emancipation became effective, I had 
the fortune to he elected solicitor of the Fifth District, including 
the counties of Greene. Marengo, Sumter. Pickens. Choctaw, where 
the negro was most numerous, or perhaps as numerous, as m any 
counties in this State in proportion to population. As Solicitor 
at that time 1 had every opportunity to judge him and his char¬ 
acteristics. and I venture to say that during that time we heard 
not of a single case of assault upon our fair women or of muider 
wavlaving. or other violations of the law by them of an aggravated 
character except that of theft, which was then chai actenstic of t it 
race' That was his attitude from the year 1869 to the days of re¬ 
construction At that time the carpet-bagger arose, and the scala¬ 
wag in this country, and I do not wish to he understood as saying 
S all of those who came from the North, and designated as car¬ 
pet-baggers were bad men, but the majority of them who came 
1 ere came not for a good purpose. Then we had the midnight 
meetings. Thousands would gather upon the word sent; inflam¬ 
matory speeches were made to them, and this peaceful race with¬ 
in a short time, had developed the character of savages. The race 



2712 


OFFICIAL PROCEEDINGS 


which had been quiet so long converted this whole country into 
pandemonium. I have seen, with my own eyes, a thousand of 
them around a ballot box, and not a white man was permitted to 
reach the ballot box. I have known, delegates of this Convention, 
1.500 armed negroes to enter a little village on one occasion, for the 
purpose of creating consternation and fear among the whites I have 
known a judge trying a case, and a Republican judge at that and 
under the testimony came to the conclusion that the defendant 
should be held or committed for trial. I have known these defend¬ 
ants to rise from their seats and deliberately shoot the judge 
through the head, scattering his brains upon the floor. I know and 
the parties are living now, who dressed in Federal uniforms’met 
by appointment known leaders of the negroes and thev declared 
that they were ready to arise with the axe and the torch and burn 
and slay men, women and children. I have been told by a delegate 
upon this floor that he knew of a negro bov 16 vears of age who 
voted sixteen times, once for every year of "his age, and defied ar¬ 
rest or investigation under the laws passed in reconstruction days 
when that race was in power. We know that our State was p'il- 
laged, our counties strangulated, and the main purpose seemed to 
be that of plunder and destruction. Now I mention these facts for 
this purpose. Here was a peaceable race of people, obedient in 
law, and here was pandemonium raised when thev were no longer 
restrained by law. and were inflamed and led. Now what hap¬ 
pened at that time? 

MR. GRAN 1 (Calhoun)—Will the gentleman allow me to in¬ 
terrupt him? I want to say— 

THE PRESIDENT—Does the gentleman yield? 

MR. COLEMAN (Greene)—I am discussing the question at 
this time. 

MR. GRAN I’ (Calhoun)—I have a very perfect recollection 
of all those kind of performances— 

THE PRESIDENT—The gentleman will be seated. 

MR. COLEMAN (Greene)—At that time, and under those 
circumstances arose the organization that was denominated Ku 
KIux. i his organization was guilty of excesses and were not 
countenanced. It soon disappeared. That was the condition of 
this country when the people resorted to a more peaceful and ef¬ 
fective method securing predominance in this State through the 
ballot box. I wish the fact of our condition to be known, and 
while there are those of us alive yet who know these facts. I think 
they should not be forgotten. Now if the delegates will consider, 
since that time, the white race has predominated in this State, and 
the people who have voted at all elections, and preserved us, have 
been the white race, and that with regard to literacy or illiteracy 



CONSTITUTIONAL CONVENTION, 1901 


2713 


They have all voted, and they have voted from the first establish¬ 
ment of government in this country down to the present time. 
Contrast these two people. See what condition we were in when 
the negro predominated in this State, and made our laws for us, 
and enforced them, and see our condition when it passed from them 
back into the hands of the white men. Can anybody look upon 
those two pictures and come to any conclusion other than that 
the negro, a.-' a race, is incapable of self-government? and has no 
appreciation of the duties and obligations of a citizen of a Repub¬ 
lican form of government or that the white man. by reason of be¬ 
longing to the white race, or his education, or some other char¬ 
acteristic, is competent to rule and can be trusted with the State's 
government with perfect safety. 


The facts cannot be denied, and seem to me sufficient to sat- 
isfv everybody of the truth of the preamble to the platform of the 
Democratic party, that the one race is callable of self-government 
as a race, and the other a< a race should not be trusted with the 
right to vote. Xow. Mr. President, and delegates of the Conven¬ 
tion. having these matters in view, having our pledges before us, 
we have tried to frame an article upon suffrage, which .would pre¬ 
serve our institutions - , and we have at the same time tried to com¬ 
ply with the Fifteenth Amendment of the Constitution, and have 
admitted to the exercise of suffrage every competent negro in the 
State. 1 do not doubt, and 1 have heard no man yet say, that every 
person of the negro race who ought to vote has not been admitted 
to vote, and the only question that seems to trouble some of our 
people is whether the white man shall vote, and not the negro. 
That is what confront us today. I think it is our duty as Demo¬ 
crats. and as citizens of this State, to comply with our pledges, and 
admit to the exercise of the franchise every white voter if it can 
be done legallv. So far as the details of the plan submitted are 
concerned tliev will come up as we proceed section by section. 1 he 
Committee is'not partial to anything they have said or written 
in the article. Wc have presented to you that which seemed to 
us the best solution, but if any man has anything better than that 
which we have presented to you, no one will join m its adoption 
more readilv and satisfactorily than my self. I know full well dele¬ 
gates of this Convention, that during the few years that will be 
spared to mvself and to men of my age. we will be sure to main¬ 
tain our supremacy and good government but we look to con¬ 
ditions that may exist fifteen, twenty or thirty years from now, 
when the old men will be gone, and when the question will be for 
the younger members of this Convention, and our children who 
have not vet arrived at the state of manhood. I hat is what we 
h 1 \ • W . that is what we desire to provide for, and I 

are ooking out io , that «s v h and ability in solving 

shall most sincereb „ nder consideration. We do not 

bebe^eThat It is an insult to confer the franchise upon the descend- 



2714 


OFFICIAL PROCEEDINGS 


ants of those who wore the gray. It is recorded that Moses of old 
said to the children of Israel, “Teach the statutes to your children, 
as you lie down; teach them as you walk in the way and as you 
get upand we believe that the old Confederate soldier has 
taught his children to love their country and its laws and govern¬ 
ment. Mr. President, it is no dishonor to say to a Confederate sol¬ 
dier’s son that the State recognizes that you are a better citizen 
and have a better right to vote than the negro who can read and 
write. I think it is due him, and I would rather this right hand 
of mine would become palsied rather than it should write “dis¬ 
franchise” against one of their names. I would rather my tongue 
would cleave to the roof of my mouth, before 1 would pronounce 
so unjust a sentence against him. Those are my sentiments upon 
this question, and I have no doubt, as a lawyer who has investi¬ 
gated the case, that his enfranchisement is perfectly constitutional. 
Mr. President, I may have been betrayed into saying too much, 
and I will not sav anything more- 

Cries of “Go on. Go on.” 

MR. COLEMAN—Now, then, to refer rapidly to another pro¬ 
vision. Men who have objected to what might be called the “un¬ 
derstanding clause” surely have not apprehended its true mean¬ 
ing. Surely, they have not understood that it embodies the Fed¬ 
eral law of the United States with reference to naturalization of 
foreigners; surely, they have not considered that before that could 
be declared unconstitutional, the courts would have to declare un¬ 
constitutional the laws which have been adopted by Congress, ap¬ 
plicable to the naturalization of foreigners. The thing that trou¬ 
bles me, is not what is now to transpire or to transpire within the 
next few years, but that which comes after that, and whether the 
permanent requirements are sufficient or not to protect the people 
in their rights, the civilization of this country, and the happiness 
of the people, in the permanent plan. That prescribes a property 
qualification, an understanding qualification to read and write, 
and it also provides for those who have been regularly engaged 
in some lawful employment for a year. There never was a sen¬ 
tence, or provision, more prevertcd, or less understood, than that 
provision in the Article reported by the Committee on Suffrage and 
Elections. The Committee was at least a day, and a half or two 
days selecting those words. They used the word “engaged” be¬ 
cause it had been often interpreted by the Supreme Court of this 
State, and it is not, as I have seen in the papers, a provision which 
requires not only that a man should always be employed, but that 
he should have some profitable employment. There is nothing 
further from its meaning. We all know that a man is engaged in 
business when he holds himself out as a party ready for employ¬ 
ment. As has been often illustrated in the case of a lawyer—he 
is engaged in the practice of law whether he has a client or not. 



2715 


CONSTITUTIONAL CONVKNTION, 1901 


- physician is engaged in the practice of medicine if he holds him- 

°V * 3S *iI phys, ? an an(1 is rea],y - That is his business without 
regard to the number of patrons that he may have. The purpose 

° ... e f * uail 1 cat 'on was to reach people passing from place to place 
without employment—tramps, as it were, though not strictly with¬ 
in the definition of the word tramp, as defined in the Code of Ala- 
lama. would willingly accept anv substitute or amendment 
which could reach or supply the end intended by that provision. 
Air. resident. I believe I will say nothing more at this time, and 
mow that we take up this report section by section in accordance 
with the rules of this Convention. 


IHh PRESIDENT— In the opinion of the chair, the rule 
adopted this morning will cover the object intended to be secured 
by the motion just made. The Secretary will read the first sec¬ 
tion. 


The Secretary read Section 1 as follows: 

Section 1. ^ Every male citizen of this State who is a citizen 
ot the United State, 21 years old or upwards, not laboring under 
any of the disabilities named in this Article, and possessing the 
qualifications required by it, shall be an elector, and shall be en¬ 
titled to vote at any election by the people. 

MR. RED DOW—I desire to offer an amendment. 

The Secretary read the amendment as follows: “Amend bv 
adding after the words ‘United States’ in the first line of Section 1, 
the following words, ‘and every male person of foreign birth who, 
before the adoption of this Constitution, may have legally declared 
his intention to become a citizen of the United States.” 

THE PRESIDENT—The question will be upon the adoption 
of the amendment offered by the gentleman from Jefferson, Mr 
Beddow. 


MR. BEDDOW—Mr. President, I feel safe, after hearing the 
learned argument of the chairman of this committee, that this 
amendment will be adopted without a dissenting voice. As he has 
truly stated in his argument, the Democratic party of this State is 
pledged in framing the suffrage Article for our new Constitution, 
to do it in a manner so as not to disfranchise any white person now 
entitled to vote under the present Constitution. If Section 1 is 
adopted as submitted by the committee, there are no doubt thou¬ 
sands of persons throughout the State of Alabama, who are good 
white citizens, who have declared their intention to become citizens 
of the United States under the laws made and provided therefor, 
that will be deprived of the right of suffrage. In order to post my¬ 
self upon this question, I put myself in correspondence with the 
clerks of the courts of record in my county, and I find that in the 



2716 


OFFICIAL PROCEEDINGS 


County of Jefferson there are at least 1,500 white citizens who 
have declared their intention to become voters, who have not, by 
reason of the law requiring a residence of five years, been en¬ 
abled to perfect their citizenship. I feel sure that no member of 
this Convention has any desire whatever to go back on the pledges 
so recently made by us to the people of this State, and that this 
amendment as offered by me will be adopted. Bv scanning the 
amendment, it will be seen that it relates only to those who at the 
time of the adoption of this Constitution have declared their inten¬ 
tion to become citizens of the United States. The amendment will 
speak for itself. 

MR. WATTS—I would like to ask the gentleman a question. 
I understand you to say there are 1,500 citizens who are willing to 
become citizens of Alabama, but for the inhibition of the law de¬ 
claring against their voting until they have been here five vears. 

MR. BEDDOVV—No, sir; under the law. the intentions has 
got to be declared, and they cannot perfect their citizenship for 
five years. 

MR. WATTS—But does not the present Constitution of Ala¬ 
bama give such citizens the right to vote on declaring their in¬ 
tention ? 

MR. BEDDOW It does; yes—but under Section 1 of this 
Article, they would not be entitled to vote if this Constitution is 
adopted. 

MR. LOWE (Jefferson)—I rise to second the amendment of 
my colleague, the gentleman from Jefferson. I did not care to in¬ 
terrupt the argument of the distinguished chairman of the commit¬ 
tee, because it appeared to me that the first section of the report 
of the committee does not support what is said. I do not care to 
tell him we were unwilling for one side of this controversv to °- e t 
up a monopoly upon the wearing of the grev. I did not care then 
to say that no one side of this controvery should have a monopolv 
upon an appeal to history and the recollection of reconstruction 
times I thought, Mr. President, as the report of the committee of 
which the distinguished gentleman from Greene is chairman, was 
read, it would be found how far the inconsistence existed between 
the remarks which the gentleman submitted, in so pathetic a man¬ 
ner, and the report and the language that the gentleman sought 
to put not upon the statute books, but in the organic law of Ala¬ 
bama. The gentleman referred to the declaration often repeated 
m Democratic conventions, that no white man was to be disfran¬ 
chised. There is no such provision anywhere in the report of this 
committee and the first section of the report of the committee 
aims to disfranchise those now entitled to vote in Alabama Mr 
Chairman, I second the adoption of the amendment of the <r e ntle- 
man from Jefferson. * 



CONSTITUTIONAL CONVENTION, 1901 


2717 


AIR. Cl NNINGHAM — I had in mind precisely the same 
amendment that was offered hv my colleague from Jefferson, Mr. 
Beddow. 1 shall not take up the time of the Convention in discuss¬ 
ing the merits of this question, except to say this: 1 believe that the 
inhibition resting upon us in regard to the disfranchisement of 
white men applies to those citizens of foreign birth who, under the 
existing Constitution, have declared their intention to become citi¬ 
zens of the United States, and, therefore, have been permitted to 
\ote in State, county and municipal elections. If I understand 
the gentleman's amendment aright, it docs not apply to citizens of 
foreign birth who may hereafter undertake to qualify as citizens 
in this State. I will ask the gentleman from Jefferson if that is 
not his amendment'' 

MR. RKIVDOW—That is mv amendment. 

MR. CUNNINGHAM—It applies only to those who are here 
now. and I sincerely hope, Mr. President, and T appeal to this Con¬ 
vention, to adopt that amendment. I believe it will be a mistake 
not to do so, because you undoubtedly knock out a great many 
white citizens of this State who are now qualified voters. In con¬ 
clusion, let me say. Mr. President, that for the last eighteen years 
I have had a very large, and rather extensive, personal experience 
and business relationship with the foreign population in Jefferson 
County, and during that entire time, Mr. President, to my personal 
knowledge, not exceeding half dozen have been convicted of crimes 
in the State of Alabama. Only about three have reached the peni¬ 
tentiary of vour State and possibly as many or a few more, have 
been sentenced to hard labor for the county. In their debt-paying 
capacity. Mr. President, there is perhaps no one class of citizens in 
the State of Alabama that excels them: their credit, as a rule, is 
good; they pay their debts; they are law-abiding citizens. I will 
sav the majority of them at least vote the ticket of the dominant 
party of this State. Already there is some dissatisfaction among 
this class of our people who believe they are indeed disfranchised 
under the first section of this ordinance, and I sincerely hope the 
committee will accept this amendment and urge its being adopted 
bv this Convention. 

MR. UOXO (Walker) — I am heartily in favor of the amend¬ 
ment offered bv the gentleman from Jefferson. I can see no rea¬ 
son why foreigners from the land from which our forefathers came 
should be disfranchised and others should be infranchised by simp¬ 
ly wearing the gray. I cannot conceive of any banks that would 
honor thedraft of a Confederate soldier and yet recognize the rule 
of honoring the draft of the son of the Confederate soldier. I can¬ 
not conceive whv the people in the county of Jefferson, and in my 
own beloved county of Walker, who have come there to gather 
the crops that nature makes, and toil beneath the surface of the 
earth should be disfranchised because they have not been in the 



2718 


OFFICIAL PROCFFDINOS 


State of Alabama five years. I can testify to their virtue, their 
manhood, and their right of self government. I can testify further 
to all that is said, that these people are white people, coming from 
the land that bore us long, long centuries ago, and from which our 
forefathers came from across the >ea. It we intend to adopt a war 
measure, why not go back and adopt luimpeau laws as well as the 
laws of the United States. Why should we say that foreigners 
are required to reside in the State ot Alabama for live long vears, 
when a simple fellow or something of the kind of a Confederate 
soldier, has not the same restriction placed around him? I appeal 
in justice and for humanity's sake, to thU Convention not to ig¬ 
nore the right of any white man in my country to vote, who has 
worked down beneath the soil with a lantern <>n his head guiding 
his way, and disfranchise him under this first Section of the report 
of the Committee on Suffrage. If we want to do justice to the 
white man, let us put in tin* word “white” right in front of the 
word “male," between the word '‘male” and “citizen” in the first 
Section of this Article. 1 for one, am in favor of, and strictly in 
favor of. and will vote for. any amendment to that end, and will 
take my medicine like a man. We should >av everv white male 
citizen of the United States, or a white person who has declared 


his intention of becoming a citizen shall have the right to vote, and 
no one else. I am in favor of putting that in. and of meeting the 
issue like men. 1 here has never yet been a man in the halls of 
Congress that has dared to deny the right of a State to limit the 
right of suffrage. They have put restrictions around it. and pro¬ 
vided for punishment for those States that violate it. What 
would be the effect if we should put m there “everv white male 
citizen of this State, and everv white male citizen of the United 
states 1 What would he the effect." We would siniplv go up and 
pleat guilty to violating the Fourteenth and undoubtedly the Fif¬ 
teenth Amendment of the Constitution, like a man before the bar of 
justice that comes up and pleads guiltv to carrying concealed 


weapons. What is the penalty" W liv the penalty in this case 
would be to reduce our representation in the Klectoral College, and 
in the Congiess of the Lnited States. 1 would rather have one 
white man to represent Alabama then than to have nine now', if 
we had the words “white male citizens” in our Constitution. I am 
wi ing to vote for it. I despise a makeshift. I detest it. I am 
willing to come up to the rack and take mv fodder, or no fodder, 
as the case may he. _ f do not like a makeshift, and I don’t like this 
™ U V ch ^franchises any of the white people of Alabama. 

J ut the word “\vhite“ in there and I will support it. Let us take 
our medicine like men. Let us go to the congress of the United 
T tlat ‘^ ri * >ania ’ ^ u * first State upon the roll of the 
u n atCSf reco " n,zes onl - v white people to vote. Let us 
thereto ^ ^ aiUl take the l K * nalt W * cannot see any objection 



COXST1TUT10NAL CONVKNTION, 1901 


2719 


MR. (/RAN r—Why don't you invite Mr. Pettus to offer his 
amendment for this thing and vote for it? 

MR. 1 .<) X(i—1 I ow is that ? 

MR. GRANT—Why don’t you ask Mr. Pettits to offer his 
ordinance introduced some days ago and you can vote for it. 

MR. LONG—Mr. President, I have not the honor of knowing 
to what tin* gentleman refers, f know nothing about Mr. Pettits’ 
ordinance, but if Mr. Pettus’ ordinance stated my proposition, I 
stand here today as one of 155 men in this Constitutional Conven¬ 
tion who is ready, willing and anxious to vote for it. 

MR. GRANT—Why don’t you ask him to introduce it now? 

MR. LONG—Now, Mr. President, what 1 do object to is the 
action of the white people here assembled, that will disfranchise 
many men in my county simply because they have not been resi¬ 
dents of the United States for five years. I believe in justice to 
those who are entitled to it. I believe when the Ark landed long 
centuries ago and the descendants of Noah started out, that Ham 
was cursed, and I believe that this is a white man’s country, and 
that not a single white man should be disfranchised, and I am 
opposed to the enfranchisement of any negro in the State of Ala¬ 
bama. Let it be Booker Washington or any one else. I yesterday 
liked to have been mobbed here, because I wanted to maintain the 
purity of the Caucasian blood I wanted then and there to put the 
words “Indian and Chinese in a law prohibitory of marriage, and 
I heard men upon this floor get up and boast that the proudest 
blood in Alabama was the blood of the Indian. I want to state if 
that blood is proud, it was made so by Caucasian blood, and I want 
to state further that ours is the blood that God intended to rule 
the world, and it is only that blood which I recognize that flows 
in nrv veins and I believe flows in the veins of the majority of the 
delegates to this Convention. 

Now, Mr. President, I do sincerely hope that the amendment 
offered bv the gentleman from Jefferson will be adopted. It does 
not mean the enfranchisement of a single negro, but it means the 
enfranchisement of many honest white laborers in the State of 
Alabama, and why should we, the sovereign people of Alabama, 
violate our pledges here in the first section of this ordinance upon 
suffrage, and ignore a right that has existed ever since Alabama 
has been a State m the American Union, and disfianchise some 
of our best citizens. As far as I am able to, I will always respect 
that home across the seas from which my forefathers came. I do 
not think the people that cross the ocean now are any worse than 
the people that crossed it long centuries ago. I do not believe 
that we are called here to disfranchise any man simply because he 
comes from a European country. I do not believe that we are ask- 




272 0 


OFFICIAL PROCKKDIXC.S 


ed to do that, or that the sovereign white people in the State of 
Alabama will endorse their disfranchisement by the first section 
of this ordinance on suffrage. As 1 stated before, I am willing 
to allow none but white men to vote, and 1 shall offer that propo¬ 
sition of no one else does, before this suffrage clause is completed. 
I am willing to take my medicine like a man. 

I am willing to go before the Federal Congress of the United 
States, before partisans from Ohio and other States, in which the 
negro holds the balance of power, and say we plead guiltv to tin* 
charge. I am willing to say we once hated the American Union. 
Have the manhood and stand up and say that no one but white 
people shall be allowed to vote in the State of Alabama. I believe 
that is the better way to do it. I believe that this U the oidv fair 
wav of doing it. I have no respect tor one ot the^e dodging grand- 
daddy clauses, that excuses everybody because his daddv wore tilt* 
grey. Some of the sorriest men I ever knew wore the grev . Some 
of the best men I ever knew wore the grey. Some of those people, 
and the descendants of those people, carried with them the mark of 
rascality written upon their face, I believe in a clause that will 
give the white men preference in the State of Alabama and to say 
that nobody but white men shall vote, hut I do protest against 
the first section in this article, that disfranchises go.xl white men 
because they have crossed the seas inside of the last five years. 

Ueuv e absence was granted to Mr. Jones (Montgomery) for 
today, and to Mr. Reese ot Dallas tor todav, and the Convention 
adjourned. 


A FTF \< XOOX SFSSIOX. 

I lie Convention was called to order 7>v the IVc-idem. and the 
roll beicalled showed the presence of 105 delegates. 

Leaves of absence were granted Mr. Kvle lor tomorrow and 
Mv. ihoinpson tor vesterdav. 

IHh PRKSI DhVl The special order of business for this 

on Suffr" U ' Tri K ‘ COI1S,<l ^ atio " ,,f tlu ' r< -‘l" ,r t of the Committee 
thn^when V U1 1 JvU ‘ ct,on - ,|1C Convention had under considera¬ 
tion when it adjourned at noon Section 1. The Chair recoowes 
the gentleman from Mobile. " 

Mr. Craham (Talladega) took the Chair. 

tween n fhe S ConsHtuH U,>lk - ) T^F H ‘ T'estion as to the difference be- 
reported by the Committee !m Stiffnige and'Klfm!' ^ 
mTtteT-mrn^mm LngV.AndUie’Com- 

foreigner who „a,i „ me S’ l“i,3 Sutt 



C<)XST]Tl'TI()XA1, CONVENTION, 1W1 


2721 


who had declared their intention to hecoine citizens of the United 
States, ol the right to become participants in the elections in this 
State. It was not believed by the Committee that that class of 
people as a general thing were interested in and attached to a Re¬ 
publican form of government. They come here from various class¬ 
es. and the largest proportion of emigrants coming to this coun¬ 
try are not of the most intelligent or the most desirable class. They 
are people that come here for remunerative wages, who seek em¬ 
ployment in the mines and the other industrial pursuits of this 
countrv. They come here, not seeking the benefits of our gov¬ 
ernmental institutions, nor seeking the freedom of the United 
States of America. They know little and care less about the gov¬ 
ernmental affairs of this country, and many of them live here from 
year to vear and raise families without really knowing the organi¬ 
zation of our (iovernment, or the system of its laws and legislative 
enactment. Experience has taught the United States that they are 
not safe and good citizens until they have lived here at least five 
years, and shown to the satisfaction of the court by their conduct 
during that period that they are men of good moral character and 
attached to the principles of the Constitution of the United States, 
and well disposed to our Government and the welfare of the same. 
If it be true that it takes that length of time to test them, and to 
test if their purpose here is to enjoy the advantages that are to 
be derived from this Government, and if we must have an oppor¬ 
tunity to observe them and observe their conduct, in order to de¬ 
termine whether they are proper for citizens of the United States, 
it seemed to the Committee that it would be turning loose an unfit 
element into the electorate, to allow them to participate in elections 
in Alabama, until some opportunity is afforded our people for judg¬ 
ing of their character and their conduct and their attachments to 
our form of government. In my section of the State there is a di¬ 
versity of elements. The Italian comes in. ignorant not only of our 
Jaw, but of all existing law. The Swede is left there from the ships, 
with a tendency to freedom and a belief in it. 1 he German, the 
Scotch and the English of the better classes come there with money 
and invest in the material interests ot our country, but few of them, 
however, come under an idea that they are bettering themselves m 
the governmental sense. They come not for fieedom. but foi 
business advantages, and there are gentlemen in our community of 
high standing, of high education, good men and good citizens, 
who have raised families there, but who are still devoted to the in¬ 
stitutions and laws of the country from which thev came. I ha\ c 
in mind one who is a good, intelligent, honest, prosperous man, 
that has been there nearly thirty years. He is married to an 
American wife, has raised a large family of children, his every in¬ 
terest is there with him. but he still believes in the government 
and laws of the Fatherland, and is today sending his children back 
to Germany to be educated and imbued with the laws and institu¬ 
tions of that country. 



2722 


OFFICIAL PROCEEDINGS 


MR. SANFORD (Montgomery)- 
intention to become a citizen ? 


-Has he never declared h 


is 


MR. SMITH—Never has, and never will, so far as that is con¬ 
cerned. We have another such there, one of the finest men I ever 
knew, of fine intelligence and a good citizen. He has become a 
citizen of the United States, but he has been twenty years making 
up his mind to see if he is attached to the principles of the Con¬ 
stitution of the United States, and because he was unwilling to say 
so until recent years, he has waited until this time to take out his 
papers of citizenship. If men of that character so cherish the mem¬ 
ories of the countries from which they come, and remain attached 
to their principles, what can you expect of the laborer, the man 
who is without any knowledge as to our form of government, has 
the customs and laws of his native state instilled into him from 
childhood, what do you expect of him. when he comes here? Do 
you expect him to appreciate our Government, do you expect him 
to exercise properly the privileges of the franchise, and to do it 
for the advancement of a Republican Government? 1 think not 
Our country is not yet filled with inhabitants, but the tide of im¬ 
migration increases year by year, and the day may come when the 
majority of this country will be largely of a foreign element. 
To allow the foreign element the electorate would place it in 
their hands to at least modify, if not to control, our institu¬ 
tions, and I believe it to be dangerous to admit anv of them 
to the electorate unless they have not only declared their in¬ 
tention, but have actually become citizens. Main' gentlemen of tin* 
Convention know' that a number of them will declare their inten¬ 
tion, not because they want to become citizens, but because as 
voters they want to be brought together in classes, or hunches 
of twenty-five of fifty, and have their votes sold to candidates for 
-office, and there may be hundreds of them w-ho declare their in¬ 
tention without ever becoming citizens or ever expecting to become 
citizens of these United States, and I do not believe that the elec¬ 
torate ought to be thrown down before these people to be used 
as a mere matter of merchandise. It was in consideration of these 
views that the Committee changed the language in the old Consti¬ 
tution and excluded these people. The argument here, however, 
has been made that a number of these people w-ere already quali- 
ied voters at the time the declaration was made by the Demo¬ 
cratic Convention that no white man would be disfranchised, and 
while when 1 came here I was so green in politics as to believe 
that the State Convention had exceeded its powers, and had no 
power to bind me as a member of the Constitutional Convention, 
and while I came here I had no idea of obeying the dictates of that 
platform; yet. when I got here and found myself in association 
with a large number of gentlemen who looked at it from an entirely 
different standpoint, who thought they were bound by that plat¬ 
form, and had pledged themselves to the observance of it, I 



CONSTITUTIONAL CONVKNTJON. OOl 


2723 


thought, therefore 1 , whatever might have been my individual views, 
the fact that this Convention, as a Convention, was bound and tied 
b\ the platform, I would become ridiculous to set myself up to 
kick against the great majority of its members, and I concluded 
u >>-\ a>1( le iuy personal views and to act in all other matters in 
this .Comention as it 1 believed that the platform was binding on 
me in every word and letter, and I shall, therefore, vote consist¬ 
ently throughout for the observance of the terms of the platform, 
because I believe that the majority of the Convention are bound to 
<lo so. Now, in considering this question, it had not occurred to us 
that there was anything in the platform that made it necessary 
that we should admit any portion of this vote which we thought 
oiitfht not. upon principle, to be admitted to the electorate, but 
the discussion that has taken place here inclines me to think that 
I w as mistaken in that, and I am inclined to think that under the 
plattorm. we are obliged to allow those white people of foreign 
birth, who were qualified voters at the time their declaration was 
made, to lemain qualified voters under this Constitution, and. 
therefore, I think it is the sense of the committee to accept the 
modification that has been made* by the resolution that has been 
offeied, but I desire to offer an amendment providing that if these 
same* people who have declared their intention to become citizens 
of the l nited States shall fail to become citizens after they have 
had an opportunity to do so. that then they shall cease to partici¬ 
pate in the 1 electorate of this State, and I offer that resolution. 

SANbOKI) (Montgomery) When it says any white 
man. didn’t it have reference to citizens of the United States born 
oi natuialized ? It could not have reference to mem who were not 
citizens of this country. 

AIR. SMITH—As T said. I am not a good interpreter of that 
platform, because I was a, kicker against it, and I have taken the 
interpretation of the gentlemen who feel themselves bound bv it, 
and they think that every man who could vote 1 at that time w : as 
within the meaning of the platform, wdiether lie had become a citi¬ 
zen of the United States or not, and T am abiding bv the inter¬ 
pretation that T have received. 

1'he Secretary read the amendment of Mr. Smith as follows: 

‘'Provided, that all such foreigners who had declared their in¬ 
tention to become citizens of the United States, shall cease to have 
a right to vote if they shall fail to become citizens of the United 
States after they are entitled to become such citizens.” 

AIR. SA Alb OR I) (Pike)—I would like to have both of the 
amendments read together. 

The Secretary read the amendments as follows: “Amend 1>\ 
adding after the words ‘United States' in the 1 first line of Section ], 



2724 


OFFICIAL PROCK EDI SC ,S 


the following words, ‘and every male person of foreign birth who 
before the adoption of this Constitution, may have legally declared 
his intention to become a citizen of the United States; provided, 
that all such foreigners who have declared their intention to become 
citizens of the United States, shall cease to have a right to vote if 
they fail to become citizens of the United States after thev are en¬ 
titled to become such citizens." 

MR. SAM FOR I) (Pike) — I am not a member ot the C’ommit- 
tee on Suffrage, but no man in this Convention has the question 
closer to his heart than 1 have. There is no member on this floor 
who would go as far or further to protect the interests of every 
white man and every black man in this State than t would. There 
is no man in this Convention who would go further to guarantee 
to the peope of Alabama white supremacy than I would, and there 
is no man within the sound of my voice who would be. further from 
disfranchising any white voter of the State of Alabama than he 
who speaks to you now; but, Mr. President, the man who is not a 
citizen of the State of Alabama does not come w ithin the pledges 
made by the Democratic party in their conventions that have pre¬ 
ceded this Convention. I will admit that upon first blush, it oc¬ 
curred to me that the amendment offered bv the gentleman from 
Jefferson was the proper thing to do. That’ perhaps, it would he 
wise, to incorporate it in our organic law. but we have no more 
right to extend the right of franchise to men who are not citizens 
of the State of Alabama- 

MR. SANFORD (Montgomery)—And of the United States. 

MR. SAMTORD (Pike)—And who lived within its borders, 
than to those who own property here and live on the outside of its 
borders. 

MR. LOW h (Jefferson)—Will the gentleman permit an in¬ 
terruption? 

MR. SAM FORD (Pike)—No. sir—yes. I will: I beg pardon ; 

I will permit the interruption. 

MR. LOWh I u'ant to ask the gentleman if there is such a 
thing in the platform changing any provision of the Constitution 
regulating the right of a white man. I ask the gentleman in that 
connection, if the proposition of the committee does not alter the 
existing Constitution as to the right of a white man to vote? 

i SAM FORD (Pike)—No man in this Convention would 

be further from violating a pledge of the Democratic party with 
reference to the suffrage than I would be. but when I say that, I 
mean the intent and spirit of the platform, and not its letter—not 
necessarily its letter. There can he no good reason why men who 
are of foreign birth, who have come to our friendly shores, and 
w o have engaged in our manufactories, engaged in working out 



2725 


CONSTITUTIONAL COXVKNTION. 1901 

mi tied n! ,! hC t d ° na / S . and cents tIlat come to them, should he per- 
« i ? ar lcl I )ate ln republican forms of government before 
they ha v c learned the alphabet of a republican font, of eovernmen, 

■ m ,n S V° T nSC m pIac,nff the elective franchise in the hands of 
i. V V i° ias - m,t become familiar, either by education or bv 
study or by having it instilled into him from his voutli up—I sav 

re^nldir "° f reason . wh >' :i 111 a 11 " ho has not become educated to a 
pul 1,can orm ot government should have the right of exercising 
ns two-edged sword. He owes no obligation nor allegiance to 
nV4hi»° Pk ‘’i C !u V,1S n ° pr , 0)K ‘ rly in this State, he has no sympathy. 

e h ci he - R . ,eat r <ICSt]ny ° f lhis peopIe ' an(l vet. forsooth. 

H g '\ e h ,' m the right of casting a ballot which has been said to a 
two-edged sword, and cuts on both sides. I. for one. am not willing 
to incorporate in our organic law a clause that will give to people 
o an entirely different view of government the right to exercise 
le tianchisc and assist in maintaining this government until they 
nave at least had a few years in which to consider our forms of 
government. It may be true that at the present time there are 
comparatively few of these citizens within our borders. It mav 
be true that tor the present they are confined to a few hundred in 
the magnificent county of Jefferson and to a few more hundreds 
m the splendid county of Mobile, but as has been said bv the <wm- 
tleman from Mobile, the tide of immigration is turning" our wav. 

I he immigrants from the old countries are flowing into the beau¬ 
tiful southland, the immigrants—whenever thev can—from China 
are coming to the beautiful Southland, the people of the civilized 
world are beginning to see the beauties of our climate, and the 
glories of our soil, and the tide of immigration has turned in our 
direction. Put within our borders a few thousand of the men who 
tor some time have assisted in shaping the destinies of Chicago 
and the great cities of the Northwest, and I sav to you here I 
would rather ten thousand times have the illiterate negro vote con¬ 
tinue to cast the franchise. Mr. President. I hope that neither of 
these amendments will be adopted bv this Convention, but that the 
Convention will submit itself to the wise, to the careful and to the 
powerful conclusions of this splendid committee that they have 
appointed to frame this instrument. 


MR. SANFORD (Montgomery)—I quite concur with the 
gentleman from Pike in supporting the report of the Committee 
as it came from that body. It gives to every male citizen of this 
State, who is a citizen of the United States, the right to vote. The 
amendments propose to give to citizens of foreign countries the 
right to vote who mav not even have resided two years in the 
State of Alabama. A citizen owning land here, a citizen of Great 
Britain owning land here may come to the city of Montgomery, 
for instance, be pleased with the social surroundings, and declare 
his intention to become a citizen. He goes back home, he remains 
several years, he comes back, he never has perfected his citizenship 



2726 


OFFICIAL PROCEEDINGS 


and yet an election is held and he chooses to vote. He votes for 
the electors for President, for the Governor, for your legislature, 
for your Congressman, for your judges of evey court, from justice 
of the peace to the Supreme Court. Now, it does seem to me that 
men who have no interest in this country should not be permitted 
to vote at the elections. To those gentlemen who have so much 
sympathy for the foreigner who has merely declared his intention, 
let me say that I have quite as much, and that I have canvassed 
Alabama in behalf of the rights of foreign citizens when many of 
those gentlemen were not born, or were playing marbles in the 
school-yards. I have always been the friend of the foreigner, it is 
a fact well known where I live, but 1 do not believe that any for¬ 
eigner, however wise, virtuous or worthy he may be, has a right 
to participate in this government unless he is in a condition to bear 
its burdens. A foreigner here who has declared his intention cannot 
be compelled to bear arms in defense of the State, he cannot be 
enlisted in your police, he cannot be recruited for any purpose, and, 
therefore, it seems to me, that he who cannot be compelled to sup- 
port the government should not have the privilege of making its 
policies and of voting for its chief officers. I hope that the amend¬ 
ments will not be adopted by this Convention. ] can see no reason 
why a man from Italy or Turkey or any of the Caucasian countries 
may have the privilege of voting in Alabama when he merelv said, 

I would like to be a citizen. ’ The government requires certain 
facts to be proven. He must be proven to be a man of good moral 
character, he must be proven to be attached to republican institu¬ 
tions, and if that is the experience of the statute of naturalization 
he cannot become a citizen of Alabama unless he is a citizen of the 
United States by birth or by the process required bv its naturaliza¬ 
tion laws. It does not require him to be five years in Alabama— 
as one of my friends suggested—lie must he a resident of the United 
States five years before he can become a citizen, and vet we <Wve 
him all the rights of citizenship if he happens to declare his inten- 
t'on and comes to Alabama under the proposed amendments and 
remains two years in the State. 1 do not think it is just to other 
citizens of the country. Men may own thousands of acres of land 
here they put their tenants, foreigners, upon these lands, thev mav 
teach them to declare their intention, they become voters at once 
and then they have an influence in your elections far bevond what 
A?ateZ Th 'chen the tenantry was settled upon the lands of 
A • ‘ ' -Pf [' 1 re sident. that the section reported bv this 
Committee will be adopted without amendment. 

i *u R u K^ OX — 1 do ^sire to discuss the question at anv 
ength, but I simply want to say that I fully agree with the gentle¬ 
man from Pike and the gentleman from Montgomery who have 

recoltrctton'^s 1 Mr^P arr l^ n d me nts. I may be mistaken, but my 

Mississirmi T rmbt rCS1 *he States of South Carolina, 

Mississippi, Louisiana and North Carolina, that have dealt with 



CONSTITUTIONAL CONVENTION, 1901 


2727 


this subject have taken this view. They have embodied the same 
provision with reference to the participation of foreigners in the 
exercise of the right of suffrage that our Committee on Suffrage 
has done. It is not a disfranchisement of these people. It simply 
provides that they cannot merely declare their intention and remain 
citizens of foreign countries. Many of them, I am informed, declare 
their intention and never get any further. They never prove up 
and comply with the requirement of the act of Congress, and many 
of them, it may be. cannot comply, because the act of Congress, 
Mr. President, requires that they must be able and ascribe up to 
the conditions which our Committee on Suffrage have required. 
I hey must prove that they are men of good character, that they 
have behaved and conducted themselves as good citizens before 
they can comply, and it may be that many of them fail to comply 
because of their inability to do so. They are not disfranchised by 
this provision. They may go on if their conduct and character 
is such as to enable them to do so. and qualify themselves for citi¬ 
zenship. It seems to me that it is only reasonable to expect and to 
require that they should do so. I am in favor of the provision as it 
was originally reported by the committee. 

AIR. deCRAIT*IvNRhJD—I desire to state that I agree with 
the gentleman from Pike and it seems to me that it is absolutely 
unnecessary for this section to be encumbered with either one of 
these amendments. It also seems to me that in refusing to adopt 
them we will not violate any statement that was made in the Demo¬ 
cratic platform. If the members of this Convention will read care¬ 
fully this report that comes from this committee, they will find 
that all men who are now entitled to vote under the laws of Ala¬ 
bama will be entitled to vote in all elections except the general 
election in 1902. and that this Constitution, so far as its limitation 
upon suffrage is concerned, will not go fully into effect prior to 
1903. If the majority report of the Committee on Suffrage is 
adopted by this Convention, no election after the election in 1902 
will be held for State officers until 1906. so that any man who has 
already declared his intention to become a citizen of this State will 
have the opportunity under the general laws of the United States 
to perfect his intention by becoming a citizen, before this Constitu¬ 
tion goes fully into effect. I do not think. Mr. President, as we 
propose to cut from the electorate many men who have been born 
and raised to manhood in Alabama, and who are citizens of this 
State, that we should permit people who are foreigners by virtue 
of a mere declaration and who, perhaps, not only do not understand 
anything about our institutions, but are perhaps unable to speak 
our language, to aid us in electing officers who will in the future 
frame our laws. I believe that this provision as reported by the 
committee which comes with the endorsement of every member of 
the committee, appears in all the modern Constitutions of the 



2728 


OFFICIAI, P R()C E\i DIN C S 


States, and that it should be adopted by this Convention without 
change or amendment. 

MR. KIRKE—I rise to support the amendment of the gen¬ 
tleman from Jefferson as amended by the gentleman from Mobile. 
1 think a strict adherence to the pledges ot the Democratic party 
requires the adoption of that amendment. That amendment, as I 
understand it, applies alone to those of foreign birth who, under 
the present Constitution, should have the right of iranchise. I 
would oppose the amendment if it went any further in extending 
the privilege of franchise to the foreigner. But I do believe it is 
the duty of this Convention to adhere literally to the pledges of 
the Democratic party upon that proposition, and I might say in 
this connection, Mr. President, that notwithstanding the great 
clamor that has been made against the grandfather clause, I be¬ 
lieve it is one of the best provisions that has been reported by the 
committee. It is true that that grandfather clause applies to the 
temporary plan, but if we adhere to the pledges of the party, we 
must incorporate in the permanent plan the grandfather clause. 

I believe it is our duty to see that no white man in the State of 
Alabama is disfranchised by the Constitution that we are framing 
now. The pledges of the party have gone out to every white man, 
and as I said a moment ago, the great clamor against the grand¬ 
father clause does not emanate, Mr. President, from the masses 
of the voters in this State. They want it, and it is necessary that 
we incorporate that clause in the Constitution before we submit 
it to the people for ratification. But that question will be dis¬ 
cussed later in the consideration of this report. 1 trust, gentle¬ 
men, that you will support the amendment to this section of the 
committee’s report. 


MR. FERGUSON I rise to support the amendment offered 
by my colleague from Jefferson, and also the amendment offered 
by the gentleman from Mobile, as I believe it to be reasonable. 
We have a clause in the Declaration of Rights declaring that 
emigration shall be encouraged in the State of Alabama. Can we 
encourage emigration to this State unless we give the right to 
people coming here as emigrants to participate' in the affairs of 
government; I believe that was what induced the. framers of the 
Constitutmn of 18/5 to embody that provision in the Constitution 
of this State. I believe that is what induced the framers of the 
Constitution of the Lnited States to recognize the naturalization 
of foreign citizens. 


\ ow ’ Mr - President I desire to add mv mead of praise to 
what has been said of the foreign born citizens of [efferson countv. 
I have been a solicitor ,n that county for well nigh thirteen years. 

v th, % its courts and its grand juries and I desire to 

say that it is rare, indeed, when you find them defendants in the 
cnmtnal courts of that country. They are frugal and industrious 



CONSTITUTIONAL COXVKNTJON, 1901 


2729 


people, as a body in the main. They are home-builders. Mr. Presi¬ 
dent, a great many of them. Many of them have budded homes 
in Jefferson County, and many of their little communities have 
erected churches there for the worship of Almighty God. It is 
true, as said by the gentleman from Mobile, that many of them do 
not conceive the good purposes of citizenship. That applies to 
but one or two nationalities; but the great bulk of the foreign- 
horn citizenship of Jefferson County do appreciate the duties and 
responsibilities of citizenship, and will know and recognize the 
principles of republican form of government. They have taken an 
active interest in politics, and as a general rule they have stood by 
the dominant party in this State in many close contests. 1 will 
support, Mr. President, the amendment offered by my colleague 
from Jefferson, and also the amendment to the amendment offered 
by the gentleman from Mobile. 

MR. SANFORD (Montgomery)—There is nothing that pre¬ 
vents them from voting or holding office after they have been 
naturalized. It is before they are naturalized that we are object¬ 
ing to their voting. 

MR. FKKGUSOX—1 think the amendment offered by the 
gentleman from Mobile is entirely reasonable and covers that point. 

MR. DKNT (Harbour)—J just desire to add a word or two 
upon that amendment but before I do that, I desire to say I have 
heard a great deal said in reference to party pledges, and the 
pledges contained in the platform. 1 do not propose to violate 
what a consider the spirit of the pledges of the Democratic party, 
but. while I am upon my feet, 1 propose to present my view's of 
those pledges for what they are worth to this Convention. \Ye 
are pledged here not to disfranchise any white man. I take it that 
that means that we are not to do it if we can avoid it and prepare 
and make a Constitution that will be beneficial and acceptable to 
the people of Alabama. But, Mr. Chairman, there is another view' 
of this question which has occurred to me and which I have heard 
discussed, and I want to illustrate. Now, if the convention was 
going to adopt a Constitution without submitting it back to the 
people, we should certainly be very careful to preserve the pledges 
that we made them; but that, 1 presume, in fact, 1 am satisfied, 
is not to be the case. Whatever Constitution we make will be 
submitted back to the people of the State of Alabama for their 
ratification or their rejection. Now’, let me illustrate my view' of 
the principle that is involved. We represent the people of Ala¬ 
bama as their agents. Now, a principal sends out his agent to 
make a contract for him, and he limits him in making the con¬ 
tract, stating that he is to make the contract in a particular way 
and in a particular manner and have in it particular conditions. 
The agent goes and finds that it is impracticable to make such a 
contract, as his principal has prescribed, but he in the exercise of 



2730 


OFFICIAL PROCFKDINGS 


his discretion, makes a contract upon the condition that it shall be 
ratified by his principal. He makes that contract and submits it 
back to his principal and says: “Here. I could not make the con¬ 
tract literally as you gave me instructions to make it, but I made 
a contract as near to it as I could and which 1 think will be bene¬ 
ficial to you, and you have the right now to say whether you will 
stand by that contract or reject it.” If he does that. I want to 
know who is hurt? 

If we make a Constitution here, doing the \erv best we can, 
for what would be to the very best interests of the people of Ala¬ 
bama, suppose we do violate in letter some of the pledges made 
by the Democratic party in its platform: if we refer it hack to Un¬ 
people, and they accept it, who is hurt lw it? 

P>ut now I come back to the amendment. 1 do not believe 
that the man who is not a citizen of Alabama should have the right 
to select the men to make its laws and to enforce them. Do you 
know, Mr. President, that there are but five States in the forty- 
five that compose the Union of States in this country that have 
this principle engrafted in the organic law, Alabama being one of 
them? Take out Alabama, and we have about four or five left— 
States in the Northwest where this element dominates and con¬ 
trols. You go to the great States like New York and Ohio and 
Illinois and Pennsylvania, and States like them, and they have no 
such provision. In fact, as I have said, only a few States like them, 
and they have no such provision. In fact, as I have said, only a 
few States in the Northwest, Minnesota, Michigan and Wisconsin, 
and perhaps some others that I do not recall, have this provision 
of allowing aliens to vote. 

I say take history. Isn’t it worth something to the people of 
Alabama? Isn’t it worth something as a guide to those who are 
making a Constitution for Alabama that out of forty-five States 
in the Union less than five have this principle engrafted in their 
Constitutions? I hope the amendment will be voted down. 

The President here took the chair. 

MR. DAV IS (Titowall)—Mr. President, I favor the amend¬ 
ment of the gentleman from Jefferson as amended bv the amend¬ 
ment of the gentleman from Mobile. I believe that this is the time 
of all times when we should not stand on hair-splitting technicali¬ 
ties and say that we are going to adopt the spirit of the platform, 
but that we are at liberty to depart from the letter of the pledge. 

I believe that this report of the Suffrage Committee is a magnifi¬ 
cent production. It far exceeded mv expectations, although 1 
expected a report from them that would be a credit to this State, 
and yet, as high as I have regarded it, I saw this morning, to my 
mind, an imperfection, and that will be cured if this amendment 
is adopted. Now, Mr. President, it occurs to me that if we should 



CONSTITUTIONAL COXVKXTION, 1901 


2731 


vote down these amendments, and thereby strike from the elec¬ 
torate of Alabama some of the white people of the State who have 
heretofore enjoyed the privilege of voting, that when we go back 
in the Fall to advocate the adoption of this Constitution, the peo¬ 
ple of Alabama, who are not so intelligent as those in this Con¬ 
vention may say, “You have stricken out a part of the white people 
of Alabama who were entitled to vote.” They cannot understand 
this suffrage report as a whole, for we were so hedged in by the 
Fifteenth Amendment on the one side, and the pledges of the Party 
on the other, that it is necessarily complex, and I believe, Mr. Presi¬ 
dent, that a large number—the large mass—of the voters of this 
State will have to take that suffrage plank on faith from the mem¬ 
bers of this Convention, and others from the State, who will go 
out and advocate the adoption of the Constitution and of this par¬ 
ticular plank,—I say 1 believe they will not be able to understand 
it thoroughly, and will have to vote on faith largely. 

Now, then, if it is brought up on this plain, pure principle, 
this simple proposition, it will be urged by the opposition that you 
have disfranchised a part of the white people of Alabama, in that 
you have taken from those who heretofore had the right to vote 
that right, and we cannot gainsay it, but will have to stand silent 
and admit that we have disfranchised a certain part of them. 

How, then, can we expect them to believe this suffrage report 
and believe that we have not disfranchised them further? There 
is no man in this Convention who is more opposed to the toreign- 
born element coining in and usurping the functions of government 
and participating in shaping our laws than I am, and 1 heartily 
favor the provision in this report which says that after a certain 
dav all foreigners coming in must hew to the line and become 
citizens of the United States before they can avail themselves of 
the privilege of voting, but those who are at present entitled to 
vote are a mere handful and the amendment of the gentleman from 
Mobile and which 1 thoroughly indorse goes to the extent of say¬ 
ing that even they shall not continue to enjoy the privilege of 
voting if they do not carry out their intention of becoming citi¬ 
zens, indeed. I trust, Mr. President, that, in the incipiency of the 
discussion of this suffrage veport, we will not violate either the 
spirit or the letter of the pledge, and I hope the amendment of the 
gentleman from Jefferson as amended by the gentleman from Mo¬ 
bile will be adopted. 

MR. BULGER'—If I understand the Section as reported by 
the Committee and the purpose of the amendment offered by the 
o-entleman from Jefferson, it seems to me that it would be unwise 
to change anything in this Section as reported by the Committee. 
The framers of the fundamental law of the whole country foresaw 
the question with which we are confronted this evening. They put 
in the first article of the Constitution of the United States a pro- 



2732 


OFFICIAL PROCEEDINGS 


vision leaving to Congress the power to settle this question, and 
the Congress of the United States, in their wisdom, saw that five 
years was little enough for a foreigner to come to this country and 
become a citizen. On the other hand. Air. President, here is a 
young man of America, born on American soil, who is educated in 
the English language, trained in American colleges in the arts 
and sciences of our government, and who at 20 years of age is not 
permitted to vote, and yet right by his side, a foreigner who has 
only been in this country but a few days, has only to declare—not 
to become a citizen, but to declare—his intention to become a citi¬ 
zen, and he is entitled to vote. 1 say. Air. President, it breaks 
down the theory of the Government when you permit such a thing. 
The great moving principle that called this Convention together 
was to purify the ballot. You may pass an article on the suffrage 
that will strike down every colored voter in the land, and if von leave 
the foreign element, about which 1 have heard, still to vote, the 
ballot will be far from pure. The honest, capable negro, who has 
been born and raised in America, in my humble judgment, is better 
qualified to vote even when the foreigner has been here for a term 
of five years. It seems to me that the Committe which has so 
faithfully and so ably presented to this Convention the Article on 
the great and all-important question of the suffrage has acted wise- 
ly when they put this simple change from the old Constitution 
which, with the negro stricken out, the strange foreigner will be 
stricken out and our ballot will be pure. I desire to register not 
only my vote, but to register my voice against both of the amend¬ 
ments and in favor of the Section. 


MR. COLEMAN (Greene) — Air. President, no thoughtful 
man can underestimate the important of the questions which are 
presented to you tor consideration. The future prosperity of this 
State depends upon how these Questions are solved. \s has been 
told you. the Committee struggled with this provision for nearly 
two days, discussing it in all its various aspects. We were aware 
of the views that had been presented by the distinguished gentle¬ 
man from Jefferson, and there were counteracting views from other 
portions of the State. I here were delegates who took the same 
view of some ot the delegates here that there was a technical viola- 
tion, perhaps in their own minds it may have been, but that ques- 
tion was not discussed before the Committee. The great question 
presented to the Committee was what was the p an 

we could devise for the good of the whole State, and you hfve the 
result before you It is the purpose of the Committee to present 
its view, to let this Convention know what it thought best 'but 
upon these points to place the responsibility of the choice with the 
delegates here assembled. The Committee will make no objection 
to any action taken by this Convention. We are after the very 
best plan that can be ascertained and adopted. I think the ques¬ 
tion has been sufficiently discussed, and while I would not cut off 



CONSTITUTIONAL CONVENTION, 1901 


2733 


any gentleman from expressing his views, I believe it is time to 
move the previous question upon the adoption of the substitute of 
the gentleman from Mobile and the amendment by the gentleman 
from Jefterson and the original Section presented in the report of 
the Committee. 


THE PRESIDENT—The question is 
be now put? 


shall the main question 


Clion a vote being taken the main question was ordered. 

MR. BED DOW—Under the rules regulating the debate on 
the suffrage question, I believe I have the right to close. 


THE PRESIDENT—The right to 
Chairman of the Committee. 


close would be with the 


MR. BRDDOW—Upon reading this resolution, I believe I 
would have the right to close. 

1 HE PRESIDENT—Will the gentleman please read the reso¬ 
lution? 


Mr. Beddow thereupon read the resolution as follows: 

Resolution No. 255, by Rules Committee: 

Resolved, that the rules of the Convention limiting debate be 
suspended when the report of the Suffrage Committee is taken up 
for consideration, and that each delegate be allowed to speak once, 
and not longer than thirty minutes upon any proposition presented 
by the report of the Committee any amendment thereto, except 
that the Chairman of the Committee or mover of the amendment, 
or such delegate as such Chairman or mover may yield his time to, 
may, after the previous question has been ordered, close the debate, 
and in so doing may speak for a like period of thirty minutes; 
provided, that the time here limited may be extended by a ma¬ 
jority of the delegates voting without a suspension of the rules. 

THE PRESIDENT—The Chair will state that the same ques¬ 
tion has been presented several times before, and the construction 
which the gentleman from Jefferson put upon it would be true if 
the motion for the previous question was limited to the amend¬ 
ment. If the motion for the previous question in this case was 
limited to the adoption of the amendment, the gentleman pro¬ 
posing the amendment would have the right to conclude, but where 
the previous question, as in this case, is directed to the section, 
only one person can conclude under the rule, and the ruling of the 
Chair before has been (and the Chair still thinks it is correct) to 
give that right to conclude to the Chairman of the Committee, 
because upon this issue not only the amendment, but the original 
section is involved. 



2734 


OFFICIAL PROCEEDINGS 


MR. CARMICHAEL (Colbert)—I move that the rules be 
suspended and that the gentleman from Jefferson be allowed to 
close the debate. 

THE PRESIDENT—It is moved that the rules be suspended 
and the gentleman from Jefferson be allowed to close the debate. 
Possibly the Chairman of the Committee would yield the floor to 
him. 

MR. COLEMAN-—I yield the floor to him, but still 1 retain 
the right to close if 1 see proper. 

THE PRESIDENT—The Chairman of the Committee yields 
ten minutes of his time to the gentleman from Jefferson. 

MR. BED DOW—I desire to thank the Chairman of the Com¬ 
mittee. There have been some good arguments on the question 
of who should not be allowed to vote in our elect ins, but the 
serious question in the matter we are taking under consideration 
here is not who would be a good voter, but who would be a poor 
voter, in the contemplation of the new Constitution we are about 
to frame. 1 he question that confronts us at the verv outset, in 
the very first section of the article, and the first line of that sec¬ 
tion. is shall we. as the representatives of our constituents in this 
Constitutional Convention stand up and abide bv the pledges that 
we made our people before we were elected to this Constitutional 
Convention. When the dominant party of this State met in con- 
vention, they adopted a platform in which these words were used: 

"‘That no wlnte voter shall be disfranchised except for infamous 
crime. No white voter. There is no other construction that 
can be put upon that than that no man who, at the time he voted 
for us as delegates for this Convention, and who had the right at 
that time to vote, should be disfranchised. When we met in Bir¬ 
mingham to consult together, we, by the unanimous vote of everv 
delegate present, in the rooms of the Commercial Club, indorsed 
ratified and pledge dourselves to stand up to those pledges and 
now we are confronted as I say in the verv first paragraph—the 
very first line—and asked to go back on our pledges, and dis- 
\ r f n , C llse P 0851 ^}’ 5-000 or 6,000 citizens and voters of the State of 
Alabama. Some gentleman has seen fit to say that these foreign¬ 
ers are unworthy of a vote. There are men in mv county who are 
the peer in intellect, who are of foreign birth, 'and who are not 
naturalized, ot any gentleman upon this floor. There are men in 
my county who, if this clause was adopted, would be disfranchised, 
who favored the calling of this Convention and who thought when 
we made these promises that we made them in good faith. Some 
gentlemen seek to dodge the question by saying that it will be 
submitted back to the people for ratification, and the gentleman 
who spoke from the County of Barbour indicated as much But 
if we violate our pledge in that respect, have we not the same 



CONSTITUTIONAL CONVENTION, 1901 


2735 


ri^ht to go lurther and say that we will not submit it in one in- 
stance, you may do it in another. 

Mr. President, from the time of the landing of the Pilgrim 
lathers upon this continent, America has always been the refuge 
and tlie haven for the oppressed of other nations in quest of liberty 
and law. Shall we refrain from holding out to them those same 
blessingsr Shall we take a back step? Shall we go back on our 
pledges" Go back on the friends who voted to send us here and 
stand up here as the poet says. 

That friendship to us is ambition’s ladder, 

Whereto the climber upward turns his face, 

Hut when he once attains the upmost round 
He then to the ladder turns his back 
Looks into the crowd and scorns 

The base course by which he did ascend. 

These pledges I made to my people are just as binding to me 
today in the halls of this Convention as the day I made them, and 
if we never have suffrage reform until I am required to go back 
on the pledges I made my people, I say by my vote we will never 
have it. I believe that is all I care to say on this question. It 
has been discussed at length. It has been ably discussed from 
every standpoint, but I say to you, if you forget your pledges, this 
Constitution will not be ratified and we ought not to hope for its 
ratification. 

MR. COLEMAN (Greene)—The provisions in the Demo¬ 
cratic platform is as follows: “that we pledge our faith to the 
people of Alabama not to deprive any white man of the right to 
vote except for conviction of infamous crime/’ etc. 

The question for you to consider is this: Whether it deprives 
any white man from qualifying himself to vote by becoming a 

citizen of the United States. If he fails to become a citizen of 

the United States, he cannot vote, but if he becomes a citizen of 

the United States, then he has the right to vote, if he possesses 

the other qualifications. As I stated before, you have heard dis¬ 
tinguished men—distinguished lawyers—discuss that question. 
What is best for the people of Alabama under all the circum¬ 
stances? There is a pledge, and you have heard the opinion of the 
attorneys learned in the law upon the question. I call for the pre¬ 
vious question. 

The ayes and noes were called for and the call sustained. 

THE PRESIDENT PRO TEM.—The question is upon the 
amendment offered by the gentleman from Mobile to the amend¬ 
ment offered by the gentleman from Jefferson to the section as 
reported by the committee. 



2736 


OFFICIAL PROCEEDINGS 


The amendment was again read, and upon the call of the roll 
the vote resulted as follows: 


Almon, 

Ashcraft, 

Barefield, 

Beavers, 

Bethune, 

Blackwell, 

Brooks, 

Burnett, 

Burns, 

Carmichael, of Colbert, 
Chapman, 

Cobb, 

Coleman, of Greene, 
Coleman, of Walker, 
Cunningham, 

Davis, of DeKalb, 
Davis, of Etowah, 

Duke, 

Kiev, 

Eyster, 

Espy, 

Ferguson, 

Gilmore, 

Glover, 

Graham, of Talladega, 
Grayson, 

Greer, of Perry, 
Handley, 

Harrison, 

Heflin, of Chambers. 
Total—90. 


Messrs. Preshident, 
Altman, 

Banks, 

Bartlett, 

Beddow, 

Bulger, 

Craig, 

Dent, 

deGraffenreid, 

Fitts, 


AYES. 

Heflin, of Randolph. 
Henderson, 

Hinson, 

Hodges, 

Hood, 

Howell, 

Howze, 

Inge, 

Jackson, 

Jenkins, 

Jones, of Bibb, 

Jones, of Montgomery. 
Jones, of Wilcox, 

Kirk, 

Kyle, 

Ledbetter, 

Leigh, 

Locklin, 

Lomax. 

M acdonald, 

Malone, 

Martin, 

Maxwell. 

Merrill, 

Miller (Wilcox), 
Norman, 

Oates, 

O'Neal (Lauderdale), 
O’Neill, of Jefferson, 
Opp, 


NOES. 

Foshee. 

Freeman, 

Graham, of Montgomery, 
Knight. 

Lowe, of Jefferson, 
McMillan, of Baldwin, 
Moody, 

Norwood, 

Phillips, 

Pillans, 


1 'aimer, 

Parker (Cullman), 
Parker ( Elmore), 
Pettus, 

Pitts. 

Proctor, 

Renfro, 

Reynolds, of Henry, 
Rogers ( Lowndes), 
Saniford, 

Sanders, 

Searcy, 

Selheimer. 

Sentell, 

Smith ( Mobile). 
Smith, Mac. A., 
Smith, Morgan M., 
Sorrell, 

Spragins, 

Stewart, 

Thompson. 

Waddell. 

Walker. 

Watts, 

Weatherly, 

Whiteside, 

Williams (Barbour), 
Milliams (Marengo), 
Wilson {Clarke), 
Wilson (Wash’gton), 


Reynolds (Chilton), 
Rogers (Sumter), 
Sanford, 

Sloan, 

Spears, 

Tayloe, 

White, 

Winn, 


Total—28. 



CONSTITUTIONAL CONVENTION, 1901 
ABSENT OR NOT VOTING. 


2737 


Boone, 

Browne, 

Byars, 

Cardon, 

Carmichael, of Coffee, 
Carnathon, 

Case, 

Gofer, 

Cornwall, 

Fletcher, 

Foster, 

Grant, 

Greer, of Calhoun, 


Haley, 

Jones, of Hale, 

King, 

Kirkland, 

Kong, of Butler, 
Kong, of Walker, 
Kowe, of Lawrence, 
McMillan (Wilcox), 
Miller (Marengo), 
Morrisette, 

Mul key, 

Murphree, 

NeSmith, 


O’Rear, 

Pearce, 

Porter, 

Reese, 

Robinson, 

Sol li e, 

Stoddard, 

Vaughan, 

Weakley, 

Willet, * 

Williams (Elmore). 


By a vote of ninety ayes to twenty-eight noes, the amendment 
offered by Mr. Smith (Mobile) was adopted. 

MR. COLEMAN (Greene)—A parliamentary inquiry. Does 
the defeat of the amendment offered by the gentleman from Jeffer¬ 
son have the effect to leave the section as originally reported by 
the committee? 

THE PRESIDENT PRO TEM.—In the opinion of the Chair 
it would. The question is upon the adoption of the amendment 
offered by the gentleman from Jefferson. 

MR. BEDDOW—I call for the ayes and noes upon that. 

A DELEGATE—They have been ordered— 

THE PRESIDENT PRO TEM.—The Chair is not certain 
whether they were ordered on this proposition. Is the call sus¬ 
tained ? 

The call was sustained and the amendment of the gentleman 
from Jefferson was read. 

MR. CUNNINGHAM (Jefferson)—I rise to a parliamentary 
inquiry. If the amendment of the gentleman from Jefferson is 
defeated, leaving the present section as it stands, will it not have 
the effect to disfranchise white foreign voters who are now entitled 
to vote? 

THE PRESIDENT PRO TEM.—In the opinion of the Chair 
that is not a parliamentary inquiry, but one for the courts of the 
country. 

MR. deGRAFFENREID—I will ask if it would have that 
effect, if such foreigners should qualify themselves as citizens? 

THE PRESIDENT PRO TEM.—The Chair is of the same 
opinion in regard to that inquiry. 



2738 


OFFICIAL PROCEEDINGS 


MR. OATES—I rise for the purpose of making a suggestion. 

THE PRESIDENT PRO TEM.—The previous question hav¬ 
ing been ordered, discussion is out of order. 

Upon the call of the roll, the vote resulted as follows: 


Almon, 

Ashcraft, 

Barefield, 
lied clow, 

Bethune, 

Blackwell, 

Brooks, 

Burnett, 

Carmichael, of Colbert, 
Chapman, 

Cobb, 

Cofer, 

Cunningham, 

Davis, of Etowah, 

Duke, 

Ktey, 

Espy, 

Ferguson, 

Fitts, 

Gilmore, 

Clover, 

Graham, of Montgomery, 
Grayson, 

Total—69. 


Messrs. President, 
Altman, 

Banks, 

Bartlett, 

Bulger, 

Coleman, of Greene, 
Coleman, of Walker, 
Craig, 

Davis, of DeKalb, 
Dent, 

deGraffenreid, 

Eyster, 

Foshee, 

Graham, of Talladega, 


AYES. 

Greer, of Perry, 

1 land ley, 

Heflin, of Chambers, 
Heflin, of Randolph, 

H inson, 

Hodges. 

Howell, 

Hcnvze, 
j aekson. 

J enkins, 

J ones, of Bibb, 

Jones, of Montgomery, 
Kirk, 

Leigh, 

Lomax, 

Lowe (Jefferson), 

M acdona Id. 

Malone, 

Martin, 

Maxwell, 

Merrill, 

Miller (Wilcox), 
Norman, 


NOES. 

Harrison, 

Henderson, 

Hood, 

Inge, 

Jones, of Wilcox, 
Knight, 

Kyle, 

Ledbetter, 

Locklin, 

McMillan (Baldwin), 
McMillan (Wilcox), 
Moody, 

Norwood, 

Oates, 


O’Neill (Jefferson), 

ON ea 1 (Lauderdale), 

Opp, 

I 'arker (Cullman), 
Pettus, 

Proctor, 

Reynolds (Henry), 
Reynolds (Chilton), 
Rogers (Lowndes), 
Sanders, 

Searcy, 

Sentell, 

Smith, Mac. A., 
Sorrell, 

Spragins, 

Stewart, 

Thompson, 

Vaughan, 

Weatherly, 

White, 

Whiteside, 

Williams (Barbour), 
Williams (Marengo), 


1 > arker (Elmore), 
Palmer, 

Phillips, 

Pillans, 

Pitts, 

Renfro, 

Rogers (Sumter), 
Samford, 

San ford, 

Selheimer, 

Sloan, 

Smith (Mobile), 
Smith, Morgan M., 
Spears, 



CONS riTUTIONAI, CONVKNTJON, 1901 


2739 


Tayloe, 

Waddell, 

Walker, 

Total—49. 


Watts, 

Wilson (Clarke), 
Wilson (Wash’gton), 


Winn, 


ABSENT OR NOT VOTING. 


Beavers, 

Boone, 

Browne, 

Burns, 
i lyars, 

Canlon, 

Carmichael, of Coffee, 
Carnathon, 

Case, 

Cornwall, 

Fletcher, 

Foster, 

Freeman, 


Grant, 

Greer, of Calhoun, 
Haley, 

Jones, of Hale, 
King, 

Kirkland, 

Long (Butler), 
Look (Walker), 

I .owe (Lawrence), 
Miller (Marengo), 
M orrisettc, 

M u I key, 

M urphree. 


NeSmith, 

O'Rear, 

F caret 1 . 

Porter, 

Reese, 

Robinson. 

Sol lie, 

Studdard, 

Weakley, 

Willet, 

Williams ( Elmore), 


So the amendment to the amendment was stopped. 

I Hh I’RLSII Hi ft J PRO I LM—The question recurs upon 
the adoption of the section as amended. 

Upon a viva voce vote the section as amended was adopted. 

M I\. LOW J-, (Jefferson)—1 desire to move a suspension of 
the rules for the purpose of extending- the privileges of the floor 
to the distinguished representative of the Fourth District. One 
who has done as much, I believe, as any other man to render pos¬ 
sible the holding of this Convention, the Hon. S. J. Howie. 

Upon a vote being taken the rules were suspended, and upon 
a further vote the motion was unanimously adopted. 

Section 2 was read as follows: 


Sec. 2. To entitle a citizen to vote at an}- election by the 
people, he shall have resided in the State at least two years, in the 
county one year, and in the precinct or ward three months imme¬ 
diately preceding the election at which he offers to vote, and he 
shall have been duly registered as an elector, and shall have paid 
on or before the first day of February next preceding the date of 
the election at which he offers to vote, all poll taxes due from him 
for the year 1901, and for each subsequent year; provided, that 
any elector, who, within three months next preceding the date of 
the election at which he offers to vote, has removed from one pre¬ 
cinct or ward to another precinct or ward in the same county, in¬ 
corporated town or city, shall have the right to vote in the pre¬ 
cinct or ward from which he has so removed, if he would have been 
entitled to vote in such precinct or ward but for such removal. 



2740 


OFFICIAL PROCEEDINGS 


THE PRESIDENT—The question is upon the adoption of 
Section 2. 

MR. LOWE (Jefferson)—I have an amendment. 

The Secretary read the amendment as follows: “Amend Sec¬ 
tion 2 by adding after the words ‘to vote/ in the fifth line, the 
words ‘and each year subsequent to the last general election next 
preceding/ ” 

THE CHAIR—The question is upon the amendment of the 
gentleman from Jefferson, 

Mr. Coleman (Greene) sought recognition. 

MR. PILLANS—I desire to make a suggestion to the gentle¬ 
man from Greene which I think he will adopt. 

THE PRESIDENT—Does the gentleman yield? 

MR. COLEMAN (Greene)—I will hear it. 

MR. PILLANS—The first line of the section should be 
amended in view of the action on Section 1, by striking out the 
word “citizen'’ and putting in the words “any person/' I think 
to make it consistent with what we have done, it should entitle 
any person to vote instead of any citizen. 

MR. LOWE (Jefferson)—If the chairman of the committee 
will give me a moment I can make my provision plain. 

THE PRESIDENT—The gentleman from Jefferson asks the 
privilege of making a statement. 

MR. LOWE—It will not take but a moment; I do not care 
to discuss it. The section, as I understand it, requies the payment 
of the aggregate poll taxes in February next preceding the elec¬ 
tion. My amendment requires the poll-tax to be paid in the year 
in which it is due. I think it is salutary, for the reason that if it 
is required to be paid in the year which it is due, there will be no 
temptation to the candidates to supply the money to pay the poll- 
tax. 


MR. COLEMAN—I will say first, in reply to the suggestion 
made by the delegate from Mobile, that Section 1 has not been 
altered in any way to conflict with Section 2 as it now reads. It 
is the purpose of the committee to prepare the section just as it is. 
When a party offers to vote all the poll tax due by him at the time 
he offers to vote must have been paid by him. If he does not in¬ 
tend to vote until 1903 or 1905, he is not permitted to vote until he 
pays all the poll taxes which have accrued against him. The very 
purpose which the delegate by his amendment offers to secure, is 
better secured, as we understand the reading of this section, as it is 
now framed, not only for the year of election, but for all subsequent 



CO N ST 1T L'T ] ON AI. COX V I'. X TJ ().\, 1901 


2741 


years prior to the time he attempts to vote. The latter clause of 
that section needs some little attention, beginning at the sixth line. 
“Provided, that any elector who, within three months next pre¬ 
ceding the date oi election at which he offers to vote, has removed 
front one precinct or ward in some countv. incorporated town or 
city, shall have the right to vote in the precinct or ward from 
which he has so removed, ii he would have been entitled to vote 
in said precinct or ward, hut for such removal.’’ That is the pro¬ 
vision to prevent parties from going out of one ward or precinct 
into another a few days before the election or within a short time, 
and perhaps the managers of that heat or ward cannot ascertain 
whether he is an elector or not. But if he is required to go hack 
into tilt ward where he removed from, he would be recognized, 
whether lie is a qualified elector or not. The purpose was to pre¬ 
vent parlies trom voting who were not qualified electors, by simply 
stepping across the line of an agricultural precinct or from one 
ward to another in cities. The suggestion that it he made to apply 
to cities came from members of the committee who reside in large 
cities, and the precincts from those who are from the agricultural 
districts. W e think it would remedy a great evil as to persons 
voting who are not qualified electors. 

MR. LOWE—Will the chairman yield for a moment? I 
understand from some members of the committee, it is the purpose 
to require the payment of poll taxes in each year in which it was 
due by the first day of February. 

MR. COLEMAN—Yes. sir. 

MR. LOW!',—That is the purpose of my amendment. I 
thought the language did not reach that. The language of this 
section as I read permits the payment of the aggregate of poll tax 
before the first day of February preceding a general election. 

MR. COLEMAN—Is not that exactly what it says? 

MR. LOWE—That would permit the payment of the aggre¬ 
gate poll tax. Now, for instance, we are having four-year term 
elections; general elections every four years. '1 he lepoit of the 
committee would permit the payment of the taxes for four years 
on or before the first day of February preceding the election. 

MR. COLEMAN—I do not think it bears that construction. 

MR I OWE—I think it does. I have studied it carefully. 
Now the purpose of my amendment is merely to require the poll 
tax to he paid each year so there will not be any temptation from 
any source to supply the money to pay poll tax. 

MR COI EMAN—If it does not mean that, I do not know 
what it does mean, and for each subsequent year refer hack to the 
first day of February. 



2742 


OFFICIAL PROCEEDINGS 


MR. LOWE—Will the gentleman pardon me, if I am not 
intruding. It entitles a resident to vote at any election. “He shall 
have resided in the State,” etc., and he shall have been duly regis¬ 
tered and shall have paid on or before the first day of February 
next preceding the date of the election at which he elects to vote 
all poll taxes due for 1901 and for each subsequent year; but he 
must pay all poll taxes, but it does not say that the poll tax shall 
be paid in the year in which it is due. Now my amendment merely 
says that it must be paid in the year in which it is due. 

MR. COLEMAN—Mr. President and delegates of the Con¬ 
vention. The purpose of the Committee was exactly my under¬ 
standing now, to avoid what the gentleman desires. This election 
will come on in 1902. No election can come until 1902. It is to 
require him to go back and count from 1901 so as to pay poll tax 
for 1901, and if it comes off in 1902, also in the year 1902. 

MR. LOWE—Now, if the gentleman will indulge me, how 
would it be then as to poll taxes for 1903, 1904 and 1905, and we 
come to 1906. Under the report of the Committee could not the 
poll taxes for these four years be paid before the 1st day of Feb¬ 
ruary, 1906? 

MR. COLEMAN—Mr. President and delegates of the Con¬ 
vention, we are providing here a temporary vote providing for all 
elections up to a certain date. It can be paid at one time under 
the report of the Committee. It must be paid on the 1st dav of 
February 1901. and for each subsequent year. 

MR. LOWE—Paid for the subsequent years preceding the 
general election. Can it not be paid for four years at one time? 

MR. COLEMAN—We do not so understand. 

MR. LOWE—That is the only point I wanted to arrive at. 

MR. COLEMAN—I think it is perfectly clear. 

MR. LOWE—That is the only purpose of my amendment, 
to require it to be paid in the year in which it is due. 

MR. COLEMAN—I do not know whether I have made my¬ 
self understood. If the man pays up all his poll taxes he ought to 
be allowed to vote. I would not permanently disfranchise anybody 
because at one time he omitted to pay his poll taxes. 

MR. LOWE—Will the gentleman pardon me? 

MR. COLEMAN—I think I know the gentleman's view. 

MR, LOWE—I think the gentleman does not understand my 
views. If the language correctly reported his ideas. 



2743 


<• OX'Sll'J LTlONAI. CONVKNTION, 1W] 


.uan\rnni I Jefferlo^? NT " D ° eS ^ emU ' man - vie](I the gentle- 


MK (. ( >LEM AN—Once more. 


.1R. U W h- t is Simply to arrive at an understanding. The 
purpose to disfranchise a man who does not pay within the year, 
but i that at the general election he shall not vote unless his 
poll taxes aie paid for the year preceding that general election 
and .subsequent to tin* last general election. 


OK. COLhMAX Mr. President, the purpose of the Commit- 
* 1 * 1 ** a l )t * rson ti|) all the poll taxes when due, he 

>hou!d he allowed to vote. If he was in default in the payment of 
his poll ta\e> he should not vote. We did not desire to disfran¬ 
chise any hod v who would comply with the law, who would pay 
his poll tax. hut it he pays all the poll taxes during any year up, 
even if he misses four or five years, if he comes in and pays all his 
poll taxes, we have no disposition to disfranchise him. I think I 
ha\c made myself sufficiently understood. Bv reading it you will 
see that if a man fails to pay at any time or fails within a year to 
pay his poll tax and in any subsequent year pays all the poll taxes 
accrued against him, he shall be allowed to exercise the franchise. 
It is not our purpose to disfranchise any one permanently because 
he fails to pay poll tax. I move, therefore, that the amendment 
he laid upon the table. 


MK. LOWE — May I ask the indulgence of the gentle¬ 
men of the Convention for a moment? It is merely on account of 
the remark of the gentleman just before he took his seat. 

THE PRESIDENT—Does the gentleman from Greene with¬ 
draw— 


MK. COLEMAN—For the present. 

MK. LOWE—Does the gentleman understand it is the purpose 
of my amendment to disfranchise a man who fails to pay his poll 
tax—permanently disfranchise him? 

MK. COLEMAN—It seems to have that effect to me. 

MR. LOW E—That is not the intention of the amendment as I 
understand. The provision as covered by my amendment—we 
come to a general election. No man can vote in that general elec¬ 
tion who has not paid his poll tax within the time required each 
year since the last general election. He loses his vote only in that 
general election, but in the general election succeeding that, if he 
has paid his poll tax within the time prescribed each year, in which 
it is due he would be entitled to vote, and there is no permanent 
disfranchisement. 



2744 


OFFICIAL PROCEEDINGS 


MR. COLEMAN—I can only say that the purpose of the 
Committee was not to disfranchise a man who paid up all poll tax 
due from him; that he should not lose his right to vote if paid by 
the first day of the next preceding February. There is no pro¬ 
vision there by which if he becomes disfranchised he can be en¬ 
franchised again. By reading this provision you will see that it is 
clear. He is required on the first day of February to pay his poll 
tax, and he is required to pay at each subsequent year at that time, 
but if he gets in arrears one, two. three or four years and pays up 
his poll tax he has the right to exercise the franchise. I move to 
lay the amendment on the table. 

Upon a vote being taken a division was called for. And by a 
vote of 77 ayes and 27 noes the motion to table prevailed. 

MR. ASHCRAFT—I have an amendment. 

Secretary read the amendment as follows: “To amend Sec¬ 
tion 2, by striking out of the first line the words ‘a citizen’ and 
insert ‘an elector.’ ” 

MR. ASHCRAFT—The purpose of the amendment is simply 
this: We have so amended the first section as that other persons 
than citizens may vote and we certainly would not want any con¬ 
fusion about what is meant by Section 2. Those persons who are 
not citizens and who are entitled to vote certainly ought to be 
subjected to the same requirements as citizens. 

MR. GRAHAM (Talladega)—Mr. President I would like to 
ask the gentleman from Lauderdale if an elector is not already a 
voter? 

MR. ASHCRAFT—Sir? 

MR. GRAHAM—I would like to ask if an elector is not al¬ 
ready a voter. I understand your amendment to read “an elector,” 
entitling an elector to vote. 

MR. ASHCRAFT—That is true, if he has all the qualifica¬ 
tions that make an elector in the first section, but he cannot exer¬ 
cise the right of an elector, unless he fulfills the conditions in the 
second section. The first tells what shall be an elector, and citizens 
and persons who have declared their intention to be citizens or 
electors. He may be registered and still, if he fails to pay his poll 
tax he is not entitled to vote, although he has all the qualifications 
of an elector, and Section 2 refers to just such omissions as that 
of using the term elector instead of citizen. 

MR. GRAHAM—Would not he have to be a citizen? 

MR. ASHCRAFT—No, sir; he may be a citizen, or a person 
who has declared his intention to become a citizen. 

MR. COLEMAN—Section 1 reads as follows, as amended: 



2745 


CONSTITUTIONAl. CON\F.XTION. 1901 

Sta.^rThut is “ c ' ,lzen of the United 

United States.” U requires thatT'V "PT “ cilizen of the 
jo.. To entitle a 

he"a tc SeC,i °" '• ' th "' fOTt ‘ «> '»y the amend- 

■ * . ^ IIrLANS I would a>k if the gentleman will not with¬ 

draw that a moment. I think I can satisfy him that he is in error. 

reoue 1 t^.f th Ri:SI H )HN l 7 Wil l the Rentlen,an withdraw at the 
lequest ot the gentleman from Mobile? 

MR. PILLANS 1 will withdraw the request. I can offer it 

independently as a section. 

.MR, ASHCRAFT. I yielded to the gentleman for the purpose 
of asking a question. I did not yield for the purpose of making a 
motion to table. 


I H 1\ PRESIDENT—It seems to the Chair that the point is 
well taken. He is entitled to the floor. 


MR. COLEMAN—1 recognize it. 


THK PRESIDENT—The question 
the amendment of the gentleman from 


is on the motion to table 
Lauderdale. 


MR. HOWELL—I have an amendment to Section 2. 

“Amend by striking out the word ‘two’ in the second line and 
inserting in lieu thereof the word ‘one.’ also strike out the words 
‘one year.’ in the same line and insert the words ‘six months.’ 


MR. H( >\YKLL—Mr. President, if I remember correctly I 
have been a voter in Alabama for nearly fifty years, and that has 
been the law all these years, requiring a residence in the State for 
one year, and six months in the county. I think that is the pro¬ 
vision in our present Constitution, and 1 see no good reason why 
we should change it. Therefore, I move the adoption of the amend¬ 
ment. 


THK PRESIDENT—The question is upon the amendment 
offered by the gentleman from Cleburne. 

MR. deGRAFFENREID—I move to lay it on the table. 

MR. PROCTOR—I move that the amendment be laid on the 
table. 

The motion to table was carried. 

MR. PILLANS—I offer this amendment: “Amendment to 
Section 2 was read as follows: “Amend Section 2 by striking out 



2746 


OFFICIAL PROCEEDINGS 


of the first line thereof the words ‘a citizen’ and insert in lieu there¬ 
of ‘a person.’ ” 

THE, PRESIDE/N1—The question is upon the amendment 
offered by the gentleman from Mobile. 

MR. PILLANS—I regret that my voice is not in very good 
shape for presenting my views to the Convention, but I am so 
persuaded that an error will be committed by the adoption of this 
section, if the first line is unchanged, that I offer this amendment. 
I know the Chairman of the Committee has stated in his statement 
here to the Convention that persons who are authorized to vote bv 
the first section are declared to be citizens of Alabama. 

MR. deGRAFFE/NREID—I want to call your attention—It 
has been adopted already by the Convention, under the Hill of 
Rights in Section 3. 

MR. PILLANS—I think if the Chairman of the Rill of Rights 
Committee is here, he will bear me out that we struck out that en¬ 
tire section. We had in the old Constitution, the existing Con¬ 
stitution of the State of Alabama an absurd provision and an un¬ 
constitutional provision that every person who has declared his 
intention to become a citizen was a citizen of the United States 
and a citizen of Alabama; that was absurd, because unconstitu¬ 
tional under the Federal Constitution, which distinctly declares that 
Congress alone should pass uniform laws of bankruptcy and 
naturalization, wherefore the Alabama Constitutional Convention 
of 1875 erred grievously in attempting to make an unnaturalized 
person a citizen of the State of Alabama. Well, we have not done 
that today. We have been wiser than they. We have struck out 
that absurd proposition from the projected Constitution, and we 
have no pretense in this Constitution that a person who is not a 
natn e born in the United States, or one who is naturalized by the 
processes provided by the act of Congress can become a citizen. 
\\ e have struck down any other idea. Now comes the suffrage 
report, harmonized as originally written, and I have no complaint 
of it as originally written, but we have amended it this very after¬ 
noon by declaring that persons who may vote shall be male citizens 
of the State who are citizens of the United States, or foreigners 
not citizens of the United States who have declared their inten¬ 
tion to become citizens, so far as those foreigners have so declared 
prior to the ratification of the Constitution. Now, I undertake to 
say, and I say it without the fear of successful contradiction from 
the chairman of the committee or any other member of the com¬ 
mittee or any other member on the floor, that does not make of 
those persons so privileged, who have declared their intention 
prior to the adoption of this Constitution, citizens of this State. 
They do not become citizens of Alabama and they cannot be made 
citizens of Alabama until you strike down the Federal Constitu¬ 
tion. I heard an argument this morning that led me to suppose 



CONSTITUTIONAL CON VKNTION. 1901 


2747 


that m mu* of the members of the Convention seem to think that 
we can trafftc with the Constitution of the United States as we 
wdl, and even repeal the fifteenth Amendment, hut I do not think 
t ns Convention is of that opinion. Now as we cannot strike down 
the Constitution of the United States, and cannot make citizens 
out of a 1 k ib except by the power furnished by Congress, their 
declaration of intention and five years residence, and adjuraction of 
their lormer allegiance to the foreign country from which thev 
came, then it goes without saying that persons whom we have 
undertaken to privilege as electors in this State, aliens, by the ac¬ 
tion taken on the amendment adopted this afternoon, are not citi¬ 
zens of the l nited States, and therefore if this provision stands as 
it does, you will put burdens on your native born and naturalized 
citizens, who have simply gone through the form of declaring his 
intention to become a citizen. 

Mix. BLACKWELL—It the gentleman will allow a question, 
suppose a citizen, a person, should come here and upon landing 
should declare his intention to become a citizen the day he landed, 
and thereafter he should come to the State of Alabama with that 
declaration, could not lie vote immediately without staying here 
two years? 

MR. EILLANS—I think so, if you declare that all persons 
declaring their intention to become citizens prior to the ratification 
are electors. Elector is the word used, and elector means entitled 
to vote, but, in the first section you put an additional burden on 
the citizens and I do not think that is right. 

MR. BLACKWELL—I will ask the gentleman the additional 
question, if that would not be giving to the foreigner who has just 
landed and knows nothing of our government privileges we are 
denying to the citizens of Alabama. 

MR. RILL A NS—Of course. 

MR. COLEMAN (Greene)—This was written as a whole al¬ 
together, and I believe after hearing the gentleman from Mobile, 
the committee is prepared to accept the proposition offered by him. 

Upon a vote being taken, the amendment was adopted, and 
upon a further vote the section as amended was adopted. 

Section 3 was read as follows: 

Sec. 3. All elections by the people shall be by ballot, and all 
elections bv persons in a representative capacity shall be viva voce. 

MR. COLEMAN (Greene)—I move the adoption of the sec¬ 
tion. 

Upon a vote being taken the section was adopted. 

Section 4 was read as follows: 



2748 


OFFIC l A L PROCKKDIXPS 


Sec. 4. The following male citizens of this State, who are 
citizens of the United States, 21 years old or upwards, who, if 
their place of residence shall remain unchanged, will have, at the 
date of the next general election, the qualifications as to residence 
prescribed in Section 2 of this article, and who are not disqualified 
under Section b of this article, shall, upon application, he entitled to 
register as electors prior to the first day of January. 1903, namely: 

First-- All who have honorably -erved in the land or naval 
forces of the United States in the war of 1812. or in the war with 
Mexico, or in any war with the Indians, or in the Civil M ar be¬ 
tween the States, or in the war with Spain, or who hnnorttblv 
served in the land or naval forces of the Confederate States, or of 
the State of Alabama in the war between the States; or 

Second-—I'he lawful descendants of persons who honorable 
served in the land or naval forces of the Cnitcd States in the war 
of the .American Revolution, or in the war of 1812, or in the war 
with Mexico, or in any war with the Indians, or in the Civil War 
between the States, or in the land or naval forces of the Confed¬ 
erate States, or of the State of Alabama in the war between the 
States; or 

Third—All persons of good character and who understand the 
duties and obligations of citizenship under a republican form of 
government. 

MR. SANFORD (Montgomery) — l have an amendment. 

THE PRESIDENT—The Secretary will read the minor it v 
report. 

MR. OATES—I have an amendment to offer to a part of the 
section that precedes the minority report. 1 desire to offer an 
amendment to insert a word in line three. 

MR. HOWZE—I think it should he taken up by subdivisions. 

THE PRESIDENT—Probably it would be more convenient 
to discuss it first as a complete section. 

MR. OATES—Is it not in order to offer an amendment to 
the first part of the section before reading the subdivision. 

THE PRESIDENT—The Chair will consult the wishes of the 
minority committee. The regular order under our rules would be 
when this section is read, to consider the minority report as an 
amendment, but if the gentlemen making the report wish to offer 
another amendment they may do so. 

MR. OATES—It is not touching that. Mr. President. I want 
to offer a short amendment which 1 think aids in perfecting the 
first part of the third line of this section. 



U INSTITUTIONAL U )NVT.NTIOX, 1901 


2740 


MR. SANFORD (Montgomery)—The amendment which T 
prupose does not reach the second section to which the minoritv 
report is addressed. 

i INC I M\ LSI 1 )I\NT -To what section does it refer. 

MR SAX FORI) It reaches the first subdivision of Section 4. 

M K. 0)1,KM AX ! desire to amend Section 4. in the first 
line, in accordance with tlie amendment which lias already been 
made to Section 1, >o as to make them correspond. 

4' 11 K RR KSI DKXT -The chair will first entertain amend¬ 
ments oilerrd by the chairman of the* committee. The amendment 
v\ a" read a^ iollows : 

\mend 1 >\ adding after the words ‘United States in the lirst 
line of Section 4, the following words: ‘And every male person ol 
foreign birth who, before the ratification of this Constitution, may 
ha\e legally declared his intention to become a citizen of the United 
States ; prov ided, that all such foreigners who have declared their 
intention to become citizens of the United States shall cease to 
have the right to vote if they shall fail to become citizens of the 
United States after they are entitled to become such citizens. 

M R. O >LKM AX—f ask unanimous leave to make* that amend¬ 
ment. 

There being no objection, the amendment was allowed. 

Another reading; of the amendment was called for. 

MR. COUKMAX (Greene)—The word “person' should read 
“resident." You could not mean a man residing in Nebraska, but 
it should refer to a resident of this State. 

Bv consent, the amendment was amended to read “every male 
resident of foreign birth.” etc. 

MR. RKDDOW—I ask unanimous consent that the word 
“resident" be inserted in the amendment offered by me to Section 1. 

There being no objection, the amendment was ordered. 

MR. ASHCRAFT—Section 2 provides “who shall have resided 
in this State two years.” I do not see why it should be necessary 
to use the words prior to that, because before he is entitled to vote 
he must have resided in the State two years. 

MR. WKATHKRLY—I desire to ask if that amendment ap¬ 
plies to Section 1. 

MR. COLEMAN (Greene)—We arc trying to make them 
correspond. 




2750 


OFFICIAL PROCEEDINGS 


MR. WEATHERLY—The chair did not so state it, or at least 
I did not so understand it. 

THE PRESIDENT—The chair stated that the gentleman 
from Jefferson desired his amendment to be so altered as to make 
it read “every male resident,” instead of “person.” 

MR. COLEMAN (Greene)—According to the procedure here¬ 
tofore adopted to take up sections which are sub-divided, sub¬ 
division by sub-division, as the minority report is directed simply 
to the second sub-division and not to the first, if we pursue the 
course heretofore followed, we must consider the first sub-division 
of the section, and when we come to the second sub-division to 
which the minority report applies, then the minority report would 
come up for consideration. That seems to have been the course 
heretofore pursued, and it would be acceptable to the committee, 
and I suppose to the chairman of the minority of the committee. 

MR. OATES—I would like to offer an amendment to line 
three of Section 4, which, I think, needs a few words to make it 
more definite. 

THE PRESIDENT—The chair will state under the rule the 
Convention is considering this Article by section and not by para¬ 
graph. 

MR. OATES—It is not a paragraph, but in line three of Sec¬ 
tion 4 of the section at the beginning of the section. 

THE PRESIDENT—The gentleman will send up his amend¬ 
ment. 

The amendment was read as follows: 

“Amend Section 4, in line three, by inserting after the word 
‘election,’ the following, ‘after the ratification of this Constitution.’ ” 

MR, OATES—I offer that because I think it will make it more 
definite and certain. The next general election is not absolutely 
certain, it ought to be after, the ratification of this Constitution. 

MR. MERRILL—I rise for the purpose of making a motion 
to suspend the rules that we may continue in session. 

There were loud expressions of dissent. 

MR. CARMICHAEL (Coffee)—I move that this Convention 
be now adjourned. 

The motion was carried and the Convention adjourned.