The Austin weekly statesman. (Austin, Tex.) 1883-1898, 1883-07-26
REGARDED AS DANGEROUS.

ne INler courier Is opposed III TOTO
to tinkering the state constitution.
To the proposed amendment, concern
ing investment of the school funds
of the state and counties, it says:
"As may be prescribed by law" is the
language to which we most object
but it is well not to lose sight of the
words, ''or in such other SecuretieS,"
etc. Coupled together as they are i'll
the proposed amendment, we are
fully justified in the conclusion that
to adopt the amendment to section 4,
article Z, means opening the gates to
extravaganza and jeopardiZing the
free school fund. We do not agree
that the fund will be lost ii theamend-
ment carries, but it opens u way III
which it can be lost; and lis the con-
stitution now stands the class of Sc
curitieS is fixed, and there is no
chance for making bad investment.
The fund promises to be too large 10
justify the placing its disposal
in the hands of Such leglsla-
lures as we have been in the hal,it
OF having since the war. 1t the
amendment carries, the legislature
may determine that railroad bonds,
stocks, bonds issued for waterworks
and sewerage in small towns, or bonds
issued, the proceeds from the sale of
which is to be applied to building a
cotton co npress, a tannery, broom
factory, or for developing a salt mine,
are securities ample and sufficient;
thus leaving the board Of education
virtually unrestricted in its manage
ment OF, say $l5.OUO.O00, but holding
the people responsible for It's loss, and
that, too, without an opportunity to
approve the securities agreed upon
by the legislature, or an opportunity
TO approve, or object to, the invest
ment of the fund made by the board
This same clause in the constitution
as il now stands, was submitted to
the people with the class OF securities
in which the school fund was to he
in vested, given, and the people at the
polls accepted these securitieS-being
United States or state bOnds-but
now it is proposed to remove this
right from the people to the legiSla-
ture. Will the people agree to it !?
We trust they will not; but if they
do, we shall insist on knowing what
Use we have for state constitution.
The Courier then argues points
against the proposed investment of
the county funds. 1t concludes:
The argument that applies to sec
tion 4 applies with greater force to
section q. In this, all power is given
to the county commissioners. What
ever they do under such restrictions
as may be provided by law" is final
ity. If a bad investment is made and
the county school fund is lost by the
court, the same court that lost it is
empowered to levy a tax upon the
people of the county sufficient to
make good the loss. Like the board
of education for the state, the county
commissioners court owes reSponsi-
bility to no authority. 1t is expected
to act aS may be directed by the legiS
lature, and the legislature is expected
to act in Il very loose way if, by the
vote of the people in August next.
it is allowed to change the pre-
sent securities into such other Sc
curltiis as that body, 10y interested
parties, may be influenced to adopt.
Granting that this will be done, and
it is not at all improbable, if the
amendments carry, the commission
er's court is left to handle the
county school fund in such manner
aS it sees proper. If the court is
not reliable one, us is sometimes
the case, y can coniidentially tell the
court if it will loan the school fund
to him at, say, . per cent per annum,
he Will, in turn, loan each member Of
the court one or two thousand dollars,
and the other twenty, forty or sixty
thousand dollars he will loan out at
II to % per cent; or worse still, it can
be understood that he can give secu-
rites that are worthless, and divide
the fund equally between himself and
the court. The court, in due time,
can announce the fact that the fund
is lost, owing to worthless securities,
and levy tax on the people sufficient
to replace the fund-to be squandered
in like manner. We don't say that
this will be done, but it can be done,
and that which can be done may be
done
The objections urged by the COur-
ier are certainly patent, and THE
STATESMAN, though it sees the neces-
sity for some provision for investing
these funds, has already admitted
that the latitude given officials is too
great. 1t becomes questionable, there
fore. if the state may not lose more
by the vastly discretionary power
placed in the hands of the officials
than by holding the funds. OF course,
boarding money is very poor way
even the boarding of funds is better
than to invest them in dangerous Sc
curities and making the people re-
SponSible for any loss resulting there
from. The object OF this amendment
is good. but the modes proposed are
decidedly dangerous.