The weekly democratic statesman. [volume] (Austin, Tex.) 1871-1883, 1883-02-01
Continued From Third page.l

4
CONTINUED From Third Page.l
debt, shall never exceed fifty cents on
the one hundred dollars valuation,
and no county, city or town shall
levy more than twenty-five cents on
the one hundred dollars valuation,
except for the payment of debts in
CURED prior to the adoption of this
amendment, and for the construction
and repair of public buildings, roads
and bridges, not to exceed fifty cents
on the one hundred dollars in any
nefyear. and except as in this consti-
tftion is otherwise provided"
Mr.. Davis--I offer substitute for
the original resolution and amend
mentS.
Mr.. Houston-There are already
more amendments and substitutes
pending to the resolution than are in
order.
The Chair-The question is upon
the third subdivision of the amend
ment of the senator from Anderson.
Mr.. Houston-This is matter OF
serious Importance to more than one
half of the counties in the state, that
some action should be taken similar
to that proposed in the original reso-
luton. The resolution has already
been amenced to such an extent
as will array serious opposi-
ton to its final passage, and
such opposition, / fear, may defeat
any action looking to the amendment
- hot of
and in order that il may be- again
considered and brought back to the
senate in "A shape that we can act upon
il, / move that the joint resolution,
together with all amendments and
substitutes now pending, be recon-
mitted to the committee on constitu-
tional amendments.
Mr.. Jones-I have q substitute to
the resolution.
The Chair-It is not in order.
Mr.. Houston-It can be easily pre-
sented to the committee.
The Chair-It is not in order on ac-
count of the motion to recommit.
Mr.. Houston-So far as it not being
in order on account of the motion Il
recommit, would withdraw that; but
without regard TO the motion to re
commit, it Is out of order.
Resolution, amendments and SUP
stitute recommitted by vote q aye
to 8 nays.
SECOND SPECIAL ORDER.
Senate bill No. 4, providing for tn,
payment of fees to county judges
county attorneys, justices of tn,
peace, Sheriffs and constableS, for servi
a. ina krf.a L.
with amendments.
Mr.. Davis-I move to recoDmi
the bill and amendments. for the rea
son that the bill provides that in al
examinations in felony cases the coun
- ty attorney shall receive fees whethe
the defendant is bound over or dis
charged. / do not think the senat
had Thought about the bill deliberate
~ when they voted for IL. They dono
know what "A grab it will he upon tn
revenue of the state. My judgmen
is that it will be cheaper for the stat
to allow county attorneys 70
; such services $1,000 per annum thar
to leave it in that shape. l am salts
fed that in almost every county, n,
matter how small, they can at leas
get up one hundred examination
during the year. In my county Their
: is an examining trial going on ever,
day in the year, am satisfied. Will
am perfectly willing to allow count,
attorneys reasonable fees for thel
services, am not willing to vote TO
such draught on the treasury a
that.
Let that bill be in force about tw,
years, and we will have no cash bal
ance In the treasury, and we canno
have it.
Besides, it is not in harmony will
the balance of the law in regard /,
the compensation of county attorneys
We have seen proper all the time, eve
since Texas has been a state, not /,
allow county attorneys salary, bu
4. to make compensation depend upoI
the result of their work. In felon,
and misdemeanor cases, ii there is NJ
conviction, the county attorney re
ceives no pay. The reason. suppose
is this: To keep them from Matching
up frivolous prosecutions for sake o
the fee.
But here we propose to change tn,
law and establish rule in examining
trials that prevails in no other elias;
of cases, and allow county attorney
compensation at a rate that will max,
them more than $500 year, ant
draw il out of the public treasury
Besides that, it goes further and allow!
justices of the peace So in each examin
ing trial, and these examining trial'
generally do not consume more thar
two or three hours, and hardly evel
more than a day. 1t also allows thu
sheriff for attending these examining
trials So. There is $40 in each eX'
amining trial that is t
be paid out of the treasury,
If one will think how these exam
ming trials are being multiplied h(
will find out that it will require more
to pay the expenses of these examin
ing trials than it does for the judicia
~ Of the state. i do not think the
movers of the bill have properly
thought about 1t, and think the sen
ate should send 1t back to the com
mittee.
Mr.. Matlock--I am not in favor o.
any public officer performing any pub
lie service without receiving pay fol
II. Neither do / believe it prop
or to legislate upon the ny
pothesis that county attorneys
Justices OF the peace, sheriffs and con
stables, are dishonest. The past his
tory OF Texas shows that the criminal
law has been badly administered il
many counties, because in many coun
ties they have no officers to do il fol-
the pitiful sum paid them by the state
Justices of the peace may be required
to sit from day to day, and week Il
week. and month to month, if neces
sary, in the investigation of crimina
offences, and not receive one cent pay
for their services. Sheriffs may ride
over the state, in and out of theil
county, seeking witnesses, attaching
them and bringing them at their owl
expense and not receive dollar fol
the labor, and so county attorneys may
attend examining trials twenty miles
away from home, and have to pay
hotel bills, horse hire, and be Kept
away from home for days, and yet re
ceive no compensation Tor their serv
ices. do not think the fee ought 4
be dependent upon conviction; he
ought to have pay for his work re
gardless of that, and the amounts pro
vided for him and other officers il
this bill think is right and proper
and / hope the bill viii not be recon-
mitted.
Mr.. Jones-I am in favor of all OIL
GERS being paid, but i think it one
OF the vices of this judicial system,
that nobody Is properly paid who is