, 1889-07-25

is, a majority of one--should not be al
lowed to change a county-seat and sac
rifice property and Inconvenience q great |
many people. At least two-thirds should |
be required for such purpose.
Mr.. Turner did not think the question
of one-half or two-thirds was involved in
this proposition. This section was
NOT A GRANT OF POWER,
but merely limitation upon the legis-
laturc. A very proper limitation, as he
believed, and going as far as the consti-
tuition ought to go in restricting the
legislature.
Nossrs. Stiles and Turner in opposing
the amendment. The amendment failed
ayes 80, noes 35.
Mr.. Warner moved to strike out tie
whole section. Lost by n very decided
vote.
Mr.. Browne:wished to amend by pro-
viding that no special law shall be
enacted on this subject, but was in
formed this would be provided for later
on.
Mr., Dyer moved to strike out "majori-
ty" and insert "three-fifths, but on this
proposition there were ayes 80. nosa 80,
and 1t was lost
Mr.. Weisenburger moved to strike out
''four years and substitute 'ten years.
Lost. The section was adopted without
amendment.
Section was read providing for the
establishment of new counties. But
not if an old county was reduced below
AGO in population, nor unless the pro-
posed new county has at least 1000.
Mr.. Sullivan of Tacoma wished to
amend by requiring two-third vote of
the electors before n new county could
be formed.
Mr.. Stiles said this restriction would
indefinitely postpone the establishment
of new counties, and some of the present
counties were at least hundred miles
square, and we expected to create new
counties in such territory. But if a two.
thirds vote was required they would
practically nevcrbe divided. The amend
mont fnilcd.
Mr.. Sohns moved 10 amend by requir-
hing that before any territory be stricken
off from cc-nty for the purpose Of
forming new county, a majority of the
voters of the whole county shall vote
for IL. The committee report only re-
4uires'a majority of the voters in the ter
ritory to be stricken oil.
| Mr.. Durie offered substitute more
fully setting forth the same idea, which
Mr.. Sohns accepted.
Mr.. Durie opposed the idea of allow
ing a small portion of the inhabitants
on the border, Of a county to vote them
selves ont of tho county. The whole
county should say when 1t was desir-
able to be dismembered.
: Mr.. Stiles reiterated the explanation that
this was not a grant of power but merely
q limitation. upon the legislature. No
cqlnty can vote to change itself; all that
isAere provided by the committee Is
cutoff any portion of q county, unless
thslpeople in that portion
SAY THEY WANT TO GO
The alarm which seems to he excited
is entirely groundless. The committee
simply recommend home rule. The
amendment failed.
| Mr.. Sudksdorf moved to amend by
striking out the provision that any dis
tribution Of county indebtedness upon u
division of territory shall not affect the
rights of creditors, and thought this pro-
viso and the one preceding it(which pro-
yides that no liability for old county
buildings shall be carried over to the
/ new county,, were contradictory.
Mr. Stiles explained that when n
I county has become indebted nothin K
can discharge that Indebtedness from
the vhoIc area of that county. A settle
mcnt between the two portions of the
county was provided for, and then these
lgy were aSssd to I prevent ,;n any yspp,s, pos
OF the,ounties as high as possible.
Mr.. eriffitts further explained in the
same Inc and opposed the amendment,
The amendment failed.
Mr.. Turner moved to strike out the
words Where shall be no territory strick-
en- from any county unless a majority of
the votes living in such territory shall
petition ior such division" Mr.. Turner
said if this power of creating new coun.
ties was To be left to the legislature then
this plan Of voting was nugatory, for II
the legislature chooses to say that a
majority Of the voters desire it and so
enact il, who can go behind that action,
and how can the legislature find out aC-
ourately who wants a division2 His
own idea was that the legislature ought
TO be divided or new city or munici.
patty established. lit might be that the
committee on legislature would present
some more detailed scheme on this sub
ject, but he opposed committing the
convention 10 any such course of action
in advance or any discussion of its
merits.
Mr.. Kinnear heartily supported the
position of the last speaker.
Mr.. Sullivan OF Whitman opposed the
amendment. The section as II stands is
simply restriction upon the legisla-
ture, and the legislature ought not TO act
unless the people want them.
Mr.. Goldman favored the idea q
CONSULTING TIE PEOPLE
before the legislature exercised any
power of dividing county, and OPP
posed Mr.. Turner'S amendment.
Mr.. Comegys thought the legislative
committee would attend to the matter
later on, and lie should favor the amend.
ment,
MIR. Griffitts said that Limitation OF
this kind was not expected to be sell
acting. II simply said that the legisla.
ture shouId not commence action in any
such matter, except upon the desire OF
a majority Of the people to be affected,
A.. 10 not h, 10, =,