The sun., 1895-04-01
An Extraordinary Development Rel
ntive to the New Constitution.

a remarkable provision IN the new Con-
stltution has come to light, by which the
constitutional security against legislative
abuses aud the corrupt appropriation OF the
franchises Of cities has been practically de-
stroyed, and the organic safeguards reduced
to mere statutory rank, requiring only the
approval OF the Revisers of the Statutes" p"
for their abrogation from time to time.
In effect, q practically irresponsible body,
the Commissioners Of Statutory Revision"
is established with unlimited authority to
control and suspend, at will, the most i'm
portant provisions in restraint Of corrupt
legislation. With the cooperation of the
Commissioners, constitutional safeguards
otherwise operative can be nullfied. and
the old-time scandalous system of granting
city railroads, for example, to legislative
representatives can be revived. Thus the
marvellous result is attained Of creating a
perpetual third power in the State, greater
than any other, to suspend most valuable
portions Of the Constitution.
In order to understand the full force Of
the constitutional decentralization in this
respect, initiated by the late Convention
possibly through an accident, 1t is necessary to
take a brief review of what had been done
on the subject prior to the assembling of that
Convention. The legislative abuse Of grant
ing valuable franchises to individuals, and
that legislative favoritism under the form
of special laws by which the cities had been
plundered for the benefit of legislative favor
ties and parasites, had become 80 great a
public scandal and fraudulent outrage that
there was a general demand for constitu-
tional protection as far back rs 1873. 1t was
the eliminating demand of the swelling tide
Of reform which revolutionized the State
politically, and carried Mr.. TILDEN into the
Governors chair by a massive majority.
The essential reforms were embodied in
section 1S of Article III. of the Constitution,
which went into effect on the first of Janu-
ary, 1875. These were incorporated in the
Constitution, pursuant to the article there
Of providing for amendments to that
instrument, having been adopted by ma
jority Of the members Of the Senate and
Assembly, twice successfully chosen by the
people, and approved and ratified by the
majority Of the electors voting specifically
on the subject, at the succeeding general
election. They went into effect in accordance
with the provision Of the Constitution de-
claring that "such amendment or amend
ments, when adopted in this manner, shall
become part Of the Constitution" At the
time this reformatory measure was thus in
corporated, there were Revisers Of the Stat
utes actively at work reporting to the Leg
islature from time to time the results of
their labors. and they had not completed
their duties. For a special reason, opera
tive then, it was declared that sections II
and 1S of that article should not apply to
any bill, or to the amendments to any bill,
which should be reported to the Legislature
by the Commissioners who had then been ap-
pointed, pursuant to law, to revise the stat
utes. This exception was not intended to
be, nor was it, a continuing authority. 1t
was strictly temporary, applying only to the
Commissioners to revise the laws, who had
then been appointed exceptionally and tran
sitorily, and who were about to terminate
their labors. In order to give full warrant
for our statement in this respect we quote
the opinion and judgment Of the highest
judicial authority of the State. The ques-
tion as to the character of this exception
was brought before the Court Of Appeals in
the case Of the People vs.. Petrea, 92 n. Y.
Reports, page 1873.
The present Chief Justice ANDREWS, de-
livering the opinion of the court said upon
this question: 1t is part Of the legisla-
tive history of the State that prior to the
adoption of the constitutional amendment
of 1S74 Commissioners to revise the stat
utes had been appointed by the Legislature,
who had from time to time made reports Of
their proceedings; and when the constitu-
tional amendments were adopted, they had
not completed their labors, but were still
engaged in the work of revision. The
plain object of section 25, Article I'LL, which
was one of the amendments adopted in
1874, was to exempt from the operation of
section 8 private or local bills which had
been or should be reported by the Commits
sioners; but with the exception Of bills
originating with the Commissioners and
reported by them TO the Legislature. the
prohibition of section 1s is absolute"
These Commissioners, who had been ap-
pointed to revise the statutes, went out of
office without any attempt to interfere with
the reformatory effect and fundamental
character of the two sections in question :;
and then the exception became obsolete.
For twenty-one years prior to the meeting
OF the late Constitutional Convention these
sections had been completely operative as
the organic law Of the State, without any ex-
ception, raising the standard of legislative
morals and contributing to the welfare of
the commonwealth. And II the recent
Constitutional Convention had not been Gre
ated, these reformatory restrictions would
have been in existence now in full con-
stitutional vigor. The baffled lobby and
wolfish seekers after franchises, under the
advice of superficial lawyers, frequently
threatened to have a new set of Commits
sioners of Revision appointed, to further
their own iniquitous designs, and thus
to attempt to override the constitutional
barriers against special laws for indi-
vidual aggrandizement at the public ex-
lpense. But the exception being obviously
temporary, for the reasons stated, and the
clear exposition OF its purpose having been
specifically defined by the Court of Appeals,
they did not dare to face the ordeal of con-
summation of their threatened purpose.
In the mean time however laws have