The representative. [volume] (St. Paul, Minn.) 1893-1901, 1895-04-17
CONSTITUTIONAL CONVENTION,
A Trick to Fool the PEOPLE.

A Trick to Fool the People.
We look with the gravest suspicion
upon the proposition to hold state
convention to make new constitu-
tion. The mere fact that such start
ling proposition, involving an outlay
Of 100000 or $500, 900, was passed by
the House without dissenting vote,
proves positively that the corporations
favor it. II they had opposed it there
would have been lively fight and it
probably would have been beaten. In
the Senate the recognized railroad at
tOrneys voted for and advocated it.
What is the motive?
The corporations think they can
elect constitutional convention of
the same complexion as the present
Legislature. Why not? They own
both the old parties and nearly all the
newspapers; their power is practically
unlimited. What would follow? The
reconstruction of the entire constitu-
ton in the interest of the Money
Power. The highest ingenuity of the
sharpest rogues in Christendom would
be invoked to invent cunning phrases,
to stick in here and there, that would
form stepping stones by which hire
ling courts could advance to the en-
slavement Of the people. A declara-
ton depriving the legislature Of its
power over corporations would be
worth millions to those interested.
The dose would be sugar.coated to in
duce the people to swallow it.
We hope the people will vote it
down. Do not stick your head into
the lions mouth. Now if propositions
are made to amend the constitution
they will have to be voted on separ-
ately, and can easily be fought and an
tagonized if Objectionable. But the
work of a constitutional convention
will have to be accepted or rejected as
whole, good and bad together; and
the good will be made to carry through
the bad.
In the present condition of our poll
tics it is a most dangerous PROPOSE
tion. If the Populists had possession
of the state some such experiment
might be entered on, but now the cor
porations own the state.
We quote some thing of the debate
in the Senate:
Senator Day opposed to the bill He
asked what occasion there was for the con-
sideration of a new constitution.
In reply Senator Stevens said that when
the present constitution was adopted near
ly all the property was of that character
which made 1t capable of simple appreca-
tion it was either real estate or personal
property, and it could readily be taxed,
but today fully one-quarter of the property
subject to taxation escapes entirely because
1t is of a species which has come into being
since the constitution was adopted.
He reminded the senators that although
there were primarily only Is articles in the
constitution, there have been added in the
past 80 years "a amendments, and there will
be about Ii or IA to vote for at the COM
ing election. This fact, that there are a
dozen or more amendments to the consti-
tuition to be voted for at the next election
he said was in itself the best argument
that the constitution was no longer fit to
remain the organic law Of great and pro-
gressive state like Minnesota.
Senator Ozmun started the ball in oppo-
sition to the bill. He said the state was
too new that the conditions were not ripe
for the consideration of so important a
matter, and the feeling Of unrest which
was manifest in political matters made the
occasion especially unpropitious.
Senator Greer agreed with Senator o.
mum. He said it was true that large cor
pOrations were exempt from taxation to
unreasonable extent, but he was op-
posed to the proposition to change the
constitution. He thought it much better
to keep the good we have" than to risk
having the people at this time making a
constitution which might be much worse
Senator Wyman also opposed the bill He
argued that it is not a bad constitution
which Minnesota now has, and it ought to
be left as it is.
Senator Schaller said when Is or IA
amendments were to be submitted to the
people it was time that some steps were
taken to submit to the people the question
whether the time had not arrived Tor them
to have new constitution.
Senator Hanna-"Whence comes the de-
mand for new constitution"
Senator Schaller-"From the people; but
whether there is any popular demand for
1t or not, we are competent to judge
whether such measure is wise or not and
for one am in favor of passing this bill. -
Senators Day and Wyman arose at the
same time to interrupt the speaker with a
question They spoke in concert: MAY I
ask the senator from Dakota a question ?"
Senator Schaller replied: 'Of course.
am ready to enlighten all the ignorant men
upon the floor of the senate" There was
a laugh, when Senator Day said: II yield
10 the senator from Hennepin (Senator
Wyman)." Senator Wyman replied that he
was just on the point of yielding to the
senator from Martin Oay) Then he asked
his question. He said: I'm case we have a
new constitution, whit guarantee can the
senator from Dakota give that he will
not come up at the next session and ask for
further amendments?"
Inc senator from Dakota will not ask
Tor any amendments after the matter has
been submitted to the people," Senator
Schaller replied.
1t passed the Committee of the
Whole of the Senate by a vote of % to
10. 1t had previously passed the
House unanimously: so that its chance
of becoming law is very great.
Forewarned is forearmed. Let the
Alliances and Peoples Party clubs
talk this thing up and warn their fel.
low citizens of the dangers that
thre a ten them.
For the Unemployed.
The fOllOwinp ia Henry Claws no.