The Houston daily post. [volume] (Houston, Tex.) 1886-1903, 1897-09-17
NEW CONSTITUTION.
Representative Ayres Opposes q
Convention and Gives Reasons.

EOIt ncitu, AtAhSs StptemDcE lls-hs
The Post solicits an expression OF public
opinion on the question Of new State
constitution, 1t may not be amiss for tho
writer hereof to say that he is one OF
those who believe that the defects in our
present constitution and the prospect at
not such as to warrant the risk. the expen-
diture and the agitation necessarily in
volyed in the attempted change. The
small element that is asking 1t is COM
posed principally OF theorists, politicians,
social agitators and men who are chronic
lIckers, and on general principles agin
the gcvernment-the established order Of
things, whatever that order may be. Those
Of them who are sincere are doubtless more
familiar with abstract theories OF govern
ment than with the practical condition that
now affects this question. On matter Of
this character the people usually express
themselves through their political conv.n-
tons. and yet. OF the hundNeds. yea, thous-
ands, OF county, district and State convcn-
tons that have voiced the political sent-
ment aid demands OF the people Of Texas
during the past ten TO fifteen years, not a
single one OF them, so far as the writer
knows, has ever expressed any demand or
desire Tor new constitution, nor has any
candidate for the legislature or other pub
lilo Office ever had tho temerity TO base
his canvass upon any such demand or sup
posed necessity. On the contrary, the peo
pie have Just recently voted down three
proposed amendments TO the constitution
whether adyisedly or not is here immaterial
ali that were offered at that time, aud
another one yet pending and to be sub
mitted at the next general election, pro-
Viding for an extension OF full legislative
pay to longer period than sixty days,
Is one they have already, whether ju-
diciously or not, twice voted down, once in
1881 and again In 1887.
When amendments are thus offered with
respect to matters selected out from those
thought to be the most vulnerable and
defective parts of the constitution, and
which amendments embody those changes
deemed to be most imperatiyely necessary,
and are yet rejected upon what occult
reason Is 1t supposed that the joining with
thom of yet other amendments and changes
rot go essentially necessary will render the
aggregation any more acceptable 10 the
people?
Again. those amendments referred to, re-
cent and remote, were submitted under
conditions most favorable TO their adop-
ton-not only with the quasi Endorsement
OF the legislature, but with the affirmative
championship of their respective advocates
and friends, while upon the other side
there was no special effort by any pub
lie leader or speakers 10 defeat them. If
they could not carry under sucn circum-
stances, how will it be possible for them
to carry in the face of organized opposi-
ton. ard in a State campaign wherein the
acceptance or rejection OF the proposed
constitution embodying them will DC the
paramount, IL not sole, issue. and in which
many OF the ablest public men of the State
Will be active leaders of the large con-
servatiye element that stands immoyaby
opposed to unwarranted Innovations
The advocates of a new constitution as
sumo that 1t will be better than the pres
ent one, but upon what is that assump-
ton based? 1t must be framed by men
subject 10 the same human inflrmites that
por'ained to these who constructed the ex-
listing one. The members of such a con-
vention, by sort Of analogy perhaps. draw
only the rate OF pay prescribed by them
selves for members of the legislature; and
men OF first class ability do not usually
abandon their business to go to con-
siltutional convention any more than TO
20 10 tue legislature. The personnel of the
last convention embracing such men as
w p. Ballinger, John l.. Henry, N II.
Darnell, c. b. Kilgore, George Mccormick,
a. T. Mckinney, w. p. Mclean. l.. W.
Moore, w. l.. Crawford. j w. Ferris, j.
r. Fleming. George Fournoy. T. l.. Nu-
gent ID. 4 Num-, John II Reagan, Il. s.
T. Robertson, L. S. Ross, William H.
stewart, r. S. Stockdale and c. S. West
was unusually good and above the general
average of constitutional conventions, and
what guaranty have we that the next one
will be its equal in point of ability. in
Iesrlty or patriotism? None whatever, and
none could be given. We might even fare
much worse in this respect, for special
reasons that Will now be pointed out
ihat the populists and republicans of
Texas are both able and willing to COM
blne has been already demonstrated in
Tue last general election, and with these
elements the railroad corporations and the
trusts, that would be backed up by un-
limited money in a contest for provisions
ana lmmunlties in the new constitution,
and promoting their interests.
stand ready to unite in an effort to de-
sttoy our railroad commission and to pre-
vent constitutional restrictions against the
Iaiiroaus. the trusts and against monopolles
III otner forms. ana 10 reproduce the radical
constitution of 1869, with other vet more
features. Strong as the democ
racy OF Texas Is It would not be the part OF
wisdom just now for II TO throw open the
gates OF lis intrenched stronghold and heed
'tssly invite attack by united enemies,
nearly IFS equal in numbers and well equip-
peu with some OF the most effective weapons
~ fN'''iN"i warfare. Discretion is the
oftter part OF valor. and we should bear in
mihd mat the outs can always safely VEN
lnce ut any desperate extremes that NAV
be attractive to the popular fancy. or that
may from any cause or by any means be
successfully carried, Whom the gods would
destroy, they first make mad with over
left sNN n"''
The existing situation and the conflict.
ing views with reference to our appellate
judiciary system, illustrate the folly of at
tempting to satisfy the chronic yet variablc
desire which some people have for change
me increase of legal business rendered
some change In the appellate judiciary sys-
TEN imperatively necessary. and n change
was at last Effected; new aud adeouate
systtln was adopted. and yet within Ave
years another ange-suhstantially a On
ing back to the former system---is already
oeBinning to be advanced. We first tried
strengthening the supreme court with any
iliary Judges called commission OF an
peals aud that proved unsatisfactory. The
proposition 10 enlarge the supreme court
was then twice submitted to the people nv
proposed constitutional amendments In 1SSi
anu lsSI and being deemed unadyisahls
Nas ooth times voted down. Then the
a NOR "A nR