The Florida star., 1900-09-21
BlRRS' REPLY TO THE IETERlCEAH.
He Mistakes the Key West Editor For The
Star Man.

Editor of The Florida Star:
see in your issue OF the l4th inst an
article copied from the Key West Inter
Ocean, which you head Questions for j.
NJ. Bars" This article seems to be based
on one in former issue Of THE STAR,
which 1 have not seen. 1t says: "At the
last session Of the legislature Hon. Fred
Myers proposed constitutional amend
ment, which was defeated in the house,
allowing Leon county to vote on the ques-
ton of bonding for $25, 900 TO donate to
the state for the purpose of putting re-
pairs on the present bnilding, and at the
same time the distinguished senator had
passed an act appropriating like sum
from the state treasury. The constitute
onal amendment provided that in case
Leon county failed TO vote the bonds the
amendment would fail; likewise the ap-
preparation on behalf of the state. During
the state convention in June Mr.. Bars
stated that such a proposed amendment
would of itself be unconstitutional. Right
here comes in the queries of the STAR
man. Inasmuch as jacksonville land
other towns also We presume) proposed
such an amendment to vote on bonds for
the donation, and in case of failure on
Duval cOunty's part TO vote them they
lose the site, why wouldn't it be just as
unconstitutional now? Major w. b.
Young, a very prominent attorney of the
Big city, says il would be all right, but
"Me and Blackstone" think different.
When doctors disagree there is usually
funeral"
In your Issue Of the 18th inst. you say
"While st. Johns county could not be
bonded for such sum without special
amendment to the constitution and sub
mitting the bonding act TO the people for
ratification or rejection, we are informed
that city whose franchise is granted by
legislature can be extended the right by
the legislature To bond for the purpose
above expressed"
Replying To the statement that during
the state convention in June | stated that
a proposal To amend the state constitution
SO is 10 provide for the issuing of bonds
by city or county TO aid in building
state capital would he unconstitutional,
| must say that | must have been mis-
understood as | have made no such state
ment. | have no recollection of the con-
versation referred To, but could not have
stated that the constitution of the state of
Florida could not authorize, or even re-
quire, counties or municipalities to issue
bonds or otherwise provide for the rails
ing of money To contribute towards the
building of state capital within their
limits. Ii you, Mr.. Editor, were quoting
from recollection of any conversation had
with me, while | do not recollect the con
yersation, it is quite possible that you
may have heard me say that a JOINT
resolution proposing constitutional
amendment, which was passed through
the senate at the last session of the legiS-
lature, would have been unconstitutional
If passed, for the reason that IL provided
that the constitutional amendment should
not take effect unless majority of the
electors of Leon county voted for il. This
was clearly unconstitutional and was
withdrawn from the legislature and an
other Joint resolution, eliminating the
provision giving Leon county practical
veto Oh the tbiSlllullblldl dilitnGllcill,
Was passed by the senate and failed of
passage In the hOuse-a vote upon il not
being obtained. Jacksonville has never
asked To have constitutional amend
ment ur Legislative authority 10 vote on
the question of bonding itself 10 assist in
paving for the state capital. Jacksonville
did present, and expects 10 again present,
"A Joint resolution for the constitutional
amendment requiring the city of Jack
Sonville To furnish "A site and 100000 to-
wards the cost of erection of 4 state capt
tai. If this constitutional amendment
should be adopted the city of Jackson
vile would have no opportunity 10 vote
on the question; the constitution itself
would provide for it, and the money and
site would Ice necessarily forthcoming
without regard Ia the wishes of the peO-
pie of Jacksonville thereafter expressed
Judge Young ami agree entirely on this
proposition. There l. no difference what
ever on the law between us. Jackson
ville's constitutional amendment could be
enforced.
Gou are mistaken IN your statement of
law, in my opinion, that A city whose
franchise i granted hy the legislature
can be extended the right by the iegis-