New-York tribune. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1866-1924, 1900-04-07


thereof may administer oaths and examine
Hereunder any person touching the subject
matter hereby committed to its charge; and
each OF the boards officers, agents and servants
OF said municipality is hereby directed for the
purpose Of carrying out the provisions OF this
act furnish to said commission or its repre-
sentatives free access at all reasonable times to
all such records and documents and all infor-
nation within their possession under their
control
Still further to insure the commission against
any attempts to refuse IL information. the bill
further provides:
For the purpose of the examination hereby
authorized, the commission shall possess all the
powers conferred by the legislative law upon
committee Of the Legislature or by the code OF
civil procedure upon board committee; may
invoke the power Of any court of record In the
State to compel the attendance and testffying
of witnesses and the production of books and
papers as aforesaid: and any member Of the
commission shall have power to administer
oaths to the witnesses summoned before II.
BITTERLY FOUGHT BY DEMOCRATS.
The bill bitterly fought in the Assembly
by the Democratic minority, who argued that
fl provided for committee after the character
Of the Mazet Committee, and gave it inquisi-
torial powers for the purpose of obtaining politi-
cal fodder to be used against the Tammany ad
ministration. At that time Mr.. Fallows made
this reply to the opposition:
The charter as II now stands is a huge scrap
book. Crude chapters from the old corporation
act Of New-York City have been welded into 1t.
pieces from the old charter of Brooklyn form
another part of the patchwork that what is
needed is careful and thorough revision.
When II was argued that there should be BIZ
partisan commission, one-half Of which should
be persons named by the Mayor Of New-York,
Mr.. Fallows again said:
L think we can trust the Governor Of this
State in the appointment Of these men. The
Chief Executive Of this State. believe. has
shown himself a of Independent thought
and Of resolute courage.
The bill was also vigorously opposed IN the
Senate but amended there SO that it would not
give the Commission any opportunity to obtain
evidence matters particularly pertaining
to the revision of the charter. Nevertheless it
was vetoed by the Mayor, to be passed over his
veto by both houses. This Commission is ex-
pected to deal at length with the question Of
water supply for New-York City which was
attempted by the Morgan bill. 1t is said further
that this body of men will study into systems of
water supply for such cities as Liverpool and
Boston, and recommend legislation intended to
provide New-York with a similar system OF
water supply.
REPEAL OF THE HORTON LAW
The passage of the Lewis bill repeating the
Horton law and aboshing prizefghts in this
State is creditabe reform measure. The en-
actment of this bill was recommended by Gov
ernor Roosevelt. These the words of the
Governor: II call the attention of the Legis-
lature to the so-called Horton Boxing law, now
the statute books. and recommend its re-
peal"
The measure however. had a perilous expert
before il reached the Executive Chamber.
II fought by Tammany and the pugilists
whose lucrative trade had thus been jeopardized
When the bill had passed the Assembly without
such a show of opposition was at first ex-
pected. 1t then known that the final and
most critical conflict would arise in the Senate
Here Tim Sullivan the Big" had boosted that
he would obtain its defeat.
That the rank and fi]a of Tammany Hall We're
scidly opposed to the bill was evidenced at a
hearing before the Senate Codes Committee. At
that time Senator Grady, the chieftain of the
Tammany leg -onaries the Albany camp, came
boldly out and detained in person against the
bill. But the arguments of Mr.. Lewis and those
who supported the bill failed Of receiving
adequate answer from the Senator A. few sem
fences from Mr. Lewis's speech at that time
as follows:
the policy of this State until the enactment
Of the Horton law has always been antagonistic
TO the prizering. At the present time this State
s. the only one in. the whole Union which has
opened its doors 10 this class of men-men who
at a former time would have been adjudged
criminals and amenable TO the law.
/ do not oppose sparring. L favor athletics
which will develop muscle, train the eye and
quicken the brain. But do oppose professional
prizehghting, which is not sparring but a bust
ness engaged in for the profit of its principals
and managers and the fleeing Of the spectators.
1t is the fighting for money that I oppose. This
is IL which is demOralizing.
When the bill came up for final passage in the
Senate 1t was said that the action OF the Repub-
lican party in making the bill party measure
would not insure lis passage. Senator Willis,
IL was said, would vote with Tammany because
he had openly defied the Republican caucus and
refused to be bound by its action. Neither
II was said. would Senator Coggeshall vote for
the BILL because he. too. had yielded to the ac-
ton OF the caucus, and had left it because it
would not accept multiplying amendment which
he had to offer BY the loss Of these two Re
publicans, the bill would fail Of passage having
only twenty-five Republicans in the affirmative
When the vote was put there were. as pre-
dicted, % votes for and % against 1T. Senator
Willis had made good his threat and voted with
Tammany Senator Coggeshall delayed voting
TIL the second rollcall, and then voted for the
bill, passing it.
The bill as it reached Governor Roosevelt was
tn the following form:
Section l. Section 45S of the Penal Code is
hereby amended TO read follows:
Section 40S. PriZefghtfng and sparring exhi-
billions. aiding therein, etc.-A person who with
In this State engages in, instigates, aids
ages or does any act 10 further contention, or
fight, without weapons, between or more
persons, fight commonly called a ring or
prizefight, either within without the State, or
who engages in public private sparring ex-
hbtion, with or without gloves, within the
State at which admission fee is charged or
received. either directly Indirectly, or who
sends or publishes a challenge or acceptance of
challenge for such q contention. exhibition or