The Montgomery advertiser., 1901-07-11

when they issued that elaborate ad- dress to the people and told them that they fciieitated them on the fact that the evils of local legislation were put an end thereto thereafter. Now some thing Is said here about the courts ex- ercisins legislative power. but 1t is d. rectly competent for the flamers of a Constitution to put a check or balance by one department on another. It may be the court, or they may leave 1t. as the gentleman states, to the oath of the Legisss lure, or they may provide to let the Legislature judge in the first
 instance, but as a matter of last resort leave 1t to the court which passes as
 the tribunal of last resort on your life. liberty and property. There Is noth- ing Improper in that. and 1t seems to me that we had better strike out the whole section altogether and have none, than to put in here that the Legislature shsll not do certain things when we know that the Constitution has been construed to mean that that Is waste paper if the Legislature chooses to do 1t. and for that reason l am heartily in favor of that portion of the Committees report. and against the adoption of the amendment offered by the gentleman from Limestone.
 Mr. Wilson (Clarke)-I apologize, to the delegates for rising to discuss this question. but a sense of the great im- portance of the question has com pelled me to do it. It is recognized, as the gentleman has said. that the courts have repeatedly held. that the old clause in the present Constitution says that the Legislature may not pass any local law which can be provided for by a general law, still the courts leave tt aIx tz A | n0tata tiVA ha- partment to determine whether 1t might have been provided for by a general law, and therefore permit the Legislature to pass the local law. To prohibit that state of affairs the Con1- mlttee on Local Legislation has brought In a proposition here to let the courts and not the Legislature be the ex- elusive judge of whether the subject matter of local law could be reached by some general law in operation. The amendment proposed by the gentleman from Montgomery. 1t seems to me. will go long ways towards checking the objections to the present clause, and does not contain the dangers which are in the arrangement proposed by the Committee on Local Legislation. The only objection which gentlemen of the Committee on Local Legislation have
 urged to the amendment and in favor of tho proposition reported by them
 Is that If you strike out this part of this Section you destroy their Section.
 Now I say, Mir. President, would rather destroy their Section than to destroy somebody's property, who has
 invested in good faith under local law passed by the General Assembly.
 and which the court sometime after has declared could have been done un-
 der a general law. ana therefore that 1t is all wrong.
 MT. Banks-I want to call to your attention and also to the attention Of the gentleman from Limestone. the
 fact that this Section does not say that the courts are not to decide whether or
 not a general law could have been er1. acted, but whether or not general law has been enacted.
 M:. Wilson (Clarke)-I understand that the Section says that If the
 courts find that the relief could have been had under some general law in | effect, that the courts can declare the law unconstitutional. 1 do not think | that makes the matter any better. be-
 cause we have general laws of some
 kind on almost every subject, and think If we put this Section in the | Constitution as reported here by the | Committee on Local Legislation, why then you leave the door open for some | innocent purchaser. cr some person
 who bas acted in good faith upon the
 action of the Legislature. to be de- prived of his property. 1 believe that
 Is & dangerous proposition. Now as to I the method proposed by the gentleman from Montgomery to meet the evil
 which exists in the present Constitu-
 ton. I believe there is merit. My friend or my left. the gentlemen from
 Mobile. Mir. Pillans has suggested to
 inc that Is the provision of the Con- stitution of Mississippi. He is prAc-
 ticing attorney in the State of Mis-
 sissippi and has called my attention to
 the fact that both the local and gen. eral laws of Mississippi are not larger | than the general laws of the State of A labama. Here are the acts of Mis- | sissippi from 1894 to 1900. This propo-
 sition which Is proposed by the gentle man from Montgomery is very similar
 to the Mississippi plan. l believe #
 we have a Constitutional Committee.
 whose duty it Is to examine bill and
 ascertain if there is general law covering the subject, which committee l Is required to give their reasons, be-
 lieve that would be a great check In | this direction. Besides that, we have
 
 1 have put in this Article. There are | thirty-seven subjects here that local l law cannot be passed on, about which
 a local law could have been passed under the old Constitution. That is another check. 1 think they have a proposition in here that the Journal must afflrmatively show the notice iS
 that is adopted, that is another check.
 It might be added to that this Com | mittee on Legislation shall ascertain | and report whether the notice was given. That would be another check. but I submit, MT. President, 1t is not wise to leave the thing so that the Legislature after 1t has passed a law and people have acted on it and put their money in it for court to come along and say that the thing Is all
 wrong after 6 man has put his money
 in 1t.
 Mir. Walker-It does not seem to me that the amendment Aroposed by the gentleman from Montgomery would any more plainly, put upon the Com inittee that 1t is their duty to pass upon the quest ion of whether or not the subject could be provided by 6 general law than the present Consti- tuition puts upon the General Assembly
 the duty of ascertaining that fact.
 cannot anticipate that the action Ut such a comrat.tee would be any more satisfactory than has been the action of the Legislature in reference to that matter. And the action or the Leg islcture in reference to their duty has been simply Q complete and total ignor- ing of the duty imposed upon them by the Constitution. They asce'talned