The Montgomery advertiser., 1901-07-17

MT. Grant--1eS, uir.
 Mir. dedraffenreid--Isn't 1t . fact that this Convention has already provided in another article that no county can is- ple7
 MT. Grant-I think go.
 MT. deGraffenreid--Would 1t, there- fore. be impossible for Shelby County to erect a court house anywhere with out borrowing money?
 Mir. Grant-f think so.
 MT. Wilson (Washington)-Is 1t not a fact that the County Commissioners in any county have . right to issue their warrants to any amount?
 MT. Grant--I don't know about that.
 MT. Wilson--I would like to state for the gentleman's information that in my county of Washington, we have just built . 5000 jail without any bonds-on warrants only. And isn't 1t fact that this provision the gentleman from Hale Is talking about Is not yet . law and will not become a law until this Constitution is ratified by the peo- pie of Alabama.
 MT. Coleman (Greene)-I voted against the adoption of this section upon the ground that I thought the matter rightly belonged to the Legisla- ture. rise now for the purpose of
 
 might be placed upon the section. Some may think 1t rather far-fatched or technical. but nevertheless 1t admits of an argument, and I am not prepared to say that this section goes too far in its present. shape. would vote for the reconsideration that it might be amend ed, and desire to call the attention of ths delegates to the reading of this section: Provided. that the coun- ty site of Shelby County, in this State. shall be and re- vote of the people as provided for in an act entitled An act to provide for the permanent location of the county site of Shelby County by vote of the qualified electors of said county, ap- proved. the 9th of February, 1899, and an act amendatory thereto, approved February goth. 1899. or by an election held under the provision of this arti- cle." Now when the court house is re- moved as provided by the act of 1899 and amendatory act thereto, 1t can never be removed at any time ia the future. however much it may be desir- ed to be removed. unless by an election held under the provisions of this arti- cle. Now I will invite the gentleman's attention to show me where there Is any provision in this article under which an election can be held. If it had read "or by an election held under the law passed by the Legislature in pursuance of carrying out the provss- ions of this article" 1t would meet the question. but when 1t says 1t cannot be removed except by the act of Feb- ruary. 1899, at all, or by an sloction held under the provisions of this arti- cle. and there is no provision in this article providing for an election, CT n- not sec but what we are running some risk. That is the only purpose fer which I would vote for the reco1sider- ation-that it might not remain there always.
 MT. Brown (Talladega)-I submit that the Committee used the proper language when they said ''or held un- der the provisions of this article" The provision of the article is, that by law it may be so arranged that they can have that election.
 Mir. Coleman-Will you please point out where it is?
 MT. Browne-No county seat shall be removed except by two-thirds vote of the qualified electors in said coun- ty." That does not carry itself into operation. but the legislature must car ry 1t into operation. and when the leg
 
 ity with that provision.
 MT. Coleman-That is the very point l made. if you will amend 1t. MT. Browne-It is, as the gentleman | said. very far fetched. One of the pro- | visions of this article is that 1t must | be by two-thirds, which Is n9w chang | ed to bare majority. In answer to the suggestion made by the gentleman from Washington to the gentleman from Calhoun. I thought, Mir. Presi- dent. that all lawyers in this assembly knew that the county could not issue bonds except by direct authority oi legislation-that is the law. Mir. Wilson-And did you think that all the lawyers knew that the commis- sioners could not issue warrants? MT. Browne-The gentleman did not ask in regard to warrants.
 MT. Wilson, beg pardon, I did. MT. Browne-You may have done So afterwards. but you first said bonds. | There is no provision in existing law | allowing Shelby County to issue any | bonds. and therefore they could not build $56.000 court house. There was law passed in this bill allowing the | Commissioners of Calera to issue $35, ,00C of bonds which this Convention has | wiped out Now the Committee left l it so. if they saw fit at any time be- | fore the expiration of the law passed | two and a half years ago. can within | thirty days hold that election, and in the name of Heaven do the gentlemen fear that the Columbiana people can build $50,000 court house within thir- | ty days and deprive them of the right under that election of two years ago | The only reason the Committee had in | leaving that provision in here was SC | they could hold the election under the law of three years ago, because the law provided for g. majority vote to | remove the court house, where the Committee required a two-thirds ma jority, but now that has been amended ! by this Convention. so that at any time | in the future ten years. as well as within the time prescribed by the oth- l CT law of three years ago, they can move the court house from Columbiana to Calera or anywhere else by bars majority of the people.
 l MT. Thompson (Bibb)-On behalf ct the Committee I desire to say just a few words on this subject. The a"gu. ment made by the distinguished gen. tleman from Greene has been fully met The words as used by the Committed in this proviso are unambiguous, plain and simple, and we have provided that that court house question may be set tied by this act which I have before me, and under that act they can have their election upon thirty days notice and within thirty-one days hold their election. The matter Is now tied uu in the courts. nothing can be done prior to the ratification of this Con- NAI4