The Montgomery advertiser., 1901-06-26

Convention votes down every proposi- tion looking to compensation to people l who are slain in the discharge of their
 duty. 1t Will have bad effect not only upon the sheriffs, but upon the out | side world. do hope the friends of
 this proposition will not be led astray. | because some gentlemen say you do | not take in policemen, or judges or so- | hcitors." We are not dealing now with them, we are dealing with an | exceptional case-with great evil which we rely upon the Sheriff to sup press, and whose duties in connection with the evil make him peculiarly all object of danger and attack. For one I do not hesitate to express the opinion | as to the case of policemen slain in
 discharge of duty. If had the power l to do 1t, I would provide that every l city or town in the State should make | compensation to an officer slain in the discharge of duty. However, we are not | now legislating as to those matters. We are putting the command into the Constitution regarding certain consti- tutional officers, and 1t ought not to go
 out to the world. after having this pro vision before us, that we decline to | give the moral aid of the State to our
 sheriffs, and thus put the Convention in the attitude of making play of | words and having a heroic provision in words in the Constitution, which were | not intended for actual home consump- | tion, but to be heard of abroad. That Is the reason why I insist now. no
 matter what the case. if this provision had never been put before the Conven- | ton. that 1t would be unwise to leave it without making some such pro- vision as that suggested by the sub stitute. Personally, for the sake of harmony. although l do not think 1t should be done, l am willing to take out the Sheriff and confine 1t to his | posse: but certainly the State of Ala bama ought not to send forth the edict | from this hall that 1t never intends no matter how the citizen in it's ser vice is stricken down, to aid his fam- fly when he dies in the discharge Of | public duty.
 Mir. Boone-This matter has been very thoroughly discussed, but I want to call the attention of the delegates to the Convention to the wording of that amendment to the word adequate" in | the provision.
 Mir. Jones (Montgomery)-If the gen. | tleman will suggest better word we will take it..
 MT. Boone-l will discuss the prop osition. I am not in favor of 1t any | way and I am arguing against the proposition.
 MT. Jones-Then I suggest to my | friend it is not worth while to critic.se l language when he Is against the prin- ciple.
 MT. Boone-I oppose the principle and | the way you put it. 1 oppose 1t in It's | entirety, in toto and every way you | put 1t. But in as much as you are seek | ing to put it in the Constitution that
 way l think ie is particularly objec- | tionable the way it Is. He says the sheriff or deputy or any member of the | posse, etc, shall be entitled to ade- quate provision. It does seer1 to me that the word adequate if 1t means full and complete. should not only be | to those men but to those who are de- | pendent upon them. Now suppose man in 8 posse was a practicing phy-
 sician or a lawyer in full practice, and
 he was killed. Would not the question
 fairly be and would not the Legislature have to construe it in the light of the
 words of the Constitution and would | they not give compensation to the | family of that man, taking into consid-
 eration his situation in life, his in- come. what period of life he had yet
 to live according to the tables of mor-
 tality and what is the loss to
 the family by reason of his death. Would it not mean 1 that? It seems to me 1t would. So that
 it would at least be granting to that
 man such an amount of money or to the family such a sum per annum or l in bulk as put out at interest would l yield a sufficient amount to make them l whole by reason of the death. Now,
 is this State in any such fix financial 1 ly as to launch out upon that system | of pensfoning? The government of the United States. with all of its hundreds
 of millions don't say they will give to its pension list adeduate amounts. Congress has carefully graded that to | the different officers and men and | gives them fixed determined sum-
 But under this constitutional amend
 ment we seek to leave 1t in the power
 of the legislature to do in each partic- | ular case whatever they may deem | just and that they shall do 1t. Now, | take a case after the manner of those
 cited by the gentleman from MontSom-
 cry Here Is a sheriff who seeks to do
 his duty. and a mob takes his prison
 CT. and in endeavoring 10 hold or to
 protect him that sheriff Is shot down. | This is a generous people and from the l Gulf to the Tennessee line the plauGits of praise are shouted for tlet man. | The legislature is in session and they say for a valuable thing like that he
 should be given torty thousand dol
 lars" It seems to me vicious and that
 it should not be put n tle CJnstitu- ton.
 Mir. Jones-Do YOU know what the
 legislature paid for that man who was killed in the service nf the State? MT Boone-Would that 4stop the ies- islature. what they peid forty or fifty years ago. Is that . fair argument? Mr. Jones-They said 1t was urcon- stitutional and that they could not pay him a cent but they got around 1t and they gave him. popular man as he was, in the nature of fee U hls firm SlO,- 900 and the other members of the firm gave it to his family and if they hadn't done that the State would nor have
 paid S3.O00.
 MT. Boone-The gentleman might as
 well argue because jury in one case
 gave so much that that Would be an estoppel upon another jury. We all
 know that nothing of that kind occurs.
 What one legislature has done would
 not control another legislature. Another point suggested to me since
 I began to speak. Could the legisla-
 ture cease to make these appropria-
 tions fEom the public treasury and put
 the dependents on pension list if the people desire 1t? lt must be plain to
 all that 1t could not he done save by
 amending the Constitution. think the argument made by the distinguished
 gentleman from Greene Is conclusive.
 I have nothing further to say.
 MT. Williams (MarenSol-I move the
 previous question ln the original Trop-
 osition. on the amendment and cn the