The Montgomery advertiser., 1901-08-09
to take from the table.

was called for, and upon further vote
 there were ayes 40, noes 36, and the motion to suspend the rules was lost.
 MT. Sanford (Montgomery)-I wish to offer an amendment as an additional section.
 The Secretary read the additional sec- tion as follows: No charter for the government of any municipality. made according to any law enacted by the Legislature, shall become operative until the same shall be adopted by a vote of a majority of the qualified cleo tors residing within the limits of such municipality"
 Mir. Weakley-I move to lay the amendment upon the table.
 MT. Sanford (Montgomery) Of course. uaughter). I make that be- cause the charter Is to the city what the Constitution Is to the Leg stature and to the State. It is the authority which confers or denies the grant of privileges to the people who dwell here in. It may impose great burdens upon them, and, therefore. 1 think it is just as proper that charter after 1t has been framed, should be submitted to the people over whom it is to govern, as it is to submit a constitution to the people of the whole State. l. therefore, urge that a charge should be submit ted to the people subject to it's com mand or authority, just as the Consti- tuition is and submitted to the people for their ratification to govern the whole State. Is there any gentleman who Is opposed to 1t?
 | A Delegate--Oh, no!
 | MT. Sanford-He says, "Oh, mo-" and Is unable to make the distinction if his life and his souls salvation depended upon it-between a charter. the organic law of a city; and the Constitution | the organic law of the State. | MT. O'Neal-Would not that be in ef- feet embodying the principle of initia- tive and referendum in the Constitu- tion of Alabama?
 l Mir. Sanford (Montgomery)-No more than the Constitution itself is an ini-
 tiative and referendum-precisely the same principle.
 Mir. O'Neal-That is the only one we have in the Constitution.
 MT. Sanford (Montgomery)-That is the only one because 1t has never been agitated before, that has been moved and I move this for the same reason that the people whom it shall govern shall have something to say what shall be their organic law whether a State or a city.
 | Mir. Weakley-I renew my motion to | tah hle.
 | MT. Sanford (Montgomery)-Answ it with argument.
 Upon vote being taken the motion | to table prevailed.
 MT. Whiteside-I have an amend ment I desire to offer.
 The Secretary read the amendment as follows: Amend by adding an ad- ditional section: Any person, firm, or | association or corporation who may | construct or operate any public utility aln hn cfr tG of any municipal corporation under any privilege or franchise permitting such construction in or through such municipal corporation shall be liable to a6utting proprietors for the actual damage done to the abutting property on account of such construction or op- eration."
 The President-The question will b. upon the amendment offered by the gentleman from Calhoun.
 MT. Whiteside-Gentlemen of the Convention. the courts have held that these utilities that operate upon the streets of a city are not an additional servitude upon abutting property, they may be constructed and operated along a street and damage the prop erty and almost destroy it's value and the abutting property owners have no right to recover any damages therefor This provision is simply to allow them to recover the actual damages that may be caused by the construction and operation of these utilities along the streets by the property. MT. Boone-Mr. President, it may not be vain thing. but still l am go- ing to attempt to defend the proposi- tion offered by the gentleman from Calhoun. His idea in introducing that is where an electric railroad or other street railroad or one of these trunk lines that we were talking about this morning. having a franchise or privi- lego to run their line up against a mans sidewalk. and prevent his dray or carriage CT anything else from going in or out, the occupants of 1t loading or unloading from it. they do damage the abutting proprietor and they should pay what Is fair and just. As the delegate from Calhoun has urged, the courts have held that the putting of an electric railroad or the putting down of posts on the sidewalk for A trolley system was not an additional servitude on the street from that charging it with a different use from that originally set out by the proprie- tors who dedicated that property or from whom 1t was condemned. The object of the section introduced by him is not to effect that, but where it actually damages the abutting propri- etor in the way we have attempted to explain. it does seem to me they should be required to pay for 1t.
 MT. Kyle-lt occurs to me if that becomes part of the Constitution of this State. you cannot build an electric railroad. or any other railroad in a city, and 1t would appear that these lawyers are anticipating very dull bus | mess and want damage suits growing out of the construction of railroads to keep them up. That will be the result | of it. There never will be another railroad built if that is put in there, | for every man that lives on a street | will find himself seriously damaged | by the noise of the cars or some other | thing. which will damage him and dis | turb his family and render 1t unpeas- | ant, and he will want damages, and ! these lawyers will bring so many suits against them that :hey will have to |, abandon business. ... :~+:
 Mir Walker-It seems to me that the l proposition offered by the gentleman | from Calhoun is already the law of | the State. 1 can see no use in enact ing it in the Constitution. l move to | lay it on the table.
 Mir Whte-Please withdraw that.
 MT Walker-I withdraw the motion | to table.
 Mr White-I think my friend is mis- taken about that being the law in Ala bama now. It was decided in the All len case directly the reverse of that. | tIyr, Ty,1