The Montgomery advertiser., 1901-08-09

ana small be subject to suits in the courts of this State.
 Mr. ONeal dauderdale)-That does not apply to municipal corporations.
 MT. Boone-But SIT
 Mir. Hood-Haven't the courts of this State held that the word corpora tion." as used in the present Consti- tuition, had no reference to municipal corporations?
 MT. Boone-Yes, sir; and that is the very reason, gentlemen of the Conven- ton that we want to put it in the Con- etitution. that Municipal Corporations can be sued.
 MT. Hood-One other question: Will not that section authorize the garn;sh- ment of the revenues of the city on judgment?
 Nr. Boone-It will not in my opin- ion.
 MT. Hood-The Supreme Court
 MT. Boone-I am perfectly familiar with the principle the Supreme Court has announced that a garnishment on judgment was a suit.
 MT. Hood-Now would not this auth orize the garnishing of >he revenues of the city?
 MT. Boone-I understa nd. It seems to be the view that gentlemen constitut- ing this committee are the weakest body that has yet appeared before this Convention. but at the same time with of the gentlemen. I say that nobody who will read this section would contend that 1t confers a right because it says it shall be sub ject to suits in the courts of the State or that it would abolish or change the decisions of the courts on questions of public policy, as to when a muni- cipal corporation should be sued. and
 MT. Hood--We have nothing in the present Constitution authorizing suits against municipal corporations, have we?
 MT. Boone-Not expressly. and that is why we want it in there. We don't want it to put in the power of the General Assembly to say that no municipal corporatio shall be sued. because we think that in carrying out the governmental functions, if they trespass upon the rights of citizen, or wrong citizen. they should be lia- ble to suit.
 MT. Walker (Madison)-would not a provision of this kind raise the very serious question as to the power of the Legislature to limit the right of bringing any kind of suit by garnish- ment or otherwise against a municipal
 
 that account?
 MT. Boone-I would ask the gentle man if he thinks 1t dangerous for the Legislature to provide that a suit ! shall not be brought against a county unless it shall have been first filed with the Board of County Commissioners. There are other sections which author ize the bringing of suit against a county
 MT Walker-My answer to that is. | under the present law, regulations of that sort are left to the Legislature. do not want to put in the Constitution. that such regulation will not be left to the Legislature.
 Mir Boone-Do you contend that this section that says suits are to be | brought would be any inhibition on the power of the Legislature to bring this suit?
 MT. Walker-I do not go that far.
 Mir. Coeman-I knoY you do not, but I do.
 Mir Boone-It is a good thing that we have freedom of expression among the delegates. and that the fact that a man has held a superior position in life to another. his opinion has not always got to go. Now. gentlemen on behalf of the Committee, ask that this sec tion be adopted
 | MT. Hood-I certainly did not intend | to question the profound learning of | the gentleman who preceded me, nor tn to question the learning and ability of the committee. that has presented this question. but. Mir. President, it cer- tainly does leave the question in doubt as to whether the Legislature could regulate suits against cities, should this provision be placed in the Consti- tuition. It is undoubtedly true under the present Constitution that cities and municipalities may sue and be sued. The gentleman confesses that proposition. He admits to the Conven- ton that there is no provision in the 1 present Constitution authorizing suits against cities or authorizing cities and towns to bring suits. Then why the necessity of placing a provision in this Constitution which is open to con struction by the courts of the State, and certainly will leave the question in grave doubt?
 MT. Boone-May I ask a question Could the Legislature take away the | right to sue and be sued now?
 Mr. Hood-Not if this provision is placed in the Constitution. J Mir. Boone-But if we do not put it in there2
 Mir. Hood-Probably it could. but | certainly there Is no body Of men that will ever gather in the legislative halls of Ala bama would be so foolish as tO take away from the cities and towns of this State the power of suing and being sued. Then why cucumber this article with that section, which is to say the least of it doubtful in its con- struction. The question propounded by the distinguished gentleman from Madison. no doubt has appealed to every member of this Convention. Will that not authorize a Judgment creditor of q municipal corporation tc bring suit by garnishment and thereby reach the revenues and income of the various cities and towns in this State?
 MT. Boone-May l ask the gentle man question? If garnishment can not now be made against a city?
 Mr. Hood-It cannot. '.:.
 Mr. BOone-Do you mean to say that a writ cannot issue and the question is not whether or not the income is neces- sary. or if it is a part of the taxable revenues of the city. Do you deny that proposition7 -s. . Mir Hood-It has been decided by the courts of this State that it was against public policy to garnish the revenues of city. but the court has held that by a process of mandamus, you could reach the surplus funds-0l a city.
 Mir Boone-And they have not held that a garnishment would lie.
 MT Hood-To reach the income ol revenues of a city?
 MT Boone-On land or property of g city, which was not used for the pur- pose of carrying on the government?