The Montgomery advertiser., 1901-08-01
THE oUADRENEIAL SESSION PROVISION.

reducing the limit of State tax ation from seventy-five cents per hundred dollars to sixty-five cents. There can be no doubt that It. ia se- rious mistake, an unnecessary and dan gerous enc. The Convention should right it before 1t concludes its work.
 Today we call serious attention to another action of that body which we believe to be fraught with danger. That is the provision for sessions of the Legislature only once in four years. Biennial sessions are done away with and quadrennial sessions substituted as the Legislative Section now stands.
 This change was unnecessary after all the restrictions were thrown about the Legislature which have heen pro- vided, There has been too much leg islation in the past, it is true: but the trouble has been due to the excess Of local lesisluation. The new Legislative Section has fixed such ample metes and bounds against local bills that there can be no danger in this direction ,n the future. The Legislature is now iett free to consider matters of interest to the whole State. There has been no complaint of too much general legisia- tion In the past. On the contrary. the complaint has been common that there was too little of that sort. The absorp- ton of members in local hills has pre- vented much time or thought being given to questions of concern to the whole people.
 Now that the Legislature Is to be emancipated from the evils ot local bills, it should have the opportunity of devotins its brains and time to ways and means of uplifting this waole Commonwealth in many directions. When this new Constitution Is adopted. a certainty so far as we now sec ana when the new era of reform Tn many respects besides suffrage. is fnaugu- rated. the wisdom of the LeKts'ature will be called upon for full play In en- acting many statutes to supplement the Constitution. It may he argued that there will be an early special ses- sion for that particular purpose. So there will, B,a it will not be able to see immediately all that is necessary to be done to adapt the Code to the new in- strument. It will take months for expe- rience to develop all the necessary leg | islation. Perhaps a year or two may be necessary.
 Not only is this change to auadren- nial sessions unnecessary. in the light of the facts cited. but we believe ii to be dangerous. If this reduction of the tax limitation stands. there Is nn telling what sort of troubles may arise. as to the ordinary financial affairs of the State. or as to an extraordinary situation in connection with the pros- pective funding of the State bonds. Ii may be argued that the Governor has the power to call the Legislature to- gether at any emergency. So he has but we all know that our Governors SC | far have exercised that power rarely. Il Is intended to be used olily in great emergencies, and the average Governor would not ordinarily resort to 1t excep under great stress. There might be { great and generally admitted need oi important legislation. and yet Gov ernor might not recognize 1t. might no
 desire it. might under certain condi | tions resist the recognition of such z situation. The proper way is to pro l vide for biennial sessions, and not relS upon Governors to take so much re
 sponsibility frequently.
 The pendulum in the matter of re- stricting legislation has unquestionably swung too far that way. It is Wis' to restrict petty legislation: 1t is un
 wise, if not dangerous, to restrict gen
 eral legislation too much. This clearl!
 Is done by quadrennial sessions of onl!
 fifty days. Few States in the Unior
 have found such a course wise. Nearl!
 all have restricted the local bill evil
 and then provided for biennial session!
 of longer terms than fifty days. l | tnlS COnStltullOndI SOHNcHtiOH ud
 found it impossible to limit itself t
 fifty days in discussing a few grea
 general questions. how can 1t reason
 ably expect Legislatures to get througl
 with the discussion of the many nor
 general matters they will have befor,
 them In quadrennial sessions of fit.
 days? There was much more reason in the light of the past. in providing 4 for a tifty-day session of this Conven
 tion than there is in halvins the tim
 for future legislative discussions. WheI
 the light of the future development O
 this State is allowed to play upon thu
 problem. who can say that 1t Is no
 prudent and expedient to continue bi
 enniaI sessions?
 The question has been frequentl asked, since this quadrennial provision
 was made. as to what was at the bot
 tom of its3 It is a frequent answe
 that the fright of the railroads was tn
 main cause. There having been som
 disposition manifested in the Conven tion to deal with them more strict ly, 1t is said they are afraid of flu ture developments. It is reported tha they don't want the Assembly to mee l