The Montgomery advertiser., 1901-08-01

| and every village, and refer to the husbands of the ladies who keep a boarding house, the husband of the lady that takes in sewing. and the husband of the lady who conducts a mercantile l business or some other character of business. These men are respectable members of society in the communi- ties in which they live, and I say for the benefit of that class and for oth- CTS. the young men who have possi- bly, not decided as to what calling they will embark in ana who are dependent upon their parents-they are not work fng for living but If their parents are willing to support them until they have determined upon what business | they will embark in. Without any hos tility at all to the idea and theory of | the gentleman from Jefferson, unless some other gentleman desires to speak on his proposition, I will make a mo- tion to table the substitute, with the Mr. Long (Walker)-I hope the gen. tleman will withdraw that for a mo- ment.
 The motion to table was withdrawn MT. Long-That may not be misun- derstood !. ask for the reading of the amendment offered by the gentleman from Pike.
 l The SeCTcLdTy redQ the afn6nuU1ent, as follows: Amend first subdivision Section 5. by inserting after the word work. in the eighth line of said sec tion. the following, and who are de- pendent on their labor for support
 MT. Long (Walker)-The amendment | offered by the gentleman from Pike would allow a man, and Is intended to allow a man, who has money, to lay around the springs, or somewhere else, and not be amenable to this section. It is simply absurd and ridiculous-that is enough to say upon that proposition.
 The amendment of the gentleman from Jefferson is in the right line and I hope it will be adopted by this Con- vention. Why, sir. a poor man has right to quit work if he wants to. and no 2 by 4 registrar has the right to deny him the right to vote because he does quit work. There are a great many of us here who have never struck the ground 8 lick of work for twelve and missed it.
 Mir Jenkins-How could a man hav- ing a pension vote?
 Mir. Long-A man drawing a pension who does not work, could not vote.
 MT. Jenkins-I will ask another ques- ton. How would he come in under the soldier clause?
 MT. Long-He would not come in un- der the soldier clause, because 1t ex- pires in 1908.
 MT. Sanford Pike)-I will ask if any able-bodied soldiers in this State draw pensionsT
 MT. Long-I don't think they do, and l hope not. I am talking about the amendment of the gentleman from Jef- ferson-I think the amendment of the gentleman from Pike is too ridiculous to discuss. Qaughter).
 MT. Samford-I am much obliged to you. Q4aughter).
 MT. Long-Now, do think man has a right to quit work if he wants to. The Bible says work was put on the human race as a curse. I, for one do not like the medicine, and a great many Of us here don't like it, and the only thing lthat keeps us at work is We have not rich wife to support us, and If we are not fortunate enough to marry a rich woman, we are disfranchised because we have no visible means of support. and have not been engaged in lawful occupation for the last twelve months. I do hope that this clause will be knocked out. I understand full well why it is there. We have quite enough traps set to catch all the negroes in Africa or anywhere else.
 MT. Morrisette-If your wife supports you is not that visible means of sup port?
 is not a legal occupation. It says who is not engaged in some lawful business. trade or occupation for twelve months next preceding the time they offer to register. I ask if living upon one wife is a lawful occupation? That is the question.
 MT. Chapman-I will ask if 1t is not a lawful occupation for that man who has a rich wife to be attending to her business and minding her?
 MT. Long-Yes sir, but the wife that has money usually attends to her own business and generally attends to her husband besides. (Laughter)
 MT. Burnett-Don't you think 1t a lawful occupation for man to be engaged in counting his wife?
 MT. Long-There is not anybody that does that. They always court her be- fore marriage. I never heard of any man doing that after he is married. It is generally somebody else's wife then if he does any courting. Naugh- ter) Now I do hope that the amend ment as offered by the gentleman from Jtfferson will be adopted It is on the right line.
 MT. Burnett-I want to ask the gen. tleman question.
 | The PrSSlQenL pro leHl--LIOcS tic SSl- tleman yield?
 MT. Long-No. sir, I want to speak to the question, and seriously speak upon it. 1 cannot see why a man who has not been engaged in some lawful business or occupation, trade or calling for twelve months next preceding the time they offer to register. should not be allowed to register. I have said we have enough traps to catch every ne- gro, and there Is no use for this in here. IL will be a dagger and double bladed ax in the hands of men who op- pose the ratification of the Constitu- tion and you cannot explain 1t satis- factor1ly either. There are great many men trying to get more money for their labor that are trying to get work. that are trying to keep their wages from being cut down below what will support their father wives and children and would you deny them that right and leave it entirely with the Register to say whether a man was regularly engaged for twelve months next preceding the time of reg istration? The next Section absolutely deprives him and he is compelled to answer these questions propounded to him. Now I ask the delegates on this floor to consider how radical this Sec ton Is. 1 do not believe that they will adopt it. They cannot give any good reason why it should be adopted It is as I said another trap. We have enough subdivisions and sections in