The Montgomery advertiser., 1901-08-30

l the Convention.
 MT. Coleman-Of course. I presume | that. I did not presume the committee put this in there. do not know where was when this was introduced. A man cannot be here all the time. and I was not here then, or I would have called attention to 1t. but that is no reason why if 1t should not be here 1t ought not to be corrected. do not want any delegate in this Convention to think it is Indispensable or would be any grievance to me. The decisions al-l ready declare what general. public and special laws are. and there are deci- sions in. other courts where they have the word private" to which reference can be made.
 The word private" cannot be found In our Constitution now. It is a new term. and all these terms have legal definitions. I remember in case be- fore me 1t took this court four months, not all the time. but we were four months coming to a decision as to how to save these cities from the ef- feet of the local law. and the general law in the Constitution .the general law having the same provision that this Constitution has that the Legislature shall not grant to any municipality the power to impose a special privilege tax contrary to the general law of the State. I do not pretend to say what VIII arise or whether anything special VIII arise under it, but we need not emoarrass the courts. and unless 1t fs necessary why should it be here? If any man can say it is necessary to put It in the Constitution, will resume my seat without a word. If any mem Der who has investigated this ouestion can show where it is necessary to be in there have not a word to say. It i oniy out or great precaution, to prevent any embarrassing questions that ' make the motion to strike 1t ,out of tha section, and just let the court proceed as 1t has heretofore. I make that mo- ton for your consideration.
 NIT. boone-It seems to me that the language of Section no is very plain. mere Is no ambiguity about it. The way in considering it, and as this Con. vention adopted this whole section on Local Legislation after mature consid- eration, and three or four or five days debate upon 1t, move to lay fhe amendment on the table.
 Upon g. vote being taken, the amend. ment was tabled.
 Mr. O'Neal-I renew my motion for the previous question on the adoption
 MT. Jones (wilcox)--withdraw that motion
 MT. .O'Neal-I withdraw it with the understanding that the gentleman will renew it. I
 MT. Spragins-I wish to make a cor rection. In Section 15, page 23, we ask unanimous consent to change the word adoption" in the third line, to the word ratification"
 haiy ordered.
 MT. Spragins-On page 24, Section 31. the Committee desires to change the word effect" to affect" in the nine- teenth line. =
 There was no objection and the amendment was ordered.
 MT. Spragins-On page 25, line 2, Sec- tion 106. change the word effected to affected"
 There being no objection. the amend ment was orcered.
 MT. Jones (wilcox)-I have an amendment.
 Add at the end of Subdivision 21. line 3. page 24. local legislation and laws heretofore passed by the Legisla- ture increasing the Jurisdiction of the Justices of the Peace in Wilcox County, are hereby repealed.'"
 The President-The question will be upoA IHc duOptlOH OI tue aIHeIlOIn9uL offered by the gentleman from Will cox.
 MT. Sanford (Pike) sought recogni- tion.
 The President-The gentleman from Wilcox has the floor. Does the gentle man yield?
 Mir Jones-Certainly.
 MT. Samford-Won't you consent to strike out the word "Wilcox" and let 1t apply to the whole State?
 MT. Jones (Wilcox)-I will state did not know but what there would be some objection to it on the part ,of other delegates on the floor.
 MT. Sanford (Pike)-It would be & public benefaction.
 MT Jones (Wilcox)-Mr. President, in Wilcox County, we have county court that has Jurisdiction of all mis- demeanors committed in that county, and 1t has two jury terms of the court each year. About twenty years ago. a gentleman who was a justice of the peace represented Wilcox as a member of the Lower House of the General As- sembly, and he had a bill passed giving justices of the peace in Wilcox County concurrent Jurisdiction with the Coun- ty Court in all cases of misdemeanor. The gentleman who had the law passed was a capable and efficient justice of
  county had been his equal, it is possi- ble there would have been no serious objection to the law, but 1t has not given satisfaction, and it should be re- pealed, and the justices of the peace have the same fees that justices of the I peace have in other counties of the State,
 MT. Walker-I would like to ask the gentleman why he did not get it re- pealed by the Legislature, and not come to the Constitutional Convention?
 MT. Jones-I will say that am aware it is a matter that could be attended to by the Legislature, but 1t has not been done. A great many members of the Legislature think that the cat ought to be belled, but they are not willing to bell the cat. I am willing to bell the cat and take the responsibility, bek cause I know the feeling of my people at home. If it took up any time, if 1t did anybody in the State any wrong, I would not ask it. But 1t is the wish of delegates on the floor of the Con- vention from my county to have this enacted, and 1t can do no other part of the State any harm. I have seen the Committee and they say they have no objection, and say they will leave 1t to the delegates on this floor, and T. ask that it be passed, and I will take' up no time in discussing 1t.
 MT. Walker-I do not like to interfere with local desires, but it does not seem to me it ought to go into the Consti- tuition, and move to lay the amend