The Montgomery advertiser., 1901-08-30

number of lawyers here, delegates who have had experience in the court house and seen the sheriff's work, know what an influential man he is, especially if he is at all shrewd. and I think 1t dan gerous departure, and hope this Con- vention will not adopt this amendment. l Mir. Long CWalker)-In reply to the distinguished gentleman from Mont gomery (Mr. Oates), I wish to state that 1t is not an argument pro or con to say that 1t Is not in the old Consti- tuition. There is very little In the old Constitution that is contained in this new one. It is no argument to say that the State of Alabama has never recog- nized the right of the sheriff to be his own successor. I want to state that there is not a Southern State that does not allow the sheriff to be his own suc- cessor. A good reason cannot be given why the sheriff should not be his own successor.
 | A gentleman, possibly the oldest dele gate upon this floor, told me that when before the war it was done, no doubt there was 8 cause for its being done. because the sheriffs used to handle huri- l dreds and hundreds of thousands or dollars in some of the counties. That is not true any longer. At that time. a man might run an account with his merchant and was only required to set- | adopted so the sheriff could wind up his business every four years. Busi- ness has progressed to such an extent since that time that the sheriff, with an execution in his hands, is looked after, and the men interested in that execution look after the sheriff closer, and he is required to make settlements two or three times each year. ana man who trades with his merchant and does not pay for his goods in less than thirty days
 l Mir Sanford (Montgomery)-Wh should sheriffs be the only executive officers allowed to succeed themselves? l MT Long-I am not here to answer that, but I am here to state that the sheriffs in Alabama have never been allowed to succeed themselves, and the other executive officers of this State have up to this time--every one of them.
 | MT. Oates-When you limit the Gov ernor, the Chief Executive officer, to | four years, why should you give the sheriff the right to succeed himself? | MT Long--I am not here to atone for all the wrongs done. think every of- | ficer In the State of Alabama should be allowed to succeed himself. I have lived | in Georgia. where one sheriff, in the County of Carroll has been sheriff for over twenty years. and he has always been an efficient officer. and he has had a great deal to do. the gentleman from | Montgomery to the contrary notwith- standing, and there is no encourage ment for a sheriff of that kind to be his own successor to do his duty.
 Why should we say to the sherin you shall not be eligible as your own successor no matter how well you per- | form your duty. no matter if every | man in the county wants you to be l sheriff again? No matter If you put l to flight a thousand mobs, yet sir, you have got to content yourself, as the gentleman from Montgomery says, with being little deputy to another sher- l if. There can be no good reason given why the sheriff should not be his own successor. I hope this amendment, in- | troduced by the distinguished Chair | man of the Committee on the Execu- | tive Department, will be adopted by this Convention. It is right. It will make the Constitution stronger, be- cause it is a step in the right direc- ton. The sheriff should be allowed to succeed himself. You must remember that we do not legislate him into office. | If the sheriff should run again, the people are not bound to support him, | and if he has not made good officer they will not do 1t. Now. as far as the sheriff showing favors is concerned. there Is not a man in the State that can show as many favors to as many men as the tax col- lector, yet he is allowed to succeed himself as often as he pleases. The tax assessor can do the same thing, yet you deny the sheriff that very right. Why, the tax assessor and the tax collector and even the tax commissioners can show thousands of favors where the sheriff can show one. Let us look at this question right, and this is a ques- ton which is compromise that comes up here.
 The sheriffs of this State are not down here. while some of them are ! here. they are not here in executive session. They are here simply asking justice at the hands of this Conven- tion and I dare say that the sheriffs of this State would Nike to have the privilege of succeeding themselves. pro viding the people of their respective | counties are In favor of re-electing them. and I hope this Convention will adopt this amendment. It Is a com promise. but satisfactory to the men on this floor who represent the sheriffs. man has to be good man or he cannot be sheriff.
 Mir. White-What was the compro- mise.
 MT. Sanford (Montgomery)-Wh made the compromise?
 | NJ |. .g-A great many gentlemen here. You distinguished gentlemen are not well enough posted to be informed may be. (Laughter.) If gentlemen were familiar wtth the work and knew as much as you should, you would know a whole lot of us agreed to 1t. .t IS right and we agreed To 1t. We do rot have to let you into every little caucus that goes on here on this floor. Gaughter) We knew you were against us and did not invite you in.
 MT. Coleman (Greene)-Mr. President and delegates to the Convention. it is strange that at this stage of our pro- ceedings, we should have this question up before us again. and stranger still. to have heard the speech of the gentle man who last addressed you, when only a week or ten days ago, when the prop osltion was made here to impeach the sheriff5 and to suspend them during impeachment, he raised the hue and cry here that the sheriffs of this State, If that was put into the Constitution. would defeat it that they would rise up en masse against 1t. Now we hear | the same man advocate the adoption Of the very identical resolution he ue- nounced in such terms.
 And. MT. President, there has been a singular change of face here. When the Executive Committee first report ed. they reported the suspension of | the sheriff during the impeachment, but only gave him one term. and no one in | ci no