The Montgomery advertiser., 1901-07-10

bstes-Mr. President, since the ry able and elaborate discussion or ,is subtct by the learned delegate rofRbSsa tderdale. I do not propose to ;an4bsI but little time of the Conven- Ha In it. The Convention of 1875 kR s the country did, that prior .hl lre the evils of local legislation had 6 eloped so that they called the lttS h of the country to it, and the IuesS. A in that Convention was how Q propfly limit and restrict 1t. l had 1e hobr, Sir. to offer proposition hich Is shown on the journal. em" acint as 1 recollect, seventeen class
 of eases in which no local bills ould be passed, and that everything mel might be provided for under 1erll laws. It occurred to me that 1t xS the only way to properly limit I retrict this growing evil but in
 Chvention 1t was thought that at hs rather too radical. reeoi- ct wll the remarks of my old friend Ir.Lyn the delegate from Marengo. He ttate1 that that would curtal local leg slatih greatly, but he thought 1t would be tb radical. He offered a proposi- tiun which was adopted and incorpo- .ateI in the present Constitution re- uuirng that wherever any one desired ihe passage of a local bill that he shodd prior thereto. advertise it's pur- SC and the kind of bill, the object of
 il a newspaper published in the
 ny where the bill would operate
 II passed. 1 di not believe then
 that would remedy the evil. and 1t
 moved. The frs; case that was
 id to the Supreme Court to test ebnstitutionality of It. for hon- nplance with its requirements. the prene Court very properly decided nat 1t presumed everything to have cen done which the Constitution re- uirtd to have been done. There was 10 requirement. that this advertise nent should be affirmatively shown lpon the record. and the court pre- 'umel it was else the Legislature soull not have passed the act. That pensd the doors to the flood or local ,giaation which we have since seen, nd 1t Is a growing evil. Every Legis- tture that convenes passes greater ur1b1r. Now the members are not to larno for 1t. Their constituents al- v to them to have those measures ssed. and their representative is onx- us of course, to represent his people manner acceptable to them. It IS grown to such an extent that It nsumes the whole tiaa allowed ty c Constitution for the Legislature N, , neglected, woefully neglected. ana proper amount of attention not given them at all Now, sir, take the Leg tturc before the last, and took the ns to count uD and see what tnal 1 been. The general laws are COR led in a little volume about tfe
 of webster's Spelling Book. and sntained including the appropriation }. forty-eight so-called general laws,
 volume of local acts contained S4s. en to see something of the evils or inquired of the Secretary of State ,out the cost to the State of the pas- ge of many of these acts. You take. r instance, the acts chartering towns i'd villages, which might well have zen done before the Probate Court the expense of a dollar, but he in- rms me as to several apd the expense passing them was from $50 to s1se for the clerical work. printing. etc Now when you count up the whole amount of 1t. is is large expense and is wholly unnecessary ana In'- properly saddled upon the general tax payers of the State. To say nothing f the other evils that result from it. hese are enough to call upon this onvention to abate that evil. It can ot be done, as experience has shown n other States and in our own. by de- claring that no local act shall be passed which can be provided for by general law. That Is not o6eyed. Then she committee over which had the honnr to preside, the Legislative Department, nave bad several ordinances reterreo a 1t oA this subject. and went to work nd prepared a schedule or the cases n which the committee did not be- we any local laws should be passed. hen it transpired that the importance this thing had grown so much upon country that the President Of the invention thought 1t best. and with
 advice of his Committee on Rules, special committee. separate nmittee to deal with this question. len it was that on conference With Chairman of the Committee on Lo- Legislation. all of the work of the nmittee upon general legislation to ,icb this class of work had belonged aretofore. was turned over to that nmittee. but as they did not adopt of the recommendations of the Com- ittee on Legislative Department, the fundamental report which you have ,onosinR several additions was made V that committee. That Is the req an there are two reports here. nave card some delegates say that they ,ould like to have some explanations IL. 1n6I IS lQC DSSI an give. There is no conflict between he committees as I understand 1t at II. all deiring the same object. tho ame pm pcse--to restrict the Legisid- Ire iron. rassing local laws on good oany subjects, and the only uestfon, it seems to me TOT 1is bod1 to consider IS whether e have gne too far or not far enough nd as to each one of these paragraphs consider whether it is proper to strict them, to prevent the Legisla-
 from passing any local law upon
 subied I presume there will be
 much difference of opinion. There be soms difference little later on l,o some Of the provisions herein.
 in the seneral discussion, I will 1sume no nore of your time. feeling if these were points which my and. the Chairman of the Commit on Local Legislation. had not ,ched upon partirularly. put nao .en A most excellent and full expla- tion of the general purpose.
 Mir. Foster herA took the char.
 .Nr williams (MareAgo)-l ask unan- aons consent to intpduee q resolu- Mr ONeal-Wiu the lentleman yield ~, me for a suRseetlon'
 'o ,Ir M NIiliams-CertainlA
 Nir ONeal-The first Vection em- Me MI, all the catalogue oi subjects as ~ n,bich the Legislature lt prohibited IoxN hA1N