The Montgomery advertiser., 1901-07-19

exh House where they are passed, { E1knait to this convention, 1t will take 1 entirely too much of the time or 4 [Ee General Assembly, or Legislature, no we now call 1t. and time that seems < 1R r,n Id unwarranted, when we take SSfo consfderation the fact that the Sn1v intention of the Consultation mak- S1S of is,5. when they required the bills ( ko bc read by their titles. was to call $ SonkcfaI attention of the members of < roch House to the signing of the bill, ond what was in the bills that were being signed.
 Mr White-This contemplates that tho bill Itself shall be signed by the presiding officer does 1t not
 MT. Sanford (Pike)-Yes sir. & 1fr. white-Then I will ask you II ( . bilI up to that time had been under z another wrapper, if it would be possi- hle when 1t was read at length before ! fhe House to conceal its contents any { longer and the identity of the bill ftseir'
 MT. Samford (Pike)-I hope the gen tleman from Jefferson will not meas ure all future legislation in this state ( by the frauds that were committed wfkn reference to the removal of the Cd1rt House of Shelby County, and I hope that all members of future Legislatures in this State will not be measured by that standard.
 Mir. Bulger--I will ask the gentleman if the Speaker IS required to-read the bill at length. whether it would make it any more sure that he would detect what wrapper it had been under after X the bill ,had bean, engrossed?
 Mr. Samford-rft, occurs to me that the question of the gentleman from Jefferson, and the question of the gen. tleman from Tallapoosa are not ger ! mane to this matter at all, putin view Of the question of the gentleman from Jefferson, the question of the gentle man from Tallapoosa is very pertinent, and answers the question of the gentle man from Jefferson.
 Now, Mir President, I do not care to detain this Convention on this prop 2 osition. I desire merely to call the att tention of the Convention to the inn mense amount of time that would be taken up in the reading of these bills at length, by both the Speaker of the House and the President of the Senate, and it occurs to me that this time would be uselessly consumed. They say. there is a provision in here which says that by a two-thirds vote of the members this reading can be dispensed with. The very first thing that would be done. and the way this thing would work in actual practice, whenever bills were placed upon the Speakers desk, or upon the desk of the President of the Senate, some member would get up and say. ..Mr. President. I move that the reading of the bill be dispensed with" and a two- thirds vote would immedi- ately be recorded in favor of the mo- tion, because that is a very burden some part of legislative duties, and the bills would be signed, and not even their titles read.
 MT. Cunningham (Jefferson)-I desire to ask the gentleman from Pike if the signature of the presiding officer is not intended as a guarantee that the bill as signed by him is the bill that passed upon it's third reading.
 Mir. Samford-That is true. Yes.
 Mf. Cunningham-Then I desire to ask the gentleman, under the present Constitution, is 1t not practically a farce?
 Mir. Samford-In answer to the gen. tleman from Jefferson, I say it is not a farce unless the members of the diff ferent Houses employ clerks and sten- ographers who are not worthy to be trusted.
 Mr. Cunningham-Would not mo- tion by Senator or Representative to dispense with the reading at length of the engrossed, bill, or of the bill that had passed. exonerate the presid- Ing officer from any responsibility that he might otherwise incur for an error In the bill?
 Mr. Samford-In practice the pre- siding officer, as every one knows is not required to read the bill at length, and therefore no further responsibility attaches to him than to see that it has the ear-marks of authenticity, and WI en he has complied with that part of his duties. he has complied with everything the law imposes upon him, and all that the people expect of him.
 MT. Sanford (Montgomery)-Allo me to suggest to you that the present Con- stitution requires it to be read at length on the day of its passage.
 MT. deGraffenreid-I desire to ask the gentleman question.
 The President-Does the gentleman from Pike yield.
 Mir. Sanford (Pikek)-I have only a minute or two, and would do so with pleasure if thought could convince the gentleman by answering his ques- lion.
 Another proposition is. that the Con- stitution requires, as suggested by the gentleman from Montgomery. that a bill shall be read at length a third time after its engrossment, and in the presence of the Senate and of the House of Representatives, and it oc- CUTS to me there are enough safe guards thrown around 1t, so that if the officers who have been selected by the two houses of the General Assem- bly, do their honest duty there can be no possible opportunity for fraud, or for error creeping into it.
 MT. Macdonald-It occurs to me that the Legislature could not be better en- gagged, and could not use the time for which the State Jf Alabama pays them more advantageously, than by devotinS khis additional time to seeing whether ehe expressing clerks have engrossed sbe bills.
 The gentleman from Pike says that we ought not to look forward to the future and judge it by the past, but that we ought to consider that the last Legislature or the last few Legisla- lures were exceptions. Well, I don't Know that we have anything to base an opinion upon in that respect, md I do not know that We can get any better predicate for prophecies as to what will occur in the future than our experience as to what has occurred in Rhe past. Engrossing clerks have prac- aically been the lawmaking power of this State for twenty years. l have had some little experience about these things and know whereof 1 speak. know of instances where amendments have been passed by the Senate to bills hdopted by the House and yet he En- crossing Clerk in the plentitIle cf her