The Montgomery advertiser., 1903-02-28

MT. DuBose quoted statistics from several States to show that State uni- formty was not satisfactory.
 In closing, Mir. DuBose said he hoped that any man who voted for the bill would not be sent back to the Legislature.
 People Want the Bill.
 Mir Goldsmith of Lowndes declared that it was enough for him to know that the people of the State wanted the bill. That was more to him than that the edu- cators did not want it. The argument that New England did not think State uniformity was a god thing did not ap- peal to him. He did not know much about New England and what he did know he was not pleased with. The people want ed State uniformity and 1t was the duty of the Legislature to give it to them quick.
 Mir. Rich. of Mobile, offered an amend ment providing that the commission should be authorized to allow a separate series of books for cities and towns hav- ing more than 5000 inhabitants.
 To this amendment MT. Hoffman of Mobile offered an amendment declaring that the provision of the bill should not apply to towns having more than 5000 in- habitants.
 At that moment MT. Bankhead of Walker moved that the committee of the whole rise. This was adopted.
 MT. Bankhead then moved that the House remain in session until the com mittee of the whole reported on Senate bill 129. the textbook bill.
 The motion was adopted-ayes. 59; nays, 2s.
 The House again went into the com- mittee of the whole.
 Rich Makes a Speech.
 MT. Rich spoke for his amendment. which, he said, did not change a single provision of the bill. Great good, he said. would come from the amendment as 1t would mean the continuance of condi- tions in the cities.
 MT. London of Jefferson alluded to the lecture which he said. had been read the majority by the gentleman from Morgan (Mr. Callahan). The majority, he said, was quite able to take care of itself.
 He read the message of former State Superintendent Abercrombie urging State conformity. He had, moreover, he said, received from pr. Abercrombie letter stating that he was still in favor of State uniformity The charge had been made that the bill sought to repress intelli- gence, he said, and if the charge was true. he would rather die than vote for it. ne utiileu iIl1t tiio bii kdiSCo d 4uOo- ton of dollars and cents. He was op- posed to stinginess in education and de- clared that money invested in education brought in the highest returns. both in dollars and morals,
 Hhe supported the amendment of MT. Rich, saying that in cities where satisfac- tory conditions prevailed the law should not interfere.
 Time Fixed for Vote.
 On motion of Mir. Benners. the House decided that it would take a vote at five minutes to 2 o'clock.
 Mr. Hoffman of Mobile advocated his amendment. A State law that did not make an exception of cities where satis- factory conditions existed would mean a great and unnecessary experse to the peo- pie of Mobile, he declared. The friends of the measure. he said, had agreed to accept the amendments.
 Mir Rushton of Crenshaw opposed the ampendment The law would not be a general law, he thought, If the cities were left out
 The Hoffman amendment was defeated. The Rich amendment, leaving the mat ter with the State Board as to whether a ity should be left out. was adopted.
 MT. London of Jefferson offered an amendment eliminating from the provis- ions of the bill cities which made an an- nual appropriation out of the city treas ury for the city schools which are kept open six months in the year.
 The amendment was adopted.
 The committee at ? o'clock rose and re- poorted the bill favorably to the House.
 MT. Blackburn of Jefferson gave notice that he would today move to strike out the amendment proposed by MT. London and adopted by the committee.
 MT. Thompson of Bibb moved that the bill be made the special. paramount, continuing, exclusive, perpetual order' for Il o'clock today, and the motion was adopted.
 The House at 2:1o o'clock recessed un- til 3:30 o'clock.