The Montgomery advertiser., 1906-03-30
A VIGOROUS REPLY
TO UNJUST CRITICISM OF MEMBERS OF THE INSTITUTIONAL
 CONVENTION.
Judge Coleman shows That MT. Co., mer's Declarations are not War runted by Law or Fact. Cor
 poratious Did not Domi-
 nate the Convention
Entaw Democrat.

nate the Convention
 Entaw Democrat.
 Believing that a person who, by public favor, has been placed In po- sitions which afford opportunities for acquiring information, owes a duty to has the right of self protection when any representative act of his is assail- ed, is my excuse for this article. county nas that hat railroad influence and railroad lawyers dominated the arti- cle of our constitution affecting rail- and sessions. instead of biennial are the results of the same corporate in- fluence. Why should candidate for Congress digress from the discussion of Federal questions and lug in pro- vision of the Constitution of his State with which his opponent had nothing to do and which can not possibly be- pugn the motives of the members of the Convention? It would seem that the only apparent purpose was to ere
 ate so%e pTsjasdice sSs fGIdwins 5ny's impartial consideration.
 First--As to elections every four years, instead of every two years as provided in the old Constitution. The committee of the Constitutional Con- vention on Legislative Department had be considered as partially inclined to railroad corporations. Ex-Governor Oates was the Chairman of the com mittee and the names of the members may be seen by reference to page 70 of the Journal of the Convention, copy of this Journal Is in every prooate office.
 elections was introduced and test vote showed 96 in favor and 2S against. John A. Rogers of Sumter, was a lead ing member of the committee and in 5aho "a at that nine tQmfhS Of his people favored 1t. Ex-Governor Jones. then known to be the chief adviser or the Louisville and Nashville railroad, led the fight for biennial elections. The question came up again as to whether the Legislature should meet every two years or every four years. Several amendments were offered, and motions for recon nsideration. Elk Governor Jones still led the fight for biennial sessions. John Rogers, of Sumter County. made the last mo6ion wsich was ,6 faTo of quadrennial sessions MT Conner certifies in his Tuscaloosa address, that Joel Murphree and Lee Long were for the quadrennial elections. It was and is regarded as a distinct and pro- nounced triumph of the people. The vote of 96 to B shows how favorabiy the provision was received. Only two votes from the entire 9th Congression- al District were recorded against the The, intimation that the quadrennial provision was the result of corporate influence is without shadow of JUS tificatlon. I would not have any one to infer that ex-Governor Jones or any one else who favored the biennial elections did so under railroad influ- ence There were honest differences of opinion. All the votes and motions on this question can be seen by refer ence to the Journal of the Convention, pages 7s0-3, 7s4-S06. So much for that accusation.
 that the Constitutional provision af- fecting railroads was the product or corporate influence and that It's lorna tion was dominated by railroad lay yers and their environments Says Mir. Conner in his Tuscaloosa address: We. discovered after the light that they did not have the power to make tne rate; created by our own law. We then left the commission. and went to the Leg islature and asked for law giving the commission mandatory power We find out that under our Constitution the Legislature did not have the organ fc law or constitutional law to give such power. In other words, the com mission did not have the power be- cause it was not granted them by the statute of the state. I ne Legislature did not have the power 10 ma. make the by the Constitutional law of the State"
 T think 1t was an error back there in the Constitutional Convention that
 
 given the Legislature the enabling arr ticle I think what they lacked was aggressiveness-aggressivenes that a body of men should have in making an organic law for the State . As I understand it, when they got to that point they flickered. or in other words they would not pass the law absolutely defending the people, ....
 Such confusion of ideas is rarely met with. especially In the teachings of an educator of the people; Job has
 ha a a counsel by words without knowledge" Read the extract again. It says The Constitutional Convention should have sgb;inr gysn the Article kesslatuTar rhe the LexIs iature did not have the organic or con stitutional law to give the. the commission mandatory power We dlscovereo that they (the commissioners) did not have the power to make the rate. Tt was an advisory commission. 'The members of the Constitutional Conven- people ought to know that the Legis- iature required no authority or power from the Constitution to authorize it to govern corporations and to fix the ed silent then the Legislature could have exercised all the authority over the subject that the Constitutional Con- vention exercised. The great virtue Of the State Constitution is to provide limitations upon the power of the Leg isIature and not to grant Enabling Articles" To illustrate: The Consti- tuition fixes the maximum rate of tax ation; the Constitution prescribes the qualifications of voters. and so on through the list of Constitutional pro- visions. But for limitations in the Constitution. the Legislature would be untrammeled and its power equal to that of the Constitutional Convention; Now then, unless 1t can be shown that the Constitution has restrained and so limited the power of the Legislature, that it cannot properly legislate' upon freight rates. the charge that the Con, stitutional Convention was dominated by railroad influences; that 1t nick cred" in the discharge of its duty, Is wholly untrue-in fact without any foundation for its support. Had the Constitutional Convention. by consti- tutional provision afirmatively recog- nized the existence of the Railroad Commission, and invested 1t with cer- tain authority and privileges and re- auired of 1t the performance of certain duties, to that extent-it would have been made a constitutional office, and so far beyond legislative control By making no reference to 1t, the Legis-