The Montgomery advertiser., 1906-02-15
MIR. CONFER AS CONSTITUTION
 MAKER

MAKER.
 The people of Alabama were pleased with the New Constitution when adopt ed, and 1t has grown in favor as they have become more familiar with Its provisions.
 It was framed by one of the ablest bodies of men which ever assembled In this State. They were men impressed with the sense of the great responsibility which rested upon them. who seemed to feel that they were iegisiatins, not for this generation only. but for genera lions yet to come Not only did they deal successfully with the question of the suffrage. but with other great and important questions as well. In the matter of the regulation of freight ratesS the Convention adopted the pro visions of the Georgia Constitution. MT. Conner. in his Tuscaloosa speech, criticises the Convention for not en- bodying in the Constitutions the pro- visions of the Georgia statute From all partisans like Mfr Conner. we have become accustomed 10 hear that the, 0ldtG Ol1 1pDf Hta ts LuS SCNt oE oAt VI dom. and that the people of Georgia alone have mastered and solved suc- cessfuliy the problems of rate reguia- tion. If the provisions of the Georgia statute are better than the provisions of the Georgia Constitution. why, we might inquire. did not the people of Georgia proceed along the lines indi- cated by MT. Conner?
 MT. Conner exhibits his utter inno- cence, not to say ignorance, of the du- ties of Constitution maker by sng- gesting that the Constitution ought to be collection of statutes. instead of provisions to regulate and control the powers of the Legislature as is gen. eraily understood to be the ofice of the Consultation. In the absence of a Constitution. the Legislature, like the British Parliament. is invested with all power. but our forefathers thought it wise. and the wisdom of their view has been confirmed by all experience, that certain limitations should be put upon the power of the Legislature. The of ice of the Constitution. therefore. is not ito legislate. but to define the linn- it's within which the iaw-making tribunal may legisiate. It is folly, therefore, to assume that the constitu- ton of Alabama should be mere coll lection of statutes. That was not the purpose for which the Convention was assembled. and the able men who com- posed it would have shown themselves unfit for the task with which they were entrusted had they proceeded along the lines suggested by Mir. Conner.
 The great convention which was as- sembled in Georgia under the leader ship of Robert Toombs. and which had for one of its objects the regulation of freight rates in that State. did not un- dertake to legisIate on this question, but, in express terms, defined the power of the Legislature to do so. The Consti- tutional Convention fin Alabama did the same. The report of the Committee in that Convention was unanimous and every one at the time thought and be- Iieyed that happy solution had been reached of the question. upon which there was great diversity of opinion. The late Joel D. Murphree, the dele gate from Pike, had always been re- garded equally with MT. Conner as an ardent advocate of freight regulation. He was largely responsible for the ln- corporation of the Georgia provision in the Constitution of Alabama. If this provision was not satisfactory to MT. Conner, why, we may ask, did he and his friends stand by end allow the Convention. without protest. to adopt this provision? Without regard to the representation which he had on the committee which reported the pro- vision, he was represented on the floor by MT. Frank White and many other ardent advocates of freight reg uIation. It would have been easy enough, if he favored the adoption of the Georgia statute instead of the pro- vision of the Georgia Constitution on this question. to have had an amend ment moved on the floor of the Con- ventIon. This he did not do, for the reason, we assume. that such a propo- sition did not occur even to MT. Conner as advisable.