Western Kansas world. [volume] (WaKeeney, Kan.) 1885-current, 1907-01-26
Land Forfeiture Bm Passes Senate Con-
mIttee of Whole.

first matter of Importance to occupy
the attention of the senate today. It
was = special order In general orders
and after the usual routine business
had been transacted a committee of
the whole was formed to consider it
with Senator e. f. Porter, of Mont
gomery. in the chair.
There were no important amend
ments offered to the first section of
the bill. But when the second section
was read Senator Smith introduced
an amendment in the form of, q new
second section. Senator. Smith de-
clared that sections two and three of
the bill invalidated the measure. His
amendments he said would correct 80
per cent of the forfeitures.
A brief on this bill was placed on
the desks of all the senators. 1t was
the measure, by Frank Doster and L.
F. Carver, and in it was this state
ment: I'm our opinion this bill con-
tains nothing that is not clearly with
in the legislative powers and provides
the best way in which adequate relief
to these settlers can be given by law. !"
Senator Smith made long legal ar
gument in support of his amendment.
He was answered by Senator Young,
the floor Senator Young doubted the
propriety of the amendment offered
by Senator Smith. He said the sec
tions as it stood in the bill had been
most carefully considered and that it
should NOT be changed by an amend
ment such as was offered by Senator
Smith, because this amendment had
not been considered as carefully as
the original section had.
Senator Young expressed the opin-
Jon that the section as it stood was
perfectly valid and he offered as an
amendment an addition to the section
which he said covered the Important
objection raised by Senator Smith.
Senator Young afterwards withdrew
the amendment he offered.
A long legal and technical argn-
ment followed the merits of the Sec
tion and the amendments. 1t was the
differences over the validity of the
second section of the bill was one of
opinion between two classes of law
yers. His own Judgment as a legal
proposition was against section 2 but
he did not consider himself infallible
on questions of law and he proposed
to vote for the bill as it was drawn
by the eminent lawyers who had been
engaged by those promoting the
measure.
Senator Fitzpatrick was opposed to
the measure but said that if the bill
was passed the amendment offered by
Senator Smith should take the place
of the second section of the bill. He
did not see why the legislature had a
right 'to butt in" on a proposition
over the validity of property rights.
This was question that the courts
alone should determine.
Senators Porter of Montgomery.
Simons, Noftzger, Smith and Young
INDUCED in a futher discussion of the
original second section and the
Smith amendment.
After the discussion of an hour and
half a vote was taken on the Smith
amendment and it was lost by an
overwhelming majority.
Senator Smith moved that the COM
mittee of the whole rise and ask leave
to sit again on the measure. This mo-
tion was lost and the consideration of
the bill was proceeded with. All the
sections of the bill were then read
No amendments were offered to these
sections and on a motion of Senator
Young, which prevailed, the commit
tee of the whole decided to report the
bill to the senate with the recommen-
dation that it be passed.
Senator Porter, of Crawford, who
was chairman of the committee of
the whole, reported the action of the
committee and the senate adopted
the report.
The bill will probably come up for
tiaal passage some time this afternoon,
and it will undoubtedly pass.
Senator Young handled the fight
for the bill in skillful manner and
although there was lots>of debate on
the proposition there was never any
doubt after the first skirmish that
the senators would act favorably on
the dill.