The Montgomery advertiser., 1907-03-01

(Conftnued From l'age One
 Kirby, Lee of Etowah. Long of Butler. Long of Morgan, Maner, Middleton. Mitchell, Moore, Peete. Pitts of Perry, Powell of Bullock, Power. Price, Rain CT, Rattray, Rice, Rowe, Rushton, San ford, Smith of Elmore, Smith of Frank lin. Smith of Lee, steagall, Turner. Weaver. White of PerryL4s,
 Nays--Arno1d, Arlington, Baltzell, Benners. Doyle of Clarke. Elrod Fuller, Gunter, Hoffman, Jenkins. Lacy of walker, Lancaster, Lawson, Lindsey, Lyons. Malone, McDuffe. MeMillan, Nor- vile. Oliver. Parker. Pearson, Pitts of Dallas, Powell of Covington. Pratt, RagsdaIe, Sanders, Scale, Sherrod. TunstaIl. vann, White of Lamar, Wil- Hams, Woclf--34.
 Wants Fifteen Days Notice.
 Mir. Tunstall also presented an amendment providing for fifteen days notice of hearings on proposed raises ? by the commission, instead of five, as provided by the bill Mir. Cranford of Walker, as a member of the commit tee and a friend of the bill. argued the adoption Of the amendment, but Mir. John of Jefferson and Mir. Steagall of Dale, opposed 1t, and 1t was promptly tabled. without division.
 Mir. Sample of Morgan renewed his amendment, first proposed Tuesday afternoon to prevent the State com mission from making a second raise on any property, after the assessment had been raised once by the county board. After 1t had been opposed by Mir. Hugh ston of Lauderdale and Mir. Rice of Tus- caloosa, the amendment was tabled.
 MT. Fuller of Bibb offered an amend ment. providing that when the taxes for certain year are paid the matter of the aesessment for that year should be considered settled. Mir. John op- posed the proposed amendment, de- cisring 1t would result in perpetuating fraud, if 1t were not discovered prompt ly, and on his motion the amendment was tabled.
 When the Dill had been completed, section by section. after over two hours consideration, the substitute as amended, was adopted by vote of es to $. and the bill ordered to a third reading. Those voting no on the adop- tion of the substitute were Messrs Arnold. Fuller Lee of Houston. Pearson, Powell of Covington and TunstaIl
 Calhoun Argues Against Passage.
 MT. Arnold of Calhoun argued against the final passage of the meas ure, although, he said. he had voted for 1t upon its first passage. He had considered 1t more fully, and did not think such a measure was wanted He urged that it was sought to raise the amount of taxes that the people would have to pay, by making provi- sion for raising their assessment, in- asmuch as the Constitution declared that higher rate Of taxation could be established than was now in force.
 He believed the bill placed too great a power in the hands of the three men composing the commission. They would naturally wish to make a good record for themselves and 1t would be their tendency to try to raise assessments just as much as possible, that it might be shown they had more than made their salary for the State. While the law might be faithfully and properly administered by the present Governor, he feared some future Gov ernor mught be selected who would use the great power placed in his hands by the bill for purposes detri- mental to the people of the State.
 MT. John, in reply, said he was not surprised to hear opposition to the bill from a source from which had co 1e nothing save negative votes on the Nill and It's amendments. and af- firmative votes on every opportunity to stab the administration measures He urged the members not to be swept from their moorings by objections such as had been offered, but to vote for the bill, which was a fair and