Northern Wisconsin advertiser. [volume] (Wabeno, Wis.) 1898-1925, 1907-06-13


in changing the constitution in the
past, the instrument had been amend
ed in only about 80 of the $50 Sec
tons He insisted a constitution is
meant to be permanent. In the main
the Wisconsin constitution stands to-
day as it was in the beginning. for
most of the changes refer TO the same
parts of the instrument. He said
there was no call in his district for a
convention-he had never received a
letter or request o. any suggestion
from his constituents in favor of a
constitutional convention. Changes
of the fundamental law will continue
to be made to meet the needs of the
people and keep pace with the change
of conditions. but such changes should
be made slowly and only when the
people demand changes. Many of
the proposed amendments are simply
the suggestions of individual mem
bers. He said that in this day of in
creased cost CT living if there was any
amendment that ought to be made
it is one to raise the compensation of
the governor, but that has never even
been considered
After some discussion the roll was
called, resulting in inconvenience
by the following vote:
For submission of the question of
holding constitutional convention
Senators Barker, Browne, Fridd,
Froemming, Hazelwood, Husting
Lockney, Marsh, Martin, Morris. Owen,
Sanborn, Wilcox-1S.
Administrations Bird Bishop,
Brazeau. Burns, Fairchild, Hagemeis-
ter. Hudnall Munson. Page. Pearson
Randolph. Smith, Whitehead. Wolff
Wright-15.
The joint resolution to appoint a
commission to investigate the sub
ject of simplifying the system of trans
fer of land titles was adopted. The
committee on roads and bridges re-
ported the Sheridan drive bill for in.
definite postponement. Farmers in
Racine and Kenosha counties OBJ
jected, declaring that it was a propo-
sition to tax them for the convenience
of Milwaukee and Chicago automobile
owners. The bill proposed good
road from the Illinois state line to
Milwaukee.
The assembly after debate of two
hoors adopted the committee substitute
for the bill to regulate public utilities.
The vote was "A to IL. The original
bill had been remodeled by the COM
mittee on transportation and a sub
stitrte prepared which represents ten
weeks work ON the part of the sub
committee consisting of Assembly
men C. F. Stout, T. M. Thomas and
u. C. Coolidge The action of the
assembly were merely to adopt the
substitute The bill was then sent
to the committee on claims. Assem-
blyman Bancroft offered an amend
ment providing that where there is a
telephone plant already in operation
no additional plant shall be Installed
without the permission of the rail
road commission. After sharp de-
bate in which Assemblymen Stout,
Ingram and Coolidge opposed the
amendment, Mr.. Bancroft withdrew
it with the understanding that his
amendment was to be incorporated
into bin which was now in course
OF preparation by the committee to
provide for physical connections. An
other amendment was offered by As
semblyman Hughes of Reesville. 1t
was in the form of a substitute and
was identical with the substitute pre-
pared by Senator Paul o. Husting
providing for municipal regulation of
public utilities instead of for state
regulation as is provided in the COM
mittee bill This proposal was lost,
l6 to II. Democrats and socialists
supported it, but of the democrats
present, Assemblymen Cernahan
Douglas and Fred Peterson against
the amendment When the vote on
the committee substitute was taken
most democrats voted for it. but the
Eve social democrats voted solidly
against it. The sixteen who voted
against it were Assemblymen All
bridge, Bauer. Berner Bichler, Brock
harsen. Detling. Rollman Thompson
and Weber. When the bill came up
Mr.. Stout explained its provisions He
said that the committee had left the
telephone companies out of the sec
ton prohibiting duplication of plants
and regulating competition because
he said that would be of no effect as
the telephone companies received
their authority TO construct their
plants from the state and not as a
franchise from the municipalities as
other public utilities did Assembly
man Burke Of Green Bay spoke for
the bill, advocating the adoption Of the
substitute without change. He said
that back in 1895, when he was in
the legislature before he had been
among the first to favor regulation Of
railroads by commission Chairman
Leroy closed the debate with a force
iul speech on the general purposes OF
the bill, comparing the committee bill
with the Hughes bill OF New York