The San Francisco call., 1907-01-29
THOUGHT To FAVOR
CORPORAL
Bill Repeating Statute Civ
ing Power of Regulator
to State Is Defeated
FOUGHT BY JOHNSON

SACRAMENTO Jan. 2S.-An innocent
looking code amendment repeating one
of the two existing statutes giving the
State power to regulate and dissolve
corporations, came before the Assembly
today with every prospect of an easy
victory Grove Johnson ran his eagle
eye. over the printed page, saw what
seemed to him fine bug specimen and
made two speeches voicing his fear
that the corporations were ut work
with fine Italian hand After his
second effort, a vote was taken. and the
bill was defeated by a vote of II to 40
j. B. Wyatt of Salinas, who fathered
the measure, voted no, in order to OBJ
tain a reconsideration, and the battle
is to be fought over again tomorrow.
Wyatt's bill, which provided for the
repeal of section 5S4 Of the Civil Code
was introduced at the request of the
code commission. When Ii was called
up for final action, Wyatt explained
that sections 3S4 and 404 were Identical
and the only object sought was to do
away with the superfiuous statement
Everything looked serene Not a
cloud marred the future of the bill
until Grove johnson took the floor. The
Sacramento statesman pointed out that
3s4 had been on the statute books
long time. while 4o4 had been in being
only since the session OF 1919. He
warned the Assembly to go slow
MY experience" he said, has taught
me that corporations move in a slow,
peculiar manner. There was no ap-
parent reason for enacting 404 in 1905.
1 do not know why 1t is now asked
that 384, instead of 404, be repealed.
Therefore ! shall vote against the bill
If it is passed. 404 will remain, but in
my judgment it will apply only to cor
Wyatt took issue with Johnson He
held that the code was an entire act,
and that 404 was not new legislation,
but merely a continuation.
BY this time Johnson had the whole
Assembly aroused. Baxter of Wawona
and Cutten of Eureka asked pointed
questions. The former wanted TO know
why the repeal of 404 was not asked !:
the latter asked if the bill would not
by section 3S4.
Stetson of Oakland expressed opinion
that the bill was all right as it stood.
The danger lay in its defeat, for that
might result in a bill to repeal 404,
which legislation might by implication
be held to repeal 3S4 and leave the
State without a needed restriction on
corporations
Drew of Fresno explained that a bill
to repeal 3S4 passed the Assembly two
years ago. but got lost somehow in
the Senate.
Grove Johnson spoke again. He ar
gued that each section of the code was
construed by itself
Il am always afraid of changing the
lay referring to corporations he con-
tinued. II fear the Greeks who come
with gifts in their hands. My expe-
rience is that it is dangerous to change
corporation laws unless YOU can square
the chs.nGe with The interests o. the
people. I, believe that if this bill be-
comes a law IL will wipe out the au-
thority of this Legislature over all cor
porations formed between 1872 and
l905.'
The last note of alarm settled the
fate of Wyatt's bill. On roll call IL
got only IA votes, while Johnson
mustered As for the opposition.
Wyatt made It 49 and gave notice of
reconsideration.
The votes for the bill stand recorded
as follows: Coghlan, Drew. Held, Hew-
lit, Johnson of San Diego, Kelly. Lucas,
Otis, Pyle. Sackett. Snyder, Stetson.
Strowbridge and Speaker Beardslee-14.