Arizona republican., 1910-11-29


 pened in yesterdays session of the constitutional convention and though less than was expected was accom- pIished, the day was not without in- tcrest. The final coat of polish was put on the initiative and referendum proposition by the committee on style and revision and it was then laid aside to dry. The report of the com mittee contained only such amend ments, as in the opinion of the com mittee added to the elegance of the document though in one or two cases. the convention expressed doubt about that
 Several blanks for percentages had been left to yesterday to be filled and sy the convention it was provided that an initiative petition under the state should be signed by ten per cent of the voters and a referendum petition by eight per cent. The per cent to be required for initiating a constitutional amendment had not been determined but a few days ago in another proposition that was fixed at fifteen.
 The percentages for towns and counties were also to be agreed upon yesterday and that was done quickly For initiative petitions there must be fifteen per cent and for referendum petitions, ten per cent.
 The bill was finished late in the afternoon and the roll cal on it was preceded by several interesting speeches, the first by Judge Wells. being a forcible and well prepared appeal tO the majority to consider that the great question was state bod
 The Last Words.
 He could not, he said, discuss the merits of the proposition before the convention. That had been done in the campaign and the members of the majority had been informed of the wishes of their constituents but it must appear now, that if those wishes were carried out, as they un- doubtedly would be. there would be no statehood He believed that had come to be understood.
 Judge Wells said that sometime before he had prepared speech to be delivered on the occasion of the final passage of the bill but that it had been abstracted from his desk | by some person in search of light | and who had left in exchange only i a few scattered notes.
 Judge Wells reiterated that there | was no question for argument now ] inasmuch as the majority was pres | ent only in the shape of a machine | which had been set running by the | voters Still the question might be | asked. Do we want statehood? The | speaker believed that the people of the territory wanted it: wanted it | more than they wanted the initiative and referendum which they could not have without statehood.
 Judge Wells was present at the first territorial legislature held at this time of the year in 1864. Yes terday was an anniversary of that legislature at which a concurrent res olutiOn was adopted asking for ad mission to the union. Every subse- quent legislature had adopted such resolution. Now. for the first time. the opportunity to secure statehood was at hand.
 Members of the convention, said Judge Wells, had in many cases real ized the importance of keeping close to the enabling act; the importance of taking no action that might be to be In contravention of that act But" he asked. do we not propose in the initiative and ref erendum to depart from the act?'
 His Own Conversion.
 He said: Tn the beginning. this appealed to me so much that 1 advocated it in a measure but when began facing the possible re- sponsibility of a delegate in this con vention began to study it until | reach sd the conclusion that system of direct legislation would impinge upon our form of government and that if fol- ( lowed to its natural conclusion it would disintegrate the form of our government How many in this convention understand fully what it means by a republican form lf government? I did not until I { took up the study of this question 1 in a complete reversal of my views" Judge Wells then entered upon an {; able review of the growth of the 1 present form of government begin [ ang with the convention of the con | I tolerated states until "a more perfect