Los Angeles herald., 1910-04-10
The Railroad
Constitutional
Amendment

duties of the railroad commissioners
| the following:
"The commission (rallroad) and each
| of its members shall have such pow
! ers and perform such duties as are now
or may hereafter be provided by law"
Under this simple provision 1t was
agreed there would have been no ques-
| ton of the authority of the legisla-
! ture TO empower the railroad commits
sion to fix a system of absolute rates,
and any other regulations which the
| legislature might see fit to authorize.
! Had the amendment been adopted, the
people would have been able TO pass
on it at the general election this fall.
The next legislature would therefore
have been able to proceed with the
passage of an effective railroad regu-
lation law, without being entangled
with alleged constitutional questions.
But, unfortunately, there was in
volved in this amendment the issue of
providing for the appointment by the
governor of the railroad commission
, ers instead of their election by the
people. 1t was argued that because for
thirty years the people have been pre-
vented from electing an effective com
mission, that an effective commission
could be secured If the governor were
authorized to appoint 1t and were held
responsible for 1t.
on the other hand II was cited that
the governor appoints the state board
of harbor commissioners at San Fran
cisco, the building and loan commits
sioners, the labor commissioners and
long list of others. These appointed
commissioners have admittedly proved,
on the whole, no more effective than
those elected by the people.
Serious questions are involved IN
these proposed changes In the consti-
tuition for which much can be SAID on
each side.
Curiously enough, however, the op-
ponents of the amendment to man
were senators who had been much ex-
ercised over the alleged antiquities of
the constitution when the Stetson bill
was under consideration. Every sena-
tor who voted against the amendment
had voted against the Stetson bill and
for the Wright bill. Burnett who had
been led to believe when he had voted
for the Wright bill that the amend
ment would be submitted to the people,
voted for the amendment. Mccartney,
Walker and Wright, who had voted
against the Stetson bill and for the
Wright bill also went on record as for
the amendment. Rush and Roseburg
who had not voted on the Wright bill
-Stetson bill issue, voted for the
amendment. The remaining fourteen
senators who voted for the amend
ment had to a man been for the Stet-
son bill and against the Wright BILL
Every one of the sixteen senator's who
had voted against the amendment
had voted for the Wright bill and
against the Stetson bill.
The vote on the amendment was
as follows
For the amendment-Bell. Birdsall
Boynton, Burnett. Caminetti. Camp
bell, Cartwright. Curtin, Cutten, Holo-
han Mccartney Miller, Roseberry,
Rush. Sanford, Strobridge, Thompson,
Walker and Wright-19.
Against the mendment-Anthony,
Bills. Estudillo Finn. Hartman, Hurd,
Kennedy, Leavitt, Lewis, Price. Reilly,
Savage. Weed, Welch, Willis and
Wolfe-16.
Twenty-seven votes were required TO
submit the amendment to the people.
The measure was accordingly defeat
ed. But the Issue is still before the
state The questions involved are:
First-Must the state constitution be
amended before California can put an
railroad regulation law on her
statute books?
Second-If so, shall the alleged am
biguities of the constitution-whicf.
by the way to the commonsense mind
do not exist--be stricken from that in
strument?
Third-Shall the office of railroad
be made appointive, in
stead of elective as at present?
These are questions left over from
the session of 1909, for the legislature OF
1911 TO solve.
AS unrestricted common carriers
have unrestricted taxing power, and
as these problems deal with the fun
damental laws Of the state. there are
no more important questions before the
people OF California.