Arizona republican., 1910-10-30
Interesting Point Approach
 ed In the Convention AFTER MANY V|cIssITuDEs
Legislative Committees In itiative and Referendum Bill Reported. Hard Fight Expected Over Extension of Scheme to Counties

The constitutional convention yes-
 terday rapidly approached the chief
 business for which it assembled-the | adoption of an initiative and referen- l dunn provision for the constitution | That is to say, it approached the
 stage of adoption, but how long it will remain there is a subject of con-
 lecture.
 The legislative committees substi-
 ute was reported along with several
 minority reports, none of which per- | haps voiced the main objection to the
 substitute It was announced on Fri | day afternoon that the substitute had ! been agreed upon; that is, the mem
 bers of the committee in order to get 1 it off its hands had agreed to report it, and that the report would be of fered yesterday morning.
 But there had been a change of
 sentiment overnight, and when the
 report was called for in the morning
 session, Chairman Winsor stated that 1t was not ready. There was, he said, a singular phenomenon-a minority report signed by a majority of the members of the committee Another meeting, he said, would be necessary,
 but he thought the report would be ready before adjournment in the aft ernoon.
 During the noon hour, there was an- other change of sentiment, and the substitute was agreed to and re- ported, followed by several minority reports, all relating to the extension of direct legislation to counties. All of them but one were indefinite as to the character of legislation which might be initiated or referred in counties, or as to what extent boards of supervisors now can "legislate," or as to whether the counties could en- gage in legislation not authorized by statute, and further whether the present statutes authorized county legislation at all.
 Inquiry among the members brought out that ideas on this subject were nebulous. One was asked if, for in stance, there was no statute with reference to local option, whether the voters under the proposed power to be reserved to the people could ini- tiate such legislation for the county He replied that that particular sub ject had been avoided with great care during the deliberations of the com mittee. It was assumed, though, that the counties could legislate in regard to sanitary police and such matters.
 In the making up of the substitute, fragments were taken from the four initiative and referendum propositions, introduced by Judge Baker, Mir Cas- sidy, MT. Cunniff and MT Winsor Out of courtesy to Judge Baker, it was agreed to call the committee measure, substitute for proposition No. 4, Judge Bakers measure
 The language with reference to county and municipal legislation Is as follows: "The initiative and ref erendnrn powers reserved to the peo- pie by this section (that is. the whole substitute) are hereby further re- served to the qualified electors of ev- cry city, town and county as to all local, special and municipal legisla- ton in and for their respective towns, | cities and counties The manner of | exercising such powers shall be pre- scribed by general laws, except that | cities. towns and counties may pro- vide for the manner of exercising the | initiative and referendum powers as | to their local, special and municipal | Though no per cent for | petitions had been definitely agreed upon, it was understood that for leg islation for these subdivisions it | should be g.
 The other provisions of the substi- ute do not differ essentially from those of all other direct legislation | measures which have been enacted or | in the various states. But an embarrassing experience of Ore l gon has been provided against in the | clause: If two or more | measures or amendments | to the constitution shall be approved | by the people at the same election. | the measure or amendment receiving the greatest number of affirmative | votes shall prevail in all particulars | as to which there is conflict"
 Of course, laws passed or approved | by the people are not subject to veto. | The required percentages are left | blank
 Minority reports, or really amend ments. were submitted by Messrs Co., ker, Cunniff and Webb. All these re- ports concur, except as to clause 8 of the substitute. with reference to towns. cities and counties.
 MT. Coker's report objects to all