Santa Fe new Mexican. [volume] (Santa Fe, N.M.) 1898-1951, 1910-11-07
ARIZONANS STRIKE
4 SNAG
Complications over Initiative
and Referendum Force
Adjournment
-PROHIBITIONISTS PREVAIL
Democrats Try Hard to Kill
Local Option and Speeches
Are Hot.


and referendum legislation progressed
backward Saturday. That is, when
the convention adjourned at noon, the
legislative committees substitute was
much farther from a finished piece OF
work than it had seemed to be the
night before. when apparently all that
was required was a motion in the com.
mittee of the whole recommending
its adoption.
When the committee of the whole
rose a little before noon Saturday
the much talked about paragraph 8
was ''all shot to pieces: the members
were in an apparently hopeless tan
gle and in i'll temper, having emerged
from a heated debate over the ques-
ton of prohibition which had been
unexpectedly precipitated.
The nti-prohibitionists seemed to
have a decided advantage, and it was
at the instance of the prohibitionists
that weary members yielded to a
proposition to postpone further CON
sideration until Monday.
The trouble was produced Though
it would no doubt have come soon
anyway, by an effort by Mr.. Webb
to further amend paragraph 8, re-
lating to the extension of the initia-
tive and referendum to the counties
and their subdivisions, giving to the
counties control of the smaller sub
divisions.
He desired to have inserted in the
paragraph "and other municipalities"
so, as he said, direct legislation would
be extended to school districts and
other districts not enumerated in the
paragraph. 1t was the opinion of
most members that that matter was
already covered, but Mr.. Webb
thought not, and brought in his amend
ment, for which in a short time he was
heartily regretful.
Segregation Amendment.
Mr.. COker quickly sought it as a
vehicle for an amendment which he
had carefully concealed in an inside
pocket 1t was (referring to the ex-
tension of direct legislation to coun-
ties, cities and towns), provided that
said city or town, less than a county,
shall not be controlled on such local
matters within it's respective limits by
any larger governmental division
within the county, or by the county"
Here, under the guise of home rule,
was segregation "for your whiskers."
Mr.. Webb was on his feet instantly,
protesting against the rider, which he
said nullified entirely his amendment,
thereby confessing that his purpose
was to establish supreme control over
the towns.
A test of strength came on motion
t. attach the Coker amendment, which
was carried by a vote of 27 to 23, the
Republican vote being divided. Mr..
Webb proposed at first to withdraw
his disfgured amendment, but it was
now beyond his control Then he
prayed for it's defeat.
Excited Language.
Pending the roll call on the amend
speeches. but several hot ones. Mr..
Ingraham declared that this was car
rying the principle of home rule to
an absurdity. The Republican mem
bers believed that it had reached that
point long before. Mr.. Cobb warned
the supposed liquor interests, IF you
kill local option by this amendment
you will establish statewide prohi
bition."
Mr. Feeney resented the imputation
that the Coker amendment was franz
ed in the interest of the liquor men
Any benefit that they might receive
from it would be incidental to the es-
tablishment of home rule, and turn
ing to the other side, he said: you
fellows that want to vote for prohibi-
ton, get out from under cover and
support separate submission"
The amalgamated amendment was
lost by tie vote, 26 to 26. Two
members voted against it under a
misaprpehension, and one member
who had supported the Coker amend
ment on the previous ballot now voted
against it, saying that he had sup
posed before that it related to incor-
porated cities and towns.
Mr.. Webb then renewed his amend
ment, and Mr.. Coker renewed his,
amended by the insertion of the word
incorporated" Mr.. Webb protested
again in vain, and it seemed fore
gone conclusion that two more roll
calls would put segregation in the
constitution.