The Pensacola journal. (Pensacola, Fla.) 1898-1985, 1920-01-24
ArrACKING Tile coM,nssroN.

Under the caption Attacking the Commission" the
Palatka News. in commenting the attempt 20
have the Florida centennial exposition commission
declared Illegal and have it abolished says that
it docs not believe the citizens OF Pensacola
whole approve Of the action Of disgruntled few"
In reply the Tampa Tribune says:
Nor do We AS a matter of fact it is only dis
gruntled few in Jacksonville and dsgruntled few in
Pensacola. who are sore and mad because they We're
instrumental in having drawn commission so
strong that they cannot break in to doing the bid
ding Of that disgruntled few, which thought it
going to have the running of the whole show
THE thing fell about their when they failed
to get commission with blanks left for members
names. The putting in of such men the personnel
Of that commission spelled disaster to their plans
and they have been turning heaven and EARTH and
shouting madly in the direction of the other place.
in effort to get control again.
There is no doubt but that the commission is
legal The advocates of it, that 'disgruntled few,
to that when they had their attorney draw
the bill. They did, however, expect to hand a
bunch Of to the governor and have him ap-
point them without question, but wise
what was intended, and made the commissioners 4
part of the bill.
"The jaws of their own steel trap shut to with a
snap and caught the disgruntled few and my what
yell they putting upr"
Pensacola had hand in drawing the bill ere
ating the centennial commission. In fact Pensacola
did not know that such bin had been introduced
until after it had become law. Pensacola had been
designated by the legislatures of 1915 and 1917
centennial city and the commission bill the sin
lister effort of few to take the centennial from Pen
sacola. The very constitution of the commission is
conclusive that Pensacola had no hand il it. Even
then Pensacola would have accepted the decision of
the commission, if the commission had regarded the
law of its being; but when the commission acted in
utter disregard Of the law in fact. in flat defiance
OF the law it was time to protest.
On the first day of September, at the Hotel Sem
mole, Mr. Logan, who then represented the city of
Jacksonville before the commission Nr. Cooper then
being the commissioner from Jacksonvile) proposed
the four fair proposition John s. Beard, who repre-
scented Pensacola in part at contended that the
commission had such authority under the law;
that the law is mandatory and specific, directs
the commission to name one city in Florida for
international centennial exposition Judge w. B.
Shepard. of the United States District Court, who
also represented Pensacola and who spoke after Mr.
Beard. fully concurred with Mr. Boards construction
OF the law.
On August 2sth at the luncheon at the Hotel Sem
mole, Mr.. Mckay. of Tampa. again brought up
the four fair proposition. Mr. Beard who followed
Mckay, again denied that the commission had such
power under the law. and specifically and frankly
said that should the commission so far transcend its
authority under the statute. that Pensacola would
not be bound Mr.. h p. Heese ana Former senator
n. p. Bryan, who followed Mr. Beard agreed with
him in his construction of the law The commission
then asked the opinion of the attorney general Of
the state, whose opinion co-incided with that of Mr.
Beard Hon. ". A. McWilliams and John B. Jones.
the only lawyers on the commission. took the same
view; thus have the opinion of Mr. Beard con-
CURED in by w. B. Shepard. Judge of the Northern
District of Florida former United States Senator n
p. Bryan; the attorney general of the state; r. p
Reese. attorney for Escambia county commissioners;
City Attorney John B. Jones; W. A. McNilliams
member OF the judiciary committee the state senate
and attorney for the East Coast railroad.
In spite OF this, when the commission met in
December 18th. it persisted in its