New-York tribune., 1921-02-24
Gov. Miller's Plan Upheld
in Assembly by 90
Votes; 40 Against Bit
terIy Fought Measure
indications That
Senate Will Concur
Law Will Bring About a
Reorganization of Pub.
lie Service Commissions
From a STAT Correspondent

ALBANY, Feb. 23.-- In q test vote
the frst--in the Assembly to-day, on
Governor Miller's traction program and
general reorganization of the Public
Service Commissions, ninety-two votes
were mustered for the bill and forty
against This showing, with sixteen
not voting, gave the Governor pro-
gram majority of seventeen. Of the
ahsentees at least five more would have
voted to support the Governor on the
test vote had they been present.
This assures the passage of Gov
ernor Miller's program, as there are
at least thirty-three votes in the SEN
ate, twenty eight already pledged, or
two more than the required majority,
and five more are expected to be lined
up when the final vote is taken in the
upper house.
While the debate was at its height
in the Assembly, Governor Miller, in
his daily audience to the newspaper
correspondents, was asked if there
would be star orator at the hearing
on the bill next Tuesday to answer
the arguments of United States Sena-
tor Hiram Johnson, Of California, who
has been retained by the New York
City authorities to fight the measure.
NO." replied the Governor. "The
bill does rot require any star orator
to explain or defend it. The bill speaks
for itself"
Suburban Lines Affected
In view of the confusion in the minds
of some as to the powers of the pro-
posed New York City transit commits
sion to include the suburban lines
running into New York City from outer
Long Island and Westchester County,
the Governor was asked to comment on
this phase of the question. He assured
his interrogators that the commission
would take into the proposed unified
the suburban lines feeding New York
City, and could build connecting links
between those that did not enter the
city with the urban lines if it SO de-
sired.
The test vote in the Assembly came
as a surprise. 1t was brought about by
a motion of Assemblyman Peter A.
Hamill, Democrat, of Manhattan. to
take the bin out of the Judiciary Com
mittee, composed largely of upstate
members, and refer it to the Railroad
Committee. which is composed over
whelmingly of New York City men.
Sixteen Of the New York City Repub-
licans voted with the Democrats and
Socialists for the Hamill motion. Four
teen Republicans from the greater city
voted against the Hamill resolution.
The two remaining members of the New
York City Republican delegation were
absent when the vote was taken.
They were Assemblymen Joseph Stein
berg and George N, Jesse.
The New York City Republicans who
voted for the motion were Henry
Baum, Queens; James T. Carroll, James
Brooklyn; Ernest &. Frericks, Staten
Island; John o. Gempler, Francis X.
Giaccone, Brooklyn; Ralph Hapern,
Queens; John G. Hawkins and Nathan
Iieberman, Manhattan; James J. Mullen,
Brooklyn; Frederick H. Nichols, Morris
d. Reiss, Robert B. Wallace, Man
haitian.
The New York City Republicans who
voted against the motion were Bernard
Aronson, Manhattan; James BLY,, Wal
ter f. Clayton, Brooklyn; Mario G..
Di Pirro, Manhattan; Leo V. Doherty,
Louis J. Druss, James G. Moore, Leon
G. Moses, Brooklyn; Edward J. Neary,
Nicholas NJ. Petite, Queens; Edward r.
Theodore Stitt, Brooklyn; Sol Ullman
Manhattan; John A. Warren, Frederick
A. Wells, Brooklyn.
Democrats Voted Solidly
The Democrats present voted solid
H., ~
the three Socialist members. The Re-
to man who were in their seats, voted
against the resolution.
The action of Assemblyman Hamill
came as a surprise. He first offered a
resolution transferring the Governors
bill from the Judiciary Committee to
the Railroad Committee. To this Ma
iority Leader Simon L. Adler objected,
saying that only privileged resolu-
tion was in order.
The minority leader, Charles D. Dom
ohue, said that the bill was not prop
erly referred, as the Judiciary Com
mittee was not railroad committee
and that the bill, dealing almost exclu-
sively with railroads, properly belonged
further reason he declared the bill
largely affected New York City and
that seven members of the Railroad
Committee were New York City men,
while only four New York City men
were on the Judiciary Committee, and
that if the reference were changed New
York City would be dealt with more
fairly.
Majority Leader Adler raised point
Of order, contending that as the bill
was not before the House, it could
Il 8
his resolution and offered motion to
discharge the Judiciary Committee from
further consideration of the bill and
refer it to the Committee on Railroads.
There is little likelihood of any fur
ther action on the bill until after next
Tuesday, when there will be a hearing
on it in the Assembly chamber.