515

CONSTITUTIONAL CONVENTION, 1901

________________

NINETEENTH DAY
________

                                                                                                                              MONTGOMERY, ALA.,
                                                                                                                              Thursday, June 13th, 1901.

MORNING SESSION

     The convention met pursuant to adjournment, was called to order by the President, and the proceedings were opened with prayer by the Rev. Mr. Gay, as follows:

     O Lord of Hosts, thou dost behold a State prostrate before Thy throne clothed in sackcloth, who stand around all that now remains of our illustrious and beloved chief. We thank thee that thou hast given to us such a noble specimen of manhood. We trusted it would be he who should bring about a fair and just settlement of many questions at this time. But he is fallen. O God, give grace to sustain us in this beclouded hour.

     We commend to thy merciful regard and tender compassion the afflicted family of the deceased. Thou seest how their hearts are stricken with sorrow and wrung with agony. O, help them as they are now passing. through the dark valley and shadow of


516

OFFICIAL PROCEEDINGS

death, to fear no evil, but to lean upon Thy rod and staff for support. O Thou who was sent by the Lord Jesus to be the comforter do thine office work now. And as they proceed slowly and sadly on their way with the remains of a husband and father to consign them to their last, long resting place, may they look beyond the grave to the morning of resurrection, when that which they now sow in weakness shall be raised in strength and what they now sow a mortal body shall be raised a spiritual body; and shall be fashioned like unto Christ's most glorious body.

     Bless the new Chief Magistrate. We can only pray that the mantle of his predecessor may fall upon him. Bless the President of this convention, give him wisdom and discretion and judgment. Be pleased to endow this body of men with Thine own wisdom, and may they devise just laws. O hear the cry and the prayer and the tears of a State's smitten heart and vouchsafe Thy comforting and all powerful guidance as we ask it all through Jesus Christ our Lord, Amen.

     The roll was called and showed the presence of 139 delegates.

     MR. HARRISON--I desire to offer a resolution which I now send to the desk and ask that it be read.

     The resolution was read as follows :

     Whereas the remains of Hon. W. J. Samford, late Governor of this State now lie in state in the capitol, and whereas,

     His funeral services will occur at his home in Opelika Tomorrow, Friday, 9:30 o'clock a.m., and the delegates of this convention desire to attend these services, Now, therefore be it

     Resolved, That this convention do now recess until 2:30 this afternoon, and that when it adjourns this afternoon, it adjourn to meet at 2:30 o'clock tomorrow (Friday) afternoon, in order to give the delegates the opportunity of attending said funeral services.

     MR. HARRISON--I desire simply to state that this resolution has been prepared after consultation with the family of the deceased and the Rules Committee of this body and it meets the approbation of both.

     I move the adoption of the resolution.

     MR. GRAHAM (Talladega)--I move the suspension of the rules for the purpose of adopting the resolution.

     On a vote the rules were suspended and on a further vote the resolution was adopted.


517

CONSTITUTIONAL CONVENTION, 1901

AFTERNOON SESSION

     The Convention was called to order at 2:30 p.m. by the President, and upon a call of the roll, eighty-one delegates responded.

     The report of the Committee on Journal was read, stating that the Journal had been examined and found to be correct. On motion the report was adopted.

LEAVES OF ABSENCE

     For today--Mr. Reynolds (Henry).

     Until Monday--Mr. Kyle, on account of sickness.

     Indefinite leave granted Mr. Williams of Elmore on account of sickness.

     MR. WHITE--Under the rules, do we not take up unfinished business, while we are working on the report of a Committee I make the inquiry.

     THE PRESIDENT -- The Chair would hold that the construction the Committee on Rules seems to think is proper, is when we reach the call of Committees, the rule is this: "If the call of the roll for the introduction of resolution is not completed on any day, it shall be resumed on the next day where left off on the preceding day. This provision shall apply to the reports of standing committees." The view of the Committee on Rules, in which the chair concurred, was when we reached the standing committees in the order of business, we will go to where we left off; otherwise, we would omit the order of business, ascertaining the quorum, or the report of the Committee on the Journal.

     MR. WHITE--I move that the rules be suspended and that we take up the report of the Committee on the Executive Department where we left off.

     MR. JONES (Montgomery)--I would ask my friend from Jefferson to let the Committee on Executive Department make a report relative to an ordinance before the Committee. As I understand it he suspends the call for reports altogether. I would like to have liberty to send in this report for the Committee.

     The leave was granted, and the report was read as follows:

     The Committee on Executive Department direct me to report as a substitute for Ordinance No. 349, "To establish a great seal for the State of Alabama", the following :

     Section 22. Commemorative of the heroism of Emma Sansom the great seal of the State, which shall be used officially by the Governor, shall consist of the figure of an officer on horseback,


518

OFFICIAL PROCEEDINGS

fully armed, and a young woman seated behind him, with her left hand pointing forward, and the legend, "I will show you the way." The said seal shall be called the great seal of the State of Alabama. The Committee recommended that Section 22 of the Ordinance "to create and define the Executive Department," as it now stands be stricken out, and that said substitute be adopted in lieu thereof.                                              Thos. G. Jones, Chairman.

     MR. JONES (Montgomery)--I move that that lie over until section 20 of the article is taken up, to which it refers.

     THE PRESIDENT--The report would lie over under the rules and be printed.

     MR. SMITH (Mobile)--I desire to make a report for the Rules Committee.

     The report was read as follows :

REPORT OF THE COMMITTEE ON RULES

     The Committee reports adversely to resolution No. 136, introduced by Mr. Proctor of Jackson, and recommends that it be not adopted by the Convention. Said resolution reads as follows :

     Resolved, That on and after the passage of this resolution all requests for leave of absence shall be reduced to writing, and sent to the Secretary's desk by 12 o'clock of each day and passed upon by the Convention at that hour, and that no other requests for absence shall be considered at any other time.

     The Committee amends resolution No. 141, introduced by Mr. Wilson of Clarke, by striking out the words "ten-thirty" and inserting in place thereof the word "eleven." The Committee reports favorably on the resolution as amended, and recommends that it, as amended, be adopted by the Convention. Said resolution as amended reads as follows:

     Resolved, That sub-division 6, of rule 22, be amended so as to read as follows: 6. Call of the roll in alphabetical order for the introduction of resolutions, memorials, petitions and ordinances, and their proper reference. But if the roll call is not completed by eleven o'clock of any day, the Convention shall at that hour proceed with the next regular order of business.

     The Committee herewith returns to the Convention the resolutions hereinabove referred to.

     THE PRESIDENT--The first question will be what disposition will the Convention make of Resolution 136, reported adversely from the Committee on Rules.

     MR. BOONE--I move that the resolution be adopted as reported by the Committee adversely.


519

CONSTITUTIONAL CONVENTION, 1901

     THE PRESIDENT -- The gentleman from Mobile moves that the resolution be adopted, the report of the Committee notwithstanding.

     MR. BOONE--No, I stated it awkwardly, but I mean to say that the report of the Committee be adopted. That the report of the Committee be concurred in.

     THE PRESIDENT--In the opinion of the Chair, the question will be on the adoption or the rejection of the resolution. The resolution is before the Convention for its consideration.

     MR. BROOKS--Inasmuch as there are several subjects embraced in the report of the Committee, and the Convention is not familiar with all the subject matters embraced in those resolutions, or in this report, I move that the consideration of the report of the Committee be laid over until the session on tomorrow after the reading of the journal.

     The Chair stated that motion to postpone consideration.

     MR. OATES--I do not see what we will gain by that. We may as well consider the report now. Tomorrow afternoon it will consume just as much time, and probably more by delaying until then. If there are any complication of subjects, they can be separated and acted upon separately. It seems to me that if the delegate from Mobile would withdraw his motion, we could dispose of the matter very soon, and if he desires a division, we can have that.

     MR. BROOKS--I submit one reason I had in making the motion was, if it goes over until tomorrow, it would appear in the stenographic report tomorrow morning, and every delegate would have an opportunity of reading the resolutions, and as it is now before the convention by a very cursory and rapid reading by the clerk, I think we will save time by considering it then, instead of now, because we will have the opportunity of reading them. As a matter of course, it will have to be divided. We can't take up several resolutions, bearing on different subjects, and act on them together.

     MR. OATES--Suppose we have it read again.

     MR. BROOKS--Before the motion is put, I ask for a reading of the report.

     The report was again read.

     THE PRESIDENT--The chair understands where several resolutions are sent up by the Committee on Rules, the question will be on each resolution in order, and not on them all together. So the chair stated to the convention that the question now will be as to what this convention will do with the resolution that has


520

OFFICIAL PROCEEDINGS

been reported by the committee--No 136. The Secretary will read the resolution.

     The resolution was again read.

     MR. OATES--Does the committee report, as I understand it, adversely?

     THE PRESIDENT--It has been reported adversely by the Committee on Rules.

     MR. SMITH (Mobile)--As I understand it, the motion now is that the report of the committee be concurred in, so far as that resolution is concerned, and that it be not adopted. I merely wanted to state, the question has been before the Rules Committee several times, and they have considered it might arise, and frequently does arise, that a member, after are convention has met, obtains information in regard to sickness or other matters connected with his family or business engagements that would make it necessary for him ask for leave of absence, after the hour mentioned, or in some instances before that hour, and the committee did not, therefore, deem it wise to restrict the right of members to obtain leaves of absence to one particular hour, and for that reason they adversed the resolution.

     MR. OATES--I would like to ask the delegate from Mobile if it is not a very easy matter, if too many leaves being granted, to object?

     MR. SMITH (Mobile)--Yes.

     THE PRESIDENT--In the opinion of the chair, the question is not on the adoption of the report of the committee. The question is on the adoption or rejection of the resolution adversely reported by the committee. The chair bears no motion--

     MR. ESPY--Mr. Chairman, I move that the resolution be rejected.

     MR. O'NEAL (Lauderdale)--I move that it be laid on the table.

     MR. deGRAFFENREID.--As I understand it--

     THE PRESIDENT--What is the motion of the gentleman from Henry?

     MR. ESPY--That the resolution be rejected, which is equivalent to a concurrence in the adverse report.

     MR. BEDDOW--I move that the resolution be laid on the table.

     Seconded.


521

CONSTITUTIONAL CONVENTION, 1901

     The motion to table was carried.

     THE PRESIDENT--The question now is on the next resolution. The Secretary will read the resolution.

     The resolution was read as set out in the report of the committee.

     MR. WHITE -- I move that the resolution be adopted as amended.

     MR. PETTUS--I rise to a question of inquiry.

     THE PRESIDENT--The gentleman will state the question of inquiry.

     MR. PETTUS--Do I understand that is a resolution amending the rules? Under the rules, will that not have to lay on the table for one day?

     THE PRESIDENT--The resolution was introduced and referred to the committee, and that would cover the rule requiring a day's notice, in the opinion of the chair.

     THE PRESIDENT--The gentleman moves that the amendment of--

     MR. LONG (Walker)--What is the amendment?

     THE PRESIDENT--The chair stated it. The resolution provides that the roll call for the introduction of ordinances be suspended when the hour of 10:30 is reached, and the committee reports changing it to 11 o'clock.

     The question being put upon the amendment, the same was adopted, and upon a further vote the resolution, as amended, was adopted.

     MR. WHITE--I move that the rules be now suspended and that we return to the work we were engaged in when we adjourned last, namely, the consideration of the report of the Committee on Executive Department.

     The motion to suspend the rules was carried, and upon a further vote, the motion that the convention proceed to the consideration of the report of the Committee on Executive Department was carried.

     THE PRESIDENT--The question before the convention is upon the adoption of the amendment offered by the gentleman from Conecuh.

     The amendment was read :

     To amend Section 3 by striking out the words where they occur "on the first Monday in August" and inserting in lieu thereof


522

OFFICIAL PROCEEDINGS

the following, "on Tuesday after the first Monday in November;" and to add to said Section 3, at the end, the following words, "The Legislature shall have the power to change the time of holding the election."

     MR. BURNETT--My object, Mr. President, in offering that amendment was to save to the people the trouble and expense of holding an extra election, but as I am informed by the distinguished chairman of the Committee on the Legislative Department, that his committee has reported favorably on that subject, to hold the State and Federal elections at the same time, and as I think it more properly belongs to that committee, with the leave of the convention I will withdraw the amendment.

     The leave was granted and the amendment withdrawn.

     THE PRESIDENT--The question will be on the adoption of Section 3, as amended.

     MR. SANFORD--Mr. President, I offer one other amendment to strike out. In Section 3, I notice that the term of the executive officers is fixed at four years.

     THE PRESIDENT--Does the gentleman desire to propose an amendment?

     MR. SANFORD--I move to amend Section 3--

    THE PRESIDENT--The chair will ask that the gentleman put the amendment in writing. It is impossible for the convention to proceed orderly with these matters unless delegates reduce the amendments proposed to writing.

     MR. ROGERS (Sumter)--While the gentleman is putting his amendment in writing, I ask leave to introduce an ordinance.

     Leave was granted.

     THE PRESIDENT--The chair will state to the delegates, that the convention will not he able to delay its business to enable gentlemen to draft amendments. This ordinance has been printed and laid over, and the public business cannot be suspended for that purpose.

     Ordinance No. 370, by Mr. Rogers of Sumter:

     Relates to the meeting of the Legislature.

     Be it ordained by the people of Alabama, in convention assembled, That the Legislature of Alabama, shall meet only once in every four years, provided that the Governor of the State may assemble the Legislature in extra session whenever the peace or the interests of the State is menaced from any cause.

     Referred to Committee on Legislative Department.


523

CONSTITUTIONAL CONVENTION, 1901

     MR. PARKER--I ask unanimous consent to introduce an ordinance.

     The leave was given.

     Ordinance No. 371, by Mr. Parker:

     Be it ordained by the people of Alabama, in convention assembled That Section 17 of Article VI of the present Constitution of this State be, and the same is hereby amended so as to read as follows:

     Vacancies in the offices of any of the Judges or Chancellors of this State shall be filled by appointment of the Governor, and such appointee shall hold his office until the next regular election for Judges or Chancellors, to be provided for by the Legislature and in no case more than one year, and the person so elected shall hold for the unexpired terms and until his successor is elected and qualified.

     Referred to Committee on Judiciary.

     THE PRESIDENT--The Secretary will read the amendment proposed by the gentleman from Montgomery.

     The amendment was read as follows :

     To amend section three "by striking out the word, four years and the insertion therein of the words two years."

     MR. SANFORD--I make that motion, because I do not know the necessity for changing it. The gentleman from Barbour a day or two since said that the idea of this convention was to make as few changes in the Constitution as it now exists as is practicable. Now the rule of all amendments is this: first to ascertain what is the evil to be amended, and second the means by which it shall be amended.

     Now I do not know any evil that has ever come from having the elections of the Executive every two years. Has there been any corruption in two years, that would not exist in four? Will there be any electioneering in two years that won't be doubled in four? If you shall elect a man for four years who should be feeble, almost imbecile, and yet be guilty of no crime for which he can be removed, what relief would the people of Alabama have? It is a rule of Thomas Jefferson, the greatest popular leader our country has ever had, that the power of election should be of frequent occurrence; that this power, entrusted to any man to discharge a particular duty, should be returned to the power which conferred it, in order that the people might examine as to the faithfulness with which he has discharged his trust, and continue him, or discharge him.


524

OFFICIAL PROCEEDINGS

     Now I do not know anywhere where any evil has come from it. If a man shall electioneer--and by the way let me say this, that I do not know of but two instances in the history of Alabama where the Governor was elected to the United States Senate during his term. One was that of Clement C. Clay, Sr., and the other Gabriel Moore--and none other out of the eighteen or nineteen Governors we have had, has such an occurrence taken place. I can see no reason why, when most of the States of the Union have only two years, we should have four. In Virginia Patrick Henry was elected three terms. Nobody objected to his administration. In Tennessee John Sevier held the Governorship of that great commonwealth for twelve years, and no evil came to the State of Tennessee. In New York, DeWit Clinton held it for twenty-one years, and yet it was a glorious administration for that commonwealth. George Clinton, who ran against Madison for the Presidency, held it for eight years, and no harm befell New York. Joe Brown, one of the most popular men of the State of Georgia--but I do not hold him up to you gentleman as an exemplar of all political virtues--held it for three years, and would have held it for four but for the interference of John Sherman's march through the State.

     So I say, no harm will come from having two terms. This article says that he cannot be a candidate for any office afterwards. You cannot prohibit his being a candidate for a Federal office. You cannot prohibit his being accepted by the Congress of the United States as a Representative, or as a Senator, for those bodies are the judges of the election and qualification of their own members, and if you put a prohibition in your Constitution, and the Legislature should elect a Senator what is your recourse? None. If you put it in your Constitution and the people of a district should elect him a representative, what can you do about it? Nothing. It is never wise to do an unnecessary act, else it may be necessary to do those thins which you cannot accomplish. Therefore I say that I hope it will remain as it is. It does not disturb the people to have officers over the State elected every two years.

     Again, Mr. President, the oftener the people recur to the principles of the Government under which they live, more certainly will those principles be honored and preserved. That is the maxim of the wisest political philosophy; that governments are preserved by recurring often to the principles of their foundation, and this is a matter of profound importance; there is no business of more importance than selecting their rulers and legislators, and the people will not feel it a burden to vote every two years, as they have done since 1819. So, it seems to me, it is unnecessary to make this change, and I hope therefore that this amendment will be adopted.


525

CONSTITUTIONAL CONVENTION, 1901

     The Chair stated the question to be upon the adoption of the amendment proposed by Mr. Sanford of Montgomery.

     MR. REESE--I move to table it.

     The motion to table was seconded and carried.

     The Chair stated the question recurred upon the adoption of section three as amended.

     A reading was called for, and the section was read.

     MR. O'REAR--I have an amendment.

     The amendment was read as follows: Amend section three by striking out the figures 1902, and inserting in lieu thereof the figures 1904.

     MR. JONES (Montgomery)--I move to lay that on the table.

     Seconded and carried.

     MR. DAVIS (DeKalb)--I have an amendment.

     THE PRESIDENT--The amendment proposed by the gentleman relates to section five, which has not been reached.

     MR. DAVIS (DeKalb)--I thought we were on section five.

     THE PRESIDENT--We are on section three. The secretary will read section three as amended.

     The section was read as follows : The Governor, Lieutenant Governor, Secretary of State, Treasurer, Auditor, Attorney General, Superintendent of Education and Commissioner of Agicultue and Industries shall be elected at the same time and place appointed for the election of members of the General Assembly in 1902, and every four years thereafter, by the qualified electors of the State.

     MR. JONES (Bibb)--Mr. President I wish to add to that section, "and the Attorney General shall be a man learned in the law."

     THE PRESIDENT--Will the gentleman send up the amendment?

     MR. JONES (Bibb)--I wish to ask the Secretary to add that to the section.

     THE PRESIDENT -- The Chair cannot entertain amendments that are not in writing.

     MR. COLEMAN (Greene)--I had an amendment written out, but it has been removed from my desk. I would like to state it.


526

OFFICIAL PROCEEDINGS

     THE PRESIDENT--The chair cannot entertain an amendment unless the gentleman reduces it to writing.

     (Cries of "leave.")

     MR. O'NEAL (Lauderdale)--I ask unanimous consent.

     MR. COLEMAN (Greene)--They have been removed from my desk. I had them all written out.

     THE PRESIDENT -- Cannot the gentleman reduce the amendment to writing?

     MR. COLEMAN (Greene)--It will take a few minutes, and it is a matter of calculation.

     THE PRESIDENT--If the chair entertains amendments proposed by one delegate, it will be impossible to refuse the same privilege to all delegates, and the chair declines to entertain the amendment unless it is reduced to writing.

     MR. ROGERS (Sumter)--I ask unanimous consent to hear the statement of the gentleman, not as an amendment, but as a statement.

     MR. PROCTOR--I move that Section 3 be temporarily passed, and that we take up Section 4 until the gentleman has time to reduce the amendment to writing.

     Dissent was audibly expressed to the proposition.

     MR. WATTS--I ask unanimous consent to introduce a resolution, not to be acted upon, but to be referred.

     Leave was given.

     Resolution No. 144, by Mr. Watts :

     Be it resolved, That the Committee on Executive Department report to this convention whether any separate ordinance or provision of the Constitution to be framed is necessary to provide for succession in the office of Governor until the Governor elected in 1902 goes into office.

     Referred to Committee on Executive Department.

     MR. COLEMAN (Greene)--I would like to make a statement before any motion is made to lay this amendment on the table.

     THE PRESIDENT--The Chair will hear the gentleman's statement before any motion is entertained.

     Amendment by Mr. Coleman of Greene -- "Strike out the words 1902 and insert the words 1904."


527

CONSTITUTIONAL CONVENTION, 1901

     MR. COLEMAN (Greene)--As I understand the purpose of the Convention is to have elections every four years, and I presume that the understanding is that will apply to all elections. There are some officers in the State who hold for four years, and some who hold for six years. The terms of those who hold for six years will not expire until 1904. So if you have these elections for terms beginning in December, 1902, and every four years thereafter, as to those officers who hold for six years, with terms terminating in 1904, what is to become of them? But, by having the election postponed until 1904, you equalize all these elections, and have a short term of two years to start with, reaching up to 1904, and after that time all elections, State and County, can be held every four years, and one election serves the whole purpose intended. Thereby we will attain the object intended, if having elections every four years, and I see no other way to avoid the difficulty that will arise by declaring these officers shall be elected in 1902 and every four years thereafter. That is the purpose of the amendment; that we may have elections every four years, and that they will apply to County as well as to State officers. What will be clone with your County Treasurers who hold for six years, and with Clerks who hold for six years? Their terms of office terminate in 1904, and not in 1902.

     MR. JONES (Montgomery)--I would like to ask my friend from Greene if his amendment were adopted, if the effect of it would not be to continue the officers now in office, whose terms will expire December, 1902, for two years? I did not catch the reading of it, and inquire for information.

     MR. COLEMAN (Greene)--I wish to say that under the haste I was acting I do not know, but I wanted to get the idea before the convention. I had that drawn up at length on my desk but it is gone. We must provide in some way for a short term, in order to equalize all the offices in the State. There is no escape from that. So these officers, whose terms expire in 1902, should be elected for a short term, until 1904, and then the whole machinery of the Constitution moves off smooth and there will be no friction after that time.

     MR. DENT--It seems to me that the question which is raised by the gentleman from Greene can be settled in the schedule of the Constitution, and I therefore move to lay his amendment on the table.

     MR. FOSTER--I move as a substitute that section three be laid upon the table, to be taken up after the report of the Committee on Legislation.

     THE PRESIDENT--The gentleman cannot substitute a motion to lay on the table. The question will be on the motion of the gentleman from Barbour to table the amendment offered by the gentleman from Greene.


528

OFFICIAL PROCEEDINGS

     MR. OATES--I know it is not debatable, but I have risen for the purpose of suggesting to the delegate from Barbour and others, that this is a proper matter for the Committee on Harmonies as the delegate from Montgomery called it, or the sand-papering committee, to reconcile just such thins, and if it is adopted as temporary does not prevent it from being reconciled, and there is no use consuming time on it.

     The vote being taken, a division was called for and the motion to table the amendment was carried.

     MR. JONES (Bibb)--I wish to renew my amendment.

     The amendment was read as follows :

     Amend section three by adding immediately after the words Attorney General, the words "who shall be learned in the law."

     THE PRESIDENT--The question is on the adoption of the amendment proposed by the gentleman from Bibb.

     MR. JONES (Montgomery)--From the abstract proposition none of us dissent, but it does seem to me that it looks like a reflection on the people of Alabama to put in the Constitution an implication that they will elect an Attorney General who does not know any law:

     Upon a vote being taken, the amendment was lost.

     MR. HOWZE--I now move the adoption of section three as amended, and on that section I call the previous question.

     The call for the previous question was sustained, and upon a vote section three, as amended, was adopted.

     Section four was read by the Secretary as follows:

     Sec. 4. The returns of every election for Governor, Lieutenant Governor, Secretary of State, State Auditor, State Treasurer, Attorney General, Superintendent of Education and Commissioner of Agriculture and Industries, shall be sealed up and transmitted by the returning officers to the seat of Government, and directed to the Speaker of the House of Representatives, who shall, during the first week of the session to which said returns shall be made, open and publish them in the presence of both Houses of the General Assembly in joint convention; but the Speaker's duty shall be purely ministerial, in this respect and any objection to any return on account of informality, defect or other cause, shall be decided by the Speaker, subject to the control of the majority of the joint convention. The person having the highest number of votes for either of said offices shall be declared duly elected; but if two or more persons shall have an equal and the highest number of votes for the same office, the General Assembly, by joint vote, without delay, shall choose one of said persons for said


529

CONSTITUTIONAL CONVENTION, 1901

office. Contested elections for Governor, Lieutenant Governor, Secretary of State, State Auditor, State Treasurer, Attorney General, Superintendent of Education, and Commissioner of Agriculture and Industries shall be determined by both Houses of the General Assembly, in such manner as may be prescribed by law.

     MR. JONES--Mr. President, I would like to state that in the seventh line in the section the comma is after ministerial, when it should be after the word respect, but I suppose the Committee on Harmonics, as that is a musical term, will take the discord out, and, therefore, I do not move formally to amend it.

     MR. GRAHAM (Talladega)--I have an amendment.

     The amendment was read: Amend line one of Section 4, by adding the letter "s" to the word return, so that it will read returns.

     THE PRESIDENT--The Secretary states that it is a mistake in the printed copy. Do you withdraw the amendment?

     MR. GRAHAM (Talladega) --There is another matter in the amendment.

     The amendment was read: Amend line two, Section 4, by striking out the word State, before the word Auditor and Treasurer.

     MR. BROOKS--In order to have repetition of amendments of that kind, because we have had several, I move to amend the Article by striking out the word "State" wherever it appears in the Article before the words "Auditor" and "Treasurer."

     THE PRESIDENT--Under the rule it cannot be done. The ordinance has to be considered section by section, and no section of the ordinance except section four is now open for amendment.

     MR. JONES (Montgomery)--On behalf of the Committee, we accept the amendment, striking out the word "State" before "Auditor" and "Treasurer."

     MR. WATTS--That ought to be amended also where it occurs in the third line from the end of the section.

     MR. JONES (Montgomery)--The Committee accepts that also.

     MR. GRAHAM (Talladega)--It also occurs in the 13th and 14th lines.

     MR. FITTS--That has been accepted by the Committee.

     The motion being to amend Section 4 by striking out the word State wherever it occurs before the words "Auditor" and "Treasurer" in Section 4, the motion was carried.


530

OFFICIAL PROCEEDINGS

     Amendment by Mr. Graham (Talladega): Amend line ten, Section 4, by substituting the word "any" for the word "either."

     MR. JONES (Montgomery)--We accept that, Mr. President; it is a distinction without a difference.

     MR. ROBINSON--I have an amendment.

     The amendment was read as follows :

     Amend Section 4, by inserting after the word Convention in the ninth line, the following: "But said objection shall be determined without debate or delay, and the power of said Convention shall be limited by that of the Speaker."

     The Committee asks for the reading of the amendment, and it was again read.

     MR. ROBINSON--Mr. President, that amendment is to define and limit the powers of the joint convention. That is that they shall decide the objection that is made before the speaker, without debate and without delay, and the power and duties of the Convention are limited by the power and duties of the Speaker. If that Section stands as it is, the Convention might decide that under it they had the power to go behind the returns, and had the power to declare the returns fraudulent, and they might have the power to debate it and to delay, and this simply proposes to define and limit the power of the joint Convention to that of the Speaker. That is, to examine the returns upon their face, and pass upon them, then and there, by a vote.

     The Chair stated the question to be upon the adoption of the amendment proposed by the gentleman from Chambers. A division was called for, and by a vote of 55 ayes and 51 noes the amendment was adopted.

     Mr. Fitts changed his vote from the negative to the affirmative for the purpose of moving a reconsideration.

     MR. FITTS--I move to reconsider the vote by which that amendment was adopted, and I ask for another reading of the amendment.

     The amendment was read again.

     MR. LONG (Walker)--I make the point of order, that the gentleman cannot ask for a reconsideration of the vote, unless he voted for it.

     THE PRESIDENT--The gentleman changed his vote from the negative to the affirmative for the purpose of moving a reconsideration.

     MR. REESE--I make the point of order that a reconsideration cannot now be had.


531

CONSTITUTIONAL CONVENTION, 1901

     THE PRESIDENT--The Chair was just referring to the rule. In the opinion of the Chair it would go over until tomorrow.

     MR. deGRAFFENREID--I move a suspension of the rules, and that this motion to reconsider be now taken up, and disposed of by this body. I want to say, Mr. President, that we are on this Section now, and it seems to rne more orderly to first get rid of this Section before we go to another, and for that reason I make the motion.

     The motion to suspend the rules was carried, on a division, 86 ayes to 30 noes.

     MR. FITTS--Now, Mr. President, I call up my motion to reconsider, and upon that I desire to be heard.

     MR. LONG (Walker)--I snake a point of order.

     THE PRESIDENT--The gentleman will state the point of order.

     MR. LONG (Walker)--I make the point of order that the gentleman cannot change his vote from an aye to a negative vote, on a rising vote, and without an aye and nay vote.

     MR. deGRAFFENREID--The gentleman's objection comes too late.

     THE PRESIDENT--It seems to the Chair that the point is made too late, if there is merit in it at all. The question is on the motion of the gentleman from Tuscaloosa to reconsider the vote whereby this Convention adopted the amendment proposed by the gentleman from Chambers.

     MR. FITTS--Now I ask that the amendment of the gentleman from Chambers be read.

     The amendment was again read.

     MR. FITTS--Mr. President, your Committee feels that it owes the House an apology for having had to consume this time, and ask for this reconsideration. We were talking at the time the motion was being put. We really ought to have called attention to what we think is a fatal error, and a fatal danger in the amendment of the distinguished gentleman from Chambers. You will notice that the Section makes it the duty of the Speaker, when he assembles the joint Convention, to count the vote, purely ministerial. Now, if you stand by the vote that you took a moment ago, and make the power of the joint Convention bound by the limitations which confine the Speaker, you make the power of the Convention purely ministerial, and no matter how grossly erroneous might be the contents of the envelopes when broken at the desk, palpably erroneous, they would simply have to be checked down, and called off, and the final result declared, no matter how erroneous it might appear.


532

OFFICIAL PROCEEDINGS

     MR. ROBINSON--May I ask the gentleman a question?

     MR. FITTS--Certainly.

     MR. ROBINSON--Isn't that all that the amendment proposes to do, and isn't that all that it does do?

     MR. FITTS--That is the fact, that is exactly what the gentleman proposes, and the Committee respectfully thinks that would be a dangerous thing to do. While the duties of the Speaker ought to be purely ministerial, and while he ought to open those envelopes and count the result, there might possibly be occasions when that joint Convention should have some more power than the mere checking and chalking down of the returns. There are constantly arising, when the two houses meet to canvass the result, the most glaring errors. On one occasion, it is well known here, that the person who was running for Attorney General in this State was voted for for Treasurer, and the one that was running for Treasurer was voted for for Attorney General in several counties in the State. There ought to be a reserved power to correct errors that are apparent, to carry out the intention of the voters. For that reason the Committee think we had better pause, and consider the proposition as to whether or not the joint Convention when it assembles should be confined strictly to a mere counting and adding up of the returns, no matter how erroneous. they may appear to be set down. It is for that reason we desire to call attention to it.

     MR. PILLANS--May I ask the gentleman a question?

     MR. FITTS--Certainly.

     MR. PILLANS--Were the votes for a particular gentleman for Treasurer counted as though they had been cast for Attorney General on the occasion mentioned, and were the votes cast for the other gentleman for Attorney General counted as though they had been cast for Treasurer?

     MR. FITTS--In that particular instance it made no difference and they were counted as they were actually opened there counted erroneously, because it made no difference in the general result.

     MR. PILLANS--May I ask another question?

     MR. FITTS--Certainly.

     MR. PILLANS--Is it the opinion of the Committee in such a case, where it would make a difference, that the vote ought to be reversed to meet the supposed intention of the voters?

     MR. FITTS--I suppose there ought to be some power in the joint Convention, in as important an assembly as the Senate and


533

CONSTITUTIONAL CONVENTION, 1901

House assembled together, in a time of emergency, to carry out the real intention of the people.

     MR. ROGERS (Sumter)--I rise in the interest of the amendment of the gentleman from Chambers. The question it seems to me before this body is this, whether the power of electing the officers of this State shall be with the people, or with the General Assembly of Alabama. It seems to me that is the only question under consideration. If we do not limit the powers of the General Assembly to that of a mere ministerial body, they can, whenever they wish to change the result, come up here and defeat or elect any one, before the General Assembly of the State of Alabama.

     MR. JENKINS--I was on that Committee, and I hate very much to differ with the members of the Committee--

     MR. JONES (Montgomery)--If the gentleman from Wilcox will pardon me I have a substitute that I think will meet the views of my friend from Chambers.

     MR. JENKINS--I yield to the gentleman from Montgomery.

     THE PRESIDENT--The question now is on the motion to reconsider. For the information of the Convention the Chair will direct the Secretary to read the proposed amendment.

     The amendment was read.

     MR. JENKINS--I yield to the gentleman for the reading of the substitute.

     The substitute was read as follows :

     "Amend Section 4, line nine, by adding after the words, "joint convention," the words, "whose functions shall be ministerial merely and confined to the opening and publishing of proper returns and declaring the result.

     MR. CHAPMAN--Does that say "proper."

     THE SECRETARY--Yes, sir.

     MR. JENKINS--Mr. President, I really think all that ought to be stricken out, from the word Convention, because it is possible, as the gentleman from Sumter has said, for the General Assembly to come here and declare an irregularity of some sort in an election and defeat the will of the people. These questions of irregularity ought to be gone into by the Committees and examined by affidavits and evidence, before the election committees, and let the election committees report, as further provided in the article. I do not see any necessity for a change in the present Constitution on that particular point, and I really believe it would be a good


534

OFFICIAL PROCEEDINGS

suggestion to strike out all the words between the first semi-colon in the seventh line, and the period after the word Convention, in the ninth line, and leave it exactly--

     THE PRESIDENT--The Chair will remind the gentleman that the question before the house is the question of reconsideration.

     MR. JENKINS--Well, I am speaking, Mr. President, if the Chair will pardon me, to that point.

     THE PRESIDENT--The gentleman will proceed. The Chair was under a different impression. (Laughter.)

     MR. JENKINS--I was merely suggesting to the Chair that I was going to offer an amendment to strike out, if the gentleman's amendment failed, and for that reason, I am opposed to reconsideration, because I think his amendment is a good one and covers the point; although I think that the whole clause ought to be stricken out. But I take it the gentleman from Chambers has covered the ground. Now this is a very serious proposition of allowing the legislature to pass upon these returns, other than as they are read from the Speaker's desk, because there is the evidence and that is the only evidence before that Convention and if you allow them to depart in the least from it, why then they decide what they think the people want, and not what as a matter of fact the people decided. I shall vote against a reconsideration.

     MR. JONES (Montgomery)--I would like to inquire of my friend of Chambers if the substitute I proposed meets the objection he wished to obviate, in the language as it now stands?

     MR. ROBINSON--I think that the amendment offered by myself is clearer and better and ought to prevail, and I do not want reconsideration.

     MR. JONES (Montgomery)--Mr. President I regret very much, that as Chairman of the Committee, I have to appear on the floor so often. The original change reported by the Committee from the present Constitution. was to remove doubt and obscurity, as to the power of the Speaker of the House; about which a controversy has existed ever since the foundation of the United States, until the 'I'ilden and Hayes election. There never has been an hour in the history of Alabama, when, if the General Assembly in joint convention refused to do its duty, and to count the votes and declare the result that the officer who was elected by the people had any constitutional remedy. Therefore, the Committee deemed it wise to insert that the Speaker's duties are ministerial merely. Speaking in behalf of the Committee, I desire to say we are thoroughly in accord with the purposes expressed by my friend from Chambers, for whose common sense and legal learning we have great respect; but I do submit that when the amendment


535

CONSTITUTIONAL CONVENTION, 1901

offered by the gentleman says that the power of the joint convention shall be the same as that of the Speaker, and the section reported by the Committee, above the place where the amendment comes in says the Speaker shall be controlled by the joint convention it certainly does not carry out what is in the brain of my friend from Chambers. The Speaker can't be subject to control of the joint convention and yet have equal powers. Now, what I understand he objects to, is that this joint convention might go behind the returns. As the section now reads in the Constitution, it is very clear that legally they could not do it, because it says contested elections shall be determined in such manner as shall be prescribed by law, by the two Houses. Take this case, Mr. President. I knew it to occur in this House. Two returns were sent in, contrary to law, at a date different from that prescribed by law. Suppose the election had turned upon whether those two returns were excluded or counted. I happened to be the occupant of the Chair at that time, and remarked that to avoid creating a precedent, or claim of power in the Speaker, to determine those questions, that the Speaker would take the advise of the joint convention. I remember among some very eminent members, the late Mr. Hewitt of Jefferson County, protested against the Speaker's surrendering the power that he claimed he had under the Constitution to decide for himself.

     Now, when it comes to the returns, a Speaker may say this, return is not genuine, I refuse to count it. Under the section as proposed, an appeal can be taken, and the joint convention can say you shall count it. It seems to me, Mr. President, that if the amendment, offered by me, adding that the powers of the joint convention shall be ministerial merely, and confined to the opening, publishing and declaring the result of proper returns, this is as good a safeguard as we can have and the only one that we put in the Constitution, unless we provide some appeal from the action of the joint convention.

     MR. COBB--Will the gentleman allow me to ask a question?

     MR. JONES--Certainly.

     MR. COBB--What is the probable effect of that word proper you have got in there?

     MR. JONES (Montgomery)--Ah, there is a great deal in that.

     MR. COBB--That is why I ask. It gives that convention the same power they have under your original proposition.

     MR. JONES (Montgomery)--Exactly. The words were used advisedly. Suppose the returns carne up here, not signed by the proper officer. I have known a case where the returns were signed by three men, and it turned out that the Probate Judge and other officers were incompetent, and, therefore, they had selected


536

OFFICIAL PROCEEDINGS

these gentlemen to serve as returning board in their stead, and they properly sent up the returns, but there was not a word on the face of those returns showing how these gentlemen came to be there, or why they had any more right than John Smith, or James Brown, or John Jones, or any other citizen of Alabama, to sign it. Now I say on its face that was not a proper return. It may be that a return comes here, Mr. President, that has been tampered with. There are a great many cases which the word proper would cover, which I cannot define just at this time, and which my friend from Macon, I doubt, cannot define. We have to trust somebody, and the amendment offered by me is in the direction of defining the power of the joint convention in furtherance of the idea of the gentleman from Chambers.

     MR. CUNNINGHAM--I would like to ask the chairman of the committee a question.

     MR. JONES--Certainly.

     MR. CUNNINGHAM--After the word defect, in the eighth line, what is meant by the phrase "or other cause?" What is the limitation of that? How far does that go back?

     MR. JONES--Well the cause that was in the mind of the draftsman of that, was where the return had been tampered with; for instance, I remember in one case, a member said it is a matter of no moment in the particular case, but those figures have been tampered with, and if you put your magnifying glass there you will see it. Well, it might be material--

     MR. CUNNINGHAM--I will ask the chairman of the committee, suppose that a member of that joint convention should be on the opposite party to the supposed candidate for State offices that have been elected and he should raise the question of the honesty of the election in any given county; does the words "other causes" embrace that proposition?

     MR. JONES--I think it would, to be frank, it might give excuse for so doing without the amendment which I offered. It had not occurred to me, but I think it might be tortured into that.

     MR. CUNNINGHAM--Then the joint convention, as I understand it, would really act as a body before whom one could decide these thins of their own accord?

     MR. JONES--Not under the Constitution, because right below it the section declares how contests of elections shall be determined. The joint convention is a tribunal which must have some power to declare the result, reject improper returns, etc., and I know of no way of preventing them under the guise of counting and publishing, from contesting, if the language here does not prevent it.


537

CONSTITUTIONAL CONVENTION, 1901

     MR. LOWE--It seems to me the original proposition of the committee and the amendment, will tend to render this entire section incongruous and irreconciliable. I believe the provision of the old Constitution is amply sufficient. However, I would not, be prepared now to stickle as to the terms and to consume the time of the Convention in debating as to phraseology, but I should dislike to see engrafted in a section of the Constitution as important as that we are now considering, a proposition that would render the section totally irreconcilable with itself. The proposition that now comes into this phraseology is making the Speaker a ministerial officer and making the two houses when assembled purely ministerial. That is the tendency of the amendment. But the amendment does not reach the section of the Constitution beginning with line 13, the last clause of this section. Beginning at the thirteenth line of this Section 4, it reads: "Contested elections for Governor, Lieutenant-Governor, Secretary of State, State Auditor, State Treasurer, Attorney-General, Superintendent of Education, Commissioner of Agriculture and Industries, shall be determined by both houses of the General Assembly, in such manner as may be prescribed by law." In such manner as who may prescribe? There would be but one law and that would be that the power was vested in the two houses assembled to count the vote.

     Now, will you say, in Section 9, that the power of the two houses in counting the vote shall be purely ministerial and then say, in line 13 of this section that the pourer of the two houses to determine contests arising shall be absolute? Let it mean one thing or the other. Let us strike out one provision or the other. That matter is so plain to my mind merely as a rnatter of truth that a Constitution should not contain clauses inconsistent with themselves, that I hardly think it necessary to debate it. That the simple statement of the proposition is sufficient, and I, therefore, move that this Section 4 be re-referred to the committee.

     THE PRESIDENT--The question right now is on a motion to reconsider.

     MR. LOWE (Jefferson)--I thought the motion to reconsider had prevailed.

     THE PRESIDENT--It has not been carried. It is under debate.

     MR. ROBINSON--The powers of the joint convention under this section, as prepared and reported by the Executive Committee, are that it shall consider objections made. That is the question. Now, in considering that question, the sole purpose of that amendment is that it shall be submitted without delay then and there, without debate, simply to examine the face of the returns and see what they show and that the whole power of that joint convention is limited to the power of the Speaker. It it as plain as it can be. The General Assembly has the power to decide contests for


538

OFFICIAL PROCEEDINGS

these State offices. They may decide then and there that they will decide that contest. What prevents them? They may declare, and that objection might go, that they would desire to go behind the returns made by the State officers in several of the counties; that convention might declare that they had a right to go behind those returns and consider all questions that affect the election of a particular officer. Some gentleman might object because he says the returns from a certain county are fraudulent. He might make the objection on the ground. Then that joint convention, construing that power without limitation offered by me, would go into an investigation of that question and inquire into the frauds and determine the question and set aside the prima facie case made by the returns of the officers.

     Now, I cannot see why this ought to be reconsidered. That amendment is as plain and as unambiguous as it can be. It limits the powers of the joint convention to those possessed by the Speaker, simply to examine the returns upon the face of them. and to determine that question without delay or debate, just as the Speaker would do it. I cannot see that there can be any objection to that unless the gentlemen of this convention desire to give the joint convention the power to go behind the returns and take charge of that question and when they take charge for one purpose they take charge of it for all.

     The delegate from Tuscaloosa desires to correct errors! When you open the door to correct errors, where are you going to shut it ? When you depart from an inspection of those returns as they appear upon the face, you open the door for the joint convention to do whatever they may desire to do, so far as that particular question is concerned. That is unwise and it will be productive of great evil to give that convention any powers except to examine the face of the returns and receive or reject them.

     MR. FITTS--Your committee are not at all partisan in this matter and have no desire to fix this in any way but as the convention wants it fixed. We thought the amendment offered by the delegate from Chambers as far-reaching, and in that we were right. We thought we ought to ask this reconsideration because we failed to make any statement to call your attention to it just then. We are perfectly willing to do the work over again and fix it any way the convention wants it done. We are the servants of this convention. We want to understand the convention and to have the convention understand us. It does seem to us that if you write down in this particular section on page 5 that the duties of the Speaker are purely ministerial and then provide that the duties of the joint convention, these two Houses, are purely ministerial, that that sets a hard and fast rule.

     MR. ROBINSON--Will the gentleman permit an interruption?


539

CONSTITUTIONAL CONVENTION, 1901

     MR. FITTS--Certainly.

     MR. ROBINSON--I would like to ask him to explain the difference between that and my measure.

     MR. FITTS--I will. Then the further proposition when you add to that that the duties of the entire Assembly, of the two Houses are purely ministerial, that is a hard and fast rule that they cannot get away from and then you go on to the next page and you show that it was intended that the two Houses should have some power and you say if there is a tie they shall decide it and if there is a contest for one of the State offices, it cannot mean anything but a contest, that it shall be settled according to such views as they may have. If, therefore, you fix the first half of this section according to the amendment submitted by the gentleman from Chambers, it is directly contrary to the meaning and intention of the latter part of it reported by your committee. If the amendment means anything it means that in no event shall the joint convention of the two Houses have any power.

     As I say, the committee is without any desire to be partisan. They simply want to get before the House the far-reaching effect of the amendment offered by the gentleman and after the convention understands and determines it, if it is the desire that it should be sent back to the committee so as to make it harmonize, the committee will attend to it to the best of its abiiitv.

     MR. BROWNE--I do not think the section as amended by the gentleman from Chambers is subject to the objection made by the gentleman from Jefferson and as conceded by the gentlemen of the committee. The first part of the section says it shall be the duty of the Speaker, to open and publish the returns in the presence of both Houses of the General Assembly in joint convention--that is the duty of the Speaker--and the joint convention is to canvass the returns and declare the result where there is no contest. Then the latter part of Section 4 provides that where there is a contest it shall be decided by both Houses of the General Assembly, but not in joint convention, but by both Houses in General Assembly in such manner as may be prescribed by law, presupposing that the General Assembly will enact some law regulating contests to be had and decided by the General Assembly. And it does not seem to me that there would be any conflict in the two provisions in the section as amended either the amendment proposed by the gentleman from Chambers or the substitute by the Chairman of the committee.

     A vote being taken on the motion to reconsider on division resulted 66 yeas and 56 nays.

     So the motion to reconsider was carried.

     MR. ROGERS (Sumter)--I offer a resolution.


540

OFFICIAL PROCEEDINGS

     The resolution was read as follows:

     Resolved that it is the sense of the convention that Section 4 of the ordinance to create and define the executive Department is ambiguous and should be recommitted to the Committee on Revision.

     MR. ROGERS--I move to suspend the rules that that resolution may be put upon its passage.

     THE PRESIDENT--The Chair is of the opinion that a motion to recommit is in order with a suspension of the rules.

     MR. JONES--The committee is perfectly willing to have this matter recommitted so as to conform to the desire of the House, but we are unwilling, unless the House compels us, to take it back now when we cannot understand what the wishes and will of the House are. And, if my friend from Chambers will permit me one minute, I think I can convince him we are anxious to do what he says.

     THE PRESIDENT--The question is on the amendment of the delegate from Chambers.

     MR. JONES (Montgomery)--I thought it was on the motion to recommit.

     THE PRESIDENT--The gentleman is correct. The question was on the amendment of the delegate from Chambers and thereupon the gentleman from Sumter moved to recommit, which has precedence of a motion to amend, and the question now is on the motion to recommit, and the chair recognizes the gentleman from Montgomery, and the reason the chair asked the gentleman to suspend was to obtain order so that the delegates could hear what committee desires to make an explanation.

     MR. JONES (Montgomery)--I want to call the attention of my friend from Chambers to one fact. The language is that the Speaker shall be under the control of the joint convention, and the amendment of the delegate from Chambers says that the joint convention shall not have any more power than the Speaker. One cannot be under the control of the other, if each has equal power. I think the gentleman overlooked that in the hurry. If the House passes some resolution declaring what is the sense of the convention as to the power of the joint convention when it comes to count the vote, and declare what it wants more exactly, the committee will be glad to take the matter up and report on it; but in the absence of some such declaration, I move to postpone the motion to recommit indefinitely.

     MR. REESE--I rise to a point of order.


541

CONSTITUTIONAL CONVENTION, 1901

     THE PRESIDENT--The chair would rule that a motion to indefinitely postpone would not apply. The motion to recommit has precedence.

     MR. REESE--And on the motion to recommit, I move the previous question.

     MR. ROGERS (Sumter)--I would ask the gentleman to withdraw that just a moment. It is clear that whether this section is ambiguous or not, it is ambiguous in the minds of a great many of us, and in order to give the Committee on Executive Department a chance to make it clear, I move for the recommitment, and only for that purpose.

     THE PRESIDENT--And upon the motion, the gentleman from Dallas demands the previous question, and the question is, shall the main question now be put?

     MR. JONES (Montgomery)--Who is entitled to the close on that? Is it the chairman of the committee who has charge of the matter, or the gentleman who makes the motion to recommit?

     THE PRESIDENT--It seems to the chair that the gentleman from Sumter, as it is his motion, would be entitled to the close.

     MR. JONES--If the gentleman of the committee--

     THE PRESIDENT--Does the gentleman from Dallas withdraw his motion for the previous question? The chairman of the committee desires to make an explanation.

     MR. JONES (Montgomery)--I simply want to make a request to find out what is wanted.

     MR. REESE- I decline to withdraw the motion for the previous question.

     A vote being taken, the main question was ordered. The vote on division being 67 yeas and 38 nays.

     THE PRESIDENT--The question is on the motion of the delegate from Sumter to recommit this section to the Committee on the Executive Department.

     A vote being taken, the motion to recommit was carried.

     MR. JONES (Montgomery)--Now, if I am in order, I wish to state in behalf of the committee, that we shall be very much obliged to our friend from Sumter who says the ordinance is obscure, if he will kindly write out what he thinks will remove the obscurity.

     Mr. Reese here took the chair as President pro tem.


541

CONSTITUTIONAL CONVENTION, 1901

     THE PRESIDENT--The chair would rule that a motion to indefinitely postpone would not apply. The motion to recommit has precedence.

     MR. REESE--And on the motion to recommit, I move the previous question.

     MR. ROGERS (Sumter)--I would ask the gentleman to withdraw that just a moment. It is clear that whether this section is ambiguous or not, it is ambiguous in the minds of a great many of us, and in order to give the Committee on Executive Department a chance to make it clear, I move for the recommitment, and only for that purpose.

     THE PRESIDENT--And upon the motion, the gentleman from Dallas demands the previous question, and the question is, shall the main question now be put?

     MR. JONES (Montgomery)--Who is entitled to the close on that? Is it the chairman of the committee who has charge of the matter, or the gentleman who makes the motion to recommit?

     THE PRESIDENT--It seems to the chair that the gentleman from Sumter, as it is his motion, would be entitled to the close.

     MR. JONES--If the gentleman of the committee--

     THE PRESIDENT--Does the gentleman from Dallas withdraw his motion for the previous question? The chairman of the committee desires to make an explanation.

     MR. JONES (Montgomery)--I simply want to make a request to find out what is wanted.

     MR. REESE- I decline to withdraw the motion for the previous question.

     A vote being taken, the main question was ordered. The vote on division being 67 yeas and 38 nays.

     THE PRESIDENT--The question is on the motion of the delegate from Sumter to recommit this section to the Committee on the Executive Department.

     A vote being taken, the motion to recommit was carried.

     MR. JONES (Montgomery)--Now, if I am in order, I wish to state in behalf of the committee, that we shall be very much obliged to our friend from Sumter who says the ordinance is obscure, if he will kindly write out what he thinks will remove the obscurity.

     Mr. Reese here took the chair as President pro tem.


542

OFFICIAL PROCEEDINGS

     THE PRESIDENT PRO TEM.--The Secretary will read the next section.

     Section 5 was read as follows:

     Section 5. The Governor, Lieutenant-Governor, Secretary of State, State Treasurer, Attorney-General, State Auditor, Superintendent of Education and Commissioner of Agriculture and Industries, shall hold their respective offices for the term of four years from the first day of December of the year in which they shall have been elected, and until their successors shall be elected and qualified, and after the first election under this Constitution neither of them shall be eligible as his own successor; and the Governor shall not be eligible to election to any office under this State within one year after the expiration of his term; and his acceptance of the office of Governor shall be a pledge to the people not to accept an election or appointment to the Senate of the United States at any time during his term, or within one year thereafter.

     MR. JONES (Montgomery)--There is an amendment by the Committee which the Clerk will read, please.

     The amendment was read as follows: Amend by inserting the words "elected in the year 1902" between the words "Agriculture and Industries," and "shall."

     THE PRESIDENT PRO TEM- The amendment of the Committee is before the House.

     MR. WALKER--I offer to amend the amendment of the Committee by adding after the word "1902" the following, "and each fourth year thereafter."

     THE PRESIDENT PRO TEM--The question before the House is on the amendment of the gentleman from Madison to the amendment of the Committee.

     MR. WALKER--The amendment offered by the Committee simply makes provisions as to the terms of office of those elected in 1902. The amendment offered by myself clears away the ambiguity, and makes the terms apply not only to those elected at that time but to the officers elected thereafter as well.

     MR. JONES (Montgomery)--We are anxious to accept anything coming from so eminent a source, but if the officers hold for four years after that time, how can there be any ambiguity about it?

     THE PRESIDENT PRO TEM--The question is on the amendment of the delegate from Madison.

     MR. O'NEAL--I ask that the Section as amended by both amendments be read.


543

CONSTITUTIONAL CONVENTION, 1901

     The Section as it would be with both amendments was read as follows :

     Sec. 5. The Governor, Lieutenant-Governor, Secretary of State, State Treasurer, Attorney General, State Auditor, Commissioner of Agriculture and Industries shall hold elected in the year 1902, and every fourth year thereafter, their respective offices for the term of four years from the first day of December of the year in which they shall have been elected, and until their successors shall be elected and qualified, and after the first election under this Constitution neither of them shall be eligible as his own successor, and the Governor shall not be eligible to election to any office under this State within one year after the expiration of his term; and his acceptance of the office of Governor shall be a pledge to the people not to accept an election or appointment to the Senate of the United States at any time during his term or within one year thereafter.

     MR. LOMAX--The remarks of the Chairman of the Committee show that the amendment offered by the gentleman from Madison is entirely unnecessary and I therefore move to lay that amendment on the table.

     The motion was carried.

     MR. GREER (Perry)--As a matter of euphony, I move to strike out the word "State" before the words "Auditor and Treasurer."

     MR. PETTUS--I rise to a point of order. The amendment by the Committee is the question before the Convention.

     MR. JONES (Montgomery)--I submit when a Committee has reported an ordinance it has a right to amend its own ordinance, just like one who makes a motion has the right to amend it.

     THE PRESIDENT PRO TEM--That must be upon the theory of unanimous consent. If there is no objection the report can be amended as asked by the Committee.

     There was no objection.

     MR. deGRAFFENREID--I move to amend Section 5 by striking therefrom all of the section following the words "expiration of his term" in the seventh line.

     The effect of that amendment if adopted by this convention would be to strike from Section 5 so much of the section which reads as follows: "and his acceptance of the office of Governor shall be a pledge to the people not to accept an election or appointment to the Senate of the United States at any time during his term, or within one year thereafter." The section above that


544

OFFICIAL PROCEEDINGS

provides that the Governor shall not be eligible to any office within the gift of the people, that is, shall not be eligible to any State office within one year after the expiration of his term. My objection to this latter clause which I move to strike from the section, is this: We are adopting a Constitution for a State. We should not put into that Constitution anything that is not law because a Constitution is the fundamental law of the State and we should not attempt to do anything, we should not attempt to put anything in there that we have not the power to enforce. The expressions used by the committee in this article disclose to this convention the fact that we are attempting by this clause to do something that we have no legal power to do and to require the Governor to pledge himself not to do something which if he does, for the doing of which we can inflict no penalty. We say this acceptance of the office will be a pledge to the people not to accept an election or appointment as a United States Senator at any time during his term or one year thereafter. But suppose he were to accept such a position, would not we be helpless? What could we do? A legislative body unless there are rules to the contrary is a law unto itself. It is omnipotent in passing on the qualifications of its own members. And so when a man who has been Governor of a State received in a legal form the office of United States Senator, there would be nothing on the Senate to prohibit them from adopting him into their body as a member thereof.

     MR. WHITE--It is not his acceptance of the office but his trying to get office that we are endeavoring to get rid of.

     MR. deGRAFFENREID--Yes, I see the evil and I think so far as the convention is able legally to do it, we ought to withhold from the Governor any temptation to improperly use the power the law places in his hand. But the objection is we are undertaking to do that in an instrument that purports to be a legal instrument that purports to speak only the law and we are thereby attempting to do something that if it is disobeyed there is no power to enforce a penalty.

     MR. BURNETT--Suppose we should engraft this in the Constitution and the Legislature should elect a Governor to the United States Senate during his term or within one year thereafter, do you think that the Senate of the United States would decline to allow him to take his seat?

     MR. deGRAFFENREID--I will answer your question by referring to something that happened in the history of this Government. When John Randolph of Virginia first appeared before the House of Representatives and asked to be sworn in as a member of that House, he was under the age of 25 years, and some man arose and challenged his right to the seat.

     MR. BURNETT--Let me ask you another question.


545

CONSTITUTIONAL CONVENTION, 1901

     MR. deGRAFFENREID--I am answering your question now. Some man arose and challenged his right to take his seat and asked him if he was of age to sit in that body and he replied "Ask my constituents," and they seated him regardless of the disability.

     MR. DENT--Can I ask the gentleman from Hale a question?

     MR. deGRAFFENRFID-- You can all ask if you will just do it one at a time.

     THE PRESIDENT (who had resumed his seat some time during Mr. deGraffenreid's remarks)--To which does the gentleman from Hale desire to respond?

     MR. deGRAFFENREID--The delegate Mr. Burnett was the first one who interrogated me.

     MR. BURNETT--The Constitution didn't say that John Randolph was of age, did it?

     MR. deGRAFFENREID--No, Sir: but if it had, it was admitted he was under 25 years of age. I simply alluded to that to show that it would be entirely as to what the members of the Senate or House should determine when the question arose.

     MR. DENT--I think there is a mistake in the historical statement. My understanding was that Randolph was not 25 when he was elected but he was 25 when he presented himself for a seat.

     MR. deGRAFFENREID--I don't remember exactly about that. But I happened to be reading on the question of suffrage yesterday on the qualifications of members of the House, and saw that.

     MR. HINSON--Does not the United States Constitution require that a member of Congress be 25 years of age?

     MR. deGRAFFENREID--Yes.

     MR. HINSON--Then does not the United States Constitution contain something that cannot be enforced?

     MR. deGRAFFENREID--I said unless there was something in the law to the contrary which controlled the body, the body was a law unto itself. I have never investigated the question of whether the Senate could admit a man under 25. The point I am endeavoring to make is that each deliberative body is a law unto itself. And by the Constitution is to be the sole judge of the qualifications of its members.

     MR. CHAPMAN--Would it not be entirely proper for this convention to make a provision that the General Assembly should not elect as Senator any man who had been Governor within one year of the time of this election as Senator?


546

OFFICIAL PROCEEDINGS

     MR. deGRAFFENREID--That is not the question to which I am speaking, and I have never investigated it, but if the Legislature were to elect a Senator contrary to this provision and the man appeared, at the bar of the Senate and offered to be sworn in as a member of that body, it would not be the courts of Alabama, but the members of the United States Senate, who would determine whether or not he was entitled to a seat in the body.

     MR. WHITE--Has not the Senate of the United States power to seat a man that the Legislature did not elect?

     MR. deGRAFFENREID--They are the judges of the qualifications of their members in that regard.

     As I was going to say, I am in sympathy with the purpose of this Section 5, and believe that as far as possible, we should remove the temptation from the Governor of our State to use his office for political purposes and for his own political advancement.

     If, Mr. President, all of our Governors were like the man whose remains were carried from this Capitol today, or, if they were all like the man who has succeeded him, there would be no reason for such a provision as contempated in Section 5, but our history and the experience of our people indicate to the contrary. My objection to this is purely technical that we should not put in the Constitution as a part of the fundamental law anything that is not law and that cannot be enforced as Jaw by the courts of this State.

     MR. LONG (Walker)--I have a substitute for the amendment offered by the gentleman from Hale.

     The substitute was read as follows: "Amend Section 5 by adding the words "or appointment" after the word "election" in the sixth line, and further by striking out all the words after the word "term" in the seventh line.

     MR. LONG (Walker)--I am not posted in natural history, but it seems to me that this section is an Armadillo, one of those ambiguous animals that, we all used to hear so much about. With my amendment adopted, this section would read, beginning in the sixth line, "and the Governor shall not be eligible to election or appointment to any office under this State within one year after the expiration of his term." Then we go on further in this and put him under pledge. It seems to me that is a very ambiguous animal.

     MR. BROOKS--I had prepared an amendment to strike out the last clause of Section 5, but the amendment of the delegate from Hale entirely covers that. I desire to speak to that amendment. I favor the general purpose of Section 5, but the last clause appears to me to contain a provision which is inappropriate in a Constitution. I am free to confess my unfamiliarity with the


547

CONSTITUTIONAL CONVENTION, 1901

great mass of your different State Constitutions, but my limited observation leads me to believe that such a provision of this is, to say the least of it, unique in constitutional structure. As has been well said by the gentleman from Hale, a Constitution is the organic law, the fundamental law of the land, designed to operate upon the people either through some self-enforcing power of its own or through some provision or legislative enactment. But I submit that, this last clause is not susceptible to enforcement by either of those means. The evident purpose of it is to make the Governor of the State ineligible to the office of United States Senator at any time during his term or within one year thereafter. But why does it not express that ineligibility in direct and express terms. Why does it not say clearly and distinctly that he shall not be eligible to the office of Senator and that he shall not be eligible within one year after his term to any office in the State. It is probable that the committee saw some obstacle in the way in the Federal Constitution or laws respecting the qualifications of Senators. I am not prepared to say that such consideration would impose upon them any insuperable difficulty, but the fact remains that we have in this provision a proposition to make the Governor ineligible by a mere pledge to the people. How do they propose to do it? Simply by tacking a moral sanction to the Governors accepting the office in the way of a pledge to the people. That is the proposition. This is a sort of inchoate or intended or suggested prohibition upon the right of the Governor to accept an election to the United States Senate while he is Governor or within twelve months thereafter. Now, I submit, as a rule, moral propositions don't generally enforce themselves, and there is no way by any legal sanction in any power of enforcement in the Constitution or by any legislative enactment to enforce this moral sanction. Therefore, it seems to me it is a mere brutum fulmen. It cannot carry out itself, and it cannot be enforced by any law, and, therefore, I favor the amendment of the delegate from Hale to strike that last clause out.

     MR. CHAPMAN--I have an amendment to the amendment of the delegate from Walker.

     THE PRESIDENT--The chair would suggest to the gentleman that an amendment to an amendment is already pending, and an additional amendment would not be in order at this time.

     MR. SANFORD--I move that we adjourn.

     MR. JONES--And I move that when we do adjourn it be to 3 o'clock tomorrow.

     THE PRESIDENT- A resolution has already been passed adjourning till two thirty tomorrow and without a reconsideration it would not be in order to change that time.


548

OFFICIAL PROCEEDINGS

     MR. JONES (Montgomery)--Of course, I yield to the Chair, but I do so unwillingly. I think it is always competent when a motion to adjourn is made for the house to say to what time it will adjourn.

     THE PRESIDENT--That question has already been determined by the house by passing a resolution that when it does adjourn it will adjourn until 2:30 tomorrow, and unless there is a reconsideration, it would not be in order to change that time.

     A vote being taken on the motion to adjourn it was lost.

     THE PRESIDENT--The question is now on the amendment of the delegate from Walker.

     The section as it would be if amended according to this amendment was read and a vote being taken the amendment was lost, the division resulting 36 yeas and 60 nays. So the substitute was lost.

     MR. GREER (Calhoun)--I move to amend by striking out after the word "qualified" in the fifth line, the balance of said section. I do that for the sole purpose of allowing the people of Alabama to take care of their own officers.

     THE PRESIDENT--The question before the House is the amendment offered by the gentleman from Hale to Section 5 as reported by the Committee. Does the gentleman desire to amend the amendment of the gentleman from Hale?

     MR. GREER--Yes. It seems to me it would be unwise for this Convention to say that the people of Alabama should or should not choose their officers from any sphere in life. I repeat, the object of my substitute or amendment is solely to allow any man in the State of Alabama to aspire to any office within the gift of the people at any time and to allow the people of Alabama to pass upon his qualifications to said office. I do not remember within my brief knowledge of the history of the State of Alabama where any gentleman has prostituted the office in trying to get to the United States Senate. But if he has, the people themselves have passed upon that matter and doubtless have passed on it wisely. If they have been wise enough in the past to pass upon the qualifications of one in the Governor's chair seeking the position of United States Senator, they will continue to be as wise in the future. The adoption of this section reported by the Committee may prevent at some time in the future the people of Alabama from getting the very best man that resides within her borders as a representative in the United States Senate. It may prevent them from getting the best they have in the State as officers to succeed themselves and for these reasons, briefly stated, I am in favor of striking out all of that part of the section which says a man shall or shall not be eligible to re-election or shall or


549

CONSTITUTIONAL CONVENTION, 1901

shall not be a candidate for office within a certain time after he holds a certain office. He seems to me mere child's play. And for that reason I think the Convention should allow the people of Alabama to pass upon the question.

     MR. WHITE--I do not suppose any of us feel that a Governor will ever be elected to the United States Senate. That has been tried. But the trouble is in convincing gentlemen that they can't be elected. We are told that this provision is not enforcible because the Senate of the United States can disregard this provision and can seat a member notwithstanding this provision in our Constitution. We might, with equal force say that the Senate of the United States can seat a man who has been elected by bribery, and therefore you need not pass any laws against bribery. You might as well say because the Senate of the United States in the exercise of its power can seat a man receiving a minority of the votes of the legislature, that we need not insist upon a majority vote for him. However, this may act or whatever influence it may have upon the Senate of the United States what we are to look at is the influence it will have upon the Governor in determining whether he will be a candidate in violation of his oath when he takes an oath to support the Constitution of the State with this pledge in it. Some man might desire a seat bad enough in the Senate to attempt it, but no man who would do that would command enough respect by the people of Alabama to even be considered for the place. Therefore, I am in favor of the provision as contained in the Committee's report. I am opposed to the amendment offered by the delegate from Calhoun and also the amendment offered by the delegate from Hale. I need not appeal to you and point you to our experience in the past. You know what that is as well as I do, and I say, Mr. President and gentlemen of the Convention, if we can accomplish that which we intended by this provision we will have accomplished a great deal for the people of Alabama. They tell us that we are not concerned about a man's ambition. That is true possibly when he is not our servant, but when we installed him in the gubernatorial office and entrust to him the welfare of the State, we do have an interest in his ambition.

     MR. SANFORD--May I ask the gentleman a question?

     MR. WHITE--Certainly.

     MR. SANFORD--Is it not a fact that this is a limitation upon the rights of the people to vote for any man they please for any office, and, therefore, it is not a disfranchisement of the people so far as that is concerned?

     MR. WHITE-No, sir. If I understand it, it is a bridle to the ambitions of a man who wants to make the gubernatorial chair a stepping stone to the Senate, that and nothing else, and we should


550

OFFICIAL PROCEEDINGS

not place in the hands of the Chief Executive of the State a wonderful political influence that he could not wield but for the position he holds. I hope both of these amendments will be voted down.

     MR. OATES--I am fortunately and unfortunately in the category alluded to by my distinguished friend, the delegate from Jefferson. I am one of the ex-Governors who tried to be United States Senator and failed to get there, and I believe any other Governor who has a thousand appointments to make a year will fail to get there. (Laughter.)

     MR. WHITE--Will the delegate from Montgomery allow me a question?

     MR. OATES--Certainly.

     MR. WHITE--Will he fail to try to get there?

     MR. OATES--I don't know. As to myself, I never expect to be in that category, and when I got knocked out I never cried about it. I wanted to go but the Legislature didn't agree with me and I remained at home and consoled myself with the fact that I was beaten by a very good and meritorious man. Now the amendments which are pending I quite agree with my friend from Jefferson in opposing. I oppose the striking out of the disqualification of the Governor and other officers to succeed themselves. I differ with him decidedly on that, but I do agree with the delegate from Hale, if I understand his motion. I did not hear it distinctly. I understand it to be to strike out beginning in the seventh line the words "and his acceptance of the office of Governor shall be a pledge to the people not to accept an election or appointment to the Senate of the United States at any time during his term or within one year thereafter." I am in favor of the motion to strike that out because these words are simply a political declaration here in the Constitution. I am decidedly in favor of denying the Governor the right to succeed himself or to be a candidate for any other office. He is not likely to be a candidate for any office except Senator during his term or for a year after its expiration. And why do I take that position? I agree with the Committee in their purpose but these words, as I said, are only a political declaration and if a man could succeed in being elected while being Governor or within a year thereafter as Senator, the Senator of the United States would have to pass on his qualifications and that body sometimes makes pretty erroneous decisions and this part of this Section would not operate on that body to his exclusion, in my opinion, but when the Constitution of his State disqualifies him I think it would be a splendid objection which a decided majority of the Senate would not overcome or disregard.

     MR. JONES (Montgomery)--May I interrupt the gentleman?


551

CONSTITUTIONAL CONVENTION, 1901

     MR. OATES--Certainly.

     MR. JONES (Montgomery)--Do you remember the case of Judge Thurman of Ohio, who, while Chief Justice of that State, was elected to the Senate with the provision in their law which said he would not be eligible to any office during his term and the Senate said that could not possibly apply to a Senator?

     MR. OATES--I do not pretend to say that they have always made correct decisions. I think they have made some very erroneous ones, and if you take the opinion of our late Chief Justice Stone, whose opinions I once heard characterized by an eminent lawyer in very fitting language as being lucidity crystalized--he was certainly of the opinion that he was not eligible to any other office during the entire term for which he was elected. While, as I say, the Senate may disregard this declaration, they may possibly go so far as to seat a man who was elected even when his Constitution denied his eligibility, I do not believe they would, and this is not the test by which the merits of this provision should be tried. Now, you know a Senator cannot be elected except by a vote of the members of the Legislature, and when you have that in your Constitution are your members going to perjure themselves to elect a man. He would have a wonderful hold on them if they did. If a man is not eligible by the Constitution which everyone of those legislators has sworn to support, how could they forswear themselves? I have too much confidence in any Legislature that the people elect to believe they would do so. So it is not what the Senate of the United States may decide. If a man who held the office of Governor saw proper to make himself a candidate and to try to obtain this high honor he would meet an insuperable difficulty right there for while possibly he might find a few members of the Legislature who were so enthused as friends of his to disregard that oath, how would he make it with a majority. He never could do it. And any Governor who is thus rendered ineligible will never during the history of the State of Alabama, while that provision stands in the Constitution, be elected to the Senate or any other. The limitation will be observed certainly by those who may have sworn to support the Constitution.

     So I am highly in favor of the amendment of the delegate from Hale, because those words have no part, office or effect, and are more of a political declaration and are not enforcible. No Governor could be subjected to any penalty for disregarding them, and I think those words have no good office in the Constitution and can well be dispensed with. But the other provision about the Governor and other officers I am heartily in accord with and I believe if we adopt the Section with just that stricken out we shall have no difficulty and we will meet the wishes of the people.


551

CONSTITUTIONAL CONVENTION, 1901

     MR. OATES--Certainly.

     MR. JONES (Montgomery)--Do you remember the case of Judge Thurman of Ohio, who, while Chief Justice of that State, was elected to the Senate with the provision in their law which said he would not be eligible to any office during his term and the Senate said that could not possibly apply to a Senator?

     MR. OATES--I do not pretend to say that they have always made correct decisions. I think they have made some very erroneous ones, and if you take the opinion of our late Chief Justice Stone, whose opinions I once heard characterized by an eminent lawyer in very fitting language as being lucidity crystalized--he was certainly of the opinion that he was not eligible to any other office during the entire term for which he was elected. While, as I say, the Senate may disregard this declaration, they may possibly go so far as to seat a man who was elected even when his Constitution denied his eligibility, I do not believe they would, and this is not the test by which the merits of this provision should be tried. Now, you know a Senator cannot be elected except by a vote of the members of the Legislature, and when you have that in your Constitution are your members going to perjure themselves to elect a man. He would have a wonderful hold on them if they did. If a man is not eligible by the Constitution which everyone of those legislators has sworn to support, how could they forswear themselves? I have too much confidence in any Legislature that the people elect to believe they would do so. So it is not what the Senate of the United States may decide. If a man who held the office of Governor saw proper to make himself a candidate and to try to obtain this high honor he would meet an insuperable difficulty right there for while possibly he might find a few members of the Legislature who were so enthused as friends of his to disregard that oath, how would he make it with a majority. He never could do it. And any Governor who is thus rendered ineligible will never during the history of the State of Alabama, while that provision stands in the Constitution, be elected to the Senate or any other. The limitation will be observed certainly by those who may have sworn to support the Constitution.

     So I am highly in favor of the amendment of the delegate from Hale, because those words have no part, office or effect, and are more of a political declaration and are not enforcible. No Governor could be subjected to any penalty for disregarding them, and I think those words have no good office in the Constitution and can well be dispensed with. But the other provision about the Governor and other officers I am heartily in accord with and I believe if we adopt the Section with just that stricken out we shall have no difficulty and we will meet the wishes of the people.


553

CONSTITUTIONAL CONVENTION, 1901

     MR. BOONE--I move to lay the amendment of the delegate from Calhoun on the table.

     MR. GREER (Calhoun)--And on that I demand the yeas and nays.

     THE PRESIDENT--The question is, is the call for the yeas and nays sustained?

     The call is not sustained.

     A vote being taken the motion to table was carried.

     THE PRESIDENT--The question is on the amendment offered by the delegate from Hale.

     MR. BROWNE--I desire to offer a substitute to the amendment of the delegate from Hale.

     The substitute was read as follows: "Strike out all of Section 5 after the words `shall be eligible' in line six and insert in lieu thereof the following to election or appointment to any office under this State within one year after the expiration of his term. "

     MR. BROWNE--The effect of the amendment will be--

     MR. BROOKS--I rise to a point of order. I think the amendment offered by the gentleman from Talladega has been passed by the House. The delegate from Walker offered the same amendment.

     THE PRESIDENT--The Chair does not understand that the proposition of the delegate from Walker covered the proposition of the delegate from Talladega.

     MR. BROOKS --The amendment offered by the delegate from Talladega is not applicable to the amendment of the delegate from Hale. It applies to another part of the section.

     THE PRESIDENT--It seems to the Chair that that point is well taken. The proposition of the gentleman from Talladega would be an order after the adoption of the other amendment but the Chair will hear the delegate from Talladega.

     MR. BROWNE--The gentleman from Hale moves to strike out everything after the words "of his term" in line seven of Section five, I offer as a substitute for that to amend by striking out not only that but two lines and a half more and inserting something in lieu thereof, which is clearly permissible as a substitute for this amendment.

     THE PRESIDENT--The Chair is inclined to overrule the point of order after hearing the explanation of the gentleman from Talladega.


554

OFFICIAL PROCEEDINGS

     MR. BROOKS--Will the Chair permit me to explain. The amendment of the delegate from Hale was to strike out the last clause of Section five. The substitute of the gentleman from Talladega is nothing more than an amendment, and you cannot offer an amendment to an amendment. but you can offer another amendment to another part of the section.

     The original section, the amendment of the delegate from Hale and the amendment or substitute offered by the delegate from Talladega were then read.

     THE PRESIDENT - The Chair will state it is not free from doubt but will overrule the point of order of the delegate from Mobile.

     MR. BROWNE - I now desire to make an explanation to free it from that doubt.

     THE PRESIDENT--The Chair rules that you can discuss the merits of the question.

     MR. BROWNE- I will simply call the attention of the members to my substitute. The amendment of the delegates from Hale is to strike out all of Section five from the word "his term" on line seven which is only applicable to the Governor. I offer as a substitute to strike out all after the words "shall be eligible" in the first portion of line six so that that includes all that is embraced in the amendment of the delegate form Hale and something in addition and I insert in lieu thereof the following so as to make it read "neither of them shall be eligible to an election or appointment to any office under this State within one year after the expiration of his term."

     MR. LONG (Walker)--Your amendment, if I understand it, makes the Governor, Lieutenant Governor, Secretary of State. Treasurer, Attorney General, Auditor, Superintendent of Education and Commissioner of Agriculture and Indtistries all ineligible?

     MR. BROWNE--Every one of them.

     MR. LONG (Walker)--Whereas the committee makes only the Governor ineligible?

     MR. BROWNE--That is right. If there is any reason why the Governor should not be eligible to any office within one year after his term, the same reason applies with perhaps not so much force, but certainly with some force to all the other officers. It is within the power of every officer of the State to use his office to some extent to further his political ambition looking towards appointment or election to some other office; and if we are going to so provide in the Constitution that the Governor shall not be elected to any State office, that he shall not be elected to the United States Senate within a year after the expiration of his term


555

CONSTITUTIONAL CONVENTION, 1901

we might protect the people of Alabama further that the Auditor should not run for Treasurer or the Treasurer for Auditor or any of the State officers for any other offices. They can all get together and swap offices and the effect of this would be to put all officers in the same category as the convention seems determined to put the Governor.

     MR. ASHCRAFT--I heartily concur in the reasons which have been advanced by the gentleman from Talladega for the amendment which he offered to that part of the section, or, rather, as a substitute to the amendment offered by the delegate from Hale. It having been offered in the way it has been, illustrates to us the necessity if we are to vote upon it as a whole, of voting upon two distinct propositions at one time. I think the convention ought to vote upon the question of whether or not it will add this clause to the Constitution, and then also independently and free from that proposition have the privilege of voting upon the question of whether these various State officers may be elected to other offices than the one they are elected to at that time. I think it is proper for us to have that privilege. I am not familiar enough with parliamentary usage to know exactly how to get at it, but it seems to me, as there are two distinct questions, it is a case where we can call for a division, and I, therefore, move, if it is proper, for a division of the question.

     THE PRESIDENT--The chair does not see how the question can be stated other than the adoption or rejection of the substitute offered by the gentleman for Talladega.

     MR. ASHCRAFT--I think the gentlemen of the convention ought to have the privilege of being heard on that other proposition, if we are to vote on this as a whole. If there are reasons why the Governor should not succeed himself in office, and should not be eligible to any other office in the gift of the State in order that he may faithfully and impartially and diligently perform the duties of the office of Governor, the same reasons might pertain to the office of Treasurer, Auditor and Attorney-General. Merely to say that they are not to be allowed to succeed themselves will not reach the point we are striving after. If we are so unfortunate as to elect men who are tempted by politics to aspire to these other positions, when they come to this State House at once there will spring up these combinations which will result in a mere exchange of offices at the end of four years. These gentlemen will have excellent opportunities and great temptations to form what might be well be denominated as a State House ring, and it is from such a result as this that we are seeking to escape. Therefore, I think the provision suggested by the gentleman from Talladega to that amendment are eminently wise. We certainly want our State Treasurer to discharge his duties with faithfulness and impartiality and resting sorely upon the proposition that


556

OFFICIAL PROCEEDINGS

all the honor he is to obtain is in the faithful discharge of his duty, and the same is true of each of the other officers, and I, therefore, heartily concur in the views of the gentleman from Talladega.

     MR. BROWNE--I rise for the purpose of withdrawing my amendment temporarily to meet the views of delegates on the floor.

     MR. JONES (Montgomery)--I move that we adjourn.

     General Harrison tendered an invitation to any of the members of the Convention or its officers who desired to attend the funeral of Governor Samford transportation on a special train for that purpose.

     Various committee meetings were announced also.

     MR. WEAKLEY - I ask unanimous consent to offer a resolution.

     The consent was given and the resolution was read as follows:

     Resolution 145, by Mr. Weakley:

     Be it resolved by this Convention that the proper officers of this Convention be instructed to transmit to the Constitutional Convention of the State of Virginia now in session at Richmond the following message:

     To the President and Delegates of the Constitutional Convention of the State of Virginia, Richmond, Va.:

     The President and delegates of the Constitutional Convention of the State of Alabama now in session at Montgomery, extend greetings to the President and delegates of the Constitutional Convention of the State of Virginia now in session at Richmond, and hope that they will improve on their present laws.

     MR. PITTS - Strike out that last sentence.

     MR. WEAKLEY - I accept the amendment.

     The latter part of the sentence expressing the hope that they improve on their present laws was stricken out and the resolution adopted.

     Vote being taken the Convention then adjourned.