Records of the commission of 1943-1944 to revise the Constitution of Georgia, volume II [1946]

RECORDS
OF THE
, COMMISSION OF 1943-1944
TO REVISE THE CONSTITUTION OF GEORGIA
EDITED BY
ALBERT B. SAYE
Associate Professor of Political Science The University of Georgia
VOLUME II
PUBLISHED BY AUTHORITY OF THE STATE 1946

PREFACE

This volume is a continuation of the Records of the Commission of 1943-'14 to Revise the Constitution of Georgia. The decision to publish these records in t~o volumes was made after printing had begun; hence there is no significance in the division of material in the two volumes. At the opening of Volume Two the Commission is discussing a report of the committee on the judiciary, of which Mr. Justice Warren Grice was chairman.
In editing these records an effort has been made to preserve the wording as recorded by the Reporter (J. H. Duggan, Jr. & Associates, Court and Convention Reporters, Atlanta, Georgia). The time for proof reading has been limited, but a comparison of the records published here with the Reporter's manuscript deposited in the State Library will show this to be a fairly accurate reproduction.

Athens, Georgia January 15,1947

A. B. S.

I I I I
I I I I
I I I I
I I I I
I I I I
I I I I
I I I I
I I I I
I I I I
I I I I
I I I I
I I I I
I I I I
I I I

RECORDS OF CONSTITUTIONAL COMMISSION

5

JUDGE GRICE. In Paragraph II, change is suggested.
CHAIRMAN ARNALL. The Clerk will read the Committee recommendation.
MR. McCUTCHEN. (Reads) ''The General Assembly shall provide by law for the selection of the most experienced, intelligent and upright men to serve as grand jurors, and intelligent and upright men to serve as traverse jurors. Nevertheless, the grana jurors shall be competent to serve as traverse jurors. The General Assembly shall have the power to impose the burden of jury serviCE! on women also, under such regulations as the lawmakers may prescribe."
MR. ATKINSON. I couldn't hear that.
CHAIRMAN ARNALL. Letting the General Assembly, if it sees fit, press women into jury service.
MR. ATKINSON. Why not do it here?
MRS. HAAS. Why not change the word "men" to citizens? I am told by some of the women interested many years ago that probably the Legislature has the right now. This is not giving any new right. At the time the Federal suffrage amendment was passed the Georgia Legislature had adjourned and then at the next session it passed an act removing all the disabilities from women, except they were not required to bear arms or serve on juries, and some believed the Legislature could remove that disability.
CHAIRMAN ARNALL. The word "male," as used, also includes the female in the law.
MRS. HAAS. I don't now believe that particular section grants any new powers, but at the same time there is a question constantly arising. I am asked if I want to serve on juries. The question is whether all the citizens of the State should assume their responsibility.
CHAIRMAN ARNALL. Do you have any amendment to the paragraph?
MRS. HAAS. Yes. I make a motion that in the sentence which reads, "intelligent and upright men to serve as grand jurors, and intelligent and upright men to serve as traverse jurors," the word "men" be changed to "citizens."
CHAIRMAN ARNALL. That would press jury service on the

6

RECORDS OF CONSTITUTIONAL COMMISSION

women now.
MRS. HAAS. It would make jury service possible.
CHAIRMAN ARNALL. That might mean children.
MRS. HAAS. Would "adult citizens" cover it?
JUDGE GRICE. I do hope the Commission won't make it compulsory for the women to serve on the juries. There may be some counties where it would be all right, but we know there are counties where it is not all right.
CHAIRMAN ARNALL. My wife would divorce me.
JUDGE GRICE. I don't want my wife and daughters to have to.
CHAIRMAN ARNALL. Mrs. Haas, there are twelve states where it is mandatory and in the others the judges are so kind and considerate they make the women understand they don't have to serve. Why should they have to serve, Mrs. Haas?
MRS. HAAS. Why should they not accept any adult citizenship?
CHAIRMAN ARNALL. We have always regarded women in a class to themselves. We have not pressed burdensome duties upon them.
MRS. HAAS. The women have a real contribution to make.
CHAIRMAN ARNALL. If you pass a law allowing those who want to accept it, it is all right. I am no prognosticator, but if it was put to a vote of the women in Georgia as to whether or not they want to serve on juries, it is my judgment a great many would not vote to serve. We make men bear arms. We don't make women bear arms. We put the onerous burdens on the men, not the women. I am old fashioned, but I think the place of the woman is better in the home with the children than serving on juries. I believe that.
MRS. HAAS. The question is whether they can protect the homes by being at home.
CHAIRMAN ARNALL. They won't have to serve on the jury if they stay at home. I believe in women's rights, but I am not in favor of taking women out of the homes. We are breaking up homes today that way. I don't believe the jury is going to take them out of their homes. I am in favor of letting the women serve who want to serve. I am not talking as Chairman, but as a member of the Commission. I would hesitate to make a woman serve on the jury.

RECORDS OF CONSTITUTIONAL COMMISSION

7

JUDGE GRICE. The Court Houses in this country are not fixed for that.
CHAIRMAN ARNALL. We have never placed burdensome duties on women in government. I think the committee recommendation is fine. It is a step in the right direction. The General Assembly can authorize it if they want to.
MRS. HAAS. The Legislature now has that power.
MR. HARRIS. If we make it mandatory not many of us could go home.
JUDGE MacINTYRE. Might as well make it compulsory for women to bear arms.
MRS. HAAS. This is not physical.
CHAIRMAN ARNALL. The worst physical endurance you ever got into in your life, I am told. The question is on the lady's amendment.
MR.GROSS. Mr. Chainnan, I want to make inquiry of the distinguished members of the Commission. For the past ten years I have been privileged to serve in a branch of the General Assembly with many of them. There is one of whom I believe, if I recall, during that time he has opposed jury service for women. Now that he will assume the grace of the bench in his circuit and come in contact with jurors, he is probably advocating women serving on the jury.
CHAIRMAN ARNALL. The Chair will call for a vote on the lady's motion, that Paragraph II be amended to read as follows :-to keep down any mistake, why not say "men and women," so you won't get into the question of who is a citizen? Why not say ''The General Assembly shall provide by law for the selection of the most experienced, intelligent and upright men and women to serve as grand jurors, and intelligent and upright men and women to serve as traverse jurors. Nevertheless, the grand jurors shall be competent to serve as traverse jurors," and by striking the last sentence, "The General Assembly shall have the power to impose the burden of jury service on women also, under such regulations as the lawmakers may prescribe"-that is a mandatory provision requiring women to serve as well as men. So many as favor the amendment make it known by saying "aye"; opposed "no." The noes seem to have it and the women do not serve on juries.

8

RECORDS OF CONSTITUTIONAL COMMISSION

MR. ATKINSON. They can serve if we adopt that one about the General Assembly having power to impose the burden on them. We did not kill that one.
CHAIRMAN ARNALL. No. We are coming back to that now. The next question is on the adoption of the proposed Paragraph II, Section XVIII, Article VI, the recommendation of the Sub-committee, which provides that men shall serve on grand and traverse juries but the General Assembly shall have the power to impose the burden of jury service on women also, under such regulations as the lawmakers may prescribe.
MR. ATKINSON. The General Assembly shall have the power to impose the burden.
CHAIRMAN ARNALL. That is what it is, a burden.
JUDGE GRICE. That is exactly what it is.
MR. ATKINSON. It may be a great privilege. You have women to vote now and you want them to vote.
MR. GOWEN. Why not say the General Assembly may require women to serve?
MR. ATKINSON. The General Assembly may require jury service.
CHAIRMAN ARNALL. If the Commission will indulge the Chair, the Chair will state it as he understands it: "The General Assembly shall provide by law for the selection of the most experienced, intelligent and upright men to serve as grand jurors, and intelligent and upright men to serve as traverse jurors. Nevertheless, the grand jurors shall be competent to serve as traverse jurors. The General Assembly shall have the power to impose the burden of jury service on women also, under such regulations as the General Assembly may prescribe." Does that cover your motion? The question is on the adoption of the amended paragraph of the gentleman from Chatham, Senator Atkinson. Is there objection? Without objection it is adopted as amended by the gentleman from Chatham by changing "lawmakers" to "General Assembly." All right, Mr. Chairman.
JUDGE GRICE. Paragraph III remains the same.
MR. McCUTCHEN. (Reads) "Compensation of Jurors. It shall be the duty of the General Assembly by general laws to prescribe the manner of fixing compensation of jurors in all counties in this State."

RECORDS OF CONSTITUTIONAL COMMISSION

9

CHAIRMAN ARNALL. Is there objection to adopting Paragraph III? The Chair hears none. It is adopted. Section XIX.
MR. MAJORS. Mr. Chairman, I want to add a new section to this Section XVIII, as Paragraph IV. "No citizen drawn for jury duty shall be allowed to serve more than one term as a juror during an} one calendar year."
CHAIRMAN ARNALL. Shall be allowed or required?
MR. MAJORS. Allowed or required, either one. I can't get a lawyer to construe the law, and they keep me continually in court serving.
CHAIRMAN ARNALL. The gentleman moves to add a new paragraph to Section XVIII to read as follows: "No citizen drawn for jury duty shall be required to serve for more than one term of court as a juror during anyone calendar year."
MR. MAJORS. That is right.
CHAIRMAN ARNALL. The question is on the adoption of the pro posed paragraph.
MR. DURDEN. I don't know what effect that will have. I know jury service is a burden in those cases where you have court once a month, but I am afraid you wouldn't have enough to serve.
CHAIRMAN ARNALL. In a contested case you couldn't try them. Any further discussion? The question is on the motion of the gentleman from Evans.
MR. ATKINSON. I want to suggest when we get women on the jury there will be plenty of jurors.
MR. HOLT. All the argument against the proposal comes from a bunch of lawyers who don't have to serve on juries. I know all the trouble about getting jurors in these times. I have just finished serving, and there is never a term of court but what from two to a dozen of my employees are drawn as jurors. It is definitely a bad thing to expect men to come into each term of court, one after another, and almost every week there is a term of court going on in Macon, and I do think a man should not be required to serve for more than one week.
CHAIRMAN ARNALL. The question is on the motion of the gentleman from Evans limiting jury service to one term of court each year. Is there objection to the adoption of the amendment? The

10

RECORDS OF CONSTITUTIONAL COMMISSION

question is on the adoption of the motion. So many as favor its adoption rise and stand until counted; reverse your position, those opposed rise.
MR MAJORS. Mr. Chairman, a point of order. I suggest that the lawyers are not competent to vote here.
CHAIRMAN ARNALL. The gentleman is out of order. What is the vote on the motion? The ayes three and the nayes twelve. The amendment is lost.
The hour of 5 :10 having arrived, the Commission is adjourned until 10:00 o'clock tomorrow morning.
(Whereupon the meeting was adjourned).

WEDNESDAY MORNING
AUGUST 16, 1944
GOVERNOR ARNALL. The Commission will come to order. We are happy to have with us this morning Dr. Louie D. New-
ton, esteemed minister, who will lead us in prayer at this time. (The Commission is led in prayer by Dr. Newton.)
GOVERNOR ARNALL. Thank you, Dr. Newton, it was kind of you to come and be with us today. We appreciate it so much.
The Assistant Secretary will call the roll. (Roll is called by Mr. McCutchen.)
GOVERNOR ARNALL. At this time the chair wants to recognize in the hall Lieutenant Colonel Marvin Griffin, who has been interested in State Government for a long number of years and has rendered distinguished service in State Government. Of late he has been rendering service to his Country in the Pacific area. Marvin, come down and say a word to us.
LT.-COL. MARVIN GRIFFiN. Thank you, Governor. Fellow Georgians, I know the big business you have ahead of you, and certainly it is not encumbent on me to take up your valuable time, but I do want to take this opportunity, since the Governor was so kind as to introduce me, to bring you greetings from the "101", which is an old Georgia battalion in the south-west Pacific. I believe that battalion or that organization is a group of Georgians that traveled about the furthest away from home of any I know of. I want to tell you that, having been their commanding officer, it is useless for me to say that I am proud of each and every one of them. They are

RECORns OF CONSTITUTIONAL COMMISSION

11

made out of good stuff. They don't complain, and they don't run. And I have lost them. I am back for a new assignment now, but if I ever go off to war again, which I probably will, I just hope I am fortunate enough to have that group of men with me. It being a Georgia National Guard unit in Federal service, after being in that theater thirty-five months, and in New Guinea twenty-seven, and incidentally those boys are the first citizens in New Guinea of the United States Army, the ground force is-a grateful government is relieving a certain number of them each month. Of course it is a policy. I will say in a few more months there will not be any left in the "101", which was a Georgia Battalion. I hope and trust when the war is over we will have a reinstatement of the National Guard, and when you gentlemen are writing this Constitution, please put it in there, because we want the state of Georgia to be soldiered, if necessary, by Georgia troops.
Thank you, Governor, and I want to say it gives me a great deal of pleasure to have my feet on this Georgia soil.
GOVERNOR ARNALL. Marvin, we are proud of you, and your men. It is good to have you home again. And let me say this: In a few minutes after we get started, I am going to excuse myself, and I want to visit with you a few minutes, so if you will hold on a few minutes, I will appreciate it.
We also have with us today Representative Charles Miller of Decatur County, who will be in the Legislature representing that County; "Kid" James, one of our fine friends; Frank Forrester, Workmen's Compensation Board, who is doing a fine job; and Lonnie Pope of the State Highway Commission, representing the Eighth Congressional District. We are glad to have you all and we are glad to have Ben Fortson, who is a regular attendant at our meetings, due to his interest in our Commission,and he will be a strong arm in helping us present our report properly to the Legislature. We are glad to welcome Judge Tom Candler to our deliberations today, we have been missing him. Lonnie, if you will hold on, I will be with you in a little while. I also want to recognize a very attractive young lady, Miss Gowen, daughter of our distinguished member of the County of Glynn. Will you stand up, please? (Applause.) We are glad to have Jimmie Duggan back on the job.
Yesterday on our work on Article VI, relating to the Judiciary, we came to Section XIX. Mr. Chairman Grice-
MR. GOWEN. Mr. Chairman, at this time I am prepared to report

12

RECORDS OF CONSTITUTIONAL COMMISSION

on Section XIII, assigned to me for the purpose of undertaking to frame what appeared to be the consensus of opinion of the Committee.
CHAIRMAN ARNALL. Is there objection to receiving the report at this time? \Vithout objections, it will be received. That is a proposed Paragraph I and Paragraph II of Section XIII, of Article VI. The Sub-committee, of which Mr. Gowen is chairman of this particular Sub-committee, makes the following recommendation:
"Paragraph I: The General Assembly shall provide adequate salaries for the Justices of the Supreme Court, the Judges of the Court of Appeals, and the Superior Courts, the Attorney General, and the Solicitor General to be paid from the Treasury of the State, which shall not be decreased during the remainder of the terms of the officers then in the Commission. The General Assembly may authorize any county to supplement, out of county funds, the salary of a Judge of the Superior Court of the judicial circuit in which such county lies. The salaries now of force shall continue until changed."
You have heard the reading of the paragraph, is there any discussion or amendment?
MR. GOWEN. One thing that should be brought to the attention of the Commission, that language will give any county in the State authority to supplement the salary of the Judge of the Superior Courts. It was put in there with the thought it might do away with a number of local amendments, but I want every member of the Commission to understand what it does.
CHAIRMAN ARNALL. And it also authorizes the General Assembly to provide adequate salaries for the Supreme Court Justices, the Court of Appeals Judges, the Attorney General, and Solicitors General.
MR. HARRIS. How about Superior Court Judges?
CHAIRMAN ARNALL. Superior Court Judges, yes. Is there objection to its adoption?
MR. CULPEPPER. Will you read that again, please?
CHAIRMAN ARNALL. Yes. Read it, Mr. Assistant Secretary. (Mr. McCutchen reads the report.)
CHAIRMAN ARNALL. As the Chair understands that paragraph, if adopted it means simply this: That the present salaries provided

RECORDS OF CONSTITUTIONAL COMMISSIONla
in the Constitution shall continue in force until changed by the General Assembly. The General Assembly may change the salaries of the Judges, but they can't be lowered to affect the officers then in commission. It further provides that the counties may supplement salaries to Superior Court Judges in the wisdom of the COUDties, out of county funds, if they desire.
MR. MacINTYRE. If I understand it, for instance we had elected Supreme Court and Court of Appeals judges at different times, two judges just elected would get the salaries and the others could get different salaries unless the Legislature changed it.
MR. GOWEN. Not if they, unless they requested it; if they increased it they would get it, but if they reduced it they might-
MR. GROSS. They can't reduce the salaries during the term.
MR. GOWEN. If the salaries were reduced it would be possible t8 have different salaries.
MR. GROSS. You allow it to increase the salary of a judge whose term is not expired?
MR. GOWEN. Yes.
MR. FOLEY. And under the proposal the Legislature would have a right to increase the circuit that is now by Constitutional Amendment increasing the salaries?
MR. GOWEN. Yes.
MR. CULPEPPER. Would it not be better to add at the end, "until changed by law"? It might mean if you leave it this way you might have to change the Constitution.
MR. GOWEN. I don't think so. The way I first had it written, it was "until changed by law," and I thought it was surplusage. I have no objection to it going in. I decided it was surplusage.
MR. CULPEPPER. I move to amend by adding the language, "by law."
CHAIRMAN ARNALL. The gentleman moves to add at the end, "by law," so the sentence, "the salaries now of force shall continue until changed by law." Is there objection to adoption of the amendment? The Chair hears none. It is adopted. The question is on the adoption of Paragraph I. The Chair hears none, and it is ordered
adopted. Paragraph II-before we read it the Chair wants to recoa-

14

RECORDS OF CONSTITUTIONAL COMMISSION

nize the presence of the distinguished educator, Dr. M. L. Brittain. iIi our midst.
DR. BRITTAIN. Thank you. Will you give me two minutes?
CHAIRMAN ARNALL. We will be glad to give you two minutes, without objection.
DR BRITTAIN. My conscience would not let me, I don't know whether it would strike any of you as awkward, but I think some of you remember I was State Superintendent of Education for twelve or fourteen years in this State, and visited all of you. And I found some things out about education I thought I ought to have the grit to say to you, even though it does not please you, and though you may have made up your mind otherwise. I want to get it over to you; I put it in my first report, that of 1910, to the Legislature. Gentlemen. one of the weak spots in our educational work that you can remedy, and nobody else can do so, is if you will give the people of the country, not take away one of their privileges, whether they think so or not, but give the people in the country, the county schools, the right to get a superintendent from anywhere just as a city system has. Now, you take the city of Atlanta, or the city of Athens: if a superintendent dies or resigns, they can go to Baltimore or Massachusetts Tech, or anywhere, and get a superintendent. But if you take that county there in which my good old friend lives, Culpepper, who has been here so long, Fayette County, he is restricted not only to his county, but to some ambitious man who lives in his county, who has an eye on that, whether he be much more interested in dentistry or is a horse doctor, or what not, and consequently the people have not a square chance or a square deal. Now, I don't know that you will like what I am telling you, I am not sure of that, but it is a duty to do it, and I do hope you will consider carefully the fact of electing either by the State Board of Education or through the present Grand Jury system that you have, or what not that you have, that you give the people that right to get in their county just as good a superintendent as they can pay for instead of being restricted to the one, two, three, or four little fellows who perhaps don't know anything about it, and are far more interested in something else. Of course, we have some good ones. We have some good ones now. I ought to love them if any man in this world does, because the city and county superintendents made it unnecessary for me to ever do any campaigning. I never asked a man to vote for me in my life, although I had the man who run every other State House Official in his desire for office, Tom

RECORDS OF CONSTITUTIONAL COMMISSION

15

Watson, as my opponent, because I felt it a duty to oppose him; and I never was responsible for the fact you repeatedly elected me; it was because of those superintendents, city and county, and you people back there behind them, and therefore I do-and it is not spoken out of anything but affection and desire for the good of our people. Think of that, friends, because while it may not seem to be a very important thing, it is worth while in Georgia to give the people of the counties the same chance that the people in our city systems have, of getting the best superintendents possible from anywhere in the world they can find him. I thank you, and it is a pleasure to look in your faces.
CHAIRMAN ARNALL. Thank you, Dr. Brittain. The Committee on Education has not yet reported, and Mr. Gross is chairman of the committee, and they will consider the proposal.
We also have Jim Everett of Catoosa County, who is in attendance regularly at the meetings, and we are glad to have him.
Paragraph II of the Committee report. (reads).
''The General Assembly may, at any time, by a two-thirds vote of each branch, prescribe other and different salaries for any, or all, of the above officers, but no such reduction shall affect the officers then in commission; provided, however, that the General Assembly shall have power, at any time, by a majority vote of eacb branch, to abolish the fees at present accruing to the office of s0licitor general in any particular judicial circuit, and in lieu thereof to prescribe a salary for such office, in addition to' the salary prescribed in Paragraph I of this Section, and without regard to the uniformity of such salaries."
Is there any objection to the adoption of the Paragraph? Is there
any discussion or amendment? Without objection Paragraph n of
the Sub"committee Report is adopted. This must be in the record. That brings us to Section XIX. Are there any other reports out-
standing?
MR. MAJORS. I am copyirig mine now.
CHAIRMAN ARNALL. We will go to XIX to expedite it. Paragraph I, of Section XIX. No change.
"Paragraph I. The General Assembly shall have power to provide for the creation of county commissioner in such counties as may require them, and to define their duties."
Is there objection to the present paragraph of the Constitution going forward into the new Constitution as Paragraph I, of Sec-

16

RECORDS OF CONSTITUTIONAL COMMISSION

tion XIX, of Article VI? Without objection it is ordered adopted. Paragraph II. You know county commissioners have some judic-
ial powers. Is that your thought?
MR. GRICE. Our thought was in the old Constitution we didn9t think anybody wanted to change it, and as far as the place it shall be, it should be in, could be determined later by the committee on revision.
CHAIRMAN ARNALL. I know in some counties the commissioners are actually referred to as judges. I know in Chatham County they call them county commissioners and judges of the county court.
Section XX, Paragraph I.
MR. GRICE. No change.
CHAIRMAN ARNALL. The clerk will read it.
MR. McCUTCHEN. (Reads) Paragraph I. "All courts not specially mentioned by name in the first section of this article may be abolished in any county at the discretion of the General Assembly."
CHAIRMAN ARNALL. Is there any objection to the adoption of the paragraph?
MR. ATKINSON. I will rise when I speak. If the Chairman please, that is broad, mighty broad. We have mentioned city courts and municipal courts in Atlanta, and a criminal court; but they are mentioned, they are not specifically mentioned, and it states they ~an't be abolished.
CHAIRMAN ARNALL. Do you move to strike the paragraph?
MR. ATKINSON. Well-
MR. GOWEN. The City Court of Savannah is not mentioned in Section I.
MR. ATKINSON. I think that every court except probably-I waa going to say the Superior Court, but I don't see why the Legislature should not abolish and change the municipal courts to be creatures of the Legislature.
MR. HARRIS. They are not named in Section I.
MR. ATKINSON. We amended that.
MR. HARRIS. No, the only amendment was to add the Court of Appeals.

RECORDS OF CONSTITUTIONAL COMMISSION

IT

MR. ATKINSON. That leaves the Supreme Court.
MR. HARRIS. And Superior Court, Justices of the Peace, ex officio Notaries Public.

MR ATKINSON. The Justices of the Peace can be abolished. This is broad-and it is not my committee, I don't want to be criticising our helping on the work-but it looked like it is broad. If you are satisfied, it is all right with me.

MR. GRICE. I am trusting the Legislature.

Mil. ATKINSON. You better trust yourselves.

CHAIRMAN ARNALL. Is there any objectiop. to the paragraph

going forward?

~

MR. MacINTYRE. Mr. Atkinson served in the Legislature and is preparing to serve as judge. Have you any suggestions?

MR. ATKINSON. I will think it over.
CHAIRMAN ARNALL. Without objection we will adopt the paragraph and if the gentlemen have any suggestions to make or amendments, we can entertain those at the pleasure of the Committee. Without objection Paragraph I is adopted-Paragraph I of Section XXI.

MR. GRICE. We move that he deleted.
CHAIRMAN ARNALL. The clerk will read the paragraph. Section XXI. Paragraph I.
MR. McCUTCHEN. (Reads) "The costs in the Supreme Court shall not exceed ten dollars until otherwise provided by law. Plaintiffs in error shall not be required to pay costs in said Court when the usual pauper oath is filed in the Court below."
CHAIRMAN ARNALL. Is there objection to deleting that?

MR. HARRIS. The printed recommendation has a substitute for that paragraph.

CHAIRMAN ARNALL. The committee now recommends there be no paragraph setting the cost in the court.

MR. HARRIS. I think that is a good idea.

CHAIRMAN ARNALL. Is there any objection to deleting Paragraph I of Section XXI of Article VI of the present Constitution?

18

RECORDS OF CONSTITUTIONAL COMMISSION

Without objection it will be deleted. Is there objection?
MR. MAJORS. I object.
CHAIHMAN ARNALL. The gentleman will state his objection.
MR. MAJORS. I think the cost of the Court should be in some way controlled so the poorer citizens can come in court without the necessity of making a pauper's oath.
CHAIRMAN ARNALL. How would you determine whether a fellow would pay the court cost unless he was required to make a pauper's oath?
MR. MAJORS. I am not talking about that, I am talking about doing away with the ten dollars.
MR. GRICE. The Legislature has done that. There is a statute covering it, and why leave it?
CHAIRMAN ARNALL. Without objection it will be deleted, and the Chair hears none, and accordingly Paragraph I of Section XXI of Article VI is deleted, which in effect deletes Section XXI of Article VI.
MR. GRICE. Now, Mr. Chairman, the next recommendation is that a new provision be inserted in relation to equalizing the work of the several Superior Court judges of the State.
CHAIRMAN ARNALL. The clerk will read the proposed amendment.
MR. McCUTCHEN. (Reads) "The Supreme Court shall divide the judicial circuits of the State into five subdivisions known as Districts for the purposes of this paragraph. And the Chief Justice shall assign each Associate Justice to one of such judicial districts whose duty it shall be to acquaint himself with the volume of legal business in each judicial circuit of such district. Every two years the Chief Justice shall reassign the Associate Justices to other and different districts until such Associate Justice, or his successor in office, shall have served in all the districts. Whenever any judge of the Superior Courts, by reason of any disability or necessary absence from his circuit, or the accumulation or urgency of business, is unable to perform speedily all of the work of his circuit, the Associate Justice of the Supreme Court assigned to the District in which his circuit is located, or in his absence or disability the Chief Justice may, if in his judgment, the public interest requires,

RECORDS OF CONSTITUTIONAL COMMISSION

19

designate and assign any judge of the Superior Courts to act as judge in such circuit and to discharge any or all of the judicial duties of a judge thereof for such time as the business of the circuit may require.
"Sessions of the Superior Courts may be held in two or more counties in the same circuit at the same time. Before any such designation or assignment is made by an Associate-Justice of the Supreme Court, he shall submit the designation or the assignment to the Chief Justice and obtain his consent thereto." Paragra.ph IV of Section III of Article VI.
MR. GRICE. The next paragraph is really a part of it, although it has a new number. Read that, too.
MR. McCUTCHEN. (Reads Paragraph V, of Section III, Article
YL)
"The Clerk of the Superior Court shall prepare as of the first day of January and July of each year, and before the expiration of thirty days from these dates shall transmit to the Associate Justice of the Supreme Court having supervision of the district in which his circuit is located, a statement of all cases then pending in his court, and the length of time that they have been so pending, and whether the cause is civil or criminal. A failure to so do may be punished as for contempt of the Supreme Court."
CHAIRMAN ARNALL. The Chairman moves to amend in the third line the word "five" by inserting in lieu thereof the word "six," so as to conform to the action heretofore taken by the Commission.
MR. MacINTYRE. That is provided they make seven judges.
CHAIRMAN ARNALL. That's right. Is there objection to that? The chair hears none.
MR. GIUCE. Mr. Chairman, it is a notorious fact we have some very large circuits in Georgia, and some very small circuits in Georgia, and that in some of them the judges do not, are not required to give their full time on account of the smallness of the litigations, whereas in other circuits the judges are busy all the time, and frequently behind. This is intended to keep a check upon the business of the various circuits, and to provide that judges from other circuits may be assigned to help out in the circuits that are behind.
MR. MacINTYRE. May I 'iupplement that? Judge Grice says-and

20

RECORDS OF CONSTITUTIONAL COMMISSION

I got some of the figures this morning-Mr. Majors happens to have a small circuit, and called the attention of the Committee to the fact his particular circuit was small-and I got the circuits, just a few of them: Evans County Circuit, they have 47,000 people; Mr. Harris said the Griffin Circuit is 27,000 people; Fifth Circuit is 63, Flint Circuit is 45. Now, Judge Candler's Circuit, which I believe is the largest in area in Georgia, not in population, but in area, has 100,110 voters. Then I skipped to my own circuit to see how many people we had, and we had 119,000 and some voters. Now, I give these figures just for this reason: Now in my county, you notice is not the most population, but one of the most populous, and while our judge has not many political enemies, I never heard anybody say he was getting too much money because the circuit kept him busy in the adjoining circuit which had as good judge as we did, but it was a small circuit and the judge's time was not taken up. I frequently heard complaints, and under this system we specially put in there the Judge, the Chief Justice, should rotate the six Associate Justices so that if one Associate Justice didn't keep the work in his particular district up, somebody might inquire as to why his district was always behind. It would just be a method of sort of prodding each judge in each district to be on his toes, and the State pays all of them $7200, or whatever the figure is, $5000 a year, and that judge can do like they do in the Federal Court, and it made them catch up the docket. He don't have to stay in his circuit. He just says, "Your circuit is behind, and we want it caught up, and we are sending this judge down there, and if it is necessary he can send three judges there; or if he wants to help out the Columbus District, he can send four judges there. He can do whatever is necessary to catch up the work of the county by assigning judges there who have nothing to do at that particular time. Now, to coordinate that, we say he must, before a judge can order another judge to the circuit, he must obtain the consent of the Chief Justice. That was for the purpose of coordinating the law. So that if a judge on one circuit assigns Judge X, and the other Judge assigns Judge X, then he must consult the Chief Justice, and he will say, well, Judge A has already ordered Judge X to this circuit. And it just occurred to us, you know as I read these things, some of the judges are really overworked, and some of them, it is not their fault, but in the 45,OOOth district, if he goes fishing too much the voters will complain, and say he is not tending to his job, when he is doing all the law allows him to do, but under this system the Associate Justice can utilize every judge in Georgia that is not busy, and catch up the

RECORDS OF CONSTITUTIONAL COMMISSION

21

business in every circuit in Georgia. Mr. Majors made the point some of the judges didn't have much to do, and it turned out the ones he referred to were the small circuits, and that brought about this amendment. Is that correct?
MR. MAJORS. Yes, sir, it is just an attempt to do away with the inequality of the work.
CHAIRMAN ARNALL. You heard the reading of Paragraph IV and V as taken together. Any amendment?
MR. FOLEY. I want to suggest an amendment about the middle of Paragraph IV-"whenever any judge of the Superior Court by reason of any disability." I move to insert just before "disability," "dis qualification". My idea about that is that where a judge is disqualified, he should not select another judge to preside in that case, and I think it would be proper to let this Associate Justice select a judge for that purpose.
CHAIRMAN ARNALL. Judge Foley moves to amend the sentence, "whenever any judge of the Superior Court, whenever because.of any disability or necessary absence from his circuit," by inserting before the word "any," the language "disability," "any disqualifi. cation, disability, or necessary absence from his circuit." Any objection to that amendment? Without objection it is ordered adopted. The question is on adopting Paragraph IV and V.
MR. DURDEN. Mr. Chairman, I doubt the wisdom of Paragraph V. I don't know what the situation would be, but it is putting quite a responsibility on the clerk. I suggest that we amend that to, ''The clerk of the Superior Court shall prepare a statement under the rules and regulations as may be prescribed by the General Assembly." I can see if you put it in the Constitution at some future time it may create a hardship to tell them they have to do it twice a year.
MR. MacINTYRE. We were trying to make this thing with some intestinal fortitude. Now, we have tried to take it out. Any judge coming to the Legislature or clerk can get it messed up, if as it is, the Supreme Court does not have to punish him if he makes a showing; it just gives the Supreme Court the power, if they think he has not undertaken to do his duty, to punish him; they have a discretion; they don't have to punish him if they think he made a proper showing.
CHAIRMAN ARNALL. Do you, Mr. Durden, offer an amendment?

22

RECORDS OF CONSTITUTIONAL COMMISSION

MR. DURDEN. Yes, sir.
CHAIRMAN ARNALL. To read, "The clerk of the Superior Court shall prepare a statement of all cases then pending in his court, and the length of time they have been so pending, and whether the same is civil or criminal, and forward the same to the clerk of the Superior Court at such time and in such manner as the General Assembly may direct."
MR. DURDEN. Yes, sir.
CHAIRMAN ARNALL. You heard the reading of the amendment. Is there any objection to the adoption?
MR. GRICE. Yes, sir.
CHAIRMAN ARNALL. The question is on the adoption of the amendment. So many as favor it as stated, say "aye." Opposed "no." The "noes" seem to have it, and the amendment is lost. The question on adopting Paragraphs IV and V as amended-
MR. ATKINSON. I don't want to talk too much, but we are fixing here to let an officer in the Capitol-I don't know how good he may be now, we don't know what he will be in the future-take charge of the court. We elect a Superior Court judge in a circuit, and the people elect him. If he is disqualified, who is going to determine whether he is disqualified or if he is not attending to his business properly, who is going to do that-a man in Atlanta? The officer who has charge of the district will send another judge down there, and he takes charge of his court. The last paragraph says, "The justice may, if in his judgment the public interest requires, designate and assign any judge of the Superior Courts to act as judge in such circuit and to discharge any or all of the judicial duties of a judge thereof for such time as the business of the circuit may require." Gentlemen, you are going a long way when you take the judiciary that you have elected in your district and put it in the power of the judges in Atlanta, who are elected for six years, to come down in your district and say, "Here, you are not keeping up with your record, get out," and put somebody else down there and run this thing until we think it is time to take it over. Now, that may be all right, but that just is not the way we have been running our business, and, as far as I know, there is not any kick on the courts.
MR. MAJORS. Isn't it a fact the Superior Court is a State court, and

RECORDS OF CONSTITUTIONAL COMMISSION

23

isn't it a fact now they have no supervision as to whether the judge will work or shall not work?
MR. ATKINSON. He runs every four years, and he is responsible to the people. .
MR. MAJORS. I know. We are trying to get some work out of the judges that are not working.
CHAIRMAN ARNALL. If the Chair may indulge, I understand the Paragraph is for the purpose of assisting Superior Court judges who are behind with their calendars in those circuits where they have more business than they can adequately attend to. It is also the purpose of the Paragraph, as the Chairman understands it, to make it possible to give other work to judges in circuits that don't have much work to do, and thereby, giving the judges more work in the small circuits where they can assist the ones in the heavily burdened circuits, you lay the foundation to bring about adequate compensation for your judges of the Superior Court. That was the understanding of the Chair. The Chair did not understand these provisions would be used to go into the local circuits and control the deliberations of the court. However, that was merely the Chair's under&tanding of the purpose of the provision.
MR. MacINTYRE. The purpose of the provision was not to go in the circuit at all, if the particular circuit, if the business in the discretion of the Supreme Court was reasonably kept up, not to send anybody. As you say, just an emergency to help the local judge keep his circuit business up, so you would not have the complaint about delay. It was not the idea as long as the circuit business was reasonably kept up. Under the federal system I understand their dockets were closed until they adopted a system like this, and they sent other federal judges in other States where they weren't busy to help that judge get his docket up. There was no reflection on the judge; it was not to supersede that judge; it was simply to help clear up the docket. I don't think it will be held by the Supreme Court to refled in any way on the judge.
MR. HARRIS. There is one thing I would like to call attention to. If the scheme here was followed out and my clerk of the court set up a certification as to the cases pending, and it came to the Supreme Court, it would scare them to death. They send three or four judges to Richmond county immediately, and there is not a case down there for trial for the simple reason we have followed the custom for five or ten years that no case is ever assigned for trial

24

RECORDS OF CONSTITUTIONAL COMMISSION

unless counsel on one side or the other files a written request with the clerk, and when that is filed, it automatically goes to the calendar at the next term of the court. Thousands of cases have been filed that lawyers decided there is nothing to, and have never been assigned. The docket would go back for years; and yet there is no urgent business in my county at all right now. The last term of the court, I think, stayed in session one day on civil business. I don't think they tried a case, and I don't think in the whole county there would be over two cases ready for trial or that could be tried today if court were in session. But we have followed that custom and that custom has been followed in a great many circuits. and a great many counties, and I don't think the report the clerk would have to make-I expect it would take the clerk in my county three months to get up that report.
MR. GOWEN. I assume all your county officers are on a basis and make no effort to collect the cost of the court.
MR. HARRIS. Yes, sir, they collect more court costs in my county than any county I know, because every one of them, to build up their salary schedule and number of employees. they have to prove every year that their office has made a profit for the county, because if they don't they get the salaries cut.
MR. FOLEY. Would not this movement tend to get rid of dead wood?
MR. HARRIS. I think it would.
MR. CANDLER. I think your statement is a good argument in favor of, it.
MR. HARRIS. It is.
MR. GRICE. Mr. Chairman, we shy at a good many things because they are new. As we stated, this assembly provision has been in effect ten or fifteen years in federal courts, and it worked beautifully, and nobody ever found any objections to it.
CHAIRMAN ARNALL. Any amendments to the Paragraph?
MR. DURDEN. Mr. Chairman, following Mr. Atkinson's thought, I am sure it was not the intention of the Sub-committee to give the Chief Justice the right to send a judge into any other circuit for any reason at all. It was the urgency of the accumulation of business. That was the reason expressed by the Chairman. That being true, I move to strike, beginning at, "may, if in his judgment, the

RECORDS OF CONSTITUTIONAL COMMISSION

25

public interest requires." With the elimination of those words, then you will have a better expression as to when the Justice can designate a judge togo in your circuit, and that will be because of the accumulation of cases.
MR. MacINTYRE. Mr. Chairman-
CHAIRMAN ARNALL. The gentleman moves to amend-I will state the amendment-amend Paragraph IV by striking the language, appearing in the middle of the Paragraph, "may, if in his judgment the public interest requires:' I wanted to state that.
MR. MacINTYRE. That was modeled somewhat after the federal system, the federal system has worked so well in cleaning up the dockets. In fact, my brother Harris and I differed about that entirely. One of my thoughts was to clean up all that old stuff. In my humble opinion it ought to be cleaned up and gotten out of the way, and get the courts out from under the stigma of not trying cases and allowing cases to accumulate, and losing time, and all that stuff; and if those dockets were not, it would be better in my opinion for the judges over the circuits, and you have to give somebody the authority-
MR. DURDEN. If you eliminate those words can't the Chief Justice in a case of accumulated cases send a man down for that specific reason?
MR. MacINTYRE. I think this: Mr. Gowen and I were talking about it. There are so many cases, that we are aU human, we are just human beings, and as Mr. Gowen expresses it, you get some cases in some circuits that are hot; maybe two prominent people in the circuit start a divorce suit and a row starts about the children, and that is the worst row in the world, over children; and some times the judge-he is a human being, and both sides are pulling and tugging at him-under this system the Supreme Court judges could call in the Superior Court judge and say, "Is that a hot case down there?" and he says, "yes," and he says, I will send another judge down there that don't know a soul on either side, and he can dispose of that, and in that instance it would be of assistance to the Superior Court. In North Carolina and in South Carolina they have the rotation system. We don't have that, and I don't think the people want it, but it would enable the judges of the Supreme Court to -expressly put in there the Chief Justice should- rotate them. They would not have the same district every year, and if one associate justice's district was behind, somebody would want to know

26

RECORDS OF CONSTITUTIONAL COMMISSION

what is the matter, and the very object of it was to get rid of that. I say, in my humble opinion, I am only speaking for myself, the object of it was to get the courts rid of that sort of business and have that Court as reference on the accumulation of all the cases. and not run along to suit the lawyers or anybody else.
CHAIRMAN ARNALL. The question is on adopting the amendment.
MR. HEAD. Before we vote, there has been a lot said about congestion in the federal courts. I would like to ask this Commission. including the Chairman, ~nd any visitor that may be present, if they know of any judicial circuit in Georgia. where the judge is not keeping up the business of that circuit. I would like to know what circuit it is.
MR. MacINTYRE. That is what we want the clerk to send the cases for, and let the Supreme Court judges----
CHAIRMAN ARNALL. Anyone know any circuit that the business is not up?
MR. MacINTYRE. I would venture in every circuit cases can be found being there ten or fifteen years.
CHAIRMAN ARNALL. I can only state one fact. I know that when I became Assistant Attorney General about eight years ago. and divorced myself from private practice of law. such as it was, I had a number of cases pending in the courts that I suppose are still pending there. I don't know what happened to them. I don't know whether they are there or gone, or what. I don't know how many other lawyers have had that experience. The case is just forgotten about. That is not conducive to the good practice of law, nor to the public interest. Now, without arguing these particular paragraphs, the Chair wants to make this statement: The law practice is about dead in Georgia. We fellows who have public positions don't realize that, but when you get out and try to make a living practicing law, I think you will. That is what I am told. And in my judgment the reason the law practice is dead, and is going to continue to die. is that the lawyers and the judges, the court officials, are not attentive to the quick and speedy disposition of issues in the courts. Now, I am just as much to blame as anyone. I am not defendng myself, but I will say that unless we do something to where we can give people speedy trials in the courts, the law practice will continue to dwindle. Now, this may help. It may not. I don't know, but

RECORDS OF CONSTITUTIONAL COMMISSION

27

I know fundamentally that if the law practice is to continue a vital part of our life, we have got to do something to give the people speedy adjudication of their rights. Today it is almost impossible to file any case in the court that you can get a final determination in less than a year, or two years, or maybe longer than that, particularly if the opposing lawyers are indisposed and don't feel like trying the case. When you have a good case they are hard to try, and if you have a sorry case they are hard to try, and I don't know the solution; but I know we have got to do something to help the people and preserve the law practice, and anything that would expedite the practice in the courts would be fine. However, Mr. Attorney General, I do not know of a single circuit in Georgia that is not up with the business that the lawyers will let the courts dispose of. Most of the delay is due to the fact that we lawyers won't try our cases.
MR. HEAD. Is it the purpose of this amendment for the Supreme Court to require the lawyers to dispose of business, and lawyers agree on it not to be disposed of like Mr. Harris described awhile ago?
CHAIRMAN ARNALL. I think the way that happens, the judge of the Superior Court takes his docket, and if the lawyers say there is nothing to that case much, we ought to get rid of it, and they mark it off the docket. Don't they do that?
MR. MAJORS. Sure.
MR. GOWEN. I might answer that in the Brunswick Circuit. It is not a case I am connected with, but I know a lawyer who has for two and a half years tried to get a case assigned for trial and he can't get it on.
CHAIRMAN ARNALL. Why?
MR. GOWEN. Because the Judge felt it would take too long to try it.
MR. GRICE. I used to live in the Oconee Circuit, and I know the docket was very much crowded, and you could not get a prompt trial. I know some years ago that was true of the Macon circuit. I don't think it is true of those circuits now, but we are building for the future.
MR. HEAD. I want to move, sir, that in view of what has been said, that we substitute the following language for Paragraph IV. ''The

28

RECORDS OF CONSTITUTIONAL COMMISSION

General Assembly may provide that the Supreme Court shall divide the judicial circuits of this state in six divisions, and may provide for the assignment of Superior Court judges in the various districts."
MR. CULPEPPER. I am against this thing, but I just thought if they were going to adopt it, the amendment I want to offer nowhe has offered a substitute as I understand it. Of course if his substitute is adopted, then any amendment I offer here would be out of order.
CHAIRMAN ARNALL. Yes.
MR. CULPEPPER. What I wanted to do, if that matter is going to be voted on, is to offer this amendment, whether it is adopted or not. Add these words: "Whenever any judge of the Superior Court by reason of his disability or disqualification," I think you put in, "or necessary absence from his circuit, or the accumulation or urgency of business, is unable to perform speedily all of the work of his circuit"-then add the words, "UPOll his request"-the associate justice-
CHAIRMAN ARNALL. The question is, we are going to clear this up now, the question first is on the amendment of the gentleman from Dougherty, to strike from lines 18 and 19, the language. "may"- -
MR. DURDEN. Not the words "may, if"-
CHAIRMAN ARNALL. "If, in his judgment, the public interest requires," in Paragraph IV, from lines 18 and 19. Is there any objection to adopting it?
MR. MacINTYRE. Just one word, Ihave been on the trial courts, and appellate courts both, and in the city court. We had a tremendous amount of business, and I want to appeal to this Commission to give it a trial. Let's see if we can't do something. The constant complaint is you can't. The gentleman said it is not so much the delay of the Superior Court judges, but there have grown up customs like Mr. Harris said, and they have followed them along.
MR. ATKINSON. Don't you think the real kick the people have is on the Court of Appeals, and not the Superior Court?
MR. MacINTYRE. Yes, sir, I want to answer that. I am glad he brought it up. Some time down home the Rotary Club asked a. judge of the City Court first to make a speech before them in refer-

RECORDS OF CONSTITUTIONAL COMMISSION

29

ence to why the delay. Then they asked the judge of the Superior Court to make a statement as to why the delay. Then they asked the judge of the Court of Appeals to make a speech as to why the delay. Then they asked the judge of the Supreme Court. One of the judges of the appellate court called attention to this fact, that under the present system they have three terms of the Court of Appeals and Supreme Court, and every case must be tried during the first or the second term, or by operation of law it is affirmed. It can't stay there but two terms. It can't stay there but approximately eight months. The average layman may think-I say I have served on both courts, I have nothing against the trial courts, I am for them, but if a case is tried in the City Court or Superior Courtthere were cases down there when I went on the bench that had been there five years or longer. You can't have that in the Court of Appeals and the Supreme Court; the law won't let them stay there that long, and the complaint is unjust. I Sl:l.Y the responsibility was on me as judge of the trial court when I was there, more so than it is on me as judge of the Court of Appeals, when the law gives me a positive mandate that I must try that case within approximately eight months. And I say it would be a fine thing if the people of Georgia would more readily understand that, and let the responsi bility rest where it belongs.
CHAIRMAN ARNALL. Thank you very much, Judge MacIntyre. The question is on the adoption of the amendment-
MR. CANDLER. Mr. Chairman, we have some fine Supreme Court justices, and I would be happy to have either one of the six exercise any supervision over the court in my circuit. Roy Harris' statement here convinces me this ought to be adopted. When I went on the bench we had a custom in our circuit of letting the lawyers fix the calendars, and the judge never knew what was on the docket except those cases that the bar put on the calendar. And I had been on the bench a year or so, and I told the clerk I wanted to change all that, and I wanted to fix the calendar myself. He said, "All right." I said, "Now put every case on the docket on the calendar"; and then I notified all my attorneys to meet me in that particular county on Saturday before the convening of the court the next Monday, and I called the complete calendar. And just recently in Hall County, which is the largest County in my circuit, I found on the docket cases that had been pending since 1925, which had not been called, and when the case was called the attorneys were re-o quired to make some response about it. We struck from the docket

30

RECORDS OF CONSTITUTIONAL COMMISSION

seventy some odd cases in which there was no issue left. That is not true in the other counties of my circuit because they are small, but that would be true in this county, Richmond County, Chatham County. Dave Atkinson will correct that after the first of the year, but there is not a judge in Georgia, if his clerk was required to file with the presiding justice of the Supreme Court a list of the cases pending in court, that would ever let a situation like thai exist. Those cases would go off, and be disposed of, wound up, be~ fore any report was made. And if for no other reason, that provision would be helpful in clearing up what appears to be a congested docket, when as a matter of fact it may not be congested, I am very much in favor of it. I have the largest circuit in the State in stand~ point of counties, and I would be very much in favor of that proposal. It would be helpful to any judge who is crowded with bus~ iness in his circuit. It would equalize, in my opinion, the work 01 the various Superior Court judges, and I would welcome such procedure. I hope I myself understood Judge MacIntyre. I understood him to say that if there was a prominent case in some circuit in volving the custody of children where the parents were influential, that would enable that judge to ask the justice of the Supreme Court to send some other judge to try it. I would hate to think there is a Superior Court judge in Georgia who does not have sufficient judicial courage to settle those issues. I think that would be a reflection on every Superior Court judge in Georgia, if that is the purpose.
MR. MacINTYRE. That is not the purpose. I retract that, if I said it. I intended the judge could say what is the matter with this case, what is the matter with that case, and I withdraw anything that might reflect or could be possibly intended to reflect on any Superior Court judge or any trial judge.
CHAIRMAN ARNALL. The Commission understands the distinguished jurist would not reflect on any judicial officers of the State.
MR. MacINTYRE. I would not reflect on the lowest or the highest trial judge.
CHAIRMAN ARNALL. Thank you, Judge Candler. The question is on the adoption of the gentleman from Dougherty's amendment, that the language, "that, if in his judgment the public interest requires," in lines 18 and 19 of Paragraph IV of the Committee's Report, be stricken. Is there objection?

RECORDS OF CONSTITUTIONAL COMMISSION

31

MR. FOLEY. Yes.
MR. MAJORS. In effect how would that change the meaning of the whole paragraph?
MR. GOWEN. To my mind it has no effect on it one way or the other.
MR. DURDEN. It means primarily he can designate it if there is an accumulation.
MR. FOLEY. I object.
CHAIRMAN ARNALL. There is objection. The question on the adoption of the amendment. Those in favor say "aye"; those opposed "no." The "noes" have it, and the amendment is lost. The question is on adopting the amendment of the judge from Fayette, which is to insert after the word "cireuit," in line 15 of Paragraph IV, the language, "upon his request."
MR. MacINTYRE. That kills it, leave it like it is. If you adopt that-
CHAIRMAN ARNALL. The question is on the adoption of the amendment from the gentleman from Fayette. Are there objections?
MR. FOLEY. I object.
CHAIRMAN ARNALL. All in favor of the adoption, let it be known by saying "aye."
MR. CULPEPPER. I withdraw my amendment.
CHAIRMAN ARNALL. The question is on the adoption of the amendment of the Attorney General, which inserts at the beginning of the Paragraph IV, the words, "The General Assembly may authorize." MR. HEAD. "The General Assembly may provide the Supreme Court shall divide the judicial circuits of the State in six subdivisions, and may provide for the assignment of Superior Court judges in the district."
MR. MacINTYRE. That is another death knell.
CHAIRMAN ARNALL. You heard the language, is there objection? There is objection. All in favor, say "aye." Opposing say "no." The "noes"-those in favor of the adoption let it be known by standing, rising and standing until counted. Reversed, those opposed rise. Five to eleven, the amendment is rejected by a vote of 5 to

32

RECORDS OF CONSTITUTIONAL COMMISSION

11. The question is on adoption of Paragraph IV as amended. The amendment as adopted is this: The word "five" is stricken, the word "six" substituted before the word "subdivision," the word appearing in line 12. The language, "by reason of any disability" has been amended by including before the word "disability" the word "disqualification," so that it reads, "by reason of disqualification, disability, or necessary absence from his circuit."
JUDGE CANDLER. I can see where this problem would come up: Who is going to to determine those disqualifications or disabilities? Now, in each case that is called where some other judge is there, where the lawyers want to raise the point, or raising the point on his presence, why would it not be better-I am talking largely to Judge Grice, the author of that-would it not be better to leave out the words "disqualification" and "disability" and "absence from the circuit;' and leave that entirely in the discretion of the justice presiding over their judicial district, so that you would not have those questions arising each time you are going to have atrial?
MR. GRICE. When Mr. Foley first suggested that, I saw no objection. I think that there is a good deal of merit in what you say.
JUDGE CANDLER. Leave it entirely to the discretion of the presiding justice, so you could not have any question arising in each case called.
CHAIRMAN ARNALL. So that it will read, "Whenever any judge of the Superior Court by reason of the accumulation or urgency of business, is unable to perform speedily"; or would it read, "whenever any judge of the Superior Court is unable to perform speedily all of the work of the circuit"?
JUDGE CANDLER. My thought was to put it in language like this: "Where in the discretion of the Supreme Court justice presiding over that judicial district sees proper to do so." I have such an abiding confidence in the Supreme Court I am never afraid of any supervision they would exercise.
MR. FOLEY. Don't you think, Judge Candler, a question of disability or disqualification always arises from the local judge that reports it? They would be the ones to determine that. Don't you think that is all right in view of that?
MR. MAJOR. We supposed the presiding judge-
MR. GRICE. I wonder, if you put in "disability" you would have

RECORDS OF CONSTITUTIONAL COMMISSION

33.

little case down there. He would say, "I am disqualified." Won't you agree on so and so? We ought to have an elasticity.
MR. FOLEY. The judge disqualifies himself, I don't think it is rarely raised where they try to disqualify a judge.
JUDGE CANDLER. I don't think-Where a Superior Court judge is disqualified to try a case, he ought not to select the judge to try that case.
MR. FOLEY. That is what I was trying to take care of.
CHAIRMAN ARNALL. That takes care of that very situation. The presiding justice over the circuit would. Do you offer that amendment?
JUDGE CANDLER. No, sir.
CHAIRMAN ARNALL. The question is on the adoption of Paragraph IV. All in favor of adopting the Paragraph let it be known by saying "aye." Opposed "no." The "ayes" seem to have it. The "ayes" have it, and it is adopted, Paragraph V. Are there any amendments to that?
MR. GRICE. Mr. Chairman, there is only one remaining recommendation that the Committee makes.
CHAIRMAN ARNALL. We have not finished Paragraph V. Is there objection to adopting Paragraph V, which is part and parcel of Paragraph IV, the continuity of the plan? Without objection it is ordered adopted. Is there objection? The chair hears none, and it is adopted.
MR. GRICE. The final recommendation is one that has been adopted in a great many States. It is one that five or six different meetings of the Georgia Bar Association have recommended; and that is no longer a city organization, it covers the whole State now. A number of bar associations of the judicial circuits have recommended it, and it provides for a judicial council, or in its absence, taking the rule making power and putting it in the hands of the Supreme Court or a judicial council. Read that.
MR. McCUTCHEN. (Reads) "On and after January 1, 1947, the rule making power for practice and procedure in the several courts of this State shall be vested in the Supreme Court of Georgia; Provided, that the General Assembly shall have the power to create a Judicial Council and to confer on it this power; Provided fur-

34

RECORDS OF CONSTITUTIONAL COMMISSION

ther, that rules promulgated hereunder shall not abridge, enlarge or modify the substantive rights of any litigant."

CHAIRMAN ARNALL. Is there any discussion or amendment? Is

there objection to the adoption of the provision as read, that is, the

J;Ule making power?

.

MR. HARRIS. Mr. Chairman, I don't believe that would last five minutes in the Legislature. I don't see any use to submit it, because we have been delegating legislative power from time to time, and that is the reason all these bureaus with law-making power have come up; and I think, and always have, and always will, that the legislative power ought to be in the Legislature; and I think it is dangerous to delegate it anywhere else. Now, consequently, I am opposed to delegating legislative power to any branch of the Government regardless of what it is. The last time, you know, the judges in convention adopted some rules, and the old folks from Fayette the first day of the Legislature introduced a bill to repeal them, and we did repeal them. We have this situation too: A man stays on the bench a long time; he necessarily forgets the hardships and the difficulties of the practicing lawyer, that he has to go through with; we develop a different viewpoint, all of us want to make it easy for ourselves. The Solicitor Generals, whenever they meet they want to make it easy to convict; and the defendant counsel wants to make it hard to convict; the judges necessarily want to make their work easy; and the trial lawyers and litigants want to take care of themselves. Now, in the Legislature we do have a mixture of lawyers and laymen, some good lawyers and some laymen with intelligence. Now, on the Supreme Court we always have intelligence, but yet, at the same time, through the course of years we develop an entirely different viewpoint. As soon as a man stays on the bench a few years he forgets the difficulties of the trial lawyer, and I think we ought, as a matter of policy, to keep the law-making power in the Legislature. As far as I am concerned, I don't want to see any bureau created again in Georgia that has law-making power, or judicial power. I think we ought to keep the judicial power in the courts, and we ought to keep the law-making power in the Legislature. And if we don't quit delegating legislative power, the first thing we know we are going to get in the same position the federal government is in, because they have created such a condition in the federal courts until the average practitioner is scared of the federal courts, and everybody is scared of them. Litigation is so hard to handle and

RECORDS OF CONSTITUTIONAL COMMISSION

35

so expensive to handle until the Congress has been getting away from the court and delegating the judicial power to these "kan-:garoo courts"; and now the kangaroo courts are even worse than any criticism ever made of any other court. And I think we are going a long way to establish a precedent to delegate law-making power to anybody except the law-making body, because as bad as the law-making body may be, the people get a lick at us every two years; and they get a lick at Congress every two years; and if we go haywire, it can be corrected. When you write this in the Constitution it can't be corrected if somebody makes a mistake, and I think we ought to keep it where it is.
MR. GRICE. I submit there is no inherent power in the General Assembly to make rules for the courts. I submit the inherent power lies in the courts to make its own rules. You charge the court with the administration of justice under the law. You say, "Now you reach a certain end. " We will tell you how to drive the thing, and we will tell you how many lines to hold, and we will tell you the language to use; and when to say "gee," and when to say "haw." And we will regulate the speed here, and regulate the speed there, and you can trot up hill or not, as we say, and it is not a matter for the Legislature to undertake to tell the courts how to perform their functions. Now, this is a serious matter. You observe that says, "provided further that rules promulgated hereunder shall not abridge, enlarge or modify the substantive rights of any litigant." Now, half of the delays with which the Courts are charged in my opinion can be traced to the straight jacket in which the Legislature has placed the courts. Half the criticism as to technical decisions in my judgment can be traced to a number of statutes imposed on the court by the legislature. This does not say that the Supreme Court shall have this. It says it shall do so until the General Assembly wants to take it out of their hands and provide a judicial counsel to do that thing. And I submit that it is not fair, and it is not wise to say to the court, "Now, here, you do a certain job; we are going to lay down, not only the substantive law, but we are going to tell you exactly how to do it." Now, that is not a legislative function. It is a judicial function, and the Constitution ought to so say, and I assure the Commission that every body of lawyers-who have as much interest as, I submit, anybody else has, in seeing justice is judicially administered-are heartily in favor of this provision.
MR. GOWEN. This provision, to answer the Speaker. If I thought

36

RECORDS OF CONSTITUTIONAL COMMISSION

that the rule-making power was going to be exercised by the members of the Supreme Court, without any assistance, I might have the same fear that he has, that we would have rules fixed by people who are not in practice. There is no doubt in my mind but that the membership of the Supreme Court would appoint a Commission or body to formulate the rules, just as the Supreme Court of the United States appointed a body to promulgate rules. But we have a safeguard in it, that is, the provision that the Legislature can create a judicial council; and that was carefully put in during the meetings of the Sub-committee, so we could go to the Legislature and tell the members that you have a safeguard if the Supreme Court goes crazy, or if the lawyers go crazy in formulating rules. The Legislature can create a judicial council, and nothing is said about the membership of it. The Legislature can create a judicial council of its own members, of anybody they want to, and repeal every rule the Supreme Court has,and promulgate the rules the Legislature wants. It is not going to place it where the Supreme Court will have it, if they abuse it at all; and the Legislature will do that if it came up. However, it does leave to the courts the rule-making power, where I think it has been; and I personally think the members of the Supreme Court were wrong when they held the Supreme Court didn't have it. But be that as it may, they have held that, and a majority of the courts of the United States have ruled the rule-making power was not a legislative function, but a judicial function to be administered by the courts; and it is done in most of the states of the Union. But I don't believe the gentleman from Richmond needs to fear, because if it does, and if he is a member of the Legislature, or if the folks from Fayette County are there, I don't see the judicial council created that will certainly undo what the Supreme Court has done; but I believe it is an opportunity; and I believe the temperament and frame of mind of the Bar of the State-I attended a meeting of the Georgia Bar Association Executive Committee at Macon. At that meeting they had the chairman of the circuit Bar Association. They were country lawyers there, not city lawyers. The Georgia Bar Association is now owned and operated by country lawyers-the day when it was a social outing for the railroad corporations lawyers of Atlanta has ceased-it is a different organization, and the first order of business, the first thing sponsored by the Georgia Bar Association is a bill for the General Assembly to place the rule-making power in the Supreme Court. That is the number one order of business that has been mapped out for the Legislative Committee of the

RECORDS OF CONSTITUTIONAL COMMISSION

37

Georgia Bar Association to handle; and the distinguished gentleman from Richmond is chairman of that along with the distinguished President of the Senate. The second order of business is to establish a judicial council; and those are the things the lawyers of the State want, because of the very fact the chairman of this Commission has said, unless the lawyers do something to improve the practice of law, the Jp.gal profession, instead of being a profession of honor, is going to be a profession of people who are out on charity, because you are going to have to take care of them _from some kind of a dollar handout, or else you are going to have to cut down. The lawyers are not making a living in the country. The backbone of the legal profession of Georgia has always been the country lawyer, who was a man who was looked up to in his community, who was a man of integrity, and a man of honor, and a man who was able to not live well, but to live adequately; and that day is going unless the lawyers do something about it to improve the practice in the courts. You are going to see built up all over the country these very "kangaroo courts" the Speaker talked about. The way to get rid of kangaroo ~ourts is to improve the procedure in the regular courts.
MR. HARRIS. I may interrupt to say I am with you, and we won't have any difficulty passing any rules the lawyers want to get up in the Legislature. It is only a question of who is going to have the say-so, and I think we ought to keep it in the Legislature.
MR. GOWEN. I have the greatest respect for the Legislature, of which I happen to be a member. But I have seen appeals made in the Legislature, passionate and prejudicial; and I see members of the General Assembly who I have sometimes felt took the position thf'y took not because they felt so much for it, but because they felt it would make good reading in the paper, or would make a good spep.ch.
MR. HARRIS. I have always been in that same crowd, because I have always felt, and the average lawyer has, that by turning all this over to the Bar Association none of us would have any part in it; and most of the members of the Legislature, including the -folks from Fayette-he and I figured that we folks out in the country section would not have any say-so, and any opportunity, because we never had any in the Bar Association. It is different now. and I think every member of the Legislature is willing to travel. I don't think you will have any difficulty, but at the same time we don't want it to get back like it used to be, when a handful of rail-

38

RECORDS OF CONSTITUTIONAL COMMISSION

road lawyers went down and took charge of the Bar Association and ran it. They picked out who was going to be president, and everything else, and nobody else could do a thing unless he wanted to vote "aye." That was all he could do, and we don't want to see that return.
MR. GOWEN. It can never return if the Bar is incorporated, and I believe it will be at the next Legislature, because every member of the Bar in Georgia is a member; and the model bill will provide for a ballot, and election of the Georgia Bar Association, or Georgia Bar, in which every member will have an opportunity to vote by ballot sent to him by mail, and if he does not exercise it, he is not worthy of his profession. I don't think there is any danger of that. This provision was returned to the Court, the rule-making power, where probably it existed all the time. Certainly it was ample authority for the proposition, it existed there all the time,- and it does provide-it does not mean you will let the Court deal with substantive rights of any party, or destroy everything anybody has, but it means the Court can provide the rules of procedure. And in lots of circuits in the State, the lawyers have agreement to violate rules established by the General Assembly because they are not workable. That is the only purpose of it. It is a matter that is controversial, and everybody is entitled to their proper opinion, but I did want to point out the safeguard there. If the Supreme Court goes wild, the General Assembly by creation of the judicial council-
CHAIRMAN ARNALL. At this stage of the proceedings the chair desires to ask the very distinguished President of the G. E. A. what arrangements, if any, have been made about the lunch.
MR. BASS. I have a note. The lunch is at Piedmont Hotel, at 1 o'clock, Parlor G, and we will have transportation for all that can go, and we want everybody to go.
CHAIRMAN ARNALL. Where will we meet to be transported?
MR. BASS. From the reserve pass in front of the Tom Watson.
CHAIRMAN ARNALL. The Chair would like to ask the permission of the Commission to invite a distinguished Associate Justice of the Supreme Court in the assembly, I would like to invite him, if there is no objection, to give us the benefit of his views. Mr. Justice Duckworth, is there any objection? Alton Cogdell, will you go tell Judge Duckworth that I have invited him with the approval of the

RECORDS OF CONSTITUTIONAL COMMISSION

39

Commission to appear before us? We want to hear from him about judicial procedure.
Mr. Justice Duckworth, the Chair has taken the liberty, with the permission of the Commission, to extend you an invitation to come here and discuss with us any suggestions or ideas, criticism, or helpful views that you may have in reference to our treatment of the judiciary. We are on Article VI.
MR. DUCKWORTH. Thank you, Governor, and members of the Committee. I would hesitate to say anything bearing upon the courts, for fear the court might suffer, except for the fact I am convinced this Committee is conscious of the tremendous responsibility in preparing the very mud sills of our Government; and if my experience as a member of the judiciary would be any help to the members of this Committee, I would feel that I was an unworthy citizen if I didn't, without apology, and fearlessly, appear before you upon invitation to give such information as I might.
Now, there are two or three questions touching the reviewing courts I would like to speak to you about. I think I still have the feeling and attitude of the trial lawyer toward the courts, and toward the disposition of cases in the courts. I exercise the right of a lawyer, just like all lawyers now do, to cuss the courts when I wanted to, and when I thought they were wrong. But I never did criticize the court, and I never heard a lawyer criticize the courts, the Court of Appeals, the personnel of the Court of Appeals, or anything about the Court of Appeals, except the one thing-that I didn't want two judges out of six to decide my case against me. And of course, having that to happen, I wanted the Supreme Court to take whatever time was necessary to do what I thought was justice in that matter. Now, I want to say to you that my short experience, nearly six years on the Supreme Court, has shown me that physical limitations make it impossible for the Supreme Court to do more than we are now doing in so far as review of the Court of Appeals by certiorari. I say further I think that is a question, and I hope the Committee will agree to that, that that complaint, and that question can be settled by a courageous facing of the one complaint, and requiring the Court of Appeals, all six members of the Court of Appeals, to render judgment in your cases. I believe that if that is done, that the demand on the Supreme Court that we spend our time reviewing the Court of Appeals will practically vanish. Now, here is the situation under the Constitution as it is now, comparing jurisdiction-and I assume you will not undertake

40

RECORDS OF CONSTITUTIONAL COMMISSION

to change radically the jurisdiction of the two courts. There are certain types of cases in this State that the only court in the State that can review the trial court is the Supreme Court. If a man has been sentenced to the electric chair, his only hope of a new trial, or a review of that trial, is the Supreme Court. And to the extent that any rule or regulation might require the members of the Supreme Court to devote our time and attention to the application of a certiorari to review a damage judgment for two hundred dollars which has been passed on by the Court of Appeals, to that extent the man whose life is hanging in the balance out here is robbed of the attention and consideration that he is entitled to have at the hands of the Supreme Court. Now, I make that statement in order to say this: I hope there will be nothing written in the Constitution that will make it mandatory upon the Supreme Court to review the Court of Appeals and thereby reduce it to a secondary court, and thereby take from the members of my court of the Supreme Court the time that the public and the Bar is entitled to have us devote to those cases which we alone can review and determine, whether or not there will be a new trial. Now, on the question of application of certiorari, I would not say that we are always consistent in denying a certiorari, but I do remember in particular one case, one situation, where a case came, involving the question of unemployment, or this labor situation, where there was one application to the Supreme Court for review by certiorari. We denied it. Later there was an application for certiorari to the Supreme Court we granted. If a member of the Committee would be interested, I will be glad to get the volume and read it to you. The opinion in that case was written by Chief Justice Bell. We stated there had been a denial of the application previously, and we granted this one. But we denied the previous application because there had been no assignment of error. The attorneys bringing the case up there had failed to comply with the rules of law, and made no assignment we .
could pass on, and we could not have refused the Court of Appeals, if we sanctioned it, because there was no complaint there. That was stated by the Supreme Court in the opinion of the Supreme Court.
Now, I hope when you deal with this question the members of this Committee will keep in mind that if you were to require us to review every decision of the Court of Appeals we thought they were wrong in, you would have this kind of situation: A decision rendered in the Court of Appeals, I had only ten minutes or half a day, or a short limited time, to form an opinion of whether it was right or wrong or not, and if that was denied certiorari, then a law-

RECORDS OF CONSTITUTIONAL COMMISSION

41

yer will oppose you in court and cite that decision of the Court of Appeals and say, "This is the decision of the Supreme Court because they approved it when they denied certiorari." As it is now all lawyers know, only matters of public graft and importance are reviewed by certiorari. I hope this committee, if you rewrite the Constitution, I hope you will consider those things that vitally touch the very life and usefulness of the Courts, and will not, because of some personal desire, or the desire of some individual somewhere without knowledge of the destructive effect it would have on the Court, layoff the question of imposing further duties on the Supreme Court, in so far as reviewing the Court of Appeals is concerned. As I say, my remedy would be, and I think I know that remedy would satisfy the lawyers of the State, is to face it squarely and require .the Court of Appeals to decide cases as a whole. Six judges decide cases there. Nobody questions the ability of the personnel of the Court of Appeals. They have just as much sense, and are as good lawyers as members of the Supreme Court, and if all would have to pass on the cases you would not have an inconsistency in the two divisions; and I hope the court will stop with that. Now, this one further question, and I don't know as you wanted me to say this, but I want to say it, because I know that every member here is inspired by a patriotic desire to accomplish something here that will be worthwhile for our State. It strikes me, and I would like to urge on the members of this Commission, that in drafting, rewriting the Constitution, or amending the Constitution, that only one motive, only one object, should control the thinking and action of the members of the Committee, and only one is worthy of controlling the action, and that is: What should the Constitution be. If you, in your judgment, think that the Constitution should contain this provision, but if you listen to somebody that opposes it on the idea that the people are not going to approve that provision, you thereby rob the sovereign people of the State of an opportunity to decide whether they want that provision or not. I have no pet ideas about what should be in your Constitution except in relation to the judiciary. But I say to you, if in the judgment of this Committee, the Constitution should contain this clause, relating to your courts, for instance, if it is unworthy of consideration by this Committee, the thought that the people would not want that, or the voters would not vote for that, if in your judgment that should be in the Constitution, it is, your action on that is, a direct analogy to the action of the Supreme Court on the case that you bring to us. You would look upon the members of the Supreme

42

RECORDS OF CONSTITUTIONAL COMMISSION

Court with justifiable contempt if when confronted with a legal proposition, were to say, "I am satisfied that this should be the rule, but 1 don't think the public would want it." Write the Constitution as it should be, and give the people a chance to vote on the Constitution as your judgment dictates that it should be. If they don't want that, they are free to repudiate it. If they do want it, you have given them an opportunity to take it. Now, that would apply to all phases of the Constitution, but 1 say to you, that in so far as the Judiciary is concerned, not because 1 am a member, maybe 1 am unworthy of my membership on the Court, but 1 say to you, that no more sacred safeguard to human liberty exists in our form of Government than a free, independent judiciary. And you can obtain that only by conferring, fixing the judiciary in the fundamental law, the Constitution, by fixing the compensation of the members of that court in the Constitution. Whatever it is, let the people say what the judiciary shall be paid, and don't permit one coordinate branch of the government to control or intimidate another coordinate branch of the government, because every one of you know that if 1 have the power to write your meal ticket, collect your meal ticket, I have the power to control you. If the Legislature has the power to cut the compensation of the judiciary, the Legislature has the power to say to the judiciary, "Layoff of my pet legislation, or 1 will cut your salary." And you don't want that form of government. The three branches should be kept as we have always looked on them, as being separate, independent, and free, as a check and balance on the others. 1 think that is the only thought that 1 had pertaining to your deliberation, and I feel greatly honored, and I am extremely happy to have had the privilege of appearing before this honorable Committee that is engaged in such important work. I appreciate the invitation, Governor Arnall. If there is any question any members of the Committee want to ask me about the courts, or the judiciary, 1 will be glad to answer it, and answer it frankly to all of you.
MR. FOLEY. Are you familiar, Mr. Justice Duckworth, with what action the Commission had taken in reference to the point you raise?
JUDGE DUCKWORTH. 1 had been informed, Mr. Foley, that the Committee had tentatively perhaps decided that the Supreme Court must, that it is mandatory that the Supreme Court review the Court of Appeals on every application for certiorari, where the Supreme Court thought the Court of Appeals had erred in the law.

RECORDS OF CONSTITUTIONAL COMMISSION

43

MR. HARRIS. Now, Mr. Chairman, let me state he has been incorrectly informed.
JUDGE DUCKWORTH. If J am, I am happy.
MR. HARRIS. The language used which Mr. Foley and I prepared simply says this: That wherever a decision of the Court of Appeals is in conflict with a decision of the Supreme Court, a statute, or the Constitution, that the Supreme Court must review it.
JUDGE DUCKWORTH. Well-
MR. HARRIS. And the whole object of it is to finally get a final satisfaction by somebody as to what the law is, instead of having to practice under conflicting opinions of two courts in this State.
JUDGE DUCKWORTH. Let me answer that proposition, and Mr. Harris is an excellent lawyer, and Mr. Foley is an excellent lawyer, and I am not trying to humor them now, because I am taking issue with them on this proposition. There is not a lawyer in this State, including those two, but what knows that where there is a conflict between a decision of the Supreme Court and a decision of the Court of Appeals that the law, the controlling law, is the decision of the Supreme Court. Now, if you find a situation that Mr. Harris has just pictured, where the Supreme Court has decided that white is white, and you find one where the Court of Appeals says white is black, every lawyer in this State knows that the law is that white is white as said by the Supreme Court, no matter whether it said it now or ten years ago.
MR. HARRIS. Let me ask one question. Now, when the remittiter from the Court of Appeals goes back in my case, and, say I lose one, the remittiter goes back and is made the judgment of the court. The opinion of the Supreme Court is not made the judgment of the court, but the opinion of the Court of Appeals, isn't it? And in that case it is not decided according to the opinion of the Supreme Court, but according to the opinion of the Court of Appeals, even though they are in conflict.
JUDGE DUCKWORTH. I had not finished what I want to say. You agree my proposition of law is right, as the controlling law?
MR. HARRIS. It is theoretically, but not in practice.
JUDGE DUCKWORTH. It is supposed to do it; we remind them of it.

44

RECORDS OF CONSTITUTIONAL COMMISSION

MR. HARRIS. What we are trying to do is to give effect to the opinion of the Supreme Court and not the Court of Appeals.
JUDGE DUCKWORTH. Let me give you and the members, and particularly the laymen of the Committee, this picture, which is true of every member of the Supreme Court, and if you could sit in on us, you would hear an expression about like this some time. There comes a case, an application for certiorari to the Supreme Court, where they say this case of the Court of Appeals, on whether the judge charged the court and jury right or not, here is in conflict with this other decision, and names the Supreme Court. Some members of the Supreme Court will say, "Well, if we concede that to be true"-certainly nobody in this State would require the Supreme Court every time the Court of Appeals makes what we think is an unsound decision, that we review them again. If we tell the Court of Appeals in 140 Georgia that this is the rule of law, and the Court of Appeals comes up here in 167 Court of Appeals decision, and says, this is not the rule of law, you have no more assurance of what the law will be next week. If we come out in 197 Georgia and say what we said in 140 was the law, you make us repeat what we have already done with time not available.
CHAIRMAN ARNALL. In order to be helpful, the Chair understands this situation: That every one recognizes that the decisions of the Supreme Court is the final interpretation of the law by the judiciary in this State, and that the Court of Appeals is supposed to follow the law. But suppose through inadvertence the Court of Appeals overlooks a decision of the Supreme Court, and the rights of the litigants in that case being fixed by the Court of Appeals erroneously, irrespective of whether they did violence to the rule of law announced by the Supreme Court, determines the right of those litigants, and they have had their day in court and lost. Now, how can we protect those litigants?
JUDGE DUCKWORTH. I am ready to answer that, and I believe Mr. Foley and Mr. Harris will both agree with me. I believe they both will agree with me six members, a majority of six members of the Court of Appeals would never in any instance-we have never had six judges on the Court of Appeals that a majority of them would stand up defiantly in the face of ao decision of the Supreme Court and go contrary to it. We have had all of this time, and what Mr. Harris does not like, what Your Honor does not like, and what Mr. Foley didn't like, and what I don't like-we have three

RECORDS OF CONST1TUTIONAL COMMISSION

.45

judges of the Court of Appeals, and only two out of that three can pass on whether-and two might be wrong. You can ask any member of my Court. I would not serve on the Supreme Court if you made me confine my deliberations and the help I can get to only two members of my court. I want the help of six, for when you have six,you will not overlook those decisions.
MR. HOLT. In the interest of time, I would like to ask a question. If the Constitution requires the Court of Appeals to sit in a body rather than division, would that settle it?
JUDGE DUCK'VORTH. That will settle it.
MR. HARRIS. Then you would not have anycertior.aries?
MR. FOLEY. It will eliminate a lot of certioraries.
JUDGE DUCKWORTH. I want to urge it. You have never tried to remedy it; and I believe every lawyer in the State of Georgia, including the members of the Court of Appeals, say that the tap-root of all the trouble is that; and then you don't come back and put the certiorari burden on to us, because Mr. Foley will be satisfied when six judges pass on his case.
MR. GRICE. Mr. Harris' proposition is, in the opinion of the Supreme Court, if the Court of Appeals decision is contrary to a former decision of the Supreme Court, or statute, or the Constitution, it is mandatory on the Supreme Court to review it. Do you think the Supreme Court could discharge its duties, do you think there are days enough in the week?
MR. HARRIS. Have you got any objection to some more justices to help you? I don't care what it costs the State of Georgia, my position is this: If we have to have 15 members of the Supreme Court, it is worth it to the State of Georgia, and save them money to have somewhere that you get a final say-so as to what the law is.
JUDGE DUCKWORTH. I hope I am not taking too much time.
CHAIRMAN ARNALL. No.
JUDGE DUCKWORTH. And I hope I am not offending any member about taking a positive stand.
CHAIRMAN ARNALL. We are trying to get the truth, what is best.
JUDGE DUCKWORTH. Here is the truth.
MR. FOLEY. We are as interested as you are.

46

RECORDS OF CONSTITUTIONAL COMMISSION

JUDGE DUCKWORTH. I know you are, and I know Mr. Harris is, but I honestly think Mr. Harris is wrong, and if you share the view he does, I think you are wrong in thinking that you need this Constitutional mandate to the Supreme Court on the subject of certiorari, when you have already by the provision this gentleman just mentioned, removed the thing that has confounded the law throughout the past.
CHAIRMAN ARNALL. Let the Chair make a statement in order to try to get to the system we adopted. It is provided that the Court of Appeals, as I understand it, shall sit in a body. That means that you will not have two divisions in conflict, and it means that having more judges working on a case, the chances are that those decisions will take advantage of all the law to the extent that six minds are better than three. Now, the question comes, though, about the certiorari, whether we are going to relegate the Court of Appeals into an intermediate court or whether we are going to make the Court of Appeals a final court of review. Now, by the certiorari procedure, it means that no matter what the case is, when it is lost in the Court of Appeals, even though six judges pass on it, that any lawyer can file, as I understand it, a petition to the Supreme Court, setting out that they have overlooked a statute or decision of the Supreme Court or statute of the United States, or the Constitution; and then whether there be any merit in that petition or not, it is then incumbent on the Supreme Court to review it, even though they misrepresented the facts?
MR. HARRIS. They would not have to review it.
CHAIRMAN ARNALL. See whether they grant the certiorari.
JUDGE DUCKWORTH. That is the point I want to catch. Roy said we would not have to review it. We might be guilty as charged. We do have to read the certiorari.
CHAIRMAN ARNALL. You would read the petition and determine whether you would grant it, whether the petition spoke the truth, and as I understand the basis of your suggestion and your statement, it is this: That the Supreme Court has kept abreast of its work, and apparently the lawyers and the Bar, and the people are, so far as I know, well satisfied with the work of the Supreme Court. They are well satisfied with the Court of Appeals, except that these two divisions encumber the Court, and create a situation that is not desirable. Now, you don't think it right to put additional duties on the Supreme Court because you are doing a good job?

RECORDS OF CONSTITUTIONAL COMMISSION

47

JUDGE DUCKWORTH. I don't; and I don't think because of this one complaint you ought to come up and say, "We will take it out on you, and make you remedy the difficulty here which the Legislature could have done long years ago." The Legislature by solemn mandate requires the Court of Appeals to operate as three and three. They could not alter it if they wanted to. I think they, all of them, want to. Now, you are remedying that; you are curing that; you are hitting the only thing as a lawyer I have ever complained about. Mr. Harris, as bad as he hates to lose a case, if six of them will pass on his case in the Court of Appeals, he isn't going to be complaining any more there than he would on the Supreme Court when we decide against him. In other words, he will be satisfied with the Court. Now, listen, all this Committee. I don't know you have got the idea, but don't treat the Supreme Court as allknowing. We are human, subject to error. We might overlook the conflicting decision; we have done it and we will do it again. The Court of Appeals, you have six good lawyers there, and the people put them there. When these cases he is talking about come up there looks like a conflict. I say it is a confession of incompetence and a confession of failure of our system of Govemmentif you say the people can't put six men on your Court of Appeals that can at least follow the controlling and binding law, the decisions of the Supreme Court; and I say, further, that if you say they can't, and won't, then I say that the same line of reasoning would require you to say that, being human and fallible as we are, the Supreme Court would do the same kind of a mess, and you are suffering what he is talking about. Don't get us in that kind of trouble, because you have a remedy.
CHAIRMAN ARNALL. The reason I said the Supre~e Court overlooked the law, was the education case.
JUDGE DUCKWORTH. I agree with you. Judge Grice don't like for you to tell him, but we think we did, and I, just myself, recently wrote an opinion where we overruled five full bench decisions of our court, and two of them were by me. But I followed an old one. The Court of Appeals makes mistakes, and we make mistakes, but I hope all members of the Committee know where all sixwhere Judge MacIntyre has the benefit of the advice and consultation of Judge Gardner, and ~udge Broyles, and Sutton, and Parker, and Felton, he can do better than he can with only Judge Gardner and Judge Broyles. For instance, Judge Grice has seen it happen not once, but numbers of times. In the Supreme Court I prepared a~

43

RECORDS OF CONSTITUTIONAL COMMISSION

opinion and carried in there I knew, or was confident, was right; and maybe three or four vote for it, sometimes every one votes for it, but somebody would say something criticising it, where I would see it was wrong, and I withdrew it; and I go back and work on it and come in the other way, and they maybe take it back; maybe around to the last man who would say, "We are not quite satisfied with this question." And we go into it, and we find we are all wrong. I say that to satisfy the opinion, consultation of six makes for a better, sounder law, than the consultation of three. And you are providing, as I understand it, for six here. Well, that will settle ninety-nine per cent of those questions. And don't put it on us. Now, so far as this one thing, in response to Speaker Harris' statement about giving us fifteen or whatever you want. He has been in the Legislature a long time, and he and I sat right about where Mr. Pope is over there in this Senate one time, shoulder to shoulder; and be will tell you, if you will ask him, it is utterly impossible to pass or to draft intelligent legislation as a whole. In the first place you put it to a committee, and if that committee is a little large, you have to really get down and do some thinking. That committee appoints a sub-committee where they think. Now, six or seven lawyers is as many as I want in a room with me, trying to decide legal questions. We can do our work in the manner we do it. Maybe it is not the best in the world, but the Supreme Court is doing its work, and it is keeping up with the work by working all the time, like we are now. If there is anything that our Court, in the judgment of this body, is not doing, that should be done as a Court, aside from monkeying with the Court of Appeals, I welcome any suggestion and any changes put in there. But don't let these little complaints run on when you have a remedy. You know that is a remedy, when you put the Court of Appeals-six of them pass on it-you know it satisfies yeur complaining, and Mr. Foley knows that will answer at least ninety-nine per cent of the complaints.
MR. HARRIS. You won't have much more work to do.
CHAIRMAN ARNALL. We appreciate the associate justice coming here. He is not only a fine justice, but a fine advocate.
MR. FOLEY. We have up now, about where the rule making authority ought to reside. We are debating that now.
JUDGE DUCKWORTH. One illustration, I think-for the laymen will get this quicker than the lawyer. We have a code section that says if a trial judge intimates what the evidence is, or is not, that a

RECORDS OF CONSTITUTIONAL COMMISSION

49

new trial must be granted. That is the legislative provision. We have another rule of law that says that if a trial judge fails to charge on an issue which is supported by evidence, we will grant a new trial. We have another rule that says that if he does charge on an issue there is not any evidence to support, we will grant a new trial, and reverse it. Every person in here knows that the judge, under those rules, the judge has to intimate as to what the evidence is to charge. If he refuses to charge, then he intimates that he does not think there is any evidence. If he does charge, he shows that he thinks there is evidence. You have a provision, the Legislature says, if he does intimate an opinion, you should grant a new trial. I say this-and it is not a reflection on laymen, because I know that the greatest brains we have may not be, and likely are not, in the legal profession-you don't have to, it is not a reflection on the intelligence of laymen-but I will say this: It is impossible for a person that has not been right under the gun and faced the question, to know what is the proper rule, a proper procedure in a court. And for that reason you can't get rules that will do justice, will take care of a situation that arises in a court, unless you take them from the lawyers, and the judges, that have to deal with those questions. Now, if you want to squirm, you get in a responsible place, get in my place for instance, and get where in your opinion the rightness, a case is literally dripping with morality and righteousness, you have a statutory rule the Legislature passed in all good faith but won't let you give consideration to thaJ question. Now, the Court by their experience knows, ought to know, of course we might not know, everything; but they ought to know what rule of procedure here, and what rule of evidence here will enable the court to ascertain the truth, and do justice in that trial; and I think so far as procedure is concerned, if you will leave me out of it, there is no hope to get an adequate rule of procedure unless you get that promulgated by the court or by a Bar Association group of lawyers with that experience.
MR. FOLEY. Judicial counsel.
JUDGE DUCKWORTH. Yet, you have to go there. I would not go to a lawyer to find out what kind of medicine to take, if I had a cold; but maybe the lawyer has more sense generally than the doctor I got it from. Or maybe a layman over here runs a newspaper, has more sense than both of them, but he could not prescribe medicine for me. But this question of rules of procedure just happens to be a prescription that comes almost exclusively with them, the pro-

50

RECORDS OF CONSTITUTIONAL COMMISSION

fession of the lawyer, and you have got to go there if you get in~ formation to guide the court. Thank you.
CHAIRMAN ARNALL. Thank you, Mr. Justice. We appreciate your coming. The Chair wishes to recognize Miss Jean Meadors, who is eighteen years old, and a student at Agnes Scott. She has been present at the session. She was president of the student body, and president of her class at Agnes Scott. We are glad to have her.
MR. HARRIS. I hate to get up so much, but since Judge Duckworth read me a lecture, I think I ought to say one or two things. And I think he brought out the point that I am driving at. But I would like to say this: The chairman asked whether it was possible to make the Court of Appeals an independent court with finality.
CHAIRMAN ARNALL. In its particular class of cases.
MR. HARRIS. The reason I say it can't be done, even though it is supposed to have finality in a particular class of cases, other cases that make their way to the Supreme Court will have incidentally involved the same principle of law that will be involved in a case over which they have finality. Consequently the Court of Appeals can't be anything, it can't be anything but an intermediate court. There is no way in the world you can make it anything else, and consequently that is the reason I say it is necessary; and I want to say this, I think we are going to eliminate a lot of certioraries when we do away with the two divisions in the Court of Appeals, and instead of increasing the work in the way of certioraries, I think our action here is diminishing. But I can't get it in my head whether there is two hundred dollars involved, or two million, or two hundred thousand, and if you remember, Justice Duckworth says we don'tJ!ave time to take up with the court with two hundred cases -
MR. GRICE. I don't think he said that.
MR. HARRIS. That is the point I am driving at. There is just as much a principle involved in a two hundred dollar verdict as in a two hundred thousand dollar, and a principle laid down in a two hundred dollar case will control later a two million dollar case; and I say that is the thing I am trying to get around, that rule of theirs saying it has to be of sufficient importance, of general interest, to justify their time. And I think it does not make any difference where they lay down a principle of law to be followed, whether a man has a sentence of six months in the chain-gang or a life sentence, because it is laying down the rules that everybody has to live

RECORDS OF CONSTITUTIONAL COMMISSION

51

under. And I don't think we are increasing their work. And I do say that if it takes fifteen members to do it-I know everybody works through committees and then it comes from a general discussion-but regardless of what it takes, I say, let's do it, and let's straighten it out because this is the one thing. And I don't know whether the rest of you have the experience I do or not. You may not believe it, but I really practice a lot of law, and I try to and have all my life. I don't believe there is a man in Georgia my age tried any more cases than I have, and at the same time I get around over the State. I tell you I don't know a single lawyer in Georgia that I have ever talked to that has not been raising sand for years about the same situation we are talking about today; and I tell you that it has more bearing upon putting confidence in our courts and our judicial system than anything else; and regardless of the expense, regardless of the work, regardless of the time it takes, I say to you that I think it is fundamental, and I don't think we will ever create the confidence we ought to have in the courts until we do this one thing, and I think we ought to let it stay. And I think another thing, too: The reason I don't want it just writing the rules, it is just like they got that notion that they haven't got time to take up the time of the Court with a two hundred dollar case; and they get that habit, and they can't help it. I would do it, and you would do it if you were on there, and I think we ought to keep the rule-making power in the Legislature. And I say this: If the Supreme Court wants to write the rules, and they will write the rules of procedure, I don't think that between now and January first-I think we will guarantee them that we will pass them through the Legislature.
CHAIRMAN ARNALL. Mr. Harris, let me ask this question, about the certiorari. It seems that is the issue that we reverted back to. As I understand it, the two provisions that we have thus far incorporated to take care of the situation of the inconsistency between the Court of Appeals and the Supreme Court, the alleged inconsistency that exists from time to time-we will require the Court of Appeals to sit in a body, that is the first thing. Second, that certiorari can be had from any decision of the Court of Appeals that is alleged to be in conflict, that is in conflict with the decision of the Supreme Court, the statute of this State, or the United States, or the Constitution thereof.
MR. HARRIS. That's right.
CHAIRMAN ARNALL. Now, I see this evil. I think I agree with you that it would be fine if we can have a final determination in our

52

RECORDS OF CONSTITUTIONAL COMMISSION

Court, but if you lose your case in the Court of Appeals, particularly if it is a criminal case, what is to keep a lawyer from filing a motion to the Supreme Court for certiorari, alleging they have overlooked something, and thereby clutter up the courts and delay the execution of the sentence?
MR. HARRIS. The answer to that is that they are already doing it, and there won't be any more effort.
CHAIRMAN ARNALL. I am about to make the statement -
MR. HARRIS. The point I am making, there won't be so many from now on as before.
CHAIRMAN ARNALL. I am about to state, I wonder if we could not prescribe, or proscribe, the right of certiorari by imposing penalties or making some restrictions where a lawyer could not, just for delay, or to hinder the execution of the sentence, or verdict, take a certiorari appeal or petition for certiorari from the Court of Appeals to the Supreme Court.
MR. HARRIS. One thing about putting penalties on it, you are going to find that the Court of Appeals and the Supreme Court are going to honestly differ as to the law, and you and I might have another opinion. A lawyer might in good faith, thinking he was absolutely right, present his petition, and he thinks he ought to have it passed upon. Because the court disagrees with him, and he got a contrary opinion, it should not have a right to penalize him. Now, I do know there are some cases filed merely for delay only, but they are not many. And I think this, that since we have corrected the Court of Appeals situation, as Justice Duckworth says, when we get a full bench decision in the Court of Appeals, I am not going to have much heart to take out, or try, a writ of certiorari. Now, when I get a case written by two men, it is a good gamble, if nothing else, that six men might have a different view of the law. And I think when you eliminate that, Judge Duckworth said he thought it would eliminate ninety-nine per cent of the trouble. I think it will, and I think instead of having more certioraries to look over, they have fewer, because if Frank Foley wants to take a case up and he has a full bench decision, unless it is clear or square in the teeth of a decision of the Supreme Court, or in the teeth of a statute, or in the teeth of the Constitution, he is not going to take a chance on it. And I don't think but very few lawyers will. And there are not many cases filed for delay, just a few.

RECORDS OF CONSTITUTIONAL COMMISSION

53

MR. THRASHER. What would be the objection to abolishing the Court of Appeals and making two divisions of the Supreme Court?
CHAIRMAN ARNALL. You never would have a finality of what the law is then.
MR. HARRIS. You would have a worse situation than now.
CHAIRMAN ARNALL. One division might hold it in good faith, and another one another.
MR. THRASHER. Each division would be the Court.
CHAIRMAN ARNALL. You would have two decisions; if you had three divisions, independent divisions, you would have three decisions. And what we are trying to do is get one final decision.
MR. FOLEY. I am like Speaker Harris about this situation. It was my opinion, and I still believe that what we have done to the Court of Appeals will result in fewer certioraries. I appreciate the limitation the Supreme Court would have on considering certioraries, an excessive flood of them. It would disastrously affect their ability to do the work they intended to do. And I am quite sure that probably Justice Grice and Justice Duckworth may know the effect of what will happen better than I do, whether this will increase or diminish it. But I was just wondering if there could not be some additional clause inserted in here where the General Assembly, in the event of that situation, would have a right to change or modify that rule, something like that be done, and further restrict it, or, in other words, they might consider everything, the cost be a little greater, that would tend to make the folks fail to do it, or something of that sort.
MR. HARRIS. I think this: That it would be all right to put a provision the General Assembly could provide for the filing of appeals and applications for certiorari that are for the purpose of delay only.
CHAIRMAN ARNALL. The Chair, without objection, will ask Speaker Harris and Judge Foley to draft some amendment touching this particular situation as you see fit, and submit it at a later date. The Chair would like to ask Mr. Justice Grice this question: In entertaining a certiorari, a petition for certiorari, presented to our c.ourt, does the Court as a whole pass upon it, or one justice?
MR. GRICE. The Court as a whole, but before that-

54

RECORDS OF CONSTITUTIONAL COMMISSION

CHAIRMAN ARNALL. That is not true, is it, in the practice in the Supreme Court of the United States?
MR. GRICE. No, sir. Not only the whole Court passes on it, but before it gets-
CHAIRMAN ARNALL. I am not talking about on its merits-
MR. GRICE. Whether it is granted, when a petition for certiorari comes in under the rules the Chief Justice refers it to a member of the Court and that same rule requires that he, before bringing it before the six, shall take it up with some other member of the Court. If it comes to me, I go in that other man's office and I say, "Well, here is an application for certiorari," and I read it, and read him the assignment for error. I say, "Here are the briefs," and I discuss with him the points. Now he and I go over it. We then take it in at the next meeting, and we make that report and tell the whole Court what it is about, and lay it before them, and frequently other members of the Court pick it up and read the petition and read the briefs, all six of us. It is a mistake to think we treat certioraries lightly. It takes a great deal of the time of the Court, a great deal of time.
CHAIRMAN ARNALL. I wanted that information, I was under the impression in the Supreme Court it goes to one judge.
MR. GRICE. That is not true with us.
JUDGE CANDLER. Judge Duckworth's talk has convinced me that Roy Harris and Frank Foley are correct about it. He says that by requiring the Courts of Appeals to sit as a whole, that it would correct ninety-nine per cent of the trouble we are complaining about. If that means one per cent that ought to be corrected, why then the procedure they outline ought to be adopted for the correction of that one per cent.
CHAIRMAN ARNALL. I wanted that information. I was under the ed Mr. Harris and Mr. Foley to give further consideration to this matter, and if there is any amendment that should be submitted giving the General Assembly power, or whatever you determine to do, we will be glad to entertain the report. Is there objection? Now, the Chair seeks enlightenment from the Assistant Secretary. Will you please at this time state the articles of the Constitution upon which the Commission has already acted?
, MR. McCUTCHEN. Article I, Article II, Article III, Article IV, Ar-

RECORDS OF CONSTITUTIONAL COMMISSION

55

ticle V, Article VI, with the exception of the last paragraph we are on now. Article VII and Article VIII have not been acted on. Article IX has not been acted on.
MR. HARRIS. In the legislative department there were three paragraphs passed over, and we will report on them tomorrow.
MR. McCUTCHEN. Article XI has not been acted on, that is County and County Matters. Article XIII has been acted on.
CHAIRMAN ARNALL. There are only three articles that have not yet been dealt with in some fashion. Education, that is Mr. Gross' committee. You are ready for reporting?
MR. GROSS. Yes, sir.
CHAIRMAN ARNALL. Homestead exemption. Whose committee is that?
MR. ATKINSON. That is mine. We can pass that in twenty minutes.
CHAIRMAN ARNALL. You are ready to report on County and County Matters. Who is the assistant chairman of the Sub-committee-Mr. Carmichael is Chairman of the Sub-committee. Who is the Assistant Chairman? I would like to announce that the League of Women Voters' party tonight will be held at the residence of Mrs. Harry L. Greene, 870 Lullwater Road. If any out-of-town wives are present they are invited. Now, Mrs. Haas, have you had acceptances from those who will attend?
MRS. HAAS. Yes. We want to remind them of the address.
CHAIRMAN ARNALL. All right, 870 Lullwater Road, at 7 o'clock.
MR. HOLT. Judge Atkinson is on the Committee of County and County Matters.
CHAIRMAN ARNALL. All right. Just a minute, we are not ready to adjourn. If the Commission will indulge the Chair a little, we will take up an amendment of the gentleman from Evans County on the rule making power; and we have fifteen minutes before we adjourn for lunch; and if he will expedite the business, we ought to be able to dispose of those two things. We have discussed the rule making power. The Clerk will read the proposed amendment or provision to become a part of the Constitution.
MR. McCUTCHEN. (Reads) '~On and after January 1, 1947, the rule making power for practice and procedure in the several courts

56

RECORDS OF CONSTITUTIONAL COMMISSION

of this State shall be vested in the Supreme Court of Georgia, p~ vided that the General Assembly shall have the power to create a Judicial Council and confer on it this power; Provided further that rules promulgated hereunder shall not abridge, enlarge or modify the substantive rights of any litigant."
CHAIRMAN ARNALL. Without objection the provision will be adopted. Is there objection?
MR. HARRIS. I object.
MR. DURDEN. Would it not be better to say, "The rules promul~ gated hereunder shall be incorporated in the action of the General Assembly"? They should be published.
MR. MacINTYRE. What is the difference between that and the Committee report?
CHAIRMAN ARNALL. He is talking about after the rules are made. He wants them published where the lawyers and people will know what they are. He would not change it. He was wondering if it should not be required they be published in the acts of the General Assembly.
MR. GRICE. I submit the Constitution would not be a proper place for that. The Legislature can do that.
CHAIRMAN ARNALL. I think when that matter is reached in the Legislature, if it is adopted, the Legislature can provide for the publication of the rule; in other words I am wondering if it should be in the Constitution. If you think so we will propose an amendment.
MR. DURDEN. The only thought I had was it should be published.
CHAIRMAN ARNALL. Mr. Durden moves to amend it by inserting at the end of it, "The rules made in conformity with this authorization shall be published in the acts of the General Assembly."
MR. HARRIS. I would like to make a motion, that we strike the proposal and substitute in lieu this: "The General Assembly shall have the power to create a judicial council, and to confer on it the rule-making power for practice and procedure in the several courts of this state." And then include the last sentence.
MR. MacINTYRE. Why not let the Supreme Court fix them first, and the Judicial Council can change them after.

RECORDS OF CONSTITUTIONAL COMMISSION

5'1

MR. HARRIS. One thing I am trying to get to, something the Legislature is going to take because they are going to rewrite this--
MR. MacINTYRE. What you propose-
MR. HOLT. May I say this--
CHAIRMAN ARNALL. I will tell you this. Mr. Harris can get through the Legislature on his side, and Mr. Gross in the Senate, anything within reason they desire. If it is within reason I believe they can get it by. Therefore when he talks about he can't get it through the Legislature, he means that he is not in favor of it. Isn't that right, Mr. Culpepper?
MR. CULPEPPER. Absolutely, I am with him in that matter.
MR. MacINTYRE. Why not give the Supreme Court the first trial? If they make a bust of the rules, or if you put it in the Legislature, and they make a bust of them, then they can appoint a Commission, and the Commission can make such corrections as they see fit, and that is what they were trying to do.
CHAIRMAN ARNALL. You heard the motion from Mr. Harris that vests the rule making power in the General Assembly. Anyobjection?
MR. HOLT. I object.
CHAIRMAN ARNALL. All in favor of Mr. Harris' amendment say "aye." Opposed "no." The "noes" seem to have it, and the amendment is rejected. The question is on the adoption of the amendment of the gentleman from Dougherty County, at the end of the paragraph he proposed the words be added, "The rules shall be published in the acts of the General Assembly and in the volumes of the Supreme Court and the Court of Appeals." The question is on the language, "The General Assembly shall provide for the publication of the rules." Is there objection to the amendment? Without objection it is so ordered. The question is on the adoption of the provision as amended. It is before you on page 14 of the Committee report. Is there objection to the adoption of the provision as amended?
MR. HARRIS. I object.
MR. CULPEPPER. I object.
CHAIRMAN ARNALL. There is objection. So many as favor the adoption of the provision as amended say "aye." Opposed "no."

58

RECORDS OF CONSTITUTIONAL COMMISSION

The "ayes" seem to have it, and the "ayes" have it, and the provision is adopted. The question is on the adoption of the amendment of the gentleman from Evans County, on page 87 of the Constitution, if you will turn to that right quickly, we can dispose of this. On page 87 of the Constitution pamphlet, fourth line, after the word "income," the following language to be inserted: "and also, provided that such donation or property shall not be predicated upon an agreement, contract or otherwise, that the donor or donors shall receive or retain any part of the net or gross income of the property relating to public charity." You heard the reading of the amendment. Is there any discussion?
MR. THRASHER. What is that amendment?
CHAIRMAN ARNALL. Page 87 of the Constitution.
MH. THRASHER. Is that an amendment by you-an amendment to the one we had yesterday?
CHAIRMAN ARNALL. Yes. If you take your Constitution pamphlet and turn to page 87, come down four lines, after the word "income". Mr. Majors moves to add after the word "income" this language: "and also provided that such donation or property shall not be predicated upon an agreement contract or otherwise, that the donor or donors shall receive or retain any part of the net or gross income of the property."
MH. THHASHER. I second that.
CHAIRMAN ARNALL. Any discussion?
MR. GRICE. Hatton Lovejoy was chairman of that Committee. fie worked on that thing until late hours of the night, and had several meetings of the Committee. He had two meetings of his Committee on this identical question, and he has done the best he could with it. And his Committee, I say this in his absence, thought that there was no way to frame the thought in mind that would not nullify the general proposition that you exempt income from charitable institutions. Now, under that nobody in the world can give a hospital to Emory University and make it a purely charitable proposition, give them a $500,000 hospital, if it was provided in the gift that Emory should employ this man at so much a year to run it. That is their business; if it is a charitable institution, we ought not, I submit, to enter in the field of how much they shall pay that man.
CHAIRMAN ARNALL. The Chair has not yet undertaken to re-

RECORDS OF CONSTITUTIONAL COMMISSION

59

strict debate, but we have four minutes, and the Chair would like to act on it or defer it.
MR. MAJORS. I wish to state Mr. Lovejoy read the amendment as I drew it, and stated that it complied with his wishes. I submitted it to him yesterday before he left, and redrafted it three or four times before he gave me his okay. It was my understanding that to accomplish what the committee wanted to accomplish, they didn't want any gift predicated upon somebody receiving a return from the property, thereby guaranteeing him an exemption from taxes and so forth. Is there-
CHAIRMAN ARNALL. Is there any discussion? The question is on the adoption of the amendment. So many as are in favor of the adoption, make it known by saying "aye." Opposing "no."-As many as favor its adoption. make it known by rising. Reverse, those opposed, raise your hands. And the amendment is adopted by a vote of 9 to 4. The Chair has the unanimous consent that the amendment be inserted in its proper place, and it is so ordered. We will recess for lunch, and meet on the Tom Watson side of the Capitol.
(Whereupon the Committee adjourned for Lunch Recess.)

AFTER RECESS
CHAIRMAN ARNALL. The Commission will com.e to order. Without objection the Commission will now pass to considera-
tion of Article VIII.
MR. HARRIS. Before you do that, could I offer an amendment on the Court situation that Judge Grice-
MR. FOLEY. Wait until I work the other one up and consider them together.
MR. HARRIS. All right.
CHAIRMAN ARNALL. Is there objection to considering Article VIII at this time? Without objection we will hear from Chairman Frank Gross, the Chairman. The Secretary will pass out the revised report of the Committee.
Now, this afternoon, if it please the Commission, we want everybody to be heard, and we don't want to do anything too rapidly, but the Chair is so hopeful that we can drive through to a conclusion of Article VIII this afternoon.

110

RECORDS OF CONSTITUTIONAL COMMISSION

MR. CULPEPPER. With that article, does that take up Counties?
CHAIRMAN ARNALL. No, there are three articles, Counties, and County Matters, and Homestead Exemption, and Education. Outside of education there is nothing left but Counties and County Matters, and Homestead Exemption, and Militia.
MR. CULPEPPER. It won't take fifteen minutes on that.
CHAIRMAN ARNALL. No. We are happy to welcome to the meeting a number of fine educators, and the excellent representative from Fulton County, Honorable Cicero Kendrick. and also Mr. Marvin Mote.
MR. GROSS. Mr. Chairman, have all the members copies of the report?
CHAIRMAN ARNALL. A point of order, is this the report?
MR. GROSS. Yes.
CHAIRMAN AHNALL. Does this stand in lieu of the printed report?
MR. GROSS. Yes. Article I, Section I-Section I of Article VIn is a rewriting of Paragraph I, Section I, of Article VIII.
CHAIRMAN ARNALL. What page in the Constitution?
MR. GROSS. Page 107 in the Constitution. The Chair wants the Secretary to read both the Constitution and the suggested redraft.
CHAIRMAN ARNALL. You amended Paragraph I of Section I?
MR. GROSS. Yes.
CHAIRMAN ARNALL. The Assistant Secretary will read Paragraph I of the present Constitution, and then read Paragraph I of the recommendation of the Sub-committee No.6.
MR. McCUTCHEN. (Reads) "There shall be a thorough system of common schools for the education of children as nearly uniform as practicable, the expenses of which shall be provided for by taxation, or otherwise. The schools shall be free to all children of the State, but separate schools shall be provided for the white and colored races."
(Recommendation of the Sub-committee) "The provision of an adequate education for the citizens shall be a primary obligation oC the State of Georgia, the expense of which shall be provided for by

RECORDS OF CONSTITUTIONAL COMMISSION

81

taxation. Separate schools shall be provided for the white and colored races."
CHAIRMAN ARNALL. Is there objection to the adoption of the paragraph as recommended by the Committee? 'Vithout objection it is ordered adopted. Read Paragraph II.
l\1R. GROSS. Section II is the recent Constitutional amendment, set ting up the State Board of Education without any changes, except some of the surplusage with reference to dates was omitted.
MH. MAJORS. Do you provide for the election of the State Super intendent of Schools by the Board instead of bythe People?
MR. GROSS. It will come later, we have not reached that yet.
CHAIRMAN ARNALL. A point of information, does the proposed committee recommendation to be known as Section II comprise Section II, Paragraphs I and II, of the old Constitution?
MR. GROSS. No, Section II comprises Paragraph II of Section II. Now Paragraph I of Section II will be taken up later-of the Constitution.
CHAIRMAN ARNALL. You are reversing the position?
MR. GROSS. Yes, sir, we are first taking the State Board of Educa tion.
CHAIRMAN ARNALL. The Assistant Secretary will read the Com mittee recommendation to be known as Section II, if adopted.
MR. McCUTCHEN. (Reads Section II.) "There shall be a State Board of Education, composed of one member from each Congress ional District in the State, who shall be appointed by the Governor, by and with the advice and consent of the Senate. The Governor shall not be a member of the State Board of Education. The first State Board of Education under this Constitution shall consist of those in office at the time this Constitution is adopted, with the terms provided by law. Thereafter, all succeeding appointments sJIall be for seven year terms from the expiration of the previous term. Vacancies upon said Board caused by expiration of term of office shall be similarly filled by appointment and confirmation. In case of a vacancy on said Board by death, resignation, or from any other cause other than the expiration of such member's term of office, the Board shall by secret ballot elect his successor, who shall hold office until the end of the next session of the General Assem

62

RECORDS OF CONSTITUTIONAL COMMISSION

bly, or if the General Assembly be then in session, to the end of that session. During such session of the General Assembly the Governor shall appoint the successor member of the Board for the unexpired term and shall submit his name to the Senate for confirmation. All members of the Board shall hold office until their successors are appointed and qualified. The members of the State Board of Education shall be citizens of this State who shall have resided in Georgia continuously for at least five years preceding their appointment. No person employed in a professional capacity by a private or public education institution, or by the State Department of Education, shall be eligible for appointment or to serve on said Board. No person who is or has been connected with or employed by a school hook publishing concern shall be eligible to membership on the Board, and if any such person shall be so connected or employed after becoming a member of the Board, his place shall immediately become vacant. The said State Board of Education shall have such powers and duties as provided by law existing at the time of the adoption of this Constitution, together with such further powers and duties as may be hereafter provided by law."
CHAIRMAN ARNALL. Mr. Chairman Gross, is that verbatim, the Paragraph II of Section II?
MR. GROSS. I would say verbatim. We changed "the adoption of this amendment" to "adoption of this Constitution." There are no material changes.
CHAIRMAN ARNALL. Are there any objections to the paragraph read?
MR. HARRIS. There is one question I would like to ask. The last sentence said, "State Board of Education shall have such powers and duties as provided by law existing at the time of the adoption of this Constitution, with such further powers and duties as may hereafter be provided by law." That peculiar wording, does it express the powers, and you can't take any away from them in the future?
MR. GROSS. No, that is the amendment passed, it gives this Board of Education such powers conferred on them by the Constitution, and such powers as may be conferred on them by the laws hereafter.
MR. HARRIS. I know that is the intention, but does it do that?
CHAIRMAN ARNALL. The Chair is of the opinion that freezes the

RECORDS OF CONSTITUTIONAL COMMISSION

63

powers and duties of the State Board of Education. That is to say, none of the powers and duties can be taken away that now exist.
MR. GROSS. I think that is correct. Any powers the State Board of Education has now would be frozen.
MR. HARRIS. How about by statute law?
MR. GROSS. It would not affect that unless the statute was in conflict with the Constitution.
CHAIRMAN ARNALL. The Chair is inclined from time to time to agree with the Speaker. However as regards the State Board of Education-the Chair speaking merely as a member of the Commission is unalterably opposed to fixing that to where the State Board of Education can be emasculated by an act of Legislature. We fought a fight once in this State having to do with those kind of things. Is there objection to the adoption of the paragraph as read?
MR. MacINTYRE. What suggestion do you make?
CHAIRMAN ARNALL. That it stay as is. Is there objection? If there is no objection, without objection Section II is adopted.
MR. GROSS. Section III is the same as Paragraph I of Section II of the old Constitution. It has to do with the State School Superintendent, and there are considerable changes. You want them both read? CHAIRMAN ARNALL. Suppose the Assistant Secretary reads the old, the present provision, and the contemplated changes.
MR. McCUTCHEN. (Reads Paragraph I of Section II of the present Constitution.) "There shall be a State School Superintendent elected by the people at the same time, for the same term, and in the same manner as the Governor, who shall hold his office until his successor is elected and qualified. His office shall be at the seat of government and he shall be paid a salary not to exceed two thousand dollars per annum. The General Assembly may substitute for the State School Superintendent such officer, or officers, as may be deemed necessary to perfect the system of public education." (Reads Section III of the Committee report.) "There shall be a State School Superintendent, who shall be the executive officer of the State Board of Education, elected by the State Board of Education, for such term as it may fix, except that the term fixed shall not exceed four years. The State School Superintendent shall have

64

RECORDS OF CONSTITUTIONAL COMMISSION

such qualifications and shall be paid such compensation as may be fixed by law. No member of said Board shall be eligible for election as School Superintendent during the time for which he shall have been appointed. The first appointment under this provision shall be made at the expiration of the term of the State School Superintendent in office at the time of the adoption of this Constitution."
CHAIRMAN ARNALL. The Chair understands that proposal is simply to do away with the salary fixed in the present situation, which is $2,000 a year, and do away with that and also provide that the State Superintendent of Schools shall be selected by the State Board of Education rather than elected by the people.
MR. GROSS. That's right.
MR. THRASHER. May I ask a question?
MR. ALLISON. Suppose the Constitution is adopted before the Legislature refixes the salary for the State School Superintendent? What happens to the $2,000 the State School Superintendent gets?
CHAIRMAN ARNALL. He would get it. Does he get it now?
MR. ALLISON. He gets a salary for being ex officio secretary of the Board of Education.
MR. GROSS. The State Board of Education could raise his salary if they wanted to.
MR. ALLISON. No, I believe that is provided by the statute.
CHAIRMAN ARNALL. Is Dr. CoIlins concerned about that? The remark of the Chair was simply intended in guess.
MR. THRASHER. Why not have a definite term of four years for the Superintendent? Why the idea of not to exceed four years?
MR. GROSS. Let me make this comment on this section. The Committee appointed by the Georgia Education Association, in their report to our Committee, advised against the selection of the State School Superintendent by the Board and recommended that that stay as is, elected by the people. They also recommended that the term of office be for four years, rather than for a term of not less than one, or more than four. Now, as to the term of office, I am not going to deal with that right now; but my idea, the Committee has recommended that the School Superintendent be selected by the Board of Education. We did that with this in mind, that if there is

RECORDS OF CONSTITUTIONAL COMMISSION.
one thing we want in the State of Georgia, it is a uniform school system from top to bottom. Later on we would provide the county school superintendent shall be selected or hired by the County Board of Education, and not elected by the people, and it was our idea that if we were going to have that system in county government, it should also be in our State government.
CHAIRMAN ARNALL. Why do you want to have an indeterminable term of office?
MR. GROSS. It is not necessary.
CHAIRMAN ARNALL. You say not more than four years. Why don't you say four years?
MR. GOWEN. We felt if any group hired a man, an executive officer, and it reached the point where the executive officers and superiors were at odds, the executive officer has a right to fire him.
MR. HOLT. I think that is a legitimate reason. As a matter of fact I feel it should not be for more than two years, because if they don't get the type of service out of a man, they can get rid of him; and I see no reason why a seven year commission should have their hands tied for that period with a man that it is not getting service from.
CHAIRMAN ARNALL. We recognize the Honorable Lewis, representative from Hancock County.
The question is on the adoption of the Paragraph. Are there any amendments or any further discussion?
MR. MAJORS. Mr. Chairman, I object as to the executive officer of the State Board of Education, or the State School Superintendent being selected by the State Board of Education, and not elected by the people, for the reason that you have appointed the members of the State Board of Education, the Governor appoints them, and there is no provision where the people have any control or any representation except through the Governor. And we may not always have a good Governor, and some one member of that Boord should be answerable to the people; and I am going to make the statement here now, when the place is reached in the county, I will object to the same basis.
CHAIRMAN ARNALL. We are glad to have this expression from the gentleman. The question is on the adoption of the amendment, Section III of Article VIII. Is there objection?
MR. MAJORS. I move to amend.

86

RECORDS OF CONSTITUTIONAL COMMISSION

CHAIRMAN ARNALL. Th~ gentleman moves to amend the Com, mittee Report by providing that the State School Superintenden~ shall be the executive officer of the State Board of Education, ane shall be elected in the same manner as the Governor, who shall holo his office until his successor is elected, by the people, at the same time, and for the same term as the Governor. The question is on the adoption-
MRS. PATTERSON. May I say something?
CHAIRMAN ARNALL. Yes, Mrs Patterson.
MRS. PATTERSON. Will I be out of order?
CHAIRMAN ARNALL. I am sure the Commission will indulge the charming President of the GEA.
MRS. PATTERSON. We are a little divided, but a majority believe it would be better to elect the State School Superintendent; and we are basing that on what the other States do. Thirty-one of the forty-eight States elect the Superintendent by popular vote. I am from Tennessee, and I know more about Tennessee than other States. They have not been able to make much progress in the State because the Governor appoints the State School Superintendent. Now, I wonder if this could some day or other reach that point? In other words, what is to keep an incoming Governor from asking the State Board of Education to resign and appoint his own State Board of Education? And who in tum would appoint the State School Superintendent?
CHAIRMAN ARNALL. There is nothing to keep that from happening except the State Board would not have to resign, and they are protected by the Constitution in their tenure of office.
MRS. PATTERSON. Now, this has happened in that State. Not only the State School Superintendent was changed every time the Governor changed, but the whole personnel of the State Department of Education. That impeded progress. I don't know; I don't see that we take it out of politics to take it out of the hands of the people. Politics is the people, and puts it under one political faction, as I see it. I may be mistaken.
MR. GROSS. In answer to that statement, may I say that the present method of constituting the State Board of Education, it being written in the Constitution, the term of office of all the members or the majority of them, does not expire during the term.

RECORDS OF CONSTITUTIONAL COMMISSION

87

CHAIRMAIN ARNALL. Each Governor gets two appointments to that Board, two full term appointments.
MRS. PATTERSON. I know in theory it sounds good, but it might change.
CHAIRMAN ARNALL. The Chair would like to make this statement, speaking as an individual member of the Commission. I can't see the intelligence or sense in having one system to apply to our higher educational institutions, and a different system to apply to our common schools. If the Superintendent of Schools ought to be elected by the people, I don't know of any reason why the Chancellor of the University System should not be elected by the people. If the Chancellor is elected by the Board of Regents, I don't know any reason why the Superintendent of the Schools should not be elected by the Board of Education. All I can say, we ought to come to some agreement to treat both systems alike.
MRS. PATTERSON. I think the public educational system is more general than the University. The University applies to a very small part of the State system, and you come to the public education system, that applies to everybody.
MR. HOLT. I don't want to consume time, but we are dealing with an important matter. In my opinion, if we are going to appoint the members of the Board of Education, they should have the right to appoint the State Superintendent of Schools. If we appoint the members of the Board of Education, and elect the State School Superintendent, we are going to have a conflict, because the Board of Education is going to say, "We are appointed by the Governor for a term of seven years"; and the State Superintendent of Schools is going to say to them, ''This IS a different policy. I have a mandate of the people, and I am elected, and I will carry out the policies I advocate." I am not prepared to say whether to appoint the members of the Board or elect them, but I say if we appoint the members of the Board of Education, they should appoint the Superintendent of Schools. If we elect the Superintendent of Schools, then we should elect the members of the Board of Education.
CHAIRMAN ARNALL. You have heard the discussion.
MR. HARRIS. Let me make one observation. Here I understand under our present setup, the State School Superintendent has no duties and no powers and no authority except that that the Board gives him, and if we elected a State School Superintendent, and the

II

RlCORDa 0' CONSTITUTIONAL COMMISSION

Board saw fit not to deal with him, they could just absolutelyaet him off in the comer and let him stay there, and still run the affairs of the schools, and we would have a man sitting over there drawin, a salary and with no power, and no authority, and no duties.
MR. HOLT. Isn't that rather ridiculous to vote that much salary to a man for doing nothing?
MR. HARRIS. I think so, and if you are going to have this setup, you ought to have a man amenable to the Board.
MRS. HAAS. I am in favor of having him appointed by the Board. but whether we have him appointed or elected, if the Governor makes up his mind to control that Board, he has a financial wield he can control. and control the Board.
CHAIRMAN ARNALL. It is my own observation no public official has any other control over any other public official that stretches beyond public opinion.
MRS. HAAS The election of the Superintendent of Schoola does not protect the people.
MR. MAJORS. But you have one member of that Board who haa been before the people.
JUDGE CANDLER. I want to agree with my friend, Mr. Majors, here. I have never believed in changing things so long as those things are working well. Now, I am about fifty-five years old, and the selection of your county board members by the Grand Jury, and the election of the county school superintendent by the people, as far as I have ever known of, works well. And the appointment of the Board Members, State Board Members, and the election of the State School Superintendent, I have never heard criticism of that. It looks to me like one group ought to be elected by the people, and the election of the county school superintendent and the election of the State School Superintendent is more practical than the election of your Board Members. My observation has been the present system of selection has been satisfactory, and I don't see any use in changing something that is all right now.
I
MR. HOLT. I hate to rise so many times, but if you are going to appoint a Board of Education. and elect a Superintendent, you are bound to have conflict.
JUDGE CANDLER. What conflict do you now have, or have you had in the past?

RECORDS 0,. CON8TITUTIONAL COMMISSION

G.

MR. HOLT. It is not a question of what you have had. It is a question of what the system you now propose will bring on. If you appoint one, and elect the other, you will have conflicl
JUDGE CANDLER. We have done pretty well
MR. HOLT. We have about 159 different systems, school8yBtema. It is what you will do further on, and not what you will do now.
CHAIRMAN ARNALL. The question is on the adoption of the amendment.
MR. M. E. THOMPSON. May I have permission to answer that. Governor?
CHAIRMAN ARNALL. The gentleman may be heard.
MR. THOMPSON. A few minutes ago you brought up a point about the consistency between the State Board of Education and the State Public School System, and the Board of Regents and the University System. Institutions like Middle Georgia College at Cochran, and University of Georgia at Athens, though they are located in Cochran and Athens respectively, they are, after all, State institutions and just happen to be located in those places. They are totally under the control of the State, with no local authority or control, and they ought not to have any local control. Now, it is different as to public schools or as to Union County public schools, or Bibb Countr public schools. Primarily those institutions are not State institu.tions. They are aided and supported by the State, but they have local interest and support. I don't think the analysis between the University System and the public school system is good.
CHAIRMAN ARNALL. The Chair appreciates that. The question is on the adoption of the amendment proposed by the gentleman from Evans County, Mr. Majors, which is substantially as follows: That is to say, Section III, if amended as the gentleman proposed, will read as follows: "There shall be a State Superintendent of Schools elected by the people at the same time, for the same term, and in the same manner, as the Governor, who shall hold his office until his successor is elected and qualified. The State Superintendent of Schools shall have such qualifications, and shall be paid such compensation as may be fixed by law." The question is on the adoption of that proposal. Is there any objection to the adoption? There is objection. So many as favor it say, "aye''. opposed "no." The "noes" seem to have-a division-so many as favor the adoption of the question just read will make it known by rising and standing until

70

RECORDS OF CONSTITUTIONAL COMMISSION

counted. Reverse; the amendment is rejected, by a vote of 6 to 9, 9
being against and 6 for. The question is on adoption of Section III
of the Committee's report. Is there objection?
MR. MAJORS. I object.
CHAIRMAN ARNALL. There is objection. All in favor say "aye"; opposed "no." The "ayes" have it, and it is ordered adopted. Read Section IV.
MR. GROSS. Section IV is a restatement of the Constitutional amendment with reference to the Board of Regents of the University System of Georgia.
CHAIRMAN ARNALL. The Clerk will read the Committee recommendation.
MR. McCUTCHEN. (Reads Section IV of the Committee Report.) "There shall be a Board of Regents of the University System of Georgia, and the government, control, and management of the University System of Georgia and all of its institutions in said system shall be vested in said Board of Regents of the University System of Georgia. Said Board of Regents of the University System of Georgia shall consist of one member from each Congressional District in the State, and five additional members from the State-atlarge, appointed by the Governor and confirmed by the Senate. The Governor shall not be a member of the said Board. The first Board of Regents under this Constitution shall consist of those in office at the time this Constitution is adopted, with the terms provided by law. Thereafter, all succeeding appointments shall be for seven year terms from the expiration of the previous term. Vacancies upon said Board caused by expiration of term of office shall be similarly filled by appointment and confirmation. In case of a vacancy on said Board by death, resignation of a member, or from any other cause other than the expiration of such member's term of office, the Board shall by secret ballot elect his successor, who shall hold office until the end of the next session of the General Assembly, or if the General Assembly be then in session, to the end of that session. During such session of the General Assembly the Governor shall appoint a successor member of the Board for the unexpired term, and shall submit his name to the Senate for confirmation. All members of the Board of Regents shall hold office until their successors are appointed. The said Board of Regents of the University System of Georgia shall have the powers and duties as provided by law existing at the time of the adoption of this Con-

RECORDS OF CONSTITUTIONAL COMMISSION

71

stitution, together with such further powers and duties as may be hereafter provided by law."
CHAIRMAN ARNALL. The Chair recognizes the presence of the distinguished and amiable Mayor of the Capitol City of Georgia, the Honorable William B. Hartsfield. (Applause)
The question is on the adoption of Section IV, which is substantially the present provision of the Constitution, relating to the Board of Regents. There is no material change. Is there any objection? Without objection it is ordered adopted.
MR. THRASHER. May I ask the Chairman of the Sub-committee a question? Why have they not provided for an executive officer of the Board of Regents in the same manner as the executive officer of the Board of Education?
MR. GROSS. State that again.
MR. THRASHER. There is no provision for an executive officer.
MR. GROSS. We do not provide for the Chancellor of the University System in the Constitution at the present time. It is provided by statute, and-
MR. HARRIS. It is frozen in here then.
CHAIRMAN ARNALL. If it is by statute it is now frozen. Unless there is objection the Commission will proceed to Section V, having adopted Section IV. There is no objection.
MR. GROSS. Section V is a new section, and it takes Section IV, Paragraph I. I suggest that the Secretary read the Committee Report, and probably I can explain the difference.
MR. McCUTCHEN. (Reads Section V of the Committee Report.) "Authority is granted to Counties to establish and maintain public schools within their limits. Each County, exclusive of any independent school system now in existence in a County, shall compose one school district and shall be confided to the control and management of a County Board of Education. The Grand Jury of each County shall select from the citizens of their respective Counties five freeholders, who shall constitute the County Board of Education. Said members shall be elected for the term of five years, except that the first elections of Board members under this Constitution shall be for such terms that will prOVIde for the expiration of the term of one member of the County Board of Education each year. In case of a vacancy on said Board by death, resignation of a member, or from

'rJ

RECORDS 0' CONSTITUTIONAL COMMISSION

any cause other than the expiration of such member's term of offiee, the Board shall by secret ballot, elect his suceessor. who shall bold office until the next Grand Jury convenes, at which time said Grand Jury shall appoint the successor member of the Board for the unexpired term. The members of the County Board of Education of such County shall be selected from that portion of the County not embraced within the territory of an independent school district."
CHAIRMAN ARNALL. Is there any discussion or amendment?
MR. GROSS. There are two or three changes in that paragraph. One is that the Board of Education is elected for a term of five years. rather than a term of four years, with one of the members' term expiring each year. Another provision is put in here. that those qualified to serve on the Board of Education shall reside in that portion of the county not embraced with an independent school system. Another thing this paragraph has provided for is that the county shall be a school unit within itself, excepting the independent school system within the county, which does away with local school districts. Now, we have undertaken not to interfere with independent school systems, and I think this section does that. There has been some criticism and some people think it probably might interfere with the independent school system, but I invite your attention to the language used in the first part of the section, and I believe it takes care of the independent school system.
CHAIRMAN ARNALL. Are there any questions, amendments?
MR. DURDEN. Mr. Chairman, with reference to the requirement that the Board members come outside of the territory of an independent school system, I am peculiarly concerned over our local situation, and I am primarily opposed to that feature of the bill Albany is composed of an independent school system. It is the only incorporated town in Dougherty County. Mr. MacIntosh, whom you all know, has been Chairman of the County Board of Education for a long number of years. Of course, if this is adopted that would exclude him from being on the Board.
MR. HOLT. How about Section IX, on the next page?
CHAIRMAN ARNALL. That have not a constitutional-
MR. HARRIS. No, Richmond, Bibb, Greene and Chatham-
MR. DURDEN. I don't know of any reason, if you have good men embraced in a territory composed of independent school systema.

0' RECORDS CONSTITUTIONAL COMMISSION

,a

'Why they would be excluded from serving on the Board.
CHAIRMAN ARNALL. What do you say?
MR. GROSS. It is my hope and desire the county will be the unit of education within itself, and there will be no independent 8yatern, but before we can do that, the county system must progress to an extent the independent school system will ask to come in. With reference to the criticism offered by the gentleman from Dougherty, and I realize he has a situation he does not want to lose the services of a man, but to save my life, I can't conceive of the advisability of permitting a man to have something to do with the schools when he does not live in the district, and more than you would let a man outside of the independent school system come in and be elected a member of the City Board of Education. It is without his jurisdiction; he does not reside in it; he does not participate in it; and I think those counties outside of the incorporate limits of an independent system should have the right to run their schools. That is the only answer I have to it.
CHAIRMAN ARNALL. Does the gentleman from Dougherty offer an amendment?
MR. DURDEN. I move to strike the last three lines of that paragraph.
CHAIRMAN ARNALL. The gentleman moves to strike the last three lines. Any other amendment?
MRS. HAAS. I think the Board of Education ought to be elected by the people, even though it is the custom now to do otherwise, because I think they are one of the biggest policy-determining bodies we have, and spend a great deal of tax money, and are responsible for an important function, and are equally as important as the county commissioners; and I think they should be elected by the people and determine what revenue is necessary for the conduct of those schools, and assume the responsibility directly for that.
CHAIRMAN ARNALL. Do you offer an amendment?
MRS. HAAS. Yes.
MR. MAJORS. I second that amendment.
CHAIRMAN ARNALL. We will proceed to vote on the amendment from the gentleman from Dougherty, the last three lines in Section V, restricting membership on the County Board of Education to

74

RECORDS OF CONSTITUTIONAL COMMISSION

such portions of the county as embraced in the county unit of administration. The question is on striking those last three lines. Is there objection?
MR. GROSS. I object.
CHAIRMAN ARNALL. The question is on the amendment. So many as favor it, make it known by saying "aye." Opposed "no." Division. So many as favor the adoption of the amendment rise and stand until counted. Reverse, those opposed; 7 to 9, 7 for and 9 against. The amendment is rejected. The question is on the adoption of the amendment from the lady from Fulton to the effect the members of the County Board of Education shall be elected by the people. The County Board of Education shall be elected by the people. Does her motion prevail? The question is on the adoption of the motion. Is there objection?
MR. GROSS. I object.
CHAIRMAN ARNALL. Those in favor let it be known by saying "aye." Opposed "no." The amendment is rejected. The question is on the adoption of Section V of the Committee's report. Is there objection to the adoption?
MR. FOLEY. Mr. Chairman, I agree with President Gross, that it is desirable that eventually the independent schools be absorbed by the county system. However, a great many of my constituents at home don't think so. And I just want to be sure that for the time being those independent systems are protected. Now, I am not sure about this language. If there is any doubt about it we ought to have some provision covering that.
CHAIRMAN ARNALL. The Chair is of the opinion, Judge Foley, it is the sense of the Committee offering this proposal, and the Commission, that nothing be included in this section which will abolish the independent school system.
MR. FOLEY. That is quite all right.
CHAIRMAN ARNALL. And the Committee on final revision can go over this and be sure the purpose of the Commission is not frustrated. Is there objection to the adoption of Section V? Without objection it is adopted. Section VI.
MR. GROSS. Section VI has to do with the manner of electing the county school superintendent.

RECORDS OF CONSTITUTIONAL COMMISSION

'I'

CHAIRMAN ARNALL. The Clerk will read the section. It is a substitute for the present section?
MR. GROSS. Yes, sir.
CHAIRMAN ARNALL. As I understand it, in order to conserve time, the present section provides the people elect the county Superintendent of Schools, and your proposal is for the Board of Education to elect the Superintendent.
MR. GROSS. Yes, sir.
CHAIRMAN ARNALL. The Clerk will read the proposed Section VI.
MR. McCUTCHEN. (Reads.) ''There shall be a County School Superintendent, who shall be the executive officer of the County Board of Education, and who shall be elected by said Board, for such term and salary as the Board may fix, except that the term shall not exceed four years. The qualifications of the County School Superintendent shall be fixed by law. No member of said Board shall be eligible for election as County School Superintendent during the time for which he shall have been elected. This provision shall not become effective until January 1, 1949."
CHAIRMAN ARNALL. Are there any amendments or discussion?
MR. MAJORS. I move to amend.
CHAIRMAN ARNALL. The gentleman moves to amend the section.
MR.' MAJORS. He is substituting the County School Superintendent shall be elected by the people for a term of four years, and that the Grand Jury shall select the members of the Board of Education. We tried to get around that by changing it, but we could not do it.
CHAIRAN ARNALL. You have adopted the section that provides the Grand Jury shall elect the County Board of Education.
MR. MAJORS. If we had been able to get the people to elect these, that would have been all right.
CHAIRMAN ARNALL. I understand now, whereas the present section in the Constitution provides under the general provisions about county officers.
MR. GROSS. Yes, sir.
CHAIRMAN ARNALL. Mr. Majors moves to amend Section VI by providing by such amendment, which if adopted, will cause Sec-

'1'

RECORDS 0' CONSTITUTIONAL COMMISSION

lion VI to read as follows: There shall be a County School Superintendent who shall be the executive officer of the County Board of Education, and who shall be elected by the people for a tenn of four years. The qualifications of the County School Superintendent shall be fixed by law. No member of the County Board of Education shall be eligible for election as County School Superintendent
MR. FOLEY. That does not give him any pay.
MR. MAJORS. The whole business here is sort of up in the air. I don't see where anybody has supervision over anybody.
CHAIRMAN ARNALL. Is not the compensation of the County School Superintendent now fixed by the County Board of Education under statute?
MR. ALLISON. The State pays $600 a year to the County School Superintendent, and the rest is paid by the County.
CHAIRMAN ARNALL. The Chair is of the opinion that the gentleman-
MR. CULPEPPER. I would like to ask the Assistant Attorney General. Now the County Board of Education fixes an additional salary to that?
1rfR. ALLISON. Yes, sir.
CHAIRMAN ARNALL. Supplements the salary by the State?
MR. ALLISON. Yes, sir.
CHAIRMAN ARNALL. The Chair is of the opinion the purport of the gentleman's amendment would be carried out if Section VI was stricken in its entirety. Is that the opinion of the Commission?
MR. GROSS. That's right
CHAIRMAN ARNALL. Therefore the Chair-
MR. HEAD. Mr. Chainnan, I want to observe in passing, it seems to be two theories on which we might proceed. I have heard the statement made that the best government w-as the government that was the closest to the people. I am not willing to concede that six men can do a better job than the people of my county can do. The only time that I have had an opportunity to observe that, they had 8 mess out of it, and I think we have taken enough from the people when we take the State School Superintendent away. I think that

RECORDS or CONSTITUTIONAL COMMISSION

'7'l

Is a mistake. I am afraid we are trying to streamline education a little too much. We are going to get ourselves in a situation where we are having a Constitutional officer appointed by a man in tum selected by a governor. Now, I don't know, it might be possible that the Board of Education might go up to New York or Massachusetts or Wisconsin, or somewhere else and bring us a Yankee down here that would not be in sympathy with the people out in the"nJral seetion of Georgia. As it is under the present system, people interested in education, when they come to Atlanta they have a man that is sympathetic, he listens to their problems, and takes up time dealing with their problems. Why? Because he knows the aspirations of a certain people every time. He is accountable to the people. I am just afraid' we are trying to streamline a little too much, and we are trying to take too much of the prerogatives of the people away from them; and I want to insist that we give the gentleman from Evans an opportunity to get his amendment in shape so we can vote on it.
CHAIRMAN ARNALL. The Chair is of the opinion that if the Commission in its wisdom rejects Section VI, which is a new section, proposed by the Committee, that then we would delete in effect the statutory law of the State which provides for a county school superintendent in each county and the method of that election.
MR. HEAD. Let's reject it.
MR. GOWEN. It would not be just as sensible to say, the clerk of the County Commissioners of every County of the State should be elected by the people. You elect the County Conimissionen and they appoint an executive officer to do their work; now they have detennined the way to elect the school superintendent, I mean the members of the Board of Education, is hy Grand Jury. That is jUlt as much an election as if he gets out and runs in a regular election. It curtails the number of electors. You put a body of men and say, "We choose you and put you in charge;" and then we turn around and say, "You can't even select the man that does your work." It does not make sense. If somebody has to be elected, you certainly do a lot better electing the members of the Board than you do if electing the executive officers.
MR. MAJORS. At the proper time and place we tried to get members of the Board of Education in the County elected by the people, and not by the Grand Jury, and if we had been able to do this, this question would not have come up. I contend that somewhere in the school system somebody ought to be elected that the people

18

RECORDS OF CONSTITUTIONAL COMMISSION

c.an say something to. Nobody in my county can say anything to a member of the Board of Education, because he is a law unto himself. He is a creature of the Grand Jury, not a creature of the people at all. And they can take and do anything they want to under this proposed set-up. The people have not got any voice in the whole thing from top to bottom.
MR. GOWEN. There is a lot to what the gentleman says, but I don't believe you will improve it by doing two things wrong. If you made a mistake about the other one, you will not improve it by making a mistake; and as far as the educational people are concerned, they run that to suit them, the school teachers and the people that run the schools.
MR. CULPEPPER. Just a word. What I say I reckon won't have any effect on anybody, and that does not make any difference to me. At one time we had this very situation they are proposing now in Georgia,~ People were very much dissatisfied with it, and changed it, providing that the County School Superintendent be elected by the people. It has worked well. I have heard no complaints about it. So far as I am concerned, here, now, and forever, I am in favor of leaving the election of part of it in the hands of the people. I am going to vote for the amendment of the gentleman from Evans to strike Section VI, and leave the matter where it stands now. You get less politics than you are liable to get. Like it was years ago, and they just perpetuated an incompetent in office, and the people could not get them out, and that has been the situation, and that is why the Legislature in its wisdom submitted to the people a provision amending it to require the selection be made by the people. Let somebody here somewhere be responsiple to the people about the matter. Nobody is going to be responsible under this set-up. A closed corporation is the Board of Education, and County School Superintendents are going to maneuver right on to keep his friends on the Board. That is what happened when we had it before. That is why the Legislature rose in its wrath and changed it. I am going to stick to this proposition.
MR. HARRIS. Will you yield?
MR. CULPEPPER. Yes, I am always delighted.
MR. HARRIS. As it now stands, most of the members of the Board of Education are appointed on recommendation of the County School Superintendent.

RECORDS OF CONSTITUTIONAL COMMISSION

79

MR. CULPEPPER. Absolutely. It is a closed corporation, and it has got so obnoxious to the people that they demanded to the Legislature that they have a change, and give them an opportunity to say who shall govern the ~chool matters in the various counties.
MR. HOLT. If I understand this proposition correctly, it provides for the appointment of the members of the County Board of Education by the Grand Jury. If any segment of the county population is represented from the people, it seems to me the Grand Jury is. As for building a Chinese wall around a county or around the State of Georgia, to keep out Yankees or anybody else that comes in to teach them, I much prefer to live in a State whose idea is more liberal. H there is not a qualified man in a county to be school superintendent, are we going to let the children from the county go to the University System and be handicapped compared to children from the other counties whose ideas are more liberal? I can't for the life of me understand why a county containing five or six or seven thousand people should wish to confine its leadership, confine it to men or women from that county, if you can get others from outside who can do a better job. As for my children, I don't care if they come from New York, or Canada, if they can teach my children more than my neighbor. I want them to have the opportunity. I think one thing is wrong now, we are hog-tied and bound by those things which we think are traditional, and it may be, my friends, and it may be that just that proposition is responsible for the fact that today Georgia is so near the bottom of the list in so many of the things today.
MR. GROSS. Mr. Chairman, I am one of those people that seem to be in the minority, who still believe that the Grand Jury is composed of upright and intelligent citizens, a group of men not influenced or controlled by the County School Superintendent. I think it is 'a body qualified to select the members of the County Board of Education. Now, if we are going to go forward in education in Georgia, we must not confine the field from which the leaders, the County School Superintendents, shall be selected. It IJrlght be in my county I might want to go to Fayette County or to Bibb County, and get their Superintendent of Schools. There is another evil of that thing, every once in a while you see a good man that has spent his entire life preparing to be county school superintendent. He comes back to his county, and he is not elected, maybe, at the next election, he is defeated, he can't go somewhere else and get a job as County School Superintendent. He will have to move into anoth-

10

RECORDS OF CONSTITUTIONAL COMMISSION

er county and build up political strength in order that he might be elected. This system we are proposing, you can go to another county, you can get that Superintendent and put him into another county. Certainly we don't want to build a wall up around Stephens County, and I am sure you don't want to build a wall up around your County. Let's get the best school people we can_get. Let's don't say they must reside in the county. There are probably counties in Georgia that don't have a qualified man that has had the proper education and training to be county school superintendent. I think this will remove that evil. I think it will broaden, I think we should go forward. I don't think we should be afraid of somebody coming from the North to take over the school system.
MR. GRICE. How about the members of the independent system? .
MR. GROSS. Yes, the independent school system here and in Macon and Augusta, they can go out and hire those men as Superintendents of the City Schools, and if they don't do a good job they are not rehired.
MRS. HAAS. In Atlanta we elect the Board of Education before they hire the person. We elect the City Board of Education.
MR. GRICE. They elect, the City elects directly by the people.
MRS. HAAS. No, no more -
MR. MAJORS. This thing vitally concerns me because you have provided nowhere in your proposed Article where anybody is responsible to anybody else for anything. Now, we put a bridle on the Supreme Court and Judges of the Superior Court, and they have been hung around with a bridle over the State for year and years. They committed no crime, but we bridle them. We put halters on them, and why we can't halter one man in the county to the people, and made him amenable to the people who recommend the appointment to the Board of Education in your County, who recommends it to the Grand Jury, your County School Superintendent and as long as he is in office he recommends those people who will help perpetuate him in office. And the only way in the world we can get a change in the Board of Education, if we don't like it, is to get rid of the County School Superintendent, and there are lots of times in the small counties we get a Board of Education that is not popular with the people. They are not interested in education, they are interested in running the school so they can get school loose at certain times in the year to gather the crop than they are whether

UCORDS 01' CONS'l'lTUTIONAL COMMISSION

11

the children learn to read and write.
MR. GROSS. I believe we are getting somewhere. I didn't believe we are a cold, blind somebody, I don't know what we are going to accomplish. We are putting responsibility on the Grand Jury, and we ought to get the good men to serve on the Grand Jury, I mean that won't be influenced by the County School Superintendent.
MR. MAJORS. One man on the Grand Jury is not going to control it.
MR. HOLT. Mr. Chairman, what right have these advocates of this amendment to presume that the Grand Jury are going to be guided entirely by the recommendations of a County School Superintendent?
MR. MAJORS. By the past performance.
MR. HOLT. I don't know, I have seen members of the Bibb County Board of Education elected, and I have never seen the time the Superintendent had any voice. Somebody said, "Give us men with courage to hold fast to those things we should bold to, the senae to change those things that should be changed, and the intelligence to distinguish between the two." I think we have an opportunity here to make a revision in the school set-up that will take it out of politics, and put it on the basis that every parent baa a right to think and expect his school system to be put on. I do not subscribe to the idea that the men on a Grand Jury had been guided entirely by the recommendations of one School Superintendent.
CHAIRMAN ARNALL. The question is on the rejection of Section VI, of the Committee's report. The Chair is of the opinion that if Section VI of the Committee's Report is rejected in conformity with the motion of Mr. Majors, that that will leave the election of the County School Superintendent up to the people, as now provided by law. The question is on the adoption of the motion of the gentleman from Evans to reject Section VI. Is there objection?
MR. GROSS. I object.
CHAIRMAN ARNALL. So many as favor the motion, which is the rejection of Sectio~ VI, make it known by saying "aye." Opposed "no." The Chair is in doubt. So many as in favor of the motion to reject Section VI, make it known by rising, and standing until counted. The amendment is lost 6 to 10, and Section VI stands. Now, the converse is true. Those who favor adoption of Section VI of the Committee report, make it known by rising and standing.

82

RECORDS OF CONSTITUTIONAL COMMISSION

Reverse, those opposed, rise, and the Section is adopted by a vote of ten to five. Read Section VII.
MR. GROSS. Section VII is a new section, or a part of another section. Read the Committee Report, Mr. Secretary.
MR. McCUTCHEN. (Reads). Section VU of Committee Report. "Authority is hereby granted to municipal corporations to maintain existing independent ~chool systems within their limits. No new independent school system shall hereafter be established."
CHAIRMAN ARNALL. Is there objection to adopting the Section as read? Without objection it is so ordered. That preserves your independent system, but says they shall not be hereafter established. Read Section VIII.
MR. GROSS. Section VIII is another new section taken from a portion of the other. Read it.
MR. McCUTCHEN. (Reads). Section VIII. "County Boards of Education and independent school systems may contract for the education, transportation and care of pupils."
CHAIRMAN ARNALL. Interrogation: Why should they contract for education?
MR. GRICE. There is a system now of vocational education that all schools do not have, such as these training schools, machinists schools. You have one at Clarksville for instance. There might be a pupil at another school that would want to take that training, and they can contract between one another to transport them and educate them.
CHAIRMAN ARNALL. Does not that give them permission and authority to contract with Culver Military Academy to send boys there if they want to? There is no limitation?
MR. GROSS. County Boards of Education and independent school systems may contract, there is no limitation.
CHAIRMAN ARNALL. Could not they contract to send them?
MR. GROSS. Probably. Put it, County Boards of Education, and in~ dependent school systems could contract with each other. May I correct it?
CHAIRMAN ARNALL. Is there objection to rewriting it, to read as follows: County Boards of Education and independent school sys-

RECORDS OF CONSTITUTIONAL COMMISSION

sa

tems may contract for transportation and care of pupils and may contract with each other for their education. Is that objectionable?
MR. GROSS. No, sir.
MR. MacINTYRE. Sometimes a school bus may run by.
CHAIRMAN ARNALL. They can contract under that provision.
MR. GRICE. Why not say contract with each other?
CHAIRMAN ARNALL. Except they may want to contract for transportation not with each other, and the way the Chair states it, it takes care of that. The Chair will state it once more. It is proposed that Section VIII be adopted so as to read as follows: "County Boards of Education and independent Schools Systems may contract for transportation and care of pupils."
MR. HARRIS. Leave "care of pupils" out.
MR ALLISON. Under Section 2-8901, Paragraph I, the last sen tence reads this way in the Constitution: "Provided, however, county Boards of Education, independent school systems, and local school districts may contract with each other for the education, transportation and care of children of school age."
CHAIRMAN ARNALL. That is fine. That is exactly what Judge Grice was saying in effect, but I wonder there if you don't limit this contract for transportation to each other, you understand?
MR. ALLISON. I don't catch you.
CHAIRMAN ARNALL. It seems that limited contracts to county Boards of Education and independent school systems may make for transportation to contract between the two. But they may want to contract with an independent hauler to haul them to school.
MR. HARRIS. My suggestion would be, shall-
CHAIRMAN ARNALL. The Chair will undertake to state the gentleman's amendment. Section VIII. "County Boards of Education and independent school systems may contract for transportation, and may contract for the education and care of pupils."
MR. HARRIS. And may contract with each other.
CHAIRMAN ARNALL. Contract with each other for the education and care of pupils. Now, does that restrict transportation contracts between the two systems?

84

BCORDS 0' CONSTITUTIONAL COMMISSION

14R. ALLISON. I think there is a separate statute that now provides County Boards of Education have a right to provide transportation and may contract for it. Now, I will also call your attention to this fact in the old Constitution provision you have local school districts, and you don't have now.

CHAIRMAN ARNALL. Why should that section be in the Constitution?

MR. THRASHER. I move it be stricken.

MR. HOLT. Second the motion.

CHAIRMAN ARNALL. Is it necessary?

l
"I

MR. HARRIS. It is in the statute.

CHAIRMAN ARNALL. Isn't it covered by statutory law?

MR. GROSS. I think it should be controlled by statute.

CHAIRMAN ARNALL. Mr. Thrasher moves to strike Section VIII. Is there objection? Without objection it is stricken. Section IX.

MR. GROSS. Section IX is in the old Constitution and brought forward.
MR. McCUT"CHEN. (Reads Section IX, Article VIII) "Public School systems established prior to the adoption of the Constitution of 1877 shall not be affected by this Constitution."

CHAIRMAN ARNALL. Mr. Chairman, why should they not be affected by a Constitution?

MR. GROSS. Well, because they don't want to be, I reckon.

CHAIRMAN ARNALL. Why should my system be affected and Mr. Harris' and Senator Atkinson's and Mr. Foley's not be? Why should they get more money for education, more money than I get?

MR. HARRIS. We don't get as much as you do.

MR. GROSS. I don't think there will be any need for this section because we have brought the State system in conformity to what they have now.

MR. HARRIS. Not quite. In other words you are driving at a county unit system. We have a county unit system and we don't want our county unit system messed up.

CHAIRMAN ARNALL. I am not complaining about the form, the

RECORDS or CONSTITUTIONAL COMMISSION

85

complaint is about the distribution of school funds.
MR. HARRIS. We have a complaint on that. We have asked to be treated like the rest instead of red-headed step-children. We are not getting it, but don't fuss. But as long as you let us raise our own money and operate under the system we have, we don't fuss. It affects counties, Richmond, Bibb, Chatham, and Glynn.
CHAIRMAN ARNALL. Does it affect you favorably or unfavorably?
MR. HARRIS. This preservt's the county unit system we have.
CHAIRMAN ARNALL. If under the Constitution we have a county unit system, why is it necessary to put this in '!
MR. HARRIS. In the first place, in our county we have a Board of Education we elect by the people. In Bibb they don't. Now, we like our system as it is. \Ve elect our Board of Education by the people, and we have a representative board. The system provided that each section of the county be represented on tlie Board. It has been working there for at least one hundred years or more, and I think ever since the original academy system was passed at the same session of the Legislature. When the General Assembly was created there were six academies created, and out of that academy system this system finally developed into a county unit system, and we want to keep it like we have got it. It does not hurt anybody else, and the only thing it does do, it would only affect the machinery, it would not affect our rights at all under the State, it would only affect the method of selecting the county school superintendent and Board of Education.
MR. GRICE. That particular department of the State government which is bridled and haltered had a case from Mr. Harris' county, and one from Mr. Holt's county, and we construed this section. It does not give them any advantage in taxes.
CHAIRMAN ARNALL. With that statement from the eminent Associate Justice of the Supreme Court, the Chair withdraws anyobjection on his part.
MR. HOLT. I would like to ask a question there, Judge Grice. Section IX provides that public school systems established prior to the adoption of the Constitution of 1877-was that formulated before then?
MR. GRICE. It was.

86

RECORDS OF CONSTITUTIONAL COMMISSION

MR. ALLISON. I think the Committee has used the wrong word in the language when they said "effected". The only Constitutional effect is affected, and I think that is better.
CHAIRMAN ARNALL. Is there objection to changing that from "effected" to "affected"?
MR. MacINTYRE. Isn't this really brought forward? You had this same right under the old Constitution, Brunswick, Augusta. Macon and Savannah had this right under the old Constitution. We are giving you the same rights you had.
MR. HARRIS. Yes, sir.
CHAIRMAN ARNALL. Since the assurance from the Associate Justice that these systems obtain no advantage over boys and girls in other counties, the Chair is not concerned.
MR. HARRIS. I would like to assure you we obtain a distinct advantage.
CHAIRMAN ARNALL. The question is on the adoption of Section IX, is there objection? The Chair hears none, and without objection it is ordered adopted. Mr. Majors-
MR. MAJORS. Mr. Chairman, I move the adoption of a new section, just move Sectio!) X down, and move Section XI to get it in the proper place.
MR. GROSS. Section VIII was stricken, just make it Section VIII. [There is apparently a brief omission in the records at this point.]
MR. MAJORS. "County Boards of Education and County School Superintendents shall publish at least once a year in the official newspaper of said county an itemized list of all receipts and expenditures."
CHAIRMAN ARNALL. You have heard the reading of the pro posed amendment, is there objection?
MR. GROSS. I object-not that I object to that.
MR. MAJORS. I am going to have this thing tied somewhere to the people, I will fight on it until I am beat clean out of the house.
MR. GROSS. I don't object to the idea. I am just wondering if that is not a matter that should be provided by statute?
MR. MAJORS. You fellows won't do it in the Legislature. I am trying to do it here.

RECORDS OF CONSTITUTIONAL COMMISSION

87

CHAIRMAN ARNALL. Is there objection to this Commission recommending to the Legislature that such a provision be enacted by statutory law?
MR. GROSS. Let him read the amendment.
MR. MAJORS. ''The County Boards of Education and the School Superintendent shall publish at least once a year in the official newspaper of the said county an itemized list of all receipts and expenditures."
MR. GOWEN. I would like to ask a question. He is a newspaper man. What would be the size of the paper in Fulton County that carried that list of all the money, every dollar that come in, and each check written?
MR. MAJORS. If you had closer scrutiny of all the dollars that went out, you would have a better government.
MR. GOWEN. What would be the size of the paper?
MR. MAJORS. It don't make any difference as to the size, it's good business.
CHAIRMAN ARNALL. Is there any objection to this Commission's recommendation that be made statutory?
MR. THRASHER. The law requires us to audit every county school board and school system once a year. We make the audits and file them, copies, with every member of the State Board or County Board of Education when the audits are completed. Before you go too far, now, you take the Fulton County Report. Roughly, offhand, that carries in it, carrying the details of salaries and traveling and all other expenses, around one hundred pages in the Fulton County Report. Now, my suggestion would be some way, rather than require it be published, to make some provision that some public official in the County keep the report on file available to any citizens that care to see them.
MR. MAJORS. That thing was tried, and they are buried, and the people as a whole have not time to look for it, and they find it, and they come back, and the result is nobody knows anything about it.
CHAIRMAN ARNALL. In order to expedite the proceedings, the Chair asks the unanimous consent of the Commission to recommend the proposal offered by the gentleman be recommended to the General Assembly for enactment in statutory law.

88

RECORDS 01' CONSTITUTIONAL COMMISSION

MR. CULPEPPER. I object. They can do it without Constitutional authority. We have a right to do it now. And if you just recommend it to them and they don't want to do it, they don't have to do it.
CHAIRMAN ARNALL. That's right. The question is then on the general motion. So many as favor the motion say "aye." Opposed "no." Division. Those in favor make it known by rising and standing until counted. Reversed, those opposed rise. And the proposal is rejected four to ten. Read Section X.
MR. MAJORS. Just a minute. The second paragraph, all official meetings of the Board of Education of the Counties, shall be open to the public at all times.
CHAIRMAN ARNALL. The gentleman proposes a new section to be known as Section VIII, to read as follows: All Meetings of the County Board of Education, all official meetings of the County Board of Education shall be open to the general public. Is there objection to the amendment? The Chair hears none.
MR. GRICE. I object.
CHAIRMAN ARNALL. There is objection. All in favor let it be known by saying "aye." Opposed "no." The "ayes" seem to haye it-division-those in favor let it be known by rising and standing until counted. Reverse, those opposed rise-and the amendment is adopted by a vote of 11 to 3. Read Section X.
MR. FOLEY. I don't want to take up any time, I want to explain my vote on that. I think in principle every meeting ought to be open, but I think it is the strangest absurdity in the world to put things like that in the Constitution. If we keep on doing that we will have the champion monstrosity of all time.
CHAIRMAN ARNALL. You heard the explanation of the gentleman's vote. The Chair is of the opinion himself those things probably should be creatures of statute.
MR. MAJORS. I am endeavoring in some manner to get the people in on this thing somewhere. So far the people have never been considered in on it, and I want the people in on it.
CHAIRMAN ARNALL. The Commission agrees with the gentleman, they ought to be. The only issue was whether it should be in the Constitution or by statute.
MR. HEAD. Mr. Chairman, I want to move, sir, that the ConunissioQ

RECORDS OF CONSTITUTIONAL COMMISSION

88

reconsider its action in adopting the provision providing for the

election of the State School Superintendent by the State Board of

Education. The statement was made that the only duties that the

State School Superintendent had was such duties as the Board of

Education saw fit to give him. If they didn't see fit to give him any

duties, and sat him over in a corner, all he would have to do would

be to draw his salary. Now, I submit to you, sir, that the State School

Superintendent is the man who directs the policy, is the policy-

forming man for all of the schools of Georgia. I don't make that

up in my own mind, I take it from the written statute law of our

state. I read you, sir, from Section 31-501 of the Annotated Code, "He

shall be charged with the administration of the school laws, and

general superintendence of the business relating to the common

schools. He shall prescribe suitable forms for the reports required

of subordinate school officers and blanks for their guidance in trans-

acting their official business, and shall from time to time prepare

and transmit to them such instructions as he may deem necessary

for the faithful and efficient execution of the school laws; and by

what is thus communicated to them they shall be bound to govern

themselves in the discharge of their official duties." I submit to

you, sir, the State School Superintendent is the man who forms the

policy of all the rural schools of Georgia. Now, in saying a few mo-

ments ago that I didn't want a man from New York, or Wisconsin

or Massachusetts, I didn't mean to cast any aspersions on the qual-

ifications of such gentlemen from the standpoint of education. Now,

I understand, sir, that the better educated class of people in the

East. The first schools were established and the first settlement es-

tablished there by a system of protective tariffs and by a system of

preferential rail rates. The best section of the country from the

standpoint of finances, and they have been able to do a better job,

from the standpoint of education. I don't mean to cast any reflec-

tion on their ability. I mean to say to you, sir, that I want someone

with a sympathetic ear to listen to the problems of the rural sections

of Georgia on education problems, and I say to you, if you take it

away from the people and turn it over to a State board, we will not

have a man who is sympathetic with the rural sections of this State,

and I move you, Sir, that we reconsider our action in providing

for the election of a State School Superintendent by the State Board

of Education.

.

CHAIRMAN ARNALL. The gentleman moves to reconsider the action of the Commission in adopting Section III of the Commit-

90

RECORDS OF CONSTITUTIONAL COMMISSION

tee's Report that provides for the selection of a State Superintendent of Schools by the State Board of Education. The question is on the motion of the distinguished Attorney General. Is there objection?
MR. GROSS. I object.
CHAIRMAN ARNALL. The question is on the adoption. So many as favor say "aye"; opposed "no." The Chair is in doubt. So many as favor the adoption, make it known by rising and standing until counted. Reverse, those opposed, rise. Five to 11. The motion is lost by a vote of 5 to 11. Section X.
MR. GROSS. I think Section X is identical with the provision in the present Constitution, I will ask him to read it.
MR. McCUTCHEN. (Reads Section X of Article VIII.) "The Regents of the University System of Georgia may accept bequests, donations and grants of land, or other property, for the use of said University. In addition to the payment of the annual interest on the debt due by the State to the University, the General Assembly shall from time to time make such appropriations to the Univel'sity System of Georgia as the condition of the treasury authorizes."
MR. THRASHER. I offer an amendment: After the word "the" insert "the State Board of Education and the Board of Regents of the University-"
CHAIRMAN ARNALL. Before we consider that amendment, if the Commission will indulge the Chair and the gentleman in particular the Chair would like to suggest the entire last sentence be deleted.
MR. THRASHER. I was going to suggest that.
CHAIRMAN ARNALL. For the reason we have a system in the State whereby the State is continually in debt to the University. Every time they pay a bond they issue another one due in five years. We have bonds that will not be due until 1996. One of the first orders of my administration was to order the State officials not to issue any more bonds under which we would be perpetually in debt. We have an arrangement with the Regents whereby we are going to payoff those bonds, and I know of no reason why we should pay bonds to the University System.
MR. GROSS. The reason that was put in, Chairman Marion Smith came before our Committee and stated to us there was some strings or some condition upon which they had received a gift that made it

RECORDS OF CONSTITUTIONAL COMMISSION

91

necessary this be in the Constitution. Now, I don't see the necessity of the last sentence.

CHAIRMAN ARNALL. Thal is the first sentence? MR. GROSS. Yes, sir.

CHAIRMAN ARNALL. Do you withdraw?

MR. THRASHER. No, I want the change in the first sentence, and I make the motion.

CHAIRMAN ARNALL. What is the amendment?

MR. THRASHER. Add, "The State Board of Education and the Board of Regents of the University of Georgia may accept bequests for the use of the respective school systems." Under the vocational education program we are having some lands donated to the State Department of Education.

CHAIRMAN ARNALL. Is there objection to the adoption of the amendment, which if adopted, will provide that the State Board of Education and the Regents of the University System of Georgia may accept bequests, donations, and grants of land or other property, for the use of their respective educational systems?

MR. GRICE. And the University System, it looks you can accept-

MR. THRASHER. Their respective school systems.

.

CHAIRMAN ARNALL. For the use of their respective systems of

education.

MR. THRASHER. Strike out the "University".

CHAIRMAN ARNALL. Does that cover it? Is there objection to adopting that sentence, the sentence as read? Without objection it is so ordered. There is objection to deleting the last sentence? The Chair hears none, and it is deleted, and that completes Section X.

MR. GOWEN. I have an additional section I want to offer.

MR. McCRACKEN. It provides that County Boards of Education and independent school systems shall contract for transportation and education of pupils, that was rejected.

CHAIRMAN ARNALL. Yes.

MR. McCRACKEN. I know one particular instance where the children in Glascock County go to school in Jefferson County, and Glas-

82

RECORDS 01' CONSTITUTIONAL COMMISSION

cock County contracted with Jefferson County and pays them so much for taking them and transportation. and to pay the teachen who teach these children. With that stricken, instances where caaea like that arise, could the County as a unit trade with each other on things like that?
CHAIRMAN ARNALL. The Chair believes so under statutory provision.
MR. GOWEN. The Supreme Court so held in a Dodge County cue.
CHAIRMAN ARNALL. Is this a new section? Section VIII?
MR. GROSS. No, sir.
CHAIRMAN ARNALL. Is that in the present Constitution?
MR. GROSS. Yes, sir, it's in there. Let me see what the preaent County Board of Education-independent school system-local school districts-(Reads Section 4 in the present Constitution.)
CHAIRMAN ARNALL. What is the objection to carrying that forward in that language?
MR. HARRIS. I make that motion.
MR. GROSS. Let me make this observation. I don't like that word "of school age." I don't know what the education system is going to come to, especially the vocational system, with boys coming back from the Army. I think there will be a system of education, and use the word "pupils" rather than "children of school age."
MR. HARmS. Page 111 has the sentence.
CHAIRMAN ARNALL. Mr. McCracken moves to insert in Article VIII a new Section VIII, to read as follows: "County Boards of Education and independent school systems may contract with each other for the education, transportation, and care of pupils." Is there any objection to adopting that?
MR. MacINTYRE. "Pupils" would include people of all ages. If a one-armed fellow comes back from war and you want to put him in school, if he is 30 years old, you can do it.
CHAIRMAN ARNALL. Is there objection to the adoption of Mr. Cracken's amendment? The Chair hears none, and it is adopted. You substitute that, gentlemen, for Section VIII, that was stricken.
MR. FOLEY. That is where we put Mr. Majors' open session ofllie Board of Education.

.RECORDS 01' CONSTITUTIONAL COMMISSION

03

CHAIRMAN ARNALL. Is there objection to the Committee on final revision renumbering those sections to conform to the general scheme?
MR. GROSS. That completes the article dealing with education. I would like to call attention to the fact we left out of this section all references in effect abolishing local school districts. We have a180 left out the paragraph allocating certain taxes for education purposes, such taxes as alcohol, beverages, dog tax, and otherwise. All reference to taxation has been left out.
CHAIRMAN ARNALL. We are about to get one now. another amendment. We are glad to recognize two distinguished gentlemen who drifted in the hall. Attorney Frank Scarlet of Brunswick, and Alfred Johns of Sea Island. We are glad to see you gentlemen. The gentleman from Glynn County. Mr. Gowen, offered an amendment to be known as Section XI, or a section appropriately numbered, to read as follows: ''The fiscal authorities of the several counties shall levy a tax not greater than 15 mills, nor less than 5 mills upon the dollar, of all taxable property in the county for educational purposes."
MR. GROSS. Now, Mr. Chairman, might I suggest that that amendment be referred to another section of the Constitution dealing with taxation? For instance that section in County and County Matters, we have not yet taken up.
}fRo GOWEN. The section dealing with taxation we have taken up. and was passed without any limit on the amount of taxes to be levied except the conscience of the tax-levying body. Now, the fiscal authorities, or the county authorities generally, the Board of County Commissioners are directly elected by the people. They are responsible to the people that elect them. We have created the County Board of Education, that are not responsible to the people, and we have given them a great deal of authority; and it occurred there probably should be some limitation to the amount of taxes they could fix, and also require that they levy some taxes for educational purposes.
CHAIRMAN ARNALL. If the Commission sees fit to adopt the proposed amendment, it can be inserted at the proper place by the Committee on final revision. But the Chair seeks this information. what is the limit of school tax now levied?
MR. GROSS. Five mills.

9.f

RECORDS OF CONSTITUTIONAL COMMISSION

MR. GOWEN. Five mills county-wide, and five local. It is ten mills now being levied.
CHAIRMAN ARNALL. Is that limited by statute?
MR. GOWEN. It is limited.
CHAIRMAN ARNALL. And we have done away with any limitation. Now you seek to limit the millage levied to not more than 15 nor less than 5.
MR.GOWEN. That is right.
MR. THRASHER. May I ask that that amendment be amendment to Article VII, Section VI, Item III, which is for educational purposes.
CHAIRMAN ARNALL. Article VII, Section VI, Paragraph III, which is page 2 of Sub-committee 3 Report. We had the tax provided and not limited. The Chair asks for information. Why should you limit your school tax and not limit any other tax?
MR. GOWEN. It is the only one limited now.
CHAIRMAN ARNALL. I just wondered what is the logic to saying you can levy taxes, as much money as you need for jails, and pay the county police and support paupers and pay the administration of county expenses and public health and county roads, but you can't levy but a certain amount for education.
MR. THRASHER. Mr. Chairman, I suggest that this be left as a statute like all other limits are limited by statute.
CHAIRMAN ARNALL. Thank you. What is the purpose of putting a constitutional limit on educational tax?
MR. GOWEN. As I understand it, the principal purpose of the Constitution is to save a minority from the aggression of the majority. Without that there would be no use for a Constitution anyway.
CHAIRMAN ARNALL. I agree with you, but why should you say you can levy as heavy taxes as you want to in the Constitution for any other purpose except schools?
MR. GOWEN. I think, personally I think there ought to be an overall limit on the amount of taxes that can be levied for all purposes.
CHAIRMAN ARNALL. Perhaps that is true, and I will say so. Yes, but why pick on schools?
MR. GOWEN. The reason the present Constitution does it, it would

RECORDS OF CONSTITUTIONAL COMMISSION

95

be my guess, the school authorities had been more aggressive in levying taxes than the other authorities of the counties. For instance, this is true, in the county adjoining ours there have been taxes levied that have been set aside by the Court, made by the Board of Education, under our law of making levies that amounted to as much as 4 per cent on the ftlxable value of the county for educational purposes alone. And those taxes would have been levied and collected except for this limitation in the Constitution. And timber growing country, or sections or the State can't exist on taxes, as much as 4 mills, but the people that levied the taxes, the people who send the children to school, don't pay any of them, and it seems to me this ought to be so. The homestead exemption has virtually relieved the school patrons from paying any tax at all. The children are being educated by the larger land-owners and property owners of the State.
MR. FOLEY. I want to ask you a question. Do I understand the taxes are levied by the County Commissioner upon the recommendation of the School Board, and it is mandatory?
MR. GOWEN. Mandatory on them.
MR. FOLEY. I think there should be a limit because that is being levied by the people that are not responsible to the people.
MR. GROSS. I think that was true; in the old Constitution they should levy an amount not less than five mills, and that is not in the Constitution.
MR. GOWEN. That is the statutory law, but unless you have a limitation on them, they willle~ anything.
CHAIRMAN ARNALL. Mr. Thrasher moves to insert Mr. Gowen's amendment,if it is adopted, as Paragraph III of Section VI of Article VII. Is there objection to that amendment?
MR. DURDEN. Mr. Chairman, I notice, with reference to taxation by counties, and also this amendment here, it gives the counties the right to levy taxes over the entire county. In your old Constitution it said outside of independent school systems. I don't think this Commission intends to let the counties levy taxes on property inside of independent school districts, and it should certainly be an exception to that effect.
CHAIRMAN ARNALL. If this amendment passes, it will require the county commissioner to levy five mills on all property in the

"

RECORDS 0' CONSTITUTIONAL COMMISSION

county whether in the county system or independent system, for the purpose of supporting the county schools.
~R. DURDEN. I understand that is what it does, but it should not be the intention. In the old Constitution they use the words "outside of this independent school system"; ant I am sure that would be the purpose and intent of this Commission to also include that, because we don't want Dougherty County coming to Albany levying taxes when they don't educate our children. We levy taxes for the support of schools on property in there, and every independent school system in Georgia will be affected.
MR. GOWEN. I have no objection to putting the language Mr. Durden wants.
CHAIRMAN ARNALL. Mr. Durden's amendment is, add the words, "located outside of independent school systems" after the word "county," so as to amend it to read: "The fiscal authorities of the several counties shall levy a tax not greater than ten mills and not less than five mills upon the dollar of taxable property in the county located outside of independent school systems for educational purposes." Is there objection to the adoption of Mr. Durden's amendment?
MR. ALLISON. Before you put that, I want to raise this question: Have you made it clear that tax is for county-wide purposes, and what provision have you made for the additional tax for local school systems. Now, as I understand it, there is a present limitation for five mills for county-wide taxes. There is also authority for five mills in local school districts. The local school district Board of Trustees--
CHAIRMAN ARNALL. That is statutory?
MR. ALLISON. That's right. I am wondering if that takes care-
MR. GROSS. The ceiling is raised from five mills to 15 mills.
MR. ALLISON. For the local school district.
MR. GROSS. No, the independent school district gets the authority from the charter granted.
MR. GROSS. The local school districts under the new Constitution are done away with.
MR. THRASHER. I would like to submit an additional item to that amendment.In other words, you have a provision there for five to

RECORDS OF CONSTITUTIONAL COMMISSION

97

fifteen mills. There is no method or no determination of what that millage rate shall be. Somebody should recommend it. I would like to make a suggestion you add in this, "as recommended by the County Board of Education."
CHAIRMAN ARNALL. That is already true.
MR. HARRIS. It won't be if you put it in the Constitution that way.
MR. GRICE. I don't think that is true.
MR. HARRIS. The present-
CHAIRMAN ARNALL. The gentleman's amendment-
MR. HARRIS. The language, if I remember it now, is this: ''The county commissioner shall levy upon recommendation of the County Board of Education...
CHAIRMAN ARNALL. That's right, and that is the statute.
CHAIRMAN ARNALL. Gentlemen, Mr. Thrasher's amendment, if adopted, would cause the section to read as follows: now, let me read the finished section: ''The fiscal authority of the several counties shall levy a tax not greater than 15 mills nor less than 5 mills as recommended by the County Board of Education, upon the dollar, of all taxable property in the county located outside independent systems, for educational purposes."
MR. GROSS. Mr. Chairman, I don't like, personally I oppose that "as recommended by the Board of Education." I think the county commissioner, the tax-levying authority ought to be the one to levy the taxes. It is all right for them to suggest, but I don't think it should be mandatory.
CHAIRMAN ARNALL. The question is on "that is recommended by the county Board of Education."
JUDGE CANDLER. I want to ask Mr. Gross a question. If the County Board of Education are the ones that make the study of the school system, and know the needs of it, why should not they recommend it rather than the authority to fix it~r the commissioner fix it, who knows nothing about the school svstem?
MR. GROSS. I think they would advise with them, but I don't like the mandatory words.
JUDGE CANDLER. I want to make this suggestion. We have counties in Georgia where it probably is not necessary to levy five mills

18

RECORDS OF CONSTITUTIONAL COMMISSION

for county school purposes. I am talking about, for instance, a county like Rabun. that has so much Power property in it that they prohably don't need five mills. I think you ought to have a ceiling, but not a floor, and let the County Board of Education have the authority to recommend up to the ceiling.
MR. GOWEN. The reason that I put the floor in there was because it has been requested by our very genial host at lunch, and I thought we ought to pay part of the debt.
MRS. HAAS. Well, I think--
CHAIRMAN ARNALL. The gentleman moves to strike the "not less than five mills."
MRS. HAAS. I do not favor making it mandatory in as much as we have no control over the County Board of Education in any way.
CHAIRMAN ARNALL. You can very easily by your vote on the amendment express your wishes, each member of the Commission on each particular thing. For instance, if you do not want to make it mandatory, you can vote against "as recommended by the county Board of Education." Now, the Chair will undertake to fix the section by putting the amendment through as thus far offered. The first amendment was adopted, that is by Mr. Durden, which limits the taxing authority of the fiscal authorities of the counties to property located outside the independent school system. That has been adopted. The next amendment was that offered by Mr. Thrasher, which provides, which in effect is, consists of the words, "as recommended by the County Board of Education," which if adopted, would mean that the fiscal authority of the County would be compelled to levy, make it mandatory. Those who want it mandatory, fight for it. Those who oppose vote against it. Those who favor vote "aye," which is mandatory. Those opposed will say "no." Nine "noes" seem to have it, and the amendment is rejected. Now, the next amendment is that of Judge Candler, which strikes the language, "nor less than five inills," which will have the effect, if the amendment prevails, of fixing a ceiling on the tax levied, but not a floor on the tax levied. Those who favor the amendment to strike the words, "nor less than five mills," Judge Candler's amendment, will make it known by saying "aye." Opposed "no." The "ayes" seem to have it-a division-those who favor striking the limitation of five mills, that is, who desire to, those who favor Judge Candler's amendment which strikes the language "nor less than five mills."
JUDGE CANDLER. In view of the fact that members have voted

RECORDS OF CONSTITUTIONAL COMMISSION

9t

against the amendment proposed by Mr. Thrasher, which would not authorize the Board of Education to make the levy, I desire to withdraw my proposed amendment.
CHAIRMAN ARNALL. Is there objection? The Chair hears none. Now, the section has been completed and perfected.
MRS. PATTERSON. May I ask a question? What we have been doing, the Board of Education has been recommending a levy. Now, is there anything in there that would still give us that privilege, or are we going to be excluded, I mean the Board of Education be excluded from having a thing in the world to say about it?
CHAIRMAN ARNALL. In the Constitution, if this section is adopted as amended, there will be no provision requiring the county commissioner, or ordinary, to levy the tax recommeBded by the Board of Education. That shall be done by statutory law. The County Board of Education under this provision can make a recommendation, but it would not be binding on the County authorities.
MR. ALLISON. I wonder if you are taking into consideration levy to pay bonds in local school districts. You provided an overall amount the fiscal authority of the county can levy. What provision do you make for those districts where they have outstanding school bonds?
CHAIRMAN ARNALL. The Chair would like to ask the unanimous consent to be indulged just a minute. I am apprehensive that by adopting this section in any form, we are going to throw out of gear our entire effort to help education in Georgia for these reasons: The County Commissioners in this Constitution that we are proposing, have the authority to levy taxes for educational purposes, just as they have the authority to levy taxes for any other purpose. The County Commissioners are elected by the people. If the County Commissioners run counter to public opinion, the public will make them account to them for it. I don't know any reason why, since the Board of Education is not going to levy the tax, why we should restrict the County fiscal authorities in the tax to be levied for education, any more than we-if we do that let's restrict them as to how much they can levy for county roads, and how much to pay county police, and support paupers, that is done by statutory law, and I submit it has not a place in this Constitution. The County Commissioners are elected by the people. They are going to do what the people want done.

100

RECORDS OF CONSTITUTIONAL COMMISSION

MR. CULPEPPER. There is no limit on the amount they can levy now.
CHAIRMAN ARNALL. In the Constitution, but by statute there is.
MR. GROSS. That would be all right, but I think they ought to have a provision in the Constitution that taxes levied for educational purposes shall not apply to property within the corporate limits, or within the bounds of an independent school system.
CHAIRMAN ARNALL. The Chair makes the point that whether it is in the Constitution or not, the Chair is of the opinion you can't levy taxes for schools in the county unless that money is used for the schools. That is to say, you can't levy taxes on the City of Newnan to support the county schools, other than under specific provisions of law. Is that right, Judge Grice, or wrong?
MR. GRICE. I don't know.
MR. DURDEN. It would not hurt to say, "For educational purposes on property outside of independent school systems."
CHAIRMAN ARNALL. Then that should go back in Section IV of Article VI, number 3, where it says, "may levy taxes for educational purposes on property located outside independent school systems."
MR. DURDEN. I agree with you.
CHAIRMAN ARNALL. Is there objection to amending Paragraph 3 of Paragraph I of Section IV or Article VI, so as to provide as follows: "For educational purposes upon property located outside independent school systems." Is there objection? The Chair hears none, and without objection that is so ordered. Now, is there objection to disregarding the amendment of the gentleman from Greene County?
MR. GOWEN. I object.
MRS. PATfERSON. One other question. Do we restrict other things like that? I am wondering what is the objection to that.
CHAIRMAN ARNALL. Here is the only objection, that is, Article VII, subsection 3 of Paragraph I of Section IV of Article VII. Mr. Gowen apprehends this, I presume to speak for the gentleman, that because of the fact that everybody favors education, that there would be an inclination on the part of the fiscal authorities of the county to levy a more liberal tax for educational purposes than
for anything else, and thereby impose an undue burden on the tax

RECORDS OF CONSTITUTIONAL COMMISSION

181

payers for educational levies. That is about the thought.
MRS. PATTERSON. I am glad to get that slant. I could not tell whether it was that, or he didn't have confidence in the Board of Education.
CHAIRMAN ARNALL. The Board of Education will have nothing to do with this. It will be the County Commissioners, as I understand it.
MRS. PATTERSON. You mean we would not be permitted to make any recommendation to the County Commissioner?
CHAIRMAN ARNALL. Certainly, I am not talking about the statutory procedure, but I am talking about what we include in the Constitution.
MRS. PATTERSON. The question I want to ask-do we prohibit levying taxes? Say for instance we are talking about LaGrange. Do the people of LaGrange pay taxes for road building in that county?
CHAIRMAN ARNALL. Yes, they do.
MRS. PATTERSON. What is the difference in that in paying a little tax? I don't think lshould pay much. What is the difference in paying a little tax to educate the children in that area? I happened to think about that.
CHAIRMAN ARNALL. Under the present system, if the Chair understands it correctly, the citizens of an independent school system do not pay county-wide educational tax. That is the present system. This is not changing the present system.
JUDGE CANDLER. I don't want to talk too much, but I would like for the record of this proceeding to show this: That on this, I believe the 16th day of August, 1944, that I made the statement that when we take away from the school authorities of these rural counties the right to determine the amount of money that they are going to need for school purposes, that we have done the greatest violence to the educational system of Georgia that could possibly be done.
CHAIRMAN ARNALL. Judge Candler, if the Chair understands all we are talking about, it is simply this: In the Constitution, in the section relating to education, we are not taking that right away from the County Board of Education.
JUDGE CANDLER. When you let your County Commissioner set
the amount-

102

RECORDS OF CONSTITUTIONAL COMMISSION

CHAIRMAN ARNALL. That is controlled by statute, as the Chair understands it. Is that right?
MR. HARRIS. It is in the Constitutionat the present time.
MR. ALLMAN. It is in the present Constitution.
MR. HARRIS. It is on page 110 and 111.
CHAIRMAN ARNALL. Local taxation for public schools.
MR. GROSS. 'We have referred that to the committee on taxation.
CHAIRMAN ARNALL. Have we acted on that?
MR. GROSS. We have not.
CHAIRMAN ARNALL. We ha:ve completed the article relating to taxation.
MR. THRASHER. We have acted on it so far as educational purposes.
MR. GOWEN. It seems to me this is the situation in the Constitution as it now stands. There is nothing to prevent the General As~ sembly to give the County Board of Education the right to le:vy any amount they want to. There is no limitation to the amount of taxes to be-levied by anything, the only subject we have dealt with is county taxes. We have said nothing about municipal taxes. We have given no Constitutional authority for city levy. They don't have it under the Constitution. It is a matter of statute, but I don't believe there would be anything wrong for the acts of the Legislature could say the several County Boards of Education could le:vy a tax to be collected by the tax collector.
CHAIRMAN ARNALL. Thank you, Charlie. On page 110 of the Constitution in the second sentence of Paragraph I of Section IV, it is provided, "The proper county authorities whose duty it is to levy taxes for county purposes in this State shall, on the recommendation of the Board of Education, assess and collect taxes for the support of public schools under its control, not less than one nor more than five mills on the dollar of all taxable property of the county outside of independent local systems."
MR. GROSS. That's right.
CHAIRMAN ARNALL. Now, the Chair is seeking information. The subcommittee dealing with Article VIII has made no report on taxation, leaving that to Mr. Lovejoy's Committee. Now, we have

RECORDS OF CONSTITUTIONAL COMMISSION

103

finished the report of Mr. Lovejoy's Committee, and the Chair does not recall having adopted any provision relating to tax for schools other than the provision in Section IV, that the General As~ sembly shall have the right to delegate to the counties the right to levy taxes for educational purposes.
MR. GROSS. Now, Mr. Chairman, at the conclusion of the report of the Chairman Lovejoy, the Chair will probably recall that I made the statement that everything dealing with taxation regarding education had been transferred to the Committee, and that after adjournment Chairman Lovejoy said he could not be here, but would take that up at some later date. It was not taken up. I anticipated it would come up in this discussion, but it would be taken up by that committee.
CHAIRMAN ARNALL. The Chair seeks to find the sentiment of the Commission on one fundamental, we must determine before we talk about rates or limitations, whether or not it is the wish of the Commission that the tax for school purposes in the county shall be levied by the fiscal authority of the county upon recommendation of the Board of Education, which will have the effect of the Board of Education making it mandatory on the Commissioners to levy taxes or whether we are going to levy it in the discretion of the county commissioners or fiscal authorities of the county to levy the school tax. Now, the Chair seeks the sentiment of the Committee-
MR. CULPEPPER. We have already passed on that, Mr. Chairman.
CHAIRMAN ARNALL. We passed on it in undertaking to perfect Mr. Gowen's amendment.
MR. POPE. I move Section IV of Paragraph I of the old Constitution be carried over in the new Constitution.
MR. FOLEY. Why don't we vote on the question?
CHAIRMAN ARNALL. There is now before the Commission Mr. Gowen's proposed amendment.
MR. GOWEN. I have.no objection to deferring it until Mr. Lovejoy's Committee finishes, if they contemplate treating the subject.
MR. GROSS. If this Commission can complete it, I wish they would complete it, since we now understand what they are talking about.
MR. THRASHER. Mr. Lovejoy discussed this, and it was also said we made provision for educational purposes and any changes that

1M

RECORDS OF CONSTITUTIONAL COMMISSION

might come about on account of the educational issue would be thrown in there. Now we are waiting to see what would happen here.
MR. FOLEY. I move it be the sense of this Commission that the county taxing authority have control over levying taxes for school purposes.
MR. CULPEPPER. I second that.
CHAIRMAN ARNALL. Thank you. It has been pointed out that working on Mr. Gowen's amendment the Commission struck the provision making it mandatory for the Commissioner, County Commissioner, to levy the tax recommended by the Board of Education. So before we get to that, we will undertake to act on Mr. Gowen's amendment, then if it fails, will get to the sentiment of the Commission. This is the proposed amendment to be inserted under the provision relating to taxation, appropriately numbered, if adopted: "The fiscal authority of the several counties shall levy a tax not greater than 15 mills, upon the dollar, of all taxable property in the county located outside independent school systems for educational purposes." The question is on the adoption of the amendment.
MR. FOLEY. I hate to rise, can't you simplify it, because if the county authorities levy the tax, I am willing to abandon any ceiling.
CHAIRMAN ARNALL. This was an amendment offered by Mr. Thrasher which said the tax should be levied and recommended by the County Board of Education. That amendment was voted down. Therefore the Commission, as far as this amendment is concerned, has expressed the sense of the Commission as being that the County Commissioners or fiscal authorities should levy the tax and not-
MR. FOLEY. If we defeat this, there won't be any ceiling, but they will still levy.
MR. THRASHER. I would like to ask a reconsideration on the item added in the amendment again, to get a vote of the Committee.
CHAIRMAN ARNALL. Mr. Thrasher moves to reconsider the action of the Commission in defeating his amendment, which provided that the county fiscal authority should levy the tax recommended by the County Board of Education. That is the present Constitution provision of the State.
MR. HARRIS. It has a floor and a ceiling, at present.

RECORDS OF CONSTITUTIONAL COMMISSION

105

CHAIRMAN ARNALL. Yes.
MR. GOWEN. My amendment would give a floor. In other words, every County Board of Education in the State would have five mills on the taxable property outside of independent system to support schools. The County Commissioner could not defeat that, but this would fix it at five. I think it has been generally five everywhere, but they got up to the question whether money over five was needed. It would be up to the county authority with the ceiling on that. No pressure group could put it over fifteen mills.

MR. CULPEPPER. You require them, under the amendment, to levy what they are now levying, as directed by the Constitution. In other words, they will be compelled to levy at least five mills, what they are levying now.

MR. GOWEN. The maximum they are levying.

CHAIRMAN ARNALL. The question is on the motion to reconsider the action in deleting the words, "as recommended by the County Board of Education."

MR. HOLT. Does that mean that if the County Board of Education

recommended fifteen mills, that the Commissioner would have to

levy i t ? '

.

CHAIRMAN ARNALL. Yes. Those in favor of the motion to reconsider the action, make it known by saying "aye."

MR. HEAD. We will have this situation in some of the counties. We have in our County newly elected county officials that will levy all the taxes. Suppose he don't want to levy any school taxes, except the minimum? It would be four years before we get a lick at him. We can't mandamus him in the Court, and nothing we can do about it, and I think it ought to be left to the County Board of Education to say what is needed, rather than the county official

MR. FORTSON. I apologize for saying anything, but I am interested in education, and I would like to call attention of the Committee to the fact my county is similar to the Attorney General's. If it were not for the recommendation of the County Board of Education, and the fact the Commissioner had to levy that tax, we would not get the taxes in my county for school purposes that we need. I think you better give that careful consideration. I know we needed in our county-

JUDGE CANDLER. I notice that those of us who come from rural

101

RECORDS OF CONSTITUTIONAL COMMISSION

counties are probably better acquainted with this very problem we are talking about. I can tell you right now, the situation obtains in my county, that if the ordinary of my county-we don't have coun~ . ty commissioner, and I am not saying it with any reflection, of course, on him-but if in situations like that, if the ordinary of the county had the right to say the amount the County Board of Educa~ tion could levy, he could, and most likely would, absolutely paralyze the school situation, and that is true in most of the rural counties.
MRS. PATTERSON. I want to say "amen" to what he just said. Now, I come from one of the rural counties of the State, one of thebig~ gest. If it were not for Echols County every time, you would use, you would say Banks, but I know what I am talking about. If it is left up to the county commissioner to carry a big bank account all the time, and have little sympathy with the schools, who have a very small bank account at all times, we are going to be in the middle of a bad fix, and we are not going to have any schools in Clinch County; and I think it is just about that way with every other rural school in Georgia. The county commissioners have enough to do to look after the roads and public welfare and all those things, without looking into school matters, and they have not been accustomed to doing it, and they are not going to look into that part of it, and they are going to levy just as little as they possibly can, and we are going to be handicapped right on unless the Board of Educationwho are supposed to know more about it, and they are supposed to be honest upright citizens-are going to be permitted to say something about that the levy shall be in the counties. Gentlemen, it looks to me like you are going to hamstring education forever in Georgia.
CHAIRMAN ARNALL. Let the Chair be indulged just a minute to say this. We are now at a very critical point in our deliberations, a point at which we will determine whether we will deal parsimoniously with education, or whether we are going to let taxes be levied in local communities, that is, local counties for the adequate support of the schools. I would hate very much for us, for this Commission to recommend that the cause of education be hamstrung by dealing parsimoniously with it in Georgia. Now, it seems to be the feeling of a number of educators if we leave it to the county com~ missioners to levy taxes, that they won't be as liberal with the schools as if we leave it to the County Board of Education. I don't know, but I am highly in favor, speaking for myself, that a most liberal limitation be allowed, so that we can provide the necessary

RECORDS OF CONSTITUTIONAL COMMISSION

107

funds.Let me tell you what is going to happen. Where you say they shall provide not less than five mills, all you have got to do to keep the schools from getting money is reduce valuation, and the schools would starve to death. There are two ways to finally complete the income from tax, ad valorem tax. One is by the millage, the other is the valuation. If you increase your millage and lower your valuation, you don't increase your money. If you increase the valuation and lower the millage, you don't-to get the money, you have to have adequate and fair valuation, and adequate millage to bring in the return. I think it is highly important we be cautious in approaching this section.
The Chair is worried about another situation. I don't see where we are making any provision of independent school system, to levy tax for independent-
MR. GROSS. It's done in the Charter, when the Legislature created the city-
CHAIRMAN ARNALL. It's in the Constitution now?
MR. HARRIS. That is correct. It is in this, on page 111, right at the top, independent school districts are included along-independent local school systems, municipalities or school districts on the vote of people, can levy tax.
Now, there is one other section of this Commission-I'd a few remarks to make, and I have kept quiet today because I talked too much yesterday, and the day before, and another thing, too, that under the exemption feature here, it does not apply to my countybut if you recall here, that we are doing away with the local school district. I am also familiar, I think, with a typical country county, and that is Jefferson, where I have lived for a long time and practiced law, and where, with the then county school superintendent, that I helped map out all of the school districts and vote the bonds, and we built the buildings. In that county there were five or six towns, three or four of them were about the same size. There is a lot of jealousy between the towns, and especially all of them are scared of the county seat. You have got a lot of counties in Georgia in that shape. They are going to be afraid that when you have a County Board of Education, of only five men named by the Grand Jury, that they are going to lose some of their schools. Now, I grant you that there should be in a lot of our rural counties some further consolidation, but yet we are going to have to look at this thing in a practical standpoint, because, if you will remember that prior to

108

RECORDS OF CONSTITUTIONAL COMMISSION

1920, and I think this Constitution amendment was ratified in 1920,

set up the present system we have now, and provided for the laying

off of the counties in school districts, authorizing a county-wide

taxation of one to five mills in each school district. Now, nearly all

these school districts are levying a five mill tax now. Most of these

rural counties are levying a county-wide tax of five mills; they are

levying approximately ten mills as it now stands, in addition to the

tax that they are levying, to retire the bond issues by these districts,

and it would be surprising the number of districts in this State that

have issued bonds since 1920. Most of them were issued along from

the period of '24 to the early '30's. Now, I think this is going to take

some right careful study as to how to work that out and maintain

it. The average rural county is going to have to levy at least ten

mills to give them the amount of money that they are now getting,

and when we submit this streamlined feature-and I think that is

what we ought to have, something of the kind, I think we ought to

get away from the local school districts-but yet, at the same time,

you are going to find them in most of the counties, in a lot of the

counties, very jealous of getting away from it. Now, in a county

like President Gross comes from, in which there is only one town,

and in which the taxable values are in that town, and in which you

have a relatively small county in area, I don't think there is going

to be any difficulty in adjusting to this new system, but in some of

these sprawling, big country counties, with three or four little

towns, all about the same size, you are going to have some practical

difficulties in working it out. Now, it is true that under the present

system the local board of trustees have very little to do, when you

really read the law, that their actions must be confirmed, even to

the employment of teachers, by the County Board of Education; yes

the custom has grown up, they have retained that local control, and

you are going to have difficulty with it. Now, if we should devise

a system here under which they do not see any way of continuing

to operate on the present level of efficiency they have, we are going

to have difficulty in getting this over. And of course there is one

thing that will always appeal to the towns, other than the county-

seat towns, and that is that when the tax is levied county-wide, in-

stead of by districts, the districts that are away from the county-

seat town will profit, because there is always more taxable values

in a county-seat town than there is in others, and I think unless

we can assure the people in these other school districts that they, at

least, will get the same advantage that they are now getting, or something better, that we are going to have the biggest fight that you

,,
;)

RECORDS OF CONSTiTUTIONAL COMMISSION

lOt

ever saw in adopting the so-called streamlined system, and yet I think for efficiency in management and operation of the schools, we have got to come to a county unit system. And I think that we have got to write in here some way and some method of control where they will know these schools would be adequately financed and maintained, or else they will not accept the provisions that you are making. Now, I know there is a tendency for school boards to be somewhat impractical, and to be somewhat more extravagant than they probably should be; yet at the same time, when you leave the authority with the County Commissioner, the average county commissioner is interested in roads, the court house and convict camp, and that is about as far as you can get his interest. Now, that is not true in every county, but it is in a lot of the small ones. And there is a tendency on the part of county commissioners to always reduce the tax rate, and to reduce not only the assessment-and I don't think the assessment can be much further reduced in the average country county, because they have them down where they are almost nothing now, in order to keep from paying taxes to the State; but at the same time it is dangerous to leave that entirely within the hands of the county commissioners. And yet you have an additional danger here of leaving the taxing power in the hands of people who are selected by the Grand Jury, that do not have to, that are not responsible to the people; and you have got that dilemma. Now, under the system we have in my county, that antedates the old Constitution, we have a School Board of twentytwo, elected, fourteen from within the city and eight from the county. The taxes are levied on their recommendation, and we have a limit by statute up to twelve mills, and they threaten to eliminate me from politics the last time, because I would not agree to raise it to fifteen for maintenance purposes only. But at the same time, you have got to vest this with somebody, and I don't know it would put your County Board of Education in politics, but I have seen them legislate in the Capitol now for twenty-five years, taking politics out of politics, and it has never been done, and it never will be done. It is one of those things that is impossible. It is just like if you take religion out of the Church, you have not got anything left, and whenever you take politics out of government, you have not got anything left, because that is the process by which governments function in a democracy. I don't see how you can keep politics out. It is not even kept out of the Church, or the luncheon clubs or anything else, and it never will be, and should not be, because that is the level by which we function in a democracy. I don't see

110

RECORDS OF CONSTITUTIONAL COMMISSION

why we should apologize for it, or try to keep them out of it. Now, I don't know the solution, and I hate to talk so much or try to say so much, but it looks to me like that you are going to eventually get around to the point where you are going to have to follow Richmond County, and elect your Board of Education by the people, and give them the say-so, and then you have a lick at them.
MRS. HAAS. Because this is such a serious subject, and none of us wants to do anything to impede schools-I least of all-could not the Chairman appoint a small committee to consider this with the educational-
CHAIRMAN ARNALL. The Chair asks unanimous consent to refer the school taxing authority, including Mr. Gowen's Committee, to the Committee on Education, Honorable Frank Gross, Chairman. Is there objection?
MR. HEAD. They have not brought out anything. I want a new committee appointed.
CHAIRMAN ARNALL. The Chair asks unanimous consent to refer this to a new committee, to be appointed, the school tax matters. Is there objection?
MR. HARRIS. I move we send it back to the same committee.
JUDGE MacINTYRE. I move that, and Mr. Gross shall be a member.
JUDGE GRICE. I ask the Committee also to consider whether or not it would not be a good idea, since the public health is also very important, to make a provision that whatever recommendation the County Board of Health should make as to tax money for health shall be made compulsory on the county commission.
MR. HARRIS. You better leave'that alone.
CHAIRMAN ARNALL. Judge Grice takes the position, to say one function shall have authority, that another function does not have~ in other words, if the Board of Education, he says, levies the school tax, why does not the Board of Health levy the health tax?
MR. HARRIS. I think there will be a plan worked out by the Agrienl.tural and Industrial Board before the year is out for a real public health program in Georgia. The reason I say the county health board is impractical in Georgia, has never worked, and never will work in the average county is because the average coun-

RECORDS OF CONSTITUTIONAL COMMISSION

111

ty in the State does not have the taxable wealth to support one, and it has to be worked out on a State basis instead of a local county unit basis.
JUDGE MacINTYRE. A good many of the members of that Committee are not present, and I would like to make a motion it be referred to Mr. Gross and Mr. Gowen, Mr. Harris and Judge Candler and Mr. Majors. They are the gentlemen that displayed a good deal of interest.
CHAIRMAN ARNALL. There are two motions, one to refer it to Mr. Gross' committee on education, and the other to refer it to a committee comprised of Mr. Gowen, Mr. Gross, Mr. Harris, Judge Candler and Mr. Majors.
MR. ATKINSON. I move to amend both of those motions by stating that the sense of the Commission is that they cut this down by fifty percent and leave most of the details to the LegiSlature. Just hit it in the high spots. You have too much in this thing.
CHAIRMAN ARNALL. Thank you, Judge Atkinson.
MR. ATKINSON. I say this for this reason. If you make the thing. more or less general, we can all understand it, and you can explain it to the people better. If you go in details, somebody is going to' jump on the details, when this could be settled by the Legislature..
JUDGE MacINTYRE. I call attention to the fact, in referring it back to Mr. Gross' Committee, there are very few present here today, and that is the reason I think it ought to go to him as Chairman.
MR. GROSS. May I say a word in opposition to both motions? There seems to be about three propositions before the Committee, and I think they are thoroughly acquainted with all of them-who shall have the authority to levy the tax? Shall it be the commissioners without any binding effect placed on the Board of Education, or shall the Board of Education say how much tax they shall levy? Shall there be a limit or shall there not be a limit, or ceiling? And that is the proposition. What is the use of referring it back to the Committee? Let's get down and get it over.
MR. CULPEPPER. I move the adoption of the amendment offered by the gentleman from Glynn.
CHAIRMAN ARNAU.. The question is on the adoption of the amendment from the gentleman from Glynn, that read, "The fiscal

112

RECORDS OF CONSTITUTIONAL COMMISSlON

authority of the several counties shall levy a tax for educational purposes not less than five mills or greater than fifteen mills, as recommended by the County Board of Education, upon the dollar value of all taxable property in the county located outside of independent school systems for educational purposes."
MR. THRASHER. A move was made to reconsider that other amendment. It has never been taken up.
CHAIRMAN ARNALL. The question is on Mr. Thrasher's motion to reconsider the action of the Commission in rejecting his amendment, which would make it incumbent on the county fiscal authority to follow the recommendation of the County Board of Education.
MRS. HAAS. I move we adjourn.
MR. CULPEPPER. My motion is to adopt-
CHAIRMAN ARNALL. My thought when we rejected-
MRS. HAAS. I move to adjourn.
JUDGE CANDLER. I second the motion.
CHAIRMAN ARNALL. The question is on the motion to adjourn. So many as favor the motion to adjourn will make it known by saying, "aye." Opposed, "no." The "noes" seem to have it and the motion is lost.
JUDGE CANDLER. I don't want to be talking too much, but I honestly do believe that we are right now in the discussion of that portion of the Constitution that is most vital to our State. I think it is the mudsill of the Constitution of this State, and we can't afford to be hasty in this matter, and we can't afford to make a mistake, because it deals with our children, and let's not make any mistakes about this. Let's not make any mistakes that might hurt even one rural county in Georgia, and let's approach this seriously; and, I know it is important; and let's give such thought and work it out in a way we are not going to be regretful about it.
CHAIRMAN ARNALL. The hour of adjournment has almost arrived. I ask unanimous consent to refer this proposition to the Committee on Education to report in the morning. It is five o'clock now. Is there objection? The Chair hears none.
MR. GOWEN. There's not but about two of us here, three of us here.

RECORDS OF CONSTITUTIONAL COMMISSION

113

MR. MAJORS. Guess this disposition of the whole question-
CHAIRMAN ARNALL. Just one minute, Mr. Majors, the Chair will ask unanimous consent to appoint a committee to entertain this amendment and all other matters relating to the school tax, and report to this Commission in the morning.
MR. HARRIS. The same committee?
CHAIRMAN ARNALL. They don't have enough here.
MR. HARRIS. They have two of them, that is enough, two good lawyers.
MR. MAJORS. The reason I say that, I move, here, and I am going to move to elect the members of the Board of Education of the County, and give them the taxing power.
CHAIRMAN ARNALL. The gentleman is out of order at this moment. In the morning you will be in order, but the hour of adjournment has about arrived. Just a minute before we go. The Chair seeks for-this matter will be referred back to Mr. Gross' Committee, without objection, to report in the morning.
MR. GROSS. I ask the Committee on Education to meet immediately after adjournment.
CHAIRMAN ARNALL. Is it the wish of the Commission to meet tomorrow? Is there objection?
MR. ATKINSON. I was going to stay up here to get through with this county and county matters tomorro'V, and then we will be through.
CHAIRMAN ARNALL. Is it the wish of the Committee to meet tomorrow?
MR. FOLEY. I inove we do. A quorum will be here.
CHAIRMAN ARNALL. We will meet at ten o'clock tomorrow morning. (Whereupon the meeting was adjourned.)

THURSDAY MORNING AUGUST 17, 1944
ACTING CHAIRMAN ROY HARRIS. The Commission will come to order. Governor Arnall called me last night and asked me to preside today and present his regrets to the Commission, and said he

114

RECORDS OF CONSTITUTIONAL COMMISSION

could not be here today, that he was going to spend the day in entertaining the Vice-President, who would be in town for the day; so we will all stand and ask Frank Gross to lead in prayer.
(The Commission is lead in prayer by Mr. Frank Gross.)
ACTING CHAIRMAN HARRIS. The Secretary will call the roll. (The Secretary calls the roll.)
ACTING CHAIRMAN HARRIS. At the time of adjournment on yesterday, I believe the Commission referred a matter to President Gross and his committee to work out some solution and report back this morning. Mr. Gross, are you ready to report?
MR. GROSS. Yes, sir. Mr. Chairman, your committee has had under advisement the matter referred to it yesterday, and beg leave to submit the following report, which I will ask the Assistant Secretary to read.
MR. McCUTCHEN. (Reads) "Amendment to Section XI. The fiscal authority of the several counties shall levy a tax for educational purposes not less than five mills or greater than fifteen mills, as recommended by the County Board of Education, upon the dollar value of all taxable property in the county located outside of independent school systems."
ACTING CHAIRMAN HARRIS. Are you amending the section dealing with schools? That is Section XI, on this report here?
MR. GROSS. That is right.
ACTING CHAIRMAN HARRIS. You have heard the reading of the amendment which the Committee offers. Is there any discussion?
MR. HEAD. Mr. Chairman, I am afraid of that amendment, to this extent. That it may be construed as limiting it for school purposes, the amount that can be levied. When I say school purposes, not only maintenance but bonds. There are districts in Georgia whereby, because of the peculiar bond situation, have to levy almost that amount for bonds. I think that should be limited to maintenance, and no statement should be made to interfere with the bond levy. That will not be sufficient for maintenance and bonds in a great many districts.
ACTING CHAIRMAN HARRIS. Does the Attorney General move to amend this amendment by adding at the end, "for the purpose of support and maintenance"?

RECORDS OF CONSTITUTIONAL COMMISSION

115

MR. GROSS. And strike "For educational purposes."
ACTING CHAIRMAN HARRIS. That will read as follows. (Reads) ''The fiscal authority shall levy a tax for educational purposes not less than five mills or more than fifteen mills, located outside independent school districts, for the support and maintenance." That should be worded different.
MR. GROSS. Read the first sentence.
ACTING CHAIRMAN HARRIS. "The fiscal authority of the several counties shall levy a tax for educational purposes."
MR. GROSS. Instead of "for educational purpose," why not say "for the support and maintenance"?
MR. ALLMAN. The only question there', we would not like to see the maintenance and operation tax in this amendment be construed to affect bond levy.
ACTING CHAIRMAN HARRIS. That is the purpose of the amendment offered. The amendment, if adopted, corrects that situation you refer to.
MR. GROSS. I ask unanimous consent that the amendment be adopted.
ACTING CHAIRMAN HARRIS. Now, let's see if this is the way it is supposed to read, if the amendment, itself, adop1s-(Reads) ''The fiscal authority of the several counties shall levy a tax for the support and maintenance of education, not less than five mills nor greater than fifteen mills, as recommended by the County Board of Education, upon the dollar of all taxable property in the county located outside of independent school systems." Anybody object to the adoption of that amendment to the proposed amendment? If not, it is adopted. The next question is the adoption of the amendment as amended. Those in favor of the adoption of the amendment, as amended, vote "aye"; those opposed, "no." The "ayes" seem to have it. The "ayes" have it, and the amendment is adopted.
MR. CULPEPPER. Mr. Chairman, I think that Article VII, which is the Taxation Provision in the Constitution-I don't recall now the paragraph or section.
ACTING CHAIRMAN HARRIS. Paragraph I, Sub-section III.
MR. CULPEPPER. I think Sub-section III should be stricken from

lUI

RECORDS OF CONSTITUTIONAL COMMISSION

the provision of Article VII. There is no need having double paragraph.
ACTING CHAIRMAN HARRIS. Paragraph IV, the Taxation by County. The General Assembly shall not have the right to delegate to any county. The third one names for educational purposes.
MR. CULPEPPER. That was amended the other day, as I recall it. I think it ought to be stricken entirely. You ought not to have a double parallel proposition.
MR. THRASHER. I make a motion this amendment be an amendment to this section.
MR. CULPEPPER. That was amended to provide for tax outside of independent school systems, because I think the last amendment adopted takes care of the situation with reference to schools. We ought not to have a provision in one place and another provision another place.
MR. GOWAN. Isn't this true? Does not the Supreme Court uphold the employment of county agents on the part of education, and would not that put all the county agents under the Board of Education?
MR. CULPEPPER. No, there is a different-
ACTING CHAIRMAN HARRIS. Section X says to pay county agricultural agents. Let me make this suggestion. Would not it be wise to leave that in there, because you have an enumeration, and add an amendment, and put this as provided under this Section III, as provided by Article VIII that we are dealing with now.
MR. CULPEPPER. That is a good idea. That takes care of the situation.
ACTING CHAIRMAN HARRIS. That will cover everything but one that I would like to call to the attention of the Commission. That is a levy for bond issue. Would that restrict the levying authority to where you could not levy any bond, tax for bond issue for school buildings?
MR. GOWAN. No, that is covered elsewhere.
ACTING CHAIRMAN HARRIS. All right. Now, Mr. Clerk, will you read Sub-section III, of Paragraph I, of Section IV, as it now is, as you have it?
MR. McCUTCHEN. (Reads) "For educational purpose, upon

RECORDS OF CONSTITUTIONAL COMMISSION

117

property located outside of independent school system."
ACTING CHAIRMAN HARRIS. The gentleman from Fayette moves to amend that by "as provided by Article VII!." Is there objection to the proposal by the gentleman from Fayette? ,The Chair hears none and it is adopted. Before going further-
MR. GROSS. Mr. Chairman, and Gentlemen of the Commission. Yesterday, in adopting Section VII of the Committee's report, with reference to municipal corporations, we have had some question arise as to the authority of the municipality providing for the support of the schools. As it was contained in the other Constitution, we adopted the text as follows: "Authority is hereby granted to municipal corporations to Il}aintain independent school system within their limits," and I move to amend that by adding the following word, and "support" the thing as authorized by special or general law.
ACTING CHAIRMAN HARRIS. Is there any objection in reconsidering the action of the Committee in adopting Section VIII? The Chair hears none. Is there objection to the amendment offered? The Chair-that is Section VII.
The next question is on the adoption of the section as amended. Now, Mr. Clerk, suppose you read the section as amended.
MR. GROSS. That is all.
ACTING CHAIRMAN HARRIS. Suppose you read the section as it will read, amended.
MR. McCUTCHEN. Section VII. (Reads) "Authority is hereby granted to municipal corporations to maintain existing school systems within their limit, and support the same as authorized by special or general law. No new independent school system shall hereafter be established."
ACTING CHAIRMAN HARRIS. Is there objection to adopting Section VII with this amendment? The Chair hears none, and it is adopted.
Now, one idea I would like to submit to the Commission for your consideration, either at this or a later time, in this session. Most of these school buildings we have over Georgia were built by bond issues, issued by the authority of these local school districts. Under the Act of 1920, County Boards of Education laid out the counties into school districts. These bonds were issued, and these buildings were built under bond issues, in most instances issued by the local

118

RECORDS OF CONSTITUTIONAL COMMISSION

district. Now, under this new amendment we do away with the local school district. We create a county-wide system, and make the county itself the unit. If that is adopted, hereafter all bond issues for school buildings will have to be county bond issues, and issued on a county-wide vote. Now, this thought occurred, and I don't mean any reflection, but I think everybody in the State is familiar with this situation. Suppose Pelham, Georgia, had to have a bond issue for a new school building. Do you think Camilla would vote for it, or vice versa? Now, there are plenty of instances of that kind; and while we may have sufficient quantity of school buildings at the present time, in most counties there are times in which the school buildings are over-crowded. Now, in Richmond County we had this experience. They could not build any building there for twentyfive years. They were old, and the only way you could ever get a bond issue issued had to be after all the buildings became dilapidated, and then we put through a county-wide bond issue to rebuild all of them at once. Now, that is right hard. If it gets in that shape from a practical standpoint, you take one little town in a rural county, waiting until the other buildings get dilapidated, until the rest of the county is ready. Now, I don't know the solution, but that is a practical problem, because in the counties you do have jealousy between little towns and between different parts of the county, and I don't know where it is going to leave us. I have in mind, I made a commencement speech in Coffee County, out at a big consolidated school way out from anywhere, nothing but a farm section. They had a big fifteen room consolidated school. That building was built by bonds issued on that district. I don't believe they could have ever got enough interest to vote a county-wide issue to build that school building, and the area was too large and thickly populated to justify transportation. I have in mind another school in Whitfield County, Valley Point. That is the biggest consolidated school in Georgia. They have thirteen or fourteen hundred pupils enrolled and twentynine teachers. It is only four or five miles from Dalton. They built the school up there, the local trustees and Mr. Chandler and their predecessors. In addition to a twenty-nine teacher school, they have a meat curing plant; they have a big community cannery; they have shops and other things, and as a result of their activities a great many people who work in Dalton live in that section and have small farms, fifteen or twenty acres, which has been built up by the individual initiative of these local trustees, and through the ability of that district to issue bonds. Now, the question is, when we go into a county-wide system, without making some provision for that, are

RECORDS OF CONSTITUTIONAL COMMISSION

119

we going to cripple the development of some of these rural sections? Now, in small counties, where you have one principal community, you don't have that difficulty. I just wanted to throw it out.
MR. HOLT. Do you have a suggestion?
ACTING CHAIRMAN HARRIS. No, I do not, because it is a right complicated situation.
MR. MAJORS. Why not supply a section treating-for the purpose of erecting school buildings in the various counties of the State. The school authority shall maintain the present district school lines, and that these districts are empowered to vote bonds for their respective district for the purpose of erecting school buildings?
ACTING CHAIRMAN HARRIS. My thught has been this, that probably we ought to put a provision in the Constitution whereby a county could determine whether it wanted to maintain those district lines for the purpose of issuing bonds to build and construct, or add to existing buildings.
MR. HOLT. Would that be also for the purpose of retiring existing bonds?
ACTING CHAIRMAN HARRIS. I think under the general provisions that would be. Now, my suggestion is, we already have, J.think a committee of the chairmen of each of these committees, and the Chairman of the Commission, who will try to correct the language and iron out any mistakes or errors that have been made in the adoption of this amendment, and preparing the final draft of the proposed Constitution to submit to this Commission. I think this, instead of trying to work it out today, it might be a good idea to refer that to that Committee, and ask them to deal with it when they submit the final draft to the Commission, and I have a notion we ought to preserve those districts some way for the purpose of taking care of existing bond issues, and for the purpose of issuing bonds in the future.
JUDGE MacINTYRE. What is that motion?
ACTING CHAIRMAN HARRIS. I say refer it to the Policy Commission, as chairman of this commission. Is there objection to referring it to that Committee, with the thought of working that out and submit it back?
JUDGE MacINTYRE. May I make this suggestion, that the State

120

RECORDS OF CONSTITUTIONAL COMMISSION

School Superintendent and his assistants be put on that committee?
ACTING CHAIRMAN HARRIS. I think that they would not do anything without-all right, we will add Mr. Allman and the State School Superintendent, on that committee. If no objection. we will give it that direction.
MR. CULPEPPER. It seems to me like this is the time to settle the question as to that committee. We had it up the other day. I think you made a motion about it which I seconded. I don't know whether it is necessary to make a formal motion.
ACTING CHAIRMAN HARRIS. I think it would be better. because it would be fresh in mind.
MR. CULPEPPER. I move we complete our labor. the whole draft, as prepared by this Committee, be submitted to a general committee, composed of various sub-committees, the chairman of the subcommittees, including the Governor, and the Attorney General.
ACTING CHAIRMAN HARRIS. You have heard the motion.
MR. POPE. Second.
ACTING CHAIRMAN HARRIS. Is there objection to adopting the motion? The Chair hears none, and it will be so referred. and when they get the final draft, it will be presented to the full Commission.
JUDGE GRICE. Mr. Chairman, we passed over-
ACTING CHAIRMAN HARRIS. Yes, I was fixing to ask. Mr. Foley has some proposition dealing with the judiciary.
MR. FOLEY. The Secretary has those that you and I struggled with.
ACTING CHAIRMAN HARRIS. Mr. Foley, you remember that wal!! referred to Mr. Foley and myself, and Mr. Foley has written an amendment here, dealing with the question of certioraries from the Court of Appeals to the Supreme Court. Now, he has written an amendment which he proposed to insert in the Constitution immediately after the amendment which he and I offered, dealing with the subject of certioraries, and the Clerk will read the amendment. That is Paragraph V of Section II of Article VI. and it follows in the section this amendment which was adopted, that is Page 3 of the Report of the Committee.

RECORDS OF CONSTITUTIONAL COMMISSION

121

MR. McCUTCHEN. Being Page V of the Constitution.
ACTING CHAIRMAN HARRIS. I would suggest that the Clerk first read the amendment which Mr. Foley and I offered, and has been adopted, because this language is proposed to folIo", right behind it. Suppose, Mr. Clerk, you read the amendment which was inserted in Paragraph V, on Page 57.
:MR. McCUTCHEN. (Reads) "It shall also be competent for the Supreme Court to require by certiorari, or otherwise, any case to be certified from the Supreme Court to the Court of Avpeals for review and determination, with the same power and authority as if the case had been carried by writ of error to the Supreme Court."
ACTING CHAIRMAN HARRIS. That is the language as it is now, and the amendment added the following language, which the Clerk will read.
MR.McCUTCHEN. (Reads) "The Supreme Court shall, by certiorari or otherwise, require to be certified from the Supreme Court to the Court of Appeals for determination, in like manner, in which it appears the Court of Appeals is in conflict with the decision of the Supreme Court, a statute or the Constitution of the State, or United States, under rules set forth by the Supreme Court."
ACTING CHAIRMAN HARRIS. That is the language as adopted. Now, read the amendment proposed to be offered to follow that.
MR. McCUTCHEN. (Reads) "Provided, however, the General Assembly may alter, modify or amend the foregoing provision, requiring the Supreme Court to, when it appears the opinion of the Court of Appeals is in conflict with a decision of the Supreme Court or statute or the Constitution of the State, or United States, whenever it appears the review and determination of such case is burdensome on the Supreme Court."
JUDGE MacINTYRE. I don't know that there is any use of rethrashing that. We went over it and over it. It looks like to me the law already. A Court of Appeals decision in conflict with the Supreme Court is not law, and the Supreme Court, and either side, or lawyer, has the right or the Court, itself, has a right to certify it up to the Supreme Court, if they wish to do so. You know, I don't know that you can make the writ of appeal mandatory and giving the,losing litigant the right to one more court of appeal, now, you have still another court, when the Supreme Court decides it. You gave them another right to appeal, a matter of right. It is not in the

122

RECORDS OF CONSTITUTIONAL COMMISSION

discretion of the Supreme Court whether or not an error has been made, and you can appeal to that, and you have innumerable courts by which there will never be an end to appeals. As I stated, yesterday, I think, my individual opinion, not the opinion of the court, that at the present time they should sit as a whole. They have, in my opinion, they can pass on the number of cases they have; but the Commission has taken care of the fact, as I understand it, that if the cases run up to a thousand, the Legislature could pass a legislative act requiring them to sit in provision, or have more discretion, or whatever the exigencies of the case demand. I can't catch the point, whatever the shortcoming of the Court of Appeals may be. It looks like to me that you are just making the Supreme Court one more direct Court of Appeals, and if you had another Court, they would keep going ad infinitum.
ACTING CHAIRMAN HARRIS. The question is on the adoption of the amendment offered by Mr. Foley. Thos in favor, vote "aye." Opposed, "no." The "ayes" seem to have it, and the "ayes" have it, and the amendment is adopted; and at Judge Grice's suggestion, Mr. Foley and I offer the following amendment, to follow that language i,n the same section and paragraph.
MR. McCUTCHEN. (Reads) "Provided, nevertheless, that a denial of an application for certiorari shall not be taken as the equivalent of the approval by the Supreme Court of the decision sought to be reviewed."
ACTING CHAIRMAN HARRIS. Is there objection? The Chair hears none, and the amendment is adopted. That completes--
JUDGE GRICE. I rise now on another matter. We passed over a section, or the report of Mr. Lovejoy, and it was referred to Judge MacIntyre and Mr. Head and myself to offer an amendment. It relates to the Railroad Tariffs, and we have our reports, and since we passed that, we should complete it.
ACTING CHAIRMAN HARRIS. The Clerk will read the report.
MR.McCUTCHEN. Paragraph I of Section II of Article IV, deal. ing with railroad tariffs. "Paragraph I. Public Utility Tariffs and Charges. The power and authority of regulating railroad freight and passenger tariffs and of charges of public utilities for their services, of preventing unjust discriminations, and requiring reasonable and just rates of freight and passenger tariffs and of charges of public utilities, are hereby conferred upon the General

l

RECORDS OF CONSTITUTIONAL COMMISSION

121

Assembly, whose duty it shall be to pass laws from time to time, to regulate such tariffs and charges, to prohibit unjust discrimination by the various railroad and public utilities of this State, and to prohibit said railroads and public utilities from charging other than just and reasonable rates, and to enforce the same by adequate penalties."
ACTING CHAIRMAN HARRIS. That is on Page VIII of the Su~ Committee No. III. The effect of this, as I understand it, is to exempt utilities from the rate making of the Public Service Commission, where they are owned by municipalities or counties. Is there any objection to the adoption of the amendment? The Chair hears none, and the amendment is adopted.
ACTING CHAIRMAN HARRIS. Now, is there-what other Committee is ready to report? That we have not heard from?
MR. ATKINSON. County aDd County Matters.
MR. CULPEPPER. I would suggest, it is very easy to dispose of it, we disposed of the balance of his report, on the article dealing with militia. It won't take but a few minutes, and then you have everything out of the way but counties.
MR. ATKINSON. Let's get through with counties. We will not have any trouble on that.
ACTING CHAIRMAN HARRIS. Mr. Zack Arnold, I would like to recognize the presence of Mr. Zack Arnold, who is president of the Municipal Association, and Judge Bond Almand, and Mayor Hartsfield, and he would like to say a few words to the Commission. If there is no objection on the part of anybody, we will be glad to hear from the Mayor of the City, of Georgia's Capital City, and the President of the Municipal Association of Georgia. Mayor Hartsfield.
MAYOR HARTSFIELD. Gentlemen, and Ladies of the Commission. We appreciate the opportunity to advise and consult with the Executive Committee of the Georgia [?] The Municipal Association passed on a number of points in the Constitution, I think ten or fifteen of them, and our Secretary, Mr. Zack Arnold will furnish those to you for your record. There are several things we are particularly interested in, and that is relinquishing the present drastic laws, or changing the drastic laws, providing for the issuance of bonds. I think the whole State has observed the rather pitiful plight of the City of Atlanta, which has twice tried to issue bonds-with

124

RECORDS OF CONSTITUTIONAL COMMISSION

all the people for it, no opposition, not even the opposition of two or three individuals that we could find-bonds for such projects as building a new hospital to replace an old frame building that was a fire trap, schools that were fire traps, only to have them fail when nobody was in opposition-merely the failure to get enough people to come to the polls, who might well, themselves, have been sick or out of town or having some important business somewhere else. We think that is going too far. \Ve think the law should be changed 80 that a community can express itself in a reasonable way at the polls, certainly the voting people. And in some Northern communities, the City Government, the City Commission or City Council can meet and authorize the bonds without anybody's vote. Of course, we don't want that in Georgia. Of course, we have the tradition and conservatism and protection of bond issues. It comes down to us from our fathers, and certainly when it is referred to the people and gets a majority vote, it seems that is a sufficient protection. It is a majority vote that puts people in office. It is a majority vote that fills every office in the land. It is a majority vote that creates practically all the Governmental institutions that you have, and can abolish them, and certainly a majority vote should be sufficient for the people to create their own debts.
There is one other provision, Gentlemen-I am merely going to touch on one or two-that the Mayor's Association, or the Georgia Municipal Association, is interested in, and it is going to occasion quite a lot of interest over the State, and it is being watched very carefully by the city attorneys, and quite a number of counties, and that is a little provision in your Constitution as redrawn conferring general jurisdiction in the Public Service Commission over all public utilities. Well, this State is full of municipal water works, which are public utilites.
ACTING CHAIRMAN HARRIS. We just adopted an amendment correcting that just a few minutes ago.
MAYOR HARTSFIELD. To include municipal light plants. Well, Gentlemen, that is good news. I know a lot of cities in this State will be very glad to know that that has been done. We are very anxious to cooperate with you. I may say to you, as the Executive Committee of the Georgia Municipal Association has already intimated, that a new Constitution is passed by the people, by a majority vote of all the people, and therefore, we feel rather important to us, as Mayors, that this is a good document. That is fair to all the people. We ask no

RECORDS OF CONSTITUTIONAL COMMISSION

125

advantage, and I certainly ask for no advantage for the city over the country, but we want to be able to assure the people in the cities that it is a good thing because we have got to put it over for you. The cities, if they do not vote for this new Constitution, will defeat it because it is a majority vote, and the cities are where a great deal of the population lies. We are happy and proud to have this privilege of meeting and conferring with you, and as I said before, we want to see a document come out that all of us will be proud of, not all of us satisfied-I don't expect to be satisfied with everything in it, and I know you don't, and I know we will never have a Constitution everybody wants-and because he didn't get it, opposes the whole of it I don't expect to do it. If it is in the main good, I hope to support it, and I hope to have the privilege of calling on the people of Atlanta to go to the polls and support it.
Gentlemen, we thank you for the opportunity of talking to you.
(Applause.)
MR. MAJORS. For your information, we passed an amendment covering the situation for bonds. Five hundred and one people can participate in an election, and 340 of those can carry it-that percentage, instead of having two-thirds majority of those voting. And that majority can-a majority vote of the registration list, it is now required that two-thirds of a majority-can carry the issue.

MAYOR HARTSFIELD. Thank you, and Gentlemen, there was one other phase of that that we in Atlanta are interested in, and if there are any newspapermen, I want to ask them if they won't do me the courtesy of forgetting this part of it. This question of how many votes it takes to pass a bond issue is very vital to us in Atlanta because thirty-five per cent of our population is Negroes, and as you Gentlemen may have heard, if you read the papers, there seems to be an insistence somewhere in this nation that they take an increasing part in the politics of local government. And these very strict bond laws have the effect of putting the control in their hands, and if they remain as they are, I tell you very frankly, Atlanta can pass no more bond issues that the Negro population does not approve. If we have not suited them, they have it, under present law, in their power to defeat our bonds; and you doubt not that there are other communities in Georgia where the balance of power lies in their hands; and these drastic present laws put the power of veto in the hands of our Negro population. I don't say that we want to be put in position to be unfair to them. or to anybody else, but certainly we

126

RECORDS OF CONSTITUTIONAL COMMISSION

don't want the veto power of our long term financing to rest in their hands.
ACTING CHAIRMAN HARRIS. May I ask you a question? This Commission, at a former meeting, referred to a Committee, of which I happen to be Chairman, the question of trying to do something with general bills, with local application. I would like to have the benefit of your views, because if there is any county in Georgia that is interested in those bills, it is Fulton. It would affect your county more than any other. Personally, I have reached the conclusion there is very little we can do about it without upsetting the whole Government of the State, but I would like to have your views.
MAYOR HARTSFIELD. You might approach the problem by enlarging the general inherent powers of local government so you would not have to go at it with general bills of local application. I might say as a lawyer it is rather confusing. Sometimes it is hard to know what the law is in a municipality. You look in the charter and it is one thing, and you look at general bills with local application, and it is something else. I don't know whether the point has come up, whether or not some of these bills we used to pass in the Legislature that referred to a population of twenty-one thousand, and not over a population of tweny-eight, would some future census automatically include other counties in those bills? I don't know whether anybody ever checked that, but it seems to me the enlargement of the powers of local government, where it could amend the charter, or do things under the charter would answer that question.
ACTING CHAIRMAN HARRIS. Let me ask you this. Do you think it would be possible to work out a uniform system of municipal government in Georgia?
MAYOR HARTSFIELD. Yes, sir, you can work it out. I don't know whether you would satisfy everybody. I don't think you would.
ACTING CHAIRMAN HARRIS. In other words, we would get in a worse mess.
MAYOR HARTSFIELD. Virginia has a system of uniform city government and provides, I think, with a population of such, you have so many powers, and if your population is more, you have broader or more general powers; and I think finally when you obtain a certain population you become a city and county government of your own. You have no county government there. The City of St. Louis, by the way, has that type of government. They are simply the City

RECORDS OF CONSTITUTIONAL COMMISSION

127

of S1. Louis. No county government at all. They maintain their courts, such as the county would operate, with city funds. That is possibly true of Baltimore, and possibly true of San Francisco, and possibly true of Boston, but these one-government ideas are never county government. They arise in congested sections of the country, where all of the population is city population. All of it has one common interest. You can't have one government when you have a section which is partially rural and partially urban. They have a different set of interests, and that is peculiarly so in Atlanta, which sits in one of the greatest rural counties in the State. A lot of our Legislators don't realize this is the fourth largest farming county in Georgia; Fulton County, fourteenth in cotton production.
MR. ATKINSON. You have the richest farmers in Georgia, too. Don't you make the money in the cities?
MAYOR HARTSFIELD. No, all the farmers in Fulton are poor. All the big office buildings you see are owned by Yankees. Just plain, ordinary Georgia folks iii Fulton County. Anything else?
ACTING CHAIRMAN HARRIS. No. Gentlemen, we have the State Treasurer with us, who is interested in rural housing, and he would like to say a few words. If there is no objection, we will hear from him at this time.
MR. GEORGE HAMILTON. Mr. Chairman, I think I presented this matter to you once before, and you told me when you considered this section you would give me the opportunity to consider, to present it again. It is a simple matter.
We have a program of rural housing in the State. where farmers can take advantage of a housing program and can replace the poor houses with safe and sanitary houses. That program is in. The Legislature passed by vast majority the law originating the program and making it available for the farmers. This question has arisen where a farmer is living on his own farm, and is getting the homestead exemption. and he gets in the program by reason of the fact he gives a deed to one acre the house is built on, even though the contract and the deed he gives cites in it that he has the option to buy that back within any time in sixty years. He still loses, under the present law, his homestead exemption he is getting. We want it corrected to where a man that is entitled to the homestead exemption and getting the homestead exemption, living on his own farm, his own home, continues to get it under this arrangement, and this deed he gets for the one acre; that is all we are asking. We are not

128

RECORDS OF CONSTITUTIONAL COMMISSION

asking that it be extended to any that otherwise would not get it, but ask that those that get it, or they are living in their own home-it is almost identical with a man living in a house with a mortgage on it. He does not have full title to that. If you don't change that in the Constitution-and if you remember, I told you before, this amendment was drawn by the Attorney General's Office for me to submit to the last session of the Legislature, and was presented to both Senate and House, and passed unanimously, and vetoed by the Governor for the reason he stated on his veto, it was unconstitutional. and should not be changed by legislative act, but rather by amendment to the Constitution; therefore, I come to you as the proper body to fix thet one thing. I will be glad to answer any question.
MR. FOLEY. Who owns the land?
MR. HAMILTON. The farm is owned by the farmer. He deeds one acre of that farm to the local housing authority under the contract that he has. He has an option to buy at any time he can at only the capital cost, that one acre and house back.
MR. ATKINSON. We passed on that. You better refer that to the General Committee.
ACTING CHAIRMAN HARRIS. Is there any objection to referring it to the Policy Committee, or whatever it is called? If not, we will give it that direction.
MR. HAMILTON. I simply ask if there are any arguments on it.
ACTING CHAIRMAN HARHIS. Let me ask a question. How many of these hous~s are you going to get?
MR. HAMILTON. That is problematical, that is, I can't answer that. We built 149 in Georgia before the emergency stopped us.
ACTING CHAIRMAN HARRIS. What do you think?
MR. HAMILTON. I am in hopes we will build them in every county in Georgia that wants them. It is entirely optional with the counties. If they want to go in the program they can; and we now have about four million dollars in existence as an allotment to Georgia, that is held in abeyance, that is ready to be built in those houses, in three sections of the State, as soon as the emergency is over, as we can get the material to go ahead and build it; and if this is not corrected, I am afraid we will lose that four million dollars to the farmers.

RECORDS OF CONSTITUTIONAL COMMISSION

129

JUDGE MaciNTYRE. Just for information, suppose a man had a five-hundred-acre farm, and he billed you one acre-
MR. HAMILTON. It's a limitation. A man that owns five hundred acres and has-he can't qualify.
JUDGE MaciNTYRE. I want to get a-qualify what his exemption-
MR. MAJORS. Up to two thousand dollars, the regular homestead exemption.
JUDGE MaciNTYRE. Whether one acre or five hundred?
MR. HAMILTON. Yes, sir. The same law applies to them as now applies.
ACTING CHAIRMAN HARRIS. Mr. Hamilton, I will tell you this. The rule seems to be if you speak long you don't get any opposition, and if you speak long, you can change-the long speeches have resulted in changing the Commission's minds against you.
MR. HAMILTON. I simply ask-
ACTING CHAIRMAN HARRIS. We will hear from Judge Atkinson and his Committees.
MR. DURDEN. Mr. Chairman, Mr. Zack Arnold and others who are interested in municipal owned utilities would like to ask unanimou8 consent to insert this amendment, the words "in any way." They were afraid it might restrict it to fixing charges.
JUDGE GRICE. That is all the section deals with.
MR. ZACK ARNOLD. I know, but I want to put in, "The Public Service Commission shall not in any way have jurisdiction-"
ACTING CHAIRMAN HARRIS. Is any objection to inserting the words "in any way", which, in the Chair's opinion, does not affect the opinion? Is there objection to its adoption? If not, it is adopted.
ACTING CHAIRMAN HARRIS. All right, Judge Atkinson.
MR. ATKINSON. I have three subjects: one, Homestead Exemptions; one, State Militia; and the other, Counties and Cities. Now, Brother Culpepper suggests we take up Homestead Exemptions.
ACTING CHAIRMAN HARRIS. What Committee report?
MR. ATKINSON. Committee No. 2, and page 5, and I will ask Mr. Roy McCracken to come up and explain that. Pass Committee Re-

130

RECORDS OF CONSTITUTIONAL COMMISSION

port No.2, page 5.
MR. McCRACKEN. Mr. Chairman, and Lady and Gentlemen of the Committee, Article IX consists of about nine paragraphs, and Mr. Atkinson, who was the chairman of our Committee, asked me to see if I could write out a short paragraph that would take care of the Homestead provisions as they are now constituted, and I prepared this Paragraph I of Article IX. (Reads) ''The General Assembly shall have authority to exempt from levy and sale, by virtue of any process whatever under the laws of this State, the property of every head of a family, or guardian, or trustee of a family of minor children, or every aged or infirm person, or person having the care and support of dependent females of any age, who is not the head of a family, realty or personalty, or both, to the value in the aggregate of Sixteen Hundred Dollars; to provide the manner of exempting said property, the sale, alienatio,n and encumbrance thereof, and to provide for the waiver of said exemption by the debtor." Paraagraph II. (Reads) ''The laws now of force with respect to homesteads and exemptions shall remain in full force until changed by law."
Those sections, now, provided,-that is page 115 in the old Constitution, and page 5, the Paragraph in the Committee Reportdoes not make it mandatory that this be done Dy the Legislature, but gives them the authority that they may do that if they see fit to do it. It retains the same requirement of eligibility. It retains the same amount that is now provided by the Constitution, and in most of these sections, it just provides there as to how the waiver shall be made, and as to how it is to be set aside, and so forth, and we just said there in one sentence that these people shall be able to have the exemption, and name the amount, and gives the Legislature the authority to provide the manner of exempting it, the manner of sale, the manner in which it may be alienated and encumbered, and provide the manner in which the waiver may be made, which does everything, I think, that is set out under these nine paragraphs that we have here.
MR. MAJORS. Your paragraph, as I read it here, it does not presuppose that a man shall have the right to waive his homestead.
Mr. McCRACKEN. No, sir. It provides in here that the Legislature may provide by law that he can waive it.
MR. MAJORS. The thought just occurred to me, if a man wanted to claim a homestead, and providing by law that he should not be

RECORDS OF CONSTITUTIONAL COMMISSION

131

permitted to mortgage it or waive it-
MR. McCRACKEN. He can do that now.
MR. MAJORS. If he does mortgage it, or signs a note, a waiver of homestead for the benefit of creditors, that should not be allowed.
MR. McCRACKEN. Under this paragraph, it is left to the Legislature.
ACTING CHAIRMAN HARRIS. This proposition here gives the Legislature authority to deal with it instead of legislating in the Constitution, and it gives them blanket authority to handle it in any way they see fit, and at the bottom provides the present laws shall remain of force and effect until changed by law.
MR. CULPEPPER. Your present laws with reference to homestead exemptions are preserved until the Legislature sees fit to change them.
ACTING CHAIRMAN HARRIS. That is right. Is there any objection , to striking Article IX, on Homestead and Exemptions, and substituting in lieu of Article IX these, the two paragraphs which preserve the present Homestead Exemption laws, and give the Legislature the right to fix it under the standard set forth. Is any objection to adopting those two paragraphs in lieu of Article IX? The Chair hears none, and they are adopted.
ACTING CHAIRMAN HARRIS. Now, the report of the-
MR. ATKINSON. Militia. I went over this militia law, which is a short paragraph, and I wrote all the military people I knew and asked them if they wanted it changed, none answered the letter and we recommend that all constitutional provisions with regard to militia-
ACTING CHAIRMAN HARRIS. This is Section X, three short paragraphs. Suppose the Clerk reads the three paragraphs of Article X, on Militia.
MR. McCUTCHEN. (Reads) "Militia and Volunteers. Paragraph I. Organization of militia. A well regulated militia being essential to the peace and security of the State, the General Assembly shall have authority to provide by law how the militia of this State shall be organized, officered, trained, armed and equipped; and of whom it shall consist.
"Paragraph 2. Volunteers. The General Assembly shall have pow-

133

RECORDS OF CONSTITUTIONAL COMMISSION

er to authorize the formation of volunteer companies, and to provide for their organization into battalions, regiments, brigades, divisions, and corps, with such restrictions as may be prescribed by law, and shall have authority to arm and equip the same.
"Paragraph III. Pay of militia and volunteers. The officers and men of the militia and volunteer forces shall not be entitled to receive any pay, rations, or emoluments, when not in active service by authority of the State."
ACTING CHAIRMAN HARRIS. The Committee recommends that we re-adopt Article X, those three paragraphs, as they are. Is there any objection? The Chair hears none, and Article X is re-adopted.
MR. ATKINSON. Now, Mr. Chairman, the Sub-Committee No.7, Mr. Carmichael was Chairman. My name comes next, and the report has been handed to me. There was some provision we never did come to an agreement on, and I would like for the members of this Committee to follow this, and help me out, because I am just a member of this Committee. I worked on it and think I have done the best I can. I know I have done the best I can, but I want the combined thought here on what is going on. We have not done any great changing. but it affects the County Government, which after all, is the Government on which our State mostly rests under our system of voting now. and it is very important to the people of the State that the thing be gotten as near right as possible.
The first section is the same. There is no change. (Reads) "Paragraph I. Each county shall be a body corporate with such powers and limitations as may be prescribed by law. All suits by or against a county shall be in the name thereof; and the metes and bounds of the several counties shall remain as now prescribed by law, unless changed as hereinafter provided."
ACTING CHAIRMAN HARRIS. Is any objection to adopting that Section of the report, which is the same as the present provision of the Constitution? The Chair hears none. It is adopted, and the Clerk will read Paragraph II.
MR. ATKINSON. Paragraph II is changed, one hundred forty-five counties being changed to one hundred fifty-nine. I think that is the correct number.
MR. McCUTCHEN. (Reads) "There shall not be more than one hundred and fifty-nine counties in this State."
ACTING CHAIRMAN HARRIS. That is what we have now. Is there any objection?

RECORDS OF CONSTITUTIONAL COMMISSION

133

MRS. HAAS. I object, for the reason, I don't like-
ACTING CHAIRMAN HARRIS. What are you going to do about it?
MRS. HAAS. I want to make an objection. I don't like to see an unwise number even put in the Constitution. I feel about that like Mr. Gowen did the salaries the other day. I don't think it means anything, because in the Constitution before it was stated we could only have one hundred forty-five, and we got as many as we wanted; and we vote another section that provides no county is to be created except by emergency, or-and I would like to see-
MR. ATKINSON. "There shall not be more than one hundred fiftynine counties." What do you want?
MRS. HAAS. I don't think we ought to mention any number of counties. I think it is unwise, and I think any time we want to amend it we can get two hundred fifty-nine, as proved by the fact in the last Constitution it said one hundred forty-five and now we have one hundred fifty-nine, and I don't think it makes sense, and I move to strike it.
ACTING CHAIRMAN HARRIS. If you take off the limit, and the Legislature can create them by a majority vote-
MR. HOLT. Mr. Chairman, just a point of information. Read Paragraph III. It says no county shall be created except by the consolidation or merger of existing counties.
MR. ATKINSON. That reduces them. This is saying you can't go over that.
MR. HOLT. It says, "No new county shall be created except by the consolidation or merger of existing counties."
MR. POPE. How can you create a new county except by taking-
ACTING CHAIRMAN HARRIS. You start consolidating or splitting them up-
MR. HOLT. I am trying to find out if Paragraph III does not take care of that.
ACTING CHAIRMAN HARRIS. I don't think so. It says, "No new county shall be created except by consolidation or merger of existing county." I think you better put a limit.
MRS. HAAS. Do you think the limit protects us? It has not in the past.

134

RECORDS OF CONSTITUTIONAL COMMISSION

ACTING CHAIRMAN HARRIS. It does this. When you put the limit in the Constitution, it takes a two-thirds "Vote of the membership of the House and a majority of the people that vote, and if you don't put a limit, the Legislature can do it by a majority vote, and without a vote of the people; and if you will make Paragraph III a little more specific, you can leave out the figures.
MR. ATKINSON. We have taken that out of the old Constitution, and made it conform to present conditions.
ACTING CHAIRMAN HARRIS. Does the lady move to strike Paragraph II?
MRS. HAAS. Yes.
ACTING CHAIRMAN HARRIS. Mrs. Haas moves to strike Paragraph II. Those in favor, vote "aye." Those opposed, "no." The "noes" have it and the amendment is lost. Is there objection to the adoption of the Paragraph? The Chair hears none, and the Paragraph is adopted. The Clerk will read Paragraph III.
MR. McCUTCHEN. (Reads) "No new county shall be created except by the consolidation or merger of existing counties."
MR. ATKINSON. That is a change. That is a new paragraph. Now, that and the next two paragraphs, Paragraph III, IV, and V and new in that they provide a different way of consolidating the counties. We thought this plan was the best. It was suggested to us.
ACTING CHAIRMAN HARRIS. Is any objection to adopting Paragraph III?
MR. GOWEN What is the purpose of it?
ACTING CHAIRMAN HARRIS. It says, "No new county shall be created except by consolidation or merger of existing counties." I think you have to read the whole thing. Is there any objection to Paragraph III?
MR. ATKINSON. Let's read III, IV, and V. (Reads) "Paragraph III. No new county shall be created except by the consolidation or merger of existing counties.
"Paragraph IV. The General Assembly shall have power, with the concurrence of a majority of the qualified voters of each of the counties to be affected who participate in elections held for that purpose, to provide for the consolidation of two or more counties into one, or the merger of one or more counties into another, or the

RECORDS OF CONSTITUTIONAL COMMISSION

135

division of a county and the merger of portions thereof into other counties.
"Paragraph V. Any county may be dissolved and merged with a contiguous county or counties by a majority of the qualified voters of each of the counties affected who participate in elections held for that purpose. On the petition of one-fifth of the registered voters of anyone of the counties to be affected, the proper authorities of all of the counties concerned shall call an election for the purpose of deciding the question of consolidation or merger."
MR. GOWEN. I would like to ask a question. Does Paragraph V, taken in conjunction with Paragraph IV, require the concurrence of the General Assembly before two counties could merge under Paragraph V?
MR. ATKINSON. I think Paragraph IV says, "The General Assembly shall have power, with the concurrence of the majority vote of each of the counties affected", it seems the General Assembly would have to pass a law, but it would be after an election, in each county.
MR. GOWEN. I would like to bring an objection to the Commission. Under the present law two counties can consolidate without the action of the General Assembly.
ACTING CHAIRMAN HARRIS. Suppose you read those paragraphs again.
[The Assistant Secretary re-reads Paragraph IV and V of the Report of the Committee.]
MR. CULPEPPER. I move tc\ strike Paragraph IV and leave it like it is now. Am I right about it?
MR. ATKINSON. No, there is a little difference.
ACTING CHAIRMAN HARRIS. The way it is initiated now is by petition. Now, I do not know the machinery, I don't remember ever reading it,-
MR. ATKINSON. I think it tukes a two-thirds vote, now.
MR. CULPEPPER. It strikes me that if you strike Paragraph IV, you leave it like it is now, except you take both counties to vote on it instead of one county. In other words, that takes it out of the hands of the Legislature to initiate it.
MR. ATKINSON. Read Paragraph V of the old Constitution.

136

RECORDS OF CONSTITUTIONAL COMMISSION

MR. McCUTCHEN. (Reads) "Paragraph V. Dissolution of counties. Any county may be dissolved and merged with contiguous counties, by a two-thirds vote of the qualified electors of such county, voting at an election held for that purpose."
MR. ATKINSON. That is just one county. One county, it can vote on that. This requires the majority of both counties.
CHAIRMAN HARRIS. Under the present Constitution, one county can tack itself on to another one, and the other one has not any say so.
MR. CULPEPPER. And if there are three of them, they can all do it.
ACTING CHAIRMAN HARRIS. Yes.
MR. ATKINSON. I think you can strike IV, as far as I am concerned.
ACTING CHAIRMAN HARRIS. Now, the Gentleman, Mr. Culpepper, moves to strike Paragraph IV. The difference between Paragraph IV and V is this. Paragraph IV enables the General Assembly to initiate a movement to consolidate two or more counties and submit it to the people for a vote, and the majority of the people in all the counties affected have to approve it. Now Paragraph V enables the people of anyone county affected to initiate the movement. Then it has to be ratified by a majority of the people in all the counties affected. Now, Mr. Culpepper moves to strike Paragraph IV. That allows the Legislature to initiate.
MR. HOLT. If IV is eliminated, and Paragraph V is adopted, the Legislature does not pass on it at all.
ACTING CHAIRMAN HARRIS. No, it has nothing to do about it.
MRS. HAAS. It seems if you eliminate Paragraph IV, you eliminate that, a hit or miss consolidation would not be, and should be an overall plan, and personally I would like to see the Committee even go so far as to recommend submitting to the vote of the people whether or not they want the Legislature to submit an overall plan for consolidation. It would not enforce it, but outline a pattern for the State to go on, and not a hit or miss. I think we need an overall plan of consolidation on the basis of tax value and area and population.
ACTING CHAIRMAN HARRIS. The only thing is, when you get out

RECORDS OF CONSTITUTIONAL COMMISSION

137

in counties you want to consolidate, they don't want. to consolidate.
MRS. HAAS. I know, but it would not force it on them, but the Legislature could outline a pattern for consolidation if they wish to adopt it.
MR. CULPEPPER. My purpose for making that is this, Mrs. Haas. It leaves it to the people. If a county wants it, people in the county want to consolidate with another, let them have the right to initiate the movement themselves; and if the adjoining county is willing, let them unite, where they now unite by the vote of one county, whether the other county wants them or not.
MRS. HAAS. I do not want to take any home rule away.
MR. CULPEPPER. That is what you are doing.
MRS. HAAS. If the people want to, and I would like to put it up to the people, to submit an. overall plan.
JUDGE MacINTYRE. Under the amendment submitted by the Committee, the Legislature then could submit as many consolidations as they wanted to, and the people of as many different counties as they saw fit, whether one consolidation or two or three or four, or the people themselves could start it; but after all the people of the counties affected would have to vote it. It looks like to me like the Committee has it in the best shape they could get it.
ACTING CHAIRMAN HARRIS. I don't think you will have to bother with the Legislature proposing it.
JUDGE MacINTYRE. In South Georgia they say, "We will submit the plan for these two counties, and in North Georgia these two counties, and in middle Georgia these three counties," and it looks like it is left for the people, and it is a wise provision to give one or more ways of initiating.
MR. DURDEN. In concurring with what Judge MacIntyre says, after all, it is left up to the people. I don't see whether it makes any difference. It goes right back to the people, and leaves it to the people to say whether they want it.
ACTING CHAIRMAN HARRIS. The motion is on the motion of Mrs. Haas to strike IV, to strike it. Those in favor say "aye." Oppose, "no." The "noes" seem to have it.
Gentlemen, we have approaching the Governor of Georgia, with the right distinguished guest. I will ask Judge MacIntyre and Presi-

138

RECORDS OF CONSTITUTIONAL COMMISSION

dent Frank Gross, of the Senate, to bring the Governor's guest to the front. We don't like the Idea of him being on the back seat. He and I occupied the back seat once.
GOVERNOR ARNALL. Roy, and Gentlemen of the Commission, I want to present to the Commision the Vice-President of the United States, who is my guest here today. Mr. Wallace.
VICE-PRESIDENT WALLACE. Governor, I wish to speak one sentence to this distinguished gathering, and that sentence is that I am greatly enjoying this day, visiting in Georgia and learning from the Governor of Georgia and his friends your plans for making the State more productive, agriculturally and industrially. That is the sentence.
GOVERNOR ARNALL. Thank you, Mr. Wallace. I want to say to the Commission that I regret so much that I am not able to be with you today, but the reports I have are to the effect that you are making fine progress and doing a very splendid job. If that be true, perhaps I should absent myself as Chairman of the Commission to a great extent.
MR. ATKINSON. We miss you very much, not only your charm and grace, but your excellent leadership.
GOVERNOR ARNALL. Thank you.
MRS. HAAS. I would like to make a motion that we recommend to the Legislature, when this Constitution is submitted to the people of Georgia, they also submit a referendum on whether the people want the Legislature to make an overall plan for the county consolidation or not.
MR. ATKINSON. You better leave this thing alone. You have something in here that might work.
MRS. HAAS. I think it would be a courageous thing to do, but I believe it is one of the things Georgia needs to do.
ACTING CHAIRMAN HARRIS. Let's finish Paragraph IV. Those in favor of adoption of Paragraph IV vote "aye." Opposed "no." The "ayes" have it, and it is adopted, and the lady from Fulton moves this Commission recommend to the Legislature that they submit to the people a plan for consolidation. Those who favor that motion will say "aye." By those opposed, "no." The lady seems to be in a hopeless minority on that question.
The Chair would like to recognize a distinguished former Sen-

RECORDS OF CONSTITUTIONAL COMMISSION

139

ator that is present in the chamber. Now, he is not a member of the Legislature. He will soon be running again, and that is former Senator Homer Edenfield.
Now, the next question is on the adoption of Paragraph V. Is there any objection to the adoption of Paragraph V?
MR. FOLEY. Has there been any amendment to these we have already adopted?
ACTING CHAIRMAN HARRIS. No, sir. Is there any objection to adoption of Paragraph V? If not, it stands adopted, and the Clerk will read Paragraph VI, and the Judge from the "State" of Chatham will explain it.
MR. McCUTCHEN. (Reads) "Paragraph VI. The organization, powers, and duties of county government shall be defined by general law. Optional plans of county government may be provided . to be effective in any county when submitted to the qualified voters thereof, and approved by a majority of those voting. No special or local law affecting county government shall be enacted in any case for which provision has been made by existing general law. No special law affecting county government shall become effective unless submitted to the qualified voters of the county and approved by a majority of those voting. The result of the election, upon ratification by the voters as herein prescribed, shall be certified to the Secretary of State by the governing authority of the county affected and shall be published in the next volume of Georgia laws to be issued subsequent to such election."
MR. ATKINSON. Beginning in the middle of the paragraph, from the words, "No special law affecting county Government shall become effective," I think that is in conflict with the provision we adopted a few days ago, prepared by the Chairman, by you, with respect to submitting all local laws to the General Assembly.
ACTING CHAIRMAN HARRIS. Let me ask this question. The effect of this amendment, or paragraph, the only effect it would have on county government would be to-it is the law now, that it has to be uniform and established by general law. Everything except two things, that is, City Court and County Commissioners. Now, under this proposed paragraph, isn't it true that it would force a uniform system of county commissioner government in the State, and a uniform system of city courts?
MR. ATKINSON. It looks to me like it would. That is a new para-

140

RECORDS OF CONSTITUTIONAL COMMISSION

graph. I don't know where it came from. That is where we broke off.
ACTING CHAIRMAN HARRIS. Let me ask one other question, to get this straight. If that be true, that you force a-in other words, you can't pass a special law now affecting the ordinary or affecting the Clerk of CourLIt has to be by general law. That being true, if you force a general, uniform system of county commissioner form of government, and a uniform system of city court, then you could not have any special laws anyhow, could you, without putting this in the Constitution?
MR. FOLEY. This was debated at some considerable length.
MR. ATKINSON. The Committee didn't agree on that. That was submitted.
MR. FOLEY. I don't think the Committee ever met any more.
MR. ATKINSON. I wrote-
MR. HOLT. This springs from the desire of the Committee to simplify local government, so that so many local bills will not have to be submitted to the people in the form of constitutional amendments. I think Paragraph VI and VII, also, bear on that. It might clarify it to read those.
ACTING CHAIRMAN HARRIS. Let me explain this, Mr. Holt, keep in mind under the present Constitution, we set up a system of county government, so far as the county commissioner end of it is concerned, to be controlled by local bills, and by special bills, and allow each county to have the type of commissioner form of government it wants. We permit, under the present Constitution, the Constitution permits, by local, special bills that each county can create any kind of a county or city court it wants. Elsewhere we have a uniform system with the exception that probably Fulton County has made some exception in here, under what we call the special constitutional amendments. That is the only difference, so with this forcing uniformity it only affects county commissioners in the county government, and your city courts. I don't think there is anything else, and-am I right, Mr. Culpepper or Mr. Foley?
MR. CULPEPPER. You mean the latter part?
ACTING CHAIRMAN HARRIS. I mean the latter part of this par-agraph. I think this, if you are going to adopt this paragraph as it is, you don't need this provision about special law. In the first

RECORDS OF CONSTITUTIONAL COMMISSION

141

part of the paragraph you outlaw special laws, and the latter part you make provision for them under certain conditions.
MR. CULPEPPER. I was fixing to make a motion to strike the last two sentences, beginning with "No special law", strike all the paragraph, the words, the sentences ending with the words, "made by existing law." Strike the balance.
ACTING CHAIRMAN HARRIS. Mr. Culpepper moves to strike all the paragraph with the sentence saying, "No special law affecting county government", beginning with that language, and strike from there on. Now, the question is on the motion-
MRS. HAAS. You are more familiar with this than I am. Do you think this would hamper Fulton and other large counties that need changes?
ACTING CHAIRMAN HARRIS. Us country counties might vote you in a system that suits us because we are in a majority, but the thing of it is, if you are going to adopt the first part of this paragraph, the second should not be adopted because it is in direct conflict.
MR. GOWEN. Why is a uniform system of county government desirable in Georgia? We have counties from five hundred thousand population down to counties of five thousand population. We have city counties, and we have country counties, and mountain coun-ties, and ocean counties. I don't know that there is anything particularly wrong with the present system of diversified county government. I just didn't know there was any great agitation over the State for uniformity in them.
MR. ALLISON. May I ask a question? I just wonder, in the first column, what would happen to the situatioq where in certain counties the official commissioner is in charge of roads and revenues, and another provision where you can have county commissioners to be in charge of fiscal affairs of the county. Now, I have not studied it through, but just a horse-back opinion is you might run into some conflict.
MR. GOWEN. I think this. It is literally true, to put the Ordinary in charge of all counties, and I think the Ordinary is in charge of all county govemment,-
MR. MacINTYRE. Under-as I understand your statement-the only exception now where you can have local law is by legislation for

142

RECORDS OF CONSTITUTIONAL COMMISSION

the county government and city courts. All others are general laws, and have to apply generally.
ACTING CHAIRMAN HARRIS. As to county government, yes, sir.
JUDGE MacINTYRE. And as Mr. Gowen says, some counties prefer a single commissioner, and some three and some five; as to myself, I rather have on commissioner and make him responsible for more things.
MR. MAJORS. If I understand it, it does not provide a uniform county government, but provides that purely local legislation can be handled in the county. I think that is what they are trying to do.
ACTING CHAIRMAN HARRIS. That is one thing that can never be done. I have watched it twenty-five years, and every time they work out the details, everybody throws up their hands and says it can't be done. The only way you can get away from local bills is to have a uniform system of government throughout the State, and I have not found any county or municipality that wants it. That is the difficulty you are up against. Everybody wants his own plan, and would be willing to adopt his system.
MR. ATKINSON. Does anybody else want to speak? I move Paragraph VI be stricken in its entirety.
ACTING CHAIRMAN HARRIS. The Chairman of the Committee makes a motion that takes precedence over the gentleman from Fayette, and he moves to strike Paragraph VI in its entirety from the report, and those who favor it say "aye."
MR. FOLEY. Where does it leave you?
ACTING CHAIRMAN HARRIS. You have to rewrite and fix up a system.
MR. ATKINSON. The plan of government comes later.
ACTING CHAIRMAN HARRIS. He moves to strike Paragraph VI in its entirety. Those in favor, vote "aye." Opposed, "no." It seems to be unanimous to strike it.
MR. DURDEN. What was that? That satisfy any section of the Constitution?
ACTING CHAIRMAN HARRIS. I think we will have .to deal with that again. I don't know until we get to reading it. Now, the Clerk will read Paragraph VII.

RECORDS OF CONSTITUTIONAL COMMISSION

143

MR. McCUTCHEN. (Reads) "Paragraph VII. The General Assembly shall provide by general law optional systems of consolidated county and municipal government, providing for the organization and the powers and duties of its officers. Such optional systems shall become effective when submitted to the qualified voters of such county, and approved by a majority of those voting."
ACTING CHAIRMAN HARRIS. Now, let me ask one question. What county officers have we already provided for in the Constitution, as far as we have gone?
MR. GOWEN. I don't think any but Section II on the next page provides for anything.
ACTING CHAIRMAN HARRIS. Have we provided for Ordinary and Justice of the Peace?
MR. CULPEPPER. Yes, sir.
ACTING CHAIRMAN HARRIS. Under the judiciary that is all we provided for. Now, the question is on Paragraph VII.
MR. MAJORS. The Committee intended the General Assembly "may,"-
ACTING CHAIRMAN HARRIS. "May" instead of "shall."
MR. ATKINSON. I move to strike "shall" and put "may."
ACTING CHAIRMAN HARRIS. Is there objection to striking the word, "shall," and inserting "may"? The Chair hears none. I would like to ask the Chairman of the Committee, the words, "of consolidating county and municipal government"-what does that mean?
MR. ATKINSON. That means-
ACTING CHAIRMAN HARRIS. This is "optional systems of consolidating county and municipal." That only provides for consolidating county and municipal governments. Is any objection to adopting this paragraph, with the amendment already adopted, changing the word "shall" to "may"? If not, the paragraph stands adopted, and the Clerk will read Paragraph VIII.
MR. McCUTCHEN. (Reads) "Paragraph VIII. When a county adopts one of the alternative plans of government provided by the General Assembly, or when a county and municipal government-adopt one of the optional systems of consolidating county and municipal government provided by the General Assembly, such

144

RECORDS OF CONSTITUTIONAL COMMISSION

county shall certify the plan chosen to the Secretary of State for publication in the volumes of Georgia laws."
MR. GOWEN. I move that be stricken.
ACTING CHAIRMAN HARRIS. That is what I was thinking, because there is no provision made in Paragraph VII for optional plans of county government.
MR. ATKINSON. Why not notify the Secretary of State, and let him publish it? Is that necessary?
MR. POPE. So the public might know what form of government they have?
MR. GOWEN. I move to strike the whole section, and it can be handled by statute. The Legislature can in providing the optional plan, provide the method.
ACTING CHAIRMAN HARRIS. As I understand your motion, you move to strike out of Paragraph VIII-
MR. GOWEN. The whole paragraph.
ACTING CHAIRMAN HARRIS. The whole paragraph. All right.
MR. GOWEN. All it provides is the Secretary of State shall publish something.
MR. CULPEPPER. If you do that, you have no method of putting Paragraph VII in option. His motion comes ahead of this; but a move to strike the first part of Paragraph VIII, which reads as follows: "When a county adopts one of the alternative plans of government provided by the General Assembly," and strike the words-
ACTING CHAIRMAN HARRIS. Mr. Gowen sa)'s the only thing Paragraph VIII does is provide it shall be certified to the Secretary of State and published, and if that is the case, he says we can do it by statute, and no use to encumber the Constitution. It only provides the election returns shall be certified to the Secretary of State. Is there any objection to striking Paragraph VIII? The Chair hears none, and it is stricken.
MR. McCUTCHEN. (Reads) "Paragraph IX. County lines shall not be changed, unless under the operation of a general law for that purpose."
MR. ATKINSON. Now, that is the old law. That is copied exactly. We have just provided how the county lines can be changed.

RECORDS OF CONSTITUTIONAL COMMISSION

145

ACTING CHAIRMAN HARRIS. That is not changing lines.
MR. GOWEN. There is a statutory procedure for changing lines.
ACTING CHAIRMAN HARRIS. Is there objection to the re-adoption of that Paragraph? The Chair hears none, and the Clerk will read Paragraph X.
MR. McCUTCHEN. (Reads) "Paragraph X. No county site shall be changed or removed, except by a two-thirds vote of the qualified voters of the county, voting at an election held for that purpose and by a two-thirds vote of the General Assembly."
MR. FOLEY. Why require two-thirds vote of General Assembly when the people, by a two-thirds vote, have decided they want to move it? I just wonder if there is any reason to make that hard? If two-thirds of the people want to move it, why put the burden of two-thirds in the General Assembly?
MR. POPE. I move you strike the last line.
MR. FOLEY. I move we substitute "majority" for "two-thirds" in the last line.
MR. POPE. Strike the last line.
MR. HOLT. That won't help you, Mr. Chairman. We provide for the consolidation of the counties and rearrangement by a majority vote. If there is a consolidation of counties, there must be a change in county seat, and in that case you are requiring a majority vote for merger of county, and two-thirds Yote to change a county seat, and it seems to me where two-thirds appears, the word "majority" should appear.
ACTING CHAIRMAN HARRIS. Mr. Foley moves wherever the words "two-thirds vote" appears in Paragraph X, that it be changed to "majority vote."
MR. FOLEY. Didn't he also suggest the vote of the General Assembly is not necessary?
MR. HOLT. I didn't say that. I think probably it would be necessary.
ACTING CHAIRMAN HARRIS. Is there objection to the adoption of the motion?
MR. DURDEN. I doubt the wisdo.n of changing that to "majority vote." I know the experience of so~e counties. They have squabbles among themselves about the counties.

146

RECORDS OF CONSTITUTIONAL COMMISSION

MR. ATKINSON. Just say, "except in case of consolidation."
MR. FOLEY. I move to strike two-thirds, as far as the General Assembly, and leave two-thirds of the people.
MR. HOLT. I would like to offer a substitute motion, and that is "that no county seat shall be changed or removed except by a twothirds vote of the qualified voters of the county." I don't know whether I can phrase that, but what I am trying to do is to leave it at two-thirds vote except in case of merger and consolidation.
ACTING CHAIRMAN HARRIS. The way to do that is to add at the end of the paragraph, the end. of the paragraph, the word "except." Change the period and change, "except in case of merger or consolidation."
MR. FOLEY. I withdraw my motion. It is not that important.
ACTING CHAIRMAN HARRIS. Mr. Holt moves to amend Paragraph X by striking the period at the end of the paragraph and inserting a comma and these words, "except in case of a merger or consolidation." It there objection to the amendment? The Chair hears none, and the amendment is adopted. Is there objection to the paragraph as amended?
MR. ATKINSON. Let's change that two-thirds of the General Assembly to "a majority vote." That is enough, because after you have an election you have to come up here. That is not right, to make the people come up. I move that two-thirds vote in the last sentence be changed to "majority vote."
ACTING CHAIRMAN HARRIS. Mr. Atkinson moves to strike the words "two-thirds" in the last line, and insert "a majo:rity." Is there objection? The Chair hears none.
MR. GOWEN. I object to that.
MR. ATKINSON. This is not two-thirds of the popular vote. This is two-thirds of the General Assembly.
MR. GOWEN. Oh, I don't object to that.
ACTING CHAIRMAN HARRIS. There is no objection, and is there any objection to adopting the paragraph with the two amendments? The Chair hears none, and it is adopted as amended.
The Clerk will read Section II, Paragraph I.
MR. McCUTCHEN. (Reads) "The county officers shall be elected

RECORDS OF CONSTITUTIONAL COMMISSION

147

by the qualified voters of their respective counties or districts, and shall hold their office for four years. They shall be removed upon conviction for malpractice in office; and no person shall be eligible for any of the offices referred to in this paragraph unless he shall have been a resident of the county for two years and is a qualified voter."
MR. ATKINSON. There is no change there. You better read the old section.
MR. McCUTCHEN. (Reads) "The county officers shall be elected by the qualified voters of their respective counties, or districts, and shall hold their offices for four years. They shall be removed on conviction for malpractice in office, and no person shall be eligible to any of the offices referred to in this paragraph, unless he shall have been a resident of the county for two years and is a qualified voter: Provided that the provisions of the proposed amendment shall not become effective until January 1, 1917. (Acts 1914, p. 43, ratified Nov. 3, 1914.)"
ACTING CHAIRMAN HARRIS. That is the same as Paragraph I of Sedion II on Page 124.
MR. ATKINSON. Mr. Chairman, we struck Paragraph VI up there, on my motion. We are getting through with the county now, and we have not yet provided for the organization of the counties. I am just asking for a suggestion. Do you think we ought to include that first sentence in Paragraph VI, "The organization, powers and duties of county government"?
ACTING CHAIRMAN HARRIS. I would suggest this. We have left a big gap out. There is not but one more page, and let's see what is in the other page.
MR. ATKINSON. Then we get to municipal government. We will get through and then go back, but you know, the Constitution of Georgia has not got anything about counties in it except to name them.
ACTING CHAIRMAN HARRIS. You mean county government?
MR. ATKINSON. That's right.
ACTING CHAIRMAN HARRIS. It seems this section we are with, Section II, Paragraph I, is only one paragraph and section, and Section III, that deals with municipalities; and it seems this is the only thing dealing with county government, and now it looks like

148

RECORDS OF CONSTITUTIONAL COMMISSION

the Commission is up against the proposition of setting up a county government, and making some provision. Now, I am not familiar with the present provision in the Constitution for county officers. Are any of them provided for?
MR. MAJORS. Section III, page 124 and 125 and 126 set up your government there.
MR. HEAD. Mr. Chairman, I understand we have stricken all of Paragraph VI. It seems that machinery would now be provided for, and we can go back and leave the first sentence of Paragraph VI that reads as follows: "The organization, powers, and duties of county government shall be defined by general law." We have general laws defining them.
ACTING CHAIRMAN HARRIS. With the exception of county commissioner and city court.
MR. ATKINSON. Suppose you say by the General Assembly instead of by general law?
JUDGE MacINTYRE. You want to preserve the general law.
MR. HEAD. Leave "general" out and say "by law."
ACTING CHAIRMAN HARRIS. Suppose the Clerk reads Section III of the old Constitution, Paragraph I, on page 124.
MR. McCUTCHEN. (Reads) "Uniformity throughout State required. Whatever tribunal, or officers, may hereafter be created by the General Assembly for the transaction of county matters, shall be uniform throughout the State, and of the same name, jurisdiction, and remedies, except that the General Assembly may provide for the appointment of Commissioners of roads and revenues in any county, and may abolish the office of county treasurer in any county, to fix the compensation of county treasurers, and such compensation may be fixed without regard to uniformity of such compensation in the various counties. And the General Assembly shall also have authority to consolidate the offices and duties of tax receiver and tax collector in any or all of the counties of the State, the official performing the duties of said two offices, when so consolidated, to be known as county tax commissioner, and the General Assembly may prescribe the compensation of such county tax commissioner or authorize county authorities to fix the same, which compensation may be on the basis of fees or salary and may be fixed without regard to uniformity in the various counties, and when

RECORDS OF CONSTITUTIONAL COMMISSION

149

such compensation is fixed on a salary basis the authority fixing the same shall determine what disposition shall be made of the fees and commissions accruing to each of said offices so consolidated and provide for the levy and collection of a tax sufficient to pay the salary so fixed." (Acts 1914, p. 42, ratified Nov. 3, 1914; 1924, p. 815, ratified Nov. 4, 1924.)
ACTING CHAIRMAN HARRIS. Read Paragraph II.
MR. McCUTCHEN. "Paragraph II. Chief clerk for certain officers in Fulton County. The General Assembly may provide, however, that the ordinary, sheriff, clerk superior court, tax receiver, tax collector (or tax commissioner as the case may be) and county treasurer, anyone or all of them, serving in Fulton county, shall be required to appoint a chief clerk, chief assistant or chief deputy, from among such officer's assistants; the appointment to be made by the person occupying such respective office and to be for such term as the person making the appointment may designate, the term in no event to extend beyond the term of the person making the appointment; and the General Assembly may provide, further, that in said county of Fulton in the event a vacancy occurs in any of the offices here named, that such designated chief clerk, chief assistant or chief deputy may fill out the unexpired term of the person making the appointment, upon qualifying for such office as provided by law." (Acts 1939, p. 33, ratified June 6, 1939.)
ACTING CHAIRMAN HARRIS. That is a constitutional amendment adopted, and the reason for it, I understand, in Fulton County, they had to have somebody vested with the authority of a chief officer so he could serve when the chief officer was not there, and that is one of your difficulties to uniformity.
MR. CULPEPPER. Mr. Chairman, I move this provision with reference to uniformity of county officers be referred to the General Committee, to rewrite and submit to the Commission a new paragraph to be added to-
ACTING CHAIRMAN HARRIS. In place of Paragraph VI, which was stricken?
MR. CULPEPPER. That is right, in place of Paragraph VI. That can be ironed out by you all.
MR. FOLEY. I notice most of these things we have been discussing is in the copy from the proposed Constitution gotten out by the University of Georgia. That is where they are written from.

150

RECORDS OF CONSTITUTIONAL COMMISSION

ACTING CHAIRMAN HARRIS. These in the report?
MR. FOLEY. Yes, and they explain in notes that they are trying to relieve the General Assembly of local and general legislation, and those sort of things.
ACTING CHAIRMAN HARRIS. Everybody wants to get rid of local bills, on account of the fact they take up a lot of time. They don't take up much time, five minutes a day, but I don't think that is the argument. The question is whether you want to trust your representative-elect or not.
JUDGE MacINTYRE. I am in favor of leaving that like it is. I understand the Legislature wants to reserve the right, and is going to reserve the right, with the two changes they now have, that is, county commissioners and city courts.
ACTING CH.\.IRMAN HARRIS. I think the city court is dealt with in the provision of Judge Grice's Committee on Judiciary. I am of the opinion, now, the only exception is the county commissioners, and in here, since reading this, it comes to my mind there is, under this provision of the Constitution, authority for consolidating the office of county tax collector and receiver, and making a commissioner. That seems to be the only two exceptions existing to the uniformity rule.
JUDGE MacINTYRE. I would like to see it left as a general law, with the exception of county commissioner and the tax receiver and collector, and county treasurer. You can abolish him and make one man. In other words, just like it is now.
MR. ATKINSON. If a city can have a special law, why not a county?
MR. CULPEPPER. To get rid of it my motion was to refer this matter to the General Committee.
ACTING CHAIRMAN HARRIS. To report after lunch?
MR.CULPEPPER.N~
ACTING CHAIRMAN HARRIS. You mean report to the same Commitee?
MR. CULPEPPER. No, to report back to the whole Committee, when we meet again.
M. ATKINSON. How about our Committee reporting in Paragraph VI the suggestion of the Attorney General, using the words, ''The

RECORDS OF CONSTITUTIONAL COMMISSION

151

organization, powers, and duties of county government shall be defined by general law"?
JUDGE MacINTYRE. I move you say general law, and put the exception.
MR. ATKINSON. I didn't say "general law." I say, "as provided by law."
JUDGE MacINTYRE. Individually, I want the words, "general law,' , with the exception. I mean I prefer that.
MR. ATKINSON. I make that motion.
ACTING CHAIRMAN HARRIS. Mr. Atkinson then moves that Paragraph VI, which has been stricken, that a new Paragraph VI be inserted to read as follows: "The organization, powers, and duties of county government shall be defined by law." That would open all of them, to local bills, from ordinary up and down.
JUDGE MacINTYRE. I move the word "general" be inserted in there.
ACTING CHAIRMAN HARRIS. Mr. McIntyre moves to put it "generallaw."
JUDGE MacINTYRE. With the exception.
ACTING CHAIRMAN HARRIS. With the exception of county commissioners, consolidation of the office of receiver and collector of taxes, and abolis~ing the office of treasurer.
MRS. HAAS. Would it not depend, whether it opened it to a lot of local law, on the legislation the Legislature passed? If they saw fit to pass some sort of statute which would give the counties a great deal of local power, it would not bring local laws in the legislature.
ACTING CHAIRMAN HARRIS. No, there is a provision that applies, where there is a general law on the same subject, you can't pass a special or local bill.
MRS. HAAS. Would it not be wise to advise the Committee to bring in more or less an enactment that we could recommend to the legislature? I think it would be difficult to cover it in the Constitution, and I think we should cover it in the Constitution.
JUDGE MacINTYRE. If you don't use the word "general" you will have local bills.
ACTING CHAIRMAN HARRIS. I will put Mr. Culpepper's motion,

152

RECORDS OF CONSTITUTIONAL COMMISSION

to refer this to the Policy Committee. Those in favor of the motionI don't see why we can't write that today, though, because I think, frankly, what we are going to have to do is to provide for uniformity in everything except these three exceptions.
MR. ATKINSON. I will take your judgment.
ACTING CHAIRMAN HARRIS. I think that is the thing we will have to do, because I think you will have to preserve those three exceptions. If you don't preserve them, you create the biggest confusion that you ever saw in anyone state. If you put it across, and my guess is you will never put it across-
MR. FOLEY. Suppose you read your suggestion into the record.
ACTING CHAIRMAN HARRIS. Now, here's the present language. "Whatever tribunal, or officers, may hereafter be created by the General Assembly for the transaction of county matters, shall be uniform throughout the State, and of the same name, jurisdiction, and remedies, except that the General Assembly may provide for the appointment of Commissioners of roads and revenues in any county, and may abolish the office of county treasurer in any county, or fix the compensation of county treasurers, and such compensation may be fixed without regard to uniformity of such compensation in the various counties. And the General Assembly shall also have authority to consolidate the offices and duties of tax receiver and tax collector in any or all of the counties of the State, the official performing the duties of said two offices, when so consolidated, to be known as county tax commissioner, by way of local bills." That is the effect of this amendment. That is the effect of the present provision of the Constitution, and I think that is what we are going to have to do; and it is just a question of somebody taking about five minutes to dictate it, and I will ask unanimous consent this same Committee be authorized to do that during the noon hour. Is there objection?
JUDGE MacINTYRE. I move that.
ACTING CHAIRMAN HARRIS. The Chair hears none, and it will be given that direction.
ACTING CHAIRMAN HARRIS. Now, that gets us down to municipal government, Section In, Paragraph I .
MRS. HAAS. I am trying to get a liberal education on why we can't have home rule. In looking through the statutes passed in 1943, the

RECORDS OF CONSTITUTIONAL COMMISSION

153

thought occurred, why not the local community? There are numerous changes -in compensation. Why didn't the elected officials in the community handle that?
ACTING CHAIRMAN HARRIS. Due to the fact the general law provides for the collection ')f fees, and the county officers have not been getting them, and business has been so poor. That is an effort to supplement the fees of the county officers with a salary out of a county treasury.
MRS. HAAS. Why not the local community solve that without bringing it to the Legislature? Why should not they be given the power to solve that? There are innumerable things that seem like details. The question is, how can you get it? In other words, the Legislature has the power now, and has not seen fit to give it to the county.
ACTING CHAIRMAN HARRIS. That is right, but at the same time the Legislature can't fix uniform salaries of county officers.
MRS. HAAS. They can grant to the counties the right to fix it.
ACTING CHAIRMAN HARRIS. That is right, except a lot of counties don't want the officers on salaries, and you have that proposition. Mrs. Haas, I have been wrestling with this thing for twenty-five years. The only way to get local home rule is have uniform government, and give the county officers broad authority, and nobody wants uniformity. When you get to that, it is the same as this morning, everybody flips it out, and you start over again.
MRS. HAAS. I know it is complicated and we understand we laymen were put on the Committee because we didn't understand the legal difference, but when people usually run for the Legislature, they run on local issues and not state-wide things.
ACTING CHAIRMAN HARRIS. Some exception, some of us don't run on any issue at all.
MRS. HAAS. I know, but when they run under the present system, the Commissioner says they are not responsible, and they won't do it, and it seems an antiquated system, and I believe clever legal talent in the State should solve that. I am not referring to Fulton County. I feel very much a citizen of Georgia, and I think it is a custom that is not good.
ACTING CHAIRMAN HARRIS. If it wasn't for Fulton County, we could get uniformity, because I think the average uniform system

154

RECORDS OF CONSTITUTIONAL COMMISSION

that suits the country counties would suit Richmond and Bibb, but Fulton County, nothing that suits the rest of the State ever suits Fulton, and I think the thing that makes the difference-I don't mean this in the way of criticism, but when you throw a half million people together, you have problems you don't have with forty or fifty thousand, or five or ten thousand.
MRS. HAAS. I think some of the problems that don't affect the rest of the State should be solved by those counties. We are trying to have so many checks on various elected officials, we just don't know who is responsible.
ACTING CHAIRMAN HARRIS. I believe we gave it that direction. [There is a short omission in Reporter's record at this point.]
ACTING CHAIRMAN HARRIS. The Clerk will read the first paragraph on municipal government.
MR. ATKINSON. All this municipal government stuff is new.
MR. McCUTCHEN. (Reads) "Section III, Paragraph I. Provision shall be made by general law for the incorporation of cities, towns, and villages, and for their organization and government. Optional plans of municipal government may be provided by general law, to be effective in any city, town, or village when submitted to the qualified voters thereof, and approved by a majority of those voting.
"Paragraph II. The General Assembly shall have the power to frame, adopt and amend any charter for municipal government and to amend any existing law relating to its organization, not inconsistent with the general law or with this Constitution. Such charters and amendments shall take effect only when submitted to the qualified voters of the municipality, and approved by a majority of those voting.
"Paragraph III. When a municipality adopts one of the optional plans of municipal government which may be provided by the General Assembly, or adopts or rejects a charter, amendment or change, the governing authority of such municipality shall certify that plan, charter or amendment chosen or adopted, to the Secretary of State for publication in the next volume of Georgia laws issued subsequent to such approval."
MR. ATKINSON. This is a part of that University of Georgia Charter. It looks to me like the first paragraph puts the cities, towns, and villages under the general law, and the second paragraph takes it out.

RECORDS OF CONSTITUTIONAL COMMISSION

155

ACTING CHAIRMAN HARRIS. I was just wondering if anybody else read it the same way.
MR. FOLEY. The second paragraph is not in this Georgia Constitution. The first and third are.
ACTING HARRIS HARRIS. As I construe that, the first paragraph provides that the legislature shall provide a uniform system of municipal government, but they can divide it, or can set up optional plans that are uniform, and require each city to vote which one of the optional plans it will operate under; and then after that is done, under Paragraph II, by local bills, you can change either of those plans to fit the peculiar notion of the municipality, provided that change is submitted to a referendum of qualifi'ed voters; so that looks to me like that is worse confusion than we have.
MRS. HAAS. That is in the University of Georgia. Instead of saying "General Assembly," they say "the municipal court."
MR. GOWEN. Now, under the Georgia law, it provides no charter except in larger cities can become effective until a referendum; but it takes in the small cities; and I believe the language is no material change affecting, or no change affecting the form of government.
MR. ATKINSON. I think Mr. Harris has an amendment with the offices affected, it has to be voted on.
ACTING CHAIRMAN HARRIS. That provided this, that no man's term would be lengthened or shortened-
MR. DURDEN. No office shall be abolished, nor the term of office, during the term of office.
ACTING CHAIRMAN HARRIS. Yes, during the term of office which I submitted. I think the Clerk ought to read Section IV, Paragraph I, which, I think, nullifies everything else you have just read.
MR. McCUTCHEN. (Reads) "Section IV, Paragraph I. All local laws or constitutional amendments affecting the form of county or municipal governments which are in force and effect on the effective date of this Constitution shall remain in full force and effect until and unless such law or Constitutional amendments be repealed, amended Dr superseded by Act of the General Assembly, adopted in accordance with the provisions of this Article of the Constitution and laws passed pursuant thereto."'

156

RECORDS OF CONSTITUTIONAL COMMISSION

ACTING CHAIRMAN HARRIS. That freezes everything as it is until it is changed according to the method set forth in Paragraphs I and II.
MR. POPE. And III.
ACTING CHAIRMAN HARRIS. They only provide for certifying advertisements..
MR. HEAD. In order to-start the argument, you move, sir, that Pa~ agraph I, Section III, read as follows: "Provision shall be made by law for the incorporation of cities, towns, and villages and for their organization and government."
MR. POPE. Second the motion.
ACTING CHAIRMAN HARRIS. May I suggest this way, you word ed it this way, "The General Assembly shall have authority to grant charters." I think you are right. Leave it like it is. Mr. Head moves to strike Section III, and insert the following in place: Strike Paragraph I of Section III, and insert the following, "Provision shall be made by law for the incorporation of cities, towns, and villages, and for their organization and government."
MR. DURDEN: I don't see where there can be any harm in optional plan, if they want to submit it.
ACTING CHAIRMAN HARRIS. You can do that now. Mr. Chair man. I am going to ask unanimous consent we refer this back to the same Committee to report, with instructions to report after lunch, and we take a recess until 1 :30.
MR. ATKINSON. Before you get through, there is one other thing.
MR. THRASHER. You are not referring it back to the same Committee, are you?
MR. ATKINSON. Let Roy be Chairman of the Committee. You know more about it.
MR. FOLEY. This Committee is under a rather serious handicap. Mr. Carmichael is father of this stuff, and he is not here, and we don't know anything about it.
MR. ATKINSON. There is one more paragraph that was overlooked. There is a zoning law, which deals with cities and counties.
ACTING CHAIRMAN HARRIS. Zoning is taken up and was pro-
vided for under the article dealing with the Legislature. Is there

RECORDS OF CONSTITUTIONAL COMMISSION

15'7

objection to referring this subject of municipal government to the same Committee with instructions to report after lunch, and we will take a recess? It is now 12:15, and we will come back at 1 :30. Is there objection? The Chair hears none.
MR. ATKINSON. I want to put on the Committee you and the Attorney General, and Charlie Gowen, and any other county attorney.
ACTING CHAIRMAN HARRIS. If no objection, we will recess until 1:30.
(Whereupon recess was called.)

AFTER RECESS
ACTING CHAIRMAN HARRIS. It is 1 :30. Let's come to order before we recognize Judge Atkinson. We have got a distinguished member of the House present, and want to recognize him, and ask him to stand up and let you see him. Mr. Luke Petite, from Bartow County. And Mr. Lamar Ball is here.
Mr. Atkinson, do you have a report to make?
MR. ATKINSON. The Committee, Mr. Chairman, met and after consideration proposes that the following substitute for Paragraph VI, Section I, which has been stricken. The Clerk will read it.
MR. McCUTCHEN. (Reads) "Whatever tribunal, or officers, may hereafter be created by the General Assembly for the transaction of county matters, shall be uniform throughout the State, and of the same name, jurisdiction, and remedies, except the General Assembly may provide for Commissioner of Roads and Revenues in any county, and may abolish the office of county treasurer in any county, and may fix the compensation of county treasurer, and may consolidate the offices of tax receiver and tax collector into the office of tax commission, and may fix his compensation without uniformity."
MRS. HAAS. What difference is there in that?
ACTING CHAIRMAN HARRIS. It is exactly-I just happened t~ over here under the Article VI, which we have already adopted, Section XIX, under Article VI, on page 79 of the Constitution, Paragraph I. We have already adopted that paragraph. I think it says "The General Assembly shall have the power to provide for the creation of county commissioners in such counties as may require

158

RECORDS OF CONSTITUTIONAL COMMISSION

them, and to define their duties." In this amendment you provide for Board of Roads and Revenue. Do you think we should reconcile that?
MR. CULPEPPER. It should be county commissioner. Since we adopted that, why not make the amendment read county commis~ sioner?
ACTING CHAIRMAN HARRIS. I notice, as I open this, I notice the notation that is Mr. Lovejoy's Committee, and the notation which I have, we adopted that exactly as it is in the old Constitution; however, we copied the language used in Mt. Atkinson's amendment, we copied it from the present Constitution that says Board of Roads and Revenue. It is used both ways in the Constitution now.
MRS.HAAS. \Vhy is it necessary in both places?
ACTING CHAIRMAN HARRIS. Well-
MR. ATKINSON. There is an exception.
ACTING CHAIRMAN HARRIS. I remember somebody asked Mr. Lovejoy the same question, and he said the county commission had some judicial power, which I think is correct. They have certain judicial power, setting forth different purposes. I never was a county attorney, I don't know much about it, but I do know they do have some. Now that is just exactly as it is. We use county commissioner as in -the present Constitution in one place, and Board of Roads and Revenues in another, and in some counties now the Act provides for Board of Roads and Revenue.
JUDGE MacINTYRE. I think there is an Act that says wherever those words are used, they shall be considered interchangeable.
ACTING CHAIRMAN HARRIS. Customarily they are interchangeable.
MR. POPE. Why not use the words, "County government authorities"?
MR. CULPEPPER. I move the adoption of the amendment as read, because it is just in line.
ACTING CHAIRMAN HARRIS. All right. Is there objection to the adoption of the amendment? The Chair hears none, and the amendment is adopted.
MR. ATKINSON. Mr. Chairman, the Committee moved to strike all

RECORDS OF CONSTITUTIONAL COMMISSION

159

reference to municipal government which was contained, which is contained -
ACTING CHAIRMAN HARRIS. What is that, Number VII? Mr. Atkinson, you move to strike--
MR. ATKINSON. I move to strike all of Section III.
ACTING CHAIRMAN HARRIS. Now, in the present Constitution, there is nothing said about municipal government, or municipal charters, and it leaves it as it, exactly as it is, by striking Section III in its entirety.
MR. CULPEPPER. I move the adoption-
ACTING CHAIRMAN HARRIS. Is there any discussion? Those in favor of the motion let it be known by saying "aye." Opposed, "no." "Ayes" have it.
ACTING CHAIRMAN HARRIS. That disposes of everything except Section IV. That provides: (Reads) "All local laws or constitutional amendments affecting the form of county or municipal governments which are in force and effect on the effective date of this Constitution shall remain in full force and effect until and unless such law or Constitutional amendments be repealed, amended or superseded by Act of the General Assembly, adopted in accordance with the provisions of this Article of the Constitution and laws passed pursuant thereto." Shall remain in force. Now, we have already adopted two other provisions-
MR. CULPEPPER. It would not hurt anything to keep this, would it?
ACTING CHAIRMAN HARRIS. Nothing, except it is a repetition, both the provisions are in here already. Now, on the-
MR. ATKINSON. Let Mr. Gowen read this.
MR. GOWEN. This has been adopted. (Reads) "Local and private acts passed for the benefit of counties, cities, towns, corporations and private persons not inconsistent with the supreme law, nor with this Constitution, and which have not expired and been repealed, shall have the force of statute law, subject to judicial decision as to their validity when passed, and as to any limitation."
MR. CULPEPPER. That takes care of it.
MR. DURDEN. Except as to Constitutional amendment.

160

RECORDS OF CONSTITUTIONAL COMMISSION

MR. GOWEN. That is taken care of in Mr. Lovejoy's report.
ACTING CHAIRMAN HARRIS. Is there any objection to striking Section IV?
MR. DURDEN. Leave it in there, and let the Revision Committee determine whether it is covered fully.
MR. CULPEPPER. There is the old Constitution of 1877, that we arE: writing in here.
ACTING CHAIRMAN HARRIS. Yes, sir.
MR. ATKINSON. I move to strike the words, "All municipal and fonn of county government," because we have already stricken out municipal government in this section.
ACTING CHAIRMAN HARRIS. Is there any objection to striking the whole thing? If there is no objection, we will strike Section IV.
MR. ATKINSON. Strike all of Section IV?
ACTING CHAIRMAN HARRIS. Yes, it is stricken. Now, Mr. Atkinson, do you have anything else to report on?
MR. ATKINSON. That completes all the Committees I was on.
ACTING CHAIRMAN HARRIS. Is there any other Committee that we have not completed, besides the Legislative Department?
MR. THHASHER. The Executive Department has not been finished.
ACTING CHAIRMAN HARRIS. Who is Chainnan of that?
MR. THRASHER. Fred Hand.
ACTING CHAIRMAN HARRIS. Suppose we finish, then, the Legislative. There were three items in the Legislative, that is Sub-Committee No.5, on page 13 of the report. The General Appropriation Bill, Paragraph IX, of Section VII. Mr. Thrasher asked that we postpone that when we reached it, until we disposed of his finance plan, when it was reached under the Article VI, which we did, and you now move the adoption of this report, is there objection? The Chair hears none, and that is adopted. That is Paragraph IX, of Section VII, of the Article dealing with the Legislature.
Now, there were two others that were referred back to the Committee for reconsideration. On page 14 is one. It has to deal with the local legislation. At the time we had that up, there seemed to

RECORDS OF CONSTITUTIONAL COMMISSION

181

be no controversy over what we had, but they referred it back with a view to a study of how to handle general bills with local application, and I am frank to say it is a better man than I am. I don't ,.know how it can be done. I don't think it can. I think it is one of the things, a question of whether the Legislature is going to pass them or not.
JUDGE MacINTYRE. Mr. Chairman, the report Mr. Atkinson just made-and that is the present method of handling them, general bills.
ACTING CHAIRMAN HARRIS. A general bill with local application is a general bill. It is on a population basis. I think the courts are going to tear up most of them, because most of them aren't even general bills with local application. They are local bills, and they are getting around, yet, at the same time-you take Fulton County is right unique, in that their problems are different from most of the rest of us. They have worlds of those bills. They are put on the basis, written this way, applying to counties of a population of two hundred thousand or more, according to th~ last census, and any future census. I don't think, to my mind, there is any doubt about those standing, because it is wide open, but most of them are not. But still one like that applies to one county, and everybody knows it, and it is a close question. I don't know what the law is or should be, but I think it is a thing we can't control, because it is a general bill, and we say no special bill shall be passed except on certain subjects. And I think it is a question for the courts to determine, and the Legislature develop a policy. There have been a lot of them that have been declared to be unconstitutional.
MR. ATKINSON. We will just have to refer that to the courts sitting six at a time.
ACTING CHAIRMAN HARRIS. I will ask the Clerk to read Paragraph XV of the Committee Report, dealing with local legislation.
MR. McCUTCHEN. (Reads) "Paragraph XV. Notice of intention to ask local legislation necessary. No local or special bill shall be passed, unless notice of the intention to apply therefor shall have been published in the locality where the matter or thing to be affected, may be situated, which notice shall be given at least thirty (30) days prior to the introduction of such bill into the General Assembly, and in the manner to be prescribed by law. No local or special bill shall become law unless there is attached to and made a part of said bill a copy of said notice certified by the publisher.

162

RECORDS OF CONSTITUTIONAL COMMISSION

or accompanied by an affidavit of the author, to the effect that said notice has been published as provided by law. No office shall be abolished nor the term of office of any official shall be either shortened or lengthened during his term of office by local or speC. cial bill unless the question shall first be submitted to a referendum by the people of the jurisdiction affected."
ACTING CHAIRMAN HARRIS. Now, right down to there, there is no change in the present law. That is the law, down to, under present law. Now, the rest is new. "No local or special bill shall become law unless there is attached to and made a part of said bill a copy of said notice certified by the publisher, or accompanied by an affidavit of the author, to the effect that said notice has been published as provided by Jaw. No office shall be abolished nor the term of office of any official shall be either shortened or lengthened during his term of office by local or special bill unless the question shall first be submitted to a referendum by the people of the jurisdiction affected."
JUDGE MacINTYRE. As I understand it, that was put in there at the suggestion of Judge W. R. Smith, and he did it to make it necessary for the notice to be published and the people have notice.
MR. ATKINSON. I think it should be certified by the ordinary.
MR. MAJORS. Oh, no.
ACTING CHAIRMAN HARRIS. I had an ordinary refuse to certify one to me once, even though it-this says "by the author of the bill."
MR. MAJORS. I know it ought not to be certified by the author. It should be certified by the newspaper publishers.
ACTING CHAIRMAN HARRIS. When it is going to be published in the Act, under an affidavit, the author will not swear falsely.
JUDGE MacINTYRE. That makes it necessary for it to publish it, and appear in the bill.
ACTING CHAIRMAN HARRIS. A copy of the notice, as it appears in the paper must be attached to the bill itself. The motion is that Paragraph XV, as recommended, be adopted. Is there objection? The Chair hears none, and it is adopted.
Now, the other one dealt with the salary of the Legislature. That is on page 17, Section IX. The Committee referred that back with a recommendation that the salary be fixed.

I

llECORDS OF CONSTITUTIOl!AL COMMISSION

163

MR. ATKINSON. How did he say that thing had to be published in a newspaper?

ACTING CHAIRMAN HARRIS. Exactly as provided now.

MR. McCUTCHEN. What about Section XXII, pagf' 16? Was that referred to your Committee, relating to signature of Governor?

ACTING CHAIRMAN HARRIS. That was sent to the Policy Com-

mission. Now, we asked Mr. Thrasher to draw a suggested amend-

ment on the pay of members of the Legislature, and this is his re-

commendation.

...

JUDGE MacINTYRE, I think the policy of the Commission was to fix the salary.

ACTING CHAIRMAN HARRIS. All salaries except the Legislature. (Reads) "Section IX. Pay of Members. Compensation and mileage. The per diem of the Members of the General Assembly shall not exceed ten dolla.rs, and the mileage shall not exceed ten cents."

MRS. HAAS. What do they get now?

ACTING CHAIRMAN HARRIS. It's eight and fourteen dollars instead of-its eight and twelve dollars now.

\ MR. THRASHER. Six hundred dollars would be sixty days at ten dollars.

MR. CULPEPPER. I move the adoption of the amendment.

ACTING CHAIRMAN HARRIS. Tha.t leaves the Legislature to fix it, but they can't fix it above ten dollars.

,MR. MAJORS. Let's do a little better. Let's let these fellows stop going in their pockets for all of it. What do you think about it? How about making it twelve dollars a day for the Members of the House and Senate, and eighteen dollars a day for the Speaker and President.

MR. CULPEPPER. Mr. Chairman, I think we ought to let it stand at ten dollars a day.

MR. MAJORS. If you are satisfied, you are a Member of the Legislature.

MR. CULPEPPER. It won't affect it because I probably won't be here when this Constitution is ratified, but I think the recommendation of the Committee-

164

RECORDS OF CONSTITUTIONAL COMMISSION

ACTING CHAIRMAN HARRIS. The question is-
MR. DURDEN. Under that amendment, would the Legislature have the authority to determine what amount-
ACTING CHAIRMAN HARRIS. It just says the pay shall not exceed these figures. That is the wording of the old Constitution, before the Lovett Amendment, fixing it at six dollars. The motion is the substitute Section IX for Paragraph I of Section IX. The Paragraph I just read. Is there any further discussion? Those in favor <of the motion will vote, "aye." Opposed, "no." The "ayes" seem to have it, and it is adopted.
MR. THRASHER. Does that complete that Section?
ACTING CHAIRMAN HARRIS. Yes.
MR. THRASHER. I would like to offer an amendment, an amend, ment to be inserted in Section VII, new Paragraph XXV, an amendment which will establish, to some extent, the taxing laws passed by the General Assembly, which would read, "No measure enacted by the General Assembly and approved by the Governor, which changes, or has the effect of changing the tax laws of the State, shall be of force and effect prior to the date of January 1 of the next year succeeding the date of enactment of the measure."
ACTING CHAIRMAN HARRIS. One question. What you are trying to do is to prevent the raising of taxes, levying of additional taxes in the middle of the year?
MR. THRASHER. Or decreasing them in the middle of the year.
ACTING CHAIRMAN HARRIS. Here's the thing. Suppose some inequity has developed; the Legislature in the last session needs to relieve something they did that is bad wrong. You cannot relieve that?
MR. THRASHER. If you wait two years to relieve it, you can wait six months to put it in effect.
ACTING CHAIRMAN HARRIS. Is there any objection to the adoption of the amendment?
MR. ATKINSON. The income taxes, they are always fixed?
MR. THRASHER. January 1.
MR. ATKINSON. The Legislature is in session in January, and they date from before the Legislature comes in session.

RECORDS OF CONSTITUTIONAL COMMISSION

165

MR. THRASHER. Yes, sir. You passed one act that was retroactive, and we had to refund preity near one million dollars because of that.
MR. ATKINSON. Federal taxes are not passed until the last of the year. That is all right.
MR. THRASHER. We had to refund over one million dollars in those taxes on that act. They tried to make it retroactive to a given date.
MR. ATKINSON. O. K.
ACTING CHAIRMAN HARRIS. One other question. You know, the Governor has authority now to suspend a tax, the payment of the tax, not the tax, until the next session of the Legislature. Then the Legislature can ratify his 3ct, which forgives the tax, or they can refuse to, which means they have to go back and pay it. Now, would that affect this?
JUDGE GRICE. You look at the act from which that code section is taken, that says, ad valorem tax.
ACTING CHAIRMAN HARRIS. Is that the only thing he can suspend?
JUDGE GRICE. Yes, sir.
ACTING CHAIRMAN HARRIS. Can he suspend license tax?
JUDGE GRICE. No.
MR. CULPEPPER. I am for that.
ACTING CHAIRMAN HARRIS. The Clerk will read the amendment, Article III, Section VII, a new paragraph to be appropriately numbered, as follows:
MR. McCUTCHEN. (Reads) "No act to be enacted by the General Assembly, and signed by the Governor, which has the effect of changing the tax laws of the State, shall be of force and effect prior to the date of January 1 of the next year succeeding the date of enactment of the measure."
MR. GOWEN. That would mean if the General Assembly ever decided to enact a sales tax in January or February, it could not be collected until a year later.
MR. THRASHER. That ha3 been one of our troubles. The Legisla-

166

RECORDS OF CONSTITUTIONAL COMMISSION

lure enacted tax laws and we have attempted to try to throw them in force and effect immediately upon passage; and we have gone off half-cocked in setting up the machinery on revenue collections; and a sales tax item. if the Leaislature should enact a measure. business should be given a chance to adjust themselves before the period of taxation goes on. At the same time, the State should be allowed to set up the proper machinery to administer that tax.
MR. GOWEN. Can't the act take-Most of those tax acts, where the Legislature thinks they have that effect, have a section providing when it shall become effective.
MR. THRASHER. Most acts do, but in the general retail sales tax, it was a definite date wben it should go into force and effect, but most acts that are passed, and most changes, just say they are changed, with no specific da teo
MR. GOWEN. Don't you think it would be better for the Legislative Branch to undertake to watch it and try to make it a general practice, and pass a statute to that effect, rather than freeze it in the Constitution, where you never could levy a tax?
MR. THRASHER. I feel this way about it. The people, the taxpayers, should be given sufficient protection on enactment of new tax measures; likewise would the State be protected in a reduction of such taxes; in other words, you could not pass an appr<r priation bill at this session. At the same time, what I have in mind particularly, you recall in the liquor tax fight, on the floor of the House. The estimates of the revenue in that case, which were appropriated, started off at around two million dollars, and every person made a speech on it got the estimate up a little higher, until they got around six or eight million dollars before the speeches were over. What we are trying to do is to set up the machinery and let it go in a specific date. Now, if you want to, if you care to amend that--no, I won't say that. I will stand by my position, on January
1.
MR. DURDEN. Under that amendment, if you should vote to reo peal it, they would have to pay the taxes that year.
MR. THRASHER. That's right, the taxes are accrued January 1.
MR. DURDEN. If they don't sell any liquor-
MR. THRASHER. If they don't sell any liquor, or they don't pay a tax, the taxes on the liquor they sell, under that amendment I

----------~-~~--,

RECORDS OF CONSTITUTIONAL COMMISSION

167

believe you can repeal the liquor law and it won't be effective until January 1, following.
MR. ATKINSON. The general tax act you passed at the Legislature would not be effective-
MR. THRASHER. The general tax act is continuously in force and effect.
MR. ATKINSON. Suppose you make a new tax act. It would not be effective until the next year.
MR. GROSS. The general tax act, you can't effectively change it in a year.
MR. ATKINSON. You can change it-
MR. THRASHER. The only thing you can do is impose an additional license tax on a concern, and they should not be imposed in a given fiscal year. They should be given time to adjust.
MR. ATKINSON. The Federal Government passes all tax acts, sometimes as late as October, and revert back. You can't tie it down to the next year.
MR. THRASHER. We don't attempt to tie it. We set a specific date they shall become effective.
MR. ATKINSON. You can't let them levy a new tax and not become effective for a year.
MR. THRASHER. How about reduction of taxes?
MR. ATKINSON. I don't know about that, I never have seen any of them reduced.
MR. THRASHER. We discussed it the other night on this, and the main principle was the time elapsed for business to adjust themselves for any tax measure, and also to allow the State to adjust itself. If you care to amend that by requiring that every revenue measure shall have a specific date of effectiveness, or some way on it-
MR. GOWEN. That would be better than this.
MR. THRASHER. But as it is now, you just pass a bill and it is effective upon date of passage, and there should be some time elapsed before it is effective, -one way or the other; say six months after the passage, or three months after the passage.

168

RECORDS OF CONSTITUTIONAL COMMISSION

JUDGE MacINTYRE. A specific date-on and after the passage of this act.
MR. THRASHER. That puts it in effect immediately. In other words, you have a budget set, and appropriations set up for a given amount of money, and it so happens the Legislature meets before the end of that fiscal year, by any reduction in taxes, six months in the last of the fiscal year-that whole setup can be completely disrupted, as far as the effectiveness of taxes within that , given period.
AGTING CHAIRMAN HARRIS. In other words, Mr. Thrasher is the watch-dog of the Treasury, and he wants to figure it out a year in advance.
MR. THRASHER. In other words, you have a fiscal setup for the period, July 1 to June 30.
MR. GROSS. Article VII, Paragraph I, is this language. (Reads) "Taxation, a sovereign right. The right of taxation is a sovereign right-inalienable, indestructible-is the life of the State, and rightfully belongs to the people in all republican governments, and neither the General Assembly, nor any, nor all other departments of the Government established by this Constitution, shall ever have the authority to irrevocably give, grant, limit, or restrain this right; and all laws, grants, contracts, and all other acts, whatsoever, by said government, or any department thereof, to effect any of these purposes, shall be, and are hereby, declared to be null and void, for every purpose whatsoever; and said right of taxation shall always be under the complete control of, and revocable by, the State, notwithstanding any gift, grant or contract, whatsoever, by the General Assembly.
"The power to tax corporations and corporate property, shall not be surrendered or suspended by any contract or grant to which the State shall be a party."
Would not that be in conflict with this? To restrain the right-
MR. THRASHER. Who are you restraining? You are not restraining the citizens. You are helping the citizens.
MR. GROSS. I am following you, but I wonder if it should not be done by statule rather than in the Constitution.
MR. THRASHER. You are not hurting the citizens. You are doing business this year, and will not change your taxes, but next year we will.

RECORDS OF CONSTITUTIONAL COMMISSION

18t

ACTING CHAIRMAN HARRIS. I think the policy is a good policy, but aren't you doing this-aren't you freezing it to such an extent there might be an emergency sometime, when the State Government might break down in the middle of the year; maybe schools could not open or anything else. Would it not be bad policy to tie the State up where it could not make any provision to take care of that before the 1st of the January?
MR. THRASHER. What tax could you pass that would be immediately effective?
ACTING CHAIRMAN HARRIS. I don't think, if you go back and study it, unless it is in the nature of a sales tax of some kind, that the State has passed any tax bills to become effective without being some future date.
MR. THRASHER. I think that is true, most major items.
ACTING CHAIRMAN HARRIS. Yes, and I don't think the policy of the Legislature has ever been to slap on a tax unless it was in the nature of a sales tax.
MR. THRASHER. Now, I am not using the liquor item as an item, because it does not make any differecne to me one way or the other, but I am thinking this-that brings in good revenue now-if the Legislature should repeal that suddenly, then the money is gone, but why can't business, as well as the State, be allowed time to adjust themselves?
ACTING CHAIRMAN HARRIS. I think that certainly you might have this ridiculous position-the Legislature made liquor illegal, yet the folks have to pay tax on it the rest of that year. MR. THRASHER. It says any act which has the effect of changing the revenue.
ACTING CHAIRMAN HARRIS. We can't adopt this before the next meeting of the Legislature.
MR. GROSS. I move the Commission recommend to the General Assembly the provision being enacted in statute.
ACTING CHAIRMAN HARRIS. You have heard the motion. Those in favor of the motion by the President of the Senate, vote "aye."
MR. POPE. What did he say?
ACTING CHAIRMAN HARRIS. He moved it be recommended to the General Assembly as a subject matter of a statute, and not a

170

RECORDS OF CONSTITUTIONAL COMMISSION

part of the Constitution. Those in favor of the motion say, "aye." Opposed, "no." The "ayes" seem to have it.
JUDGE GRICE. Mr. Chairman, one other matter, in the Report about the Legislature. I was unavoidably absent' at one sitting of the Commission the last time, a month or so ago, and I would be glad of an opportunity to briefly present this matter. You have already passed on it, it is true, on Paragraph VII, Section IV, dealing with eligibility of the members of the Legislature, appointment, and so forth. There has been a change made. The present Constitution provided that no member of either branch shall be eligible to appointment during the time for which he shall have been elected, and the Committee's recommendation, which has already been adopted, says, "unless he shall first resign his seat." That is on page 10 of the report. The Constitution of 1798 had in effect, this language, "shall not be eligible for appointment while a member thereof." The Constitution of 1861 carried forward that identical language. When I was a mere boy, a gentleman who was in public life at that time told me this incident. He said there was a great controversy in the Senate, Georgia Senate, between President Jefferson Davis and Governor Joe Brown. Of 'course Governor Brown was very antagonistic to Mr. Davis, and it was a close vote, and a motion to reconsider, that there was a Governor appointed [there was an appointment by the Governor?] The Judge's, Judge W. W. Holt, of the Middle Circuit, in Augusta, term was up, and Judge Boze's term was up in Coweta. Nobody though about opposing either one of them. Two of the Senators who voted with Jefferson Davis' view, next day on new roll call, changed their votes, and the following day resigned, and one of them was appointed Judge of the Coweta Circuit, and the other appointed Judge of the Middle Circuit. And Judge Hansell told me that created a great furor in the State, and when the Cenvention of '65 met, they put it in there, "shall not be eligible during the term for which he was elected," and we carry it forward in the Convention of '77, and I hate to see it changed. It is too big a temptation for the Governor to influence legislation that way.
MR. DURDEN. Congressmen can resign.
R. GRICE. Yes, it does not apply to Congress, but it has been ap~
plying to Georgia ever since 1865.
ACTING CHAIRMAN HARRIS. This language here was copied from the Federal Statute.

RECORDS OF CONSTITUTIONAL COMMISSION

171

MR. ATKINSON. The Federal statute says any office that has been created during the tenn or the emolument thereof increased.
JUDGE GRICE. That is in the Federal Constitution. Some years ago not only did the General Assembly take the view that was a good provision, but they added to it, if you remember, "nor shall any member of the General Assembly, during the tenn for which he has been elected, be eligible to be appointed or employed by a department, board, bureau or any state agency, in any capacity whatever"; and the Legislature repealed it, and we had members of the Legislature in the employ of the State Agricultural Department, and we had them in the employ of the Highway D'epartment, and I submit that is not a healthy situation.
JUDGE MacINTYRE. You move to reconsider-
JUDGE GRICE. J would like to have it done.
ACTING CHAIRMAN HARRfUS. Judge Grice moves the reconsideration of the adoption of that paragraph.
JUDGE MacINTYRE. Second the motion.
ACTING CHAIRMAN HARRIS. Seconded by Judge Mcintyre.
MR. DURDEN. Of course, being a member of the General Assembly, it does not influence my views at all. Whether I was or not, I would still have the same opinion. One of the most foolish things you can have in Constitutions is to disqualify a man from an appointment, merely because he happens to be a member of the General Assembly. You can take Judge Grice, or any member of the judiciary. You can resign and take any job you want. It might be predicated on a decision, or might not. I don't think any member of the General Assembly is subject to be influenced any more than any other person, and I don't see why, when you say you are a Member of the General Assembly, that you are crooked and disqualified to accept any other office, when you don't say that to any other office-when you don't say that to any other office-holderin the State.
MR. HOLT. There is something else we discussed when we had a Committee meeting. Some friction on the Governor. I remember we discussed it fully at the time.
ACTING CHAIRMAN HARRIS. Yes. Of course, originally it was written in there he should not be elected by the General Assembly or appointed by the Governor. Of course, the General Assembly

172

RECORDS OF CONSTITUTIONAL COMMISSION

does not elect. At that time the General Assembly elected the Judges and Senators, and United States Senators. The only man the Legis.. lature elects is a State Auditor, and the one we have issues orders instead of taking orders, and he has got it frozen, it looks like. There is this one thing about that. I remember what the gentleman is talking about. You know the only training school we have in Georgia for public office and State offices and State jobs, the only place anybody learns anything about them is in the Legislature, and the reason for that change put in there by the Committee was due to the fact that at the last session of the Legislature, in setting up the new administration, the Governor was quite put out because he had certain jobs that he could not find anybody he thought could fill those satisfactorily except some men who were in the Legislature. And he could not appoint them, and he has had considerable difficulty with those same positions ever since. And here's another thing, that provision keeps a man from being, I think, County Attorney, City Attorney, or from being Judge of the City Court, or from being Solicitor of the City Court. A vacancy comes along; he can't resign and take it, and the thing it does-I know plenty of men I tried to get to run for the Legislature, and they said they would except for that position, that they would be disqualified to hold any office, and it would put them down where they could not make a living following their regular law practice.
MR. GROSS. Mr. Chairman, I realize from what Judge Grice has said, that Joe Brown and Jeff Davis made a mess of the authority they probably had back in the General Assembly years and years ago. I don't think their mistakes should be visited on generations yet unborn; and I don't think we should continue to restrict members of the General Assembly because they, in years past, did make that mistake. Now, the fundamental laws that govern our State are vested more or less in the General Assembly. I would like to see such encouragement held out and offered that would enable us to get real high type men to offer for the General Assembly; and I think every time you throw a noose around a man's neck, when he is elected, you go just that far in discouraging some ambitious man to offer for that post. And while you might sometime down the line get a man in there that would get in there for that purpose, hoping to get an appointment by resignation, and even though you might protect the evil that Judge Grice is trying to prevent now, at the same time you would prevent a number of very prominent men from offering for that place. I believe it would be-this amendment,

RECORDS OF CONSTITUTIONAL COMMISSION

173'

as already adopted-would be some incentive for a young man to come to the General Assembly and learn of the fundamental laws of the Slate, which, itself, could equip him to take an appointment that might become vacant. And I think enough to ask him to do is resign his place, and then receive the appointment. I don't think we should restrict D;lembers to that extent.
MR. THRASHER. Mr. Chairman, there are one or two States that have provisions similar to this, and they have a provision where the members can be appointed to the job, but not to positions created at the recent session of the Legislature.
JUDGE GRICE. That is in the Federal Constitution.
ACTING CHAIRMAN HARRIS. That prevents them from creating jobs for themselves.
MR. ATKINSON. That is the Federal Constitution. If you are going to adopt anything, you better take the Federal.
MR. THRASHER. I don't know how to write it; but I would like to make that as a motion.
MR. MAJORS. You can amend this section by adding the words" "unless he first resigns his seat." Say that "No Member of the Legislature shall be eligible for appointment to an office created during his term of office." You can do that.
MR. HOLT. I recognize the fact, Mr. Chairman, that we must throw all the safeguards we can around government to avoid the possibility of criticism and irregularity, but it seems to me that if a man.. who is a member of the General Assembly, wants to be dishonest" all the laws you enact are not going to prohibit him from being so; and I recall, in discussing this particular provision at a meeting of the Sub-Committee, we considered the possibility that some future Governor might appoint to appointive offices key men in the General Assembly, when they had been his opponents, in order to appoint-to have the privilege of appointing-back in his county who was his supporter, and in that way stack the Legislature, or the General Assembly, with his own friends. That was taken care of when a special election was provided for in this Article, Paragraph II, Section IV, and to my mind it takes care of that part of it. This is my only approach to it. I should' very much dislike, as a businessman, to have my hands tied to where I could not appoint to any job in my organization the best man available for that job. It seems to me there is no substitute for experience, either in the General Assem.-

174

RECORDS OF CONSTITUTIONAL COMMISSION

bly or any other kind of business, and if the best man available to handle any different job happens to be a member of the General Assembly, then what good sense does it make to tie the hands of a Governor to where he can't appoint that man? I don't believe it is good practice to say that the men who have been through the mill, had the experience and are best qualified to handle a given job, should, because of some desire to hold down dishonest tendencies, be denied the privilege of serving in that capacity. I don't know anything about the problems of government, insofar as they affect the political phases of it, but I can say, as a matter of general practice, that the chief executive of any organization, be it government or business, should have as much latitude as possible in the selection of men to do the job to be done. And I would, for one, very much dislike to see members of the General Assembly disqualified from holding office by appointment by the Governor, even though it happens to be an office created during the session when that particular member of the General Assembly was present. Some job might be created that some person in the General Assembly is eminently qualified to handle; but because of this idea, somebody 'way back there somewhere has been dishonest, we will concede that every other man will be given the privilege to likewise be appointed, and it seems to me that is not a reasonable prohibition, and members of the General Assembly should be eligible to hold whatever jobs the Governor and other members of the General Assembly believe he is qualified to hold.
ACTING CHAIRMAN HARRIS. The question is on Judge Grice's motion to strike that language, "unless he shall first resign his seat," from Paragraph VII.
JUDGE GRICE. I just wanted to present to the Commission those views. As far as I am concerned, it is all right to not vote on it or anything else, but I have that conviction about it.
ACTJNG CHAIRMAN HARRIS. The question is on the motion to strike that language, and all in favor of the motion vote, "aye." Opposed, "no." The "noes" seem to have it, and the "noes" have it. Are there any other motions or amendments?
Now, Mr. Clerk, how far does that bring us? What do we lack in completing the work of the full Commission? Have we reached the Executive Department, and finished that?
MR. THRASHER. Action on the Governor and other State House Officials was postponed and referred-

RECORDS OF CONSTITUTIONAL COMMISSION

175

MR. GOWEN. There is a question of Constitutional offices and the' salaries of other State officers.
MR. McCUTCHEN. That was referred to me at the Policy Committee.
ACTING CHAIRMAN HARRIS. Well, it seems we have adopted everything in the report except the questions referred to the Policy Committee. Now, the question whether we shall leave it there to submit the final draft for adoption, or take it up this afternoon. What is the pleasure of the Committee?
JUDGE MacINTYRE. I move we leave it there.
ACTING CHAIRMAN HARRIS. You heard the motion by Judge MacIntyre. All in favor, "aye." Opposed, "no." That being the case, is there any further business? . The gentleman from Cairo wants to introduce a resolq.tion. (Mr. McCutchen reads the resolution. "Mr. Pope moves this Commission extend its sympathy to the man .who revises the Sears-Roebuck annually.")
ACTING CHAIRMAN HARRIS. That being the case, we will recognize the motion of the gentleman, the President of the Senate, that we adjourn to meet again, subject to the call of the Chair, the Chairman of the Commission. Those in favor vote, "Aye." Opposed, "No," and the motion prevails.
(Whereupon the meeting was adjourned.)

MEETING OF THE POLICY COMMITTEE of the
COMMISSION TO .HEVISE THE CONSTITUTION SENATE CHAMBER, STATE CAPITOL ATLANTA, GA. OCTOBER 10, 1944

CHAIRMAN ARNALL. Gentlemen, all members of the Policy Com~ mittee, Sub-committee of the full Commission, are here present this morning, with the exception of Sub-committee Chairman James V. Carmichael and Attorney General T. Grady Head, whom I understand will presently be here. If there is no objection to the procedure this morning, we will have the Assistant Secretary bring

176

RECORDS OF CONSTITUTIONAL COMMISSION

to the attention of the Policy Committee the particular matters which were referred to this Committee for action. Is there objection to that procedure?
MR. HARRIS. I have one little motion about something I think we overlooked I want to make.
CHAIRMAN ARNALL. Mr. Harris.
MR. HARRIS. In the article dealing with the Legislature, Section XI on page 37 of the book, we omitted recommending-that deals with married women's property, providing for a separate estatethat that be placed in an appropriate articJe and left out of the article dealing with the Legislature. It seems to me that should go in one of the articles dealing with property.
CHAIRMAN ARNALL. Just one minute. You have heard the suggestion of the gentleman, Mr. Harris. Is there any objection to adopting that recommendation? The Chair hears none and it is so ordered.
MR. HARRIS. Section XII under the same article on page 38, has several paragraphs dealing with insurance companies. That was put in there, and we were of the opinion the committee dealing with that article, that should be set up as a separate article in the Constitution and not be in this particular article; and we recommended it, but no action was taken, and I would like to move that Section XII dealing with insurance companies be set up as a new article in the Constitution. And so far as I know, I know of no reason to change any of it, and nob.->dy has suggested any change. I move that it be set up as it is.
CHAIRMAN ARNALL. You have heard the recommendation and motion of the gentleman. Is there any discussion?
MR. LOVEJOY. Might I ask if there is any objection to leaving that :to the Editing Committee, to put it in an appropriate place, whether in a separate article or not. It does not sound to me important enough to give a separate article to.
MR. HARRIS. I have no objection, except it does not seem to be dealing with the subject matter.
CHAIRMAN ARNALL. Is there objection to the Committee making the following recommendation, that that particular reference to insurance companies be deleted from the article dealing with the Legislature, the General Assembly, and be placed in the Con-

RECORDS OF CONSTITUTIONAL COMMISSION

177

stitution at an appropriate place, or else as a separate article. Is there any objection? The Chair hears none and it is so ordered.
Is there any other matter to come before the Policy Committee before we proceed? If not, Mr. Assistant Secretary, what is the first matter?
MR. McCUTCHEN. Article IlIon page 32 of the Constitution book, Paragraph XXIII, signature of the Governor.
CHAIRMAN ARNALL. What is the issue?
MR. McCUTCHEN. It is to be referred to the Policy Committee as to how they want it rewritten, or for its action.
CHAIRMAN ARNALL. What page?
MR. McCUTCHEN. Thirty-two, at the bottom of the page.
MR. HARRIS. That came up with reference to the Governor's authority to veto Constitutional Amendments, as to whether or not that should be clarified.
CHAIRMAN ARNALL. Now if we adopted that particular Paragraph XXIII-
MR. HARRIS. No, it was referred to this Committee when we reached it. Have you the Committee report? What did we recommend on it?
MR. McCUTCHEN. I think you rewrote it just like it was. Here is the Committee report. No provision in this Constitution for a twothirds vote of both houses as the General Assembly shall be construed to waive the signature of the Governor, in any other case except the two-thirds vote required to override the veto.
CHAIRMAN ARNALL. Gentlemen of the Committee, if the Chair may be indulged, I would like to make a motion that a new Paragraph XXIII be inserted in lieu of the present Paragraph XXIII of the article, of Paragraph VII, of Article III, to read as follows: "No provision in this Constitution for a two-thirds vote of both houses of the General Assembly shall be construed to waive the necessity for the signature of the Governor, as in any other case, except in the case of the two-thirds vote required to override the veto, to submit Constitutional Amendments, and in the case of prolongation of a session of the General Assembly." That completely, gentlemen, eliminates any issue as to whether the Governor can veto a Constitutional proposal.

178

RECORDS OF CONSTITUTIONAL COMMISSION

MR. ATKINSON. You don't want him to veto them?
CHAIRMAN ARNALL. We already think the Governor does not have that right. However, in some instances, the Governor has assumed that right, and this would for all time terminate the issue to the effect the Governor does not have the right to deprive the General Assembly and the people from amending their organic law. Is there any discussion of the suggestion? Is there any objection? Hearing no objection. the Committee will make the recommendation which the Chair has undertaken to dictate.
MR. ATKINSON. Before you get through with this, if anything else comes up, I don't want to take it up, but I want to take up something.
CHAIRMAN ARNALL. About that particular matter?
MR. ATKINSON. Right along in here.
CHAIRMAN ARNALL. I don't think so.
MR. ATKINSON. On page 25, Code Section 2-1507, deals with eligibility of appointments by the Governor, and that is where you had a provision that a member of the General Assembly could not accept office under appointment by the Governor which had been created or the emolument for which had been increased during the term he was elected or qualified for, and we struck out the "during the term for which he has been elected or qualified" by amendment. Anyhow they rewrote it, but we left it open to permit the acceptance of an office that may have been created or emolument thereof increased during the term at which he was elected, and the Supreme Court, the Constitution of the United States has a provision like this in it, and it does not permit a man to take an office that is created during that term that the man was elected for, and I think that is the best, and the way we ought to do it, for this reason: the Legislature-now I am not speaking about the present Legislature, but one in the future and some you know in the past-a Legislator may come in and create some office in his county and then get himself appointed right to that office while the Legislature is in session, or to increase the salary of the office that he might hold down there by being elected to the Legislature, and I don't think that should be. I think we should protect the public a little better there. Now here is what I want to limit, that a man can't take office under appointment by the Governor during the same time of his service in the Legislature that he has created that office, you understand.

RECORDS OF CONSTITUTIONAL COMMISSION

179

CHAIRMAN ARNALL. Senator Atkinson moves to amend Paragraph VII of Article III by adding at the end thereof the following language: "Provided, however,-
MR. ATKINSON. I think if you followed the Constitution of the United States.
CHAIRMAN ARNALL. Have you got it there?
MR. ATKINSON. I can get it. It says that he shall not take office. We passed that in the Senate.
CHAIRMAN ARNALL. "Provided, however, that no Senator nor Representative shall be eligible for appointment to any office created by the General Assembly during the incumbency of the Representative or Senator."
MR. HARRIS. Suppose it was to that office that was created twenty years ago, and he was a member of the Legislature twenty years ago?
CHAIRMAN ARNALL. Have we got a Federal Constitution?
MR. GROSS. While he is looking for that Constitution I would like to ask a question. I notice the motions here are that certain things be amended. In most instances, as this one, it has already been passed on by the Commission. Would it not be a better practice that that be a recommendation from the Policy Committee rather than embodied in the Constitution?
CHAIRMAN ARNALL. I think you are right about it, and I think that is all we do, will be a recommendation. So suppose we pass from this by saying that Senator Atkinson moves that the Policy Committee recommend-
MR. HARRIS. Let me see if I can state it the way we did in this paragraph. We just added the following language when the full Commission had it, we changed the period to a comma and added this language, "except he first resign his seat." That is the way it stands now. Let's see if this might get it and add another sentence, "Provided, however, that the member shall be ineligible if the office was created during the term from which he offers to resign."
CHAIRMAN ARNALL. If the office was created or the emolument thereof increased during the term?
MR. HARRIS. In which he offers to resign.
MR. ATKINSON. The term of his present service?

180

RECORDS OF CONSTITUTIONAL COMMISSION

MR. HARRIS. Yes, that might get it.
MR. LOVEJOY. Would this do? "No Senator or Representative shall be eligible to appointment to an office during the term for which he was elected, which office was created during the term for which he was elected." That is not good language.
MR. HARRIS. Change the word "which" to "if."
MR. LOVEJOY.. "If the office was created or the emolument increased during such term."
CHAIRMAN ARNALL. All you have to say is this: "No member of the General Assembly shall be eligible to appointment to an office created during his term or to an office the emoluments of which were increased during the term."
MR. LOVEJOY. You omit that he can't be appointed during his term. You don't want to prevent his being appointed twenty years later. Say "appointment during his term."
CHAIRMAN ARNALL. Suppose we pass from this with this recommendation to the Policy Committee, that the Committee recommend to the full Committee that no member of the General Assembly shall be eligible to appointment by the Governor which was created during his term, or the emoluments of which were increased during his term. Now if the Committee adopts that general recommendation we can work out the language at the full Committee meeting and follow the Federal provision. Is there objection to the adoption of that?
MR. LOVEJOY. We don't agree to that at all because that does not limit the appointment to the period for which he was elected. Now it is understood that means during the term.
CHAIRMAN ARNALL. I see what you mean.
MR. ATKINSON. We all-
CHAIRMAN ARNALL. I suggest we get the Federal Constitution and follow that.
CHAIRMAN ARNALL. Unless there is a decision on the Federal Constitution that leaves that question open. We will pass from this and after you have looked it up we will come back to it.
MR. ATKINSON. All right.
MR. LOVEJOY. Let this state it: "That no Senator or Representative

RECORDS OF CONSTITUTIONAL COMMISSION

181

shall be eligible for appointment to an office during the term for which he was elected, which office was created or the emoluments thereof were increased during such term."
MR. ATKINSON. That is all right.
CHAIRMAN ARNALL. The trouble with that, as I see it, you would not make him eligible for an office he created during his term, that he would be eligible after his term for an office he created while a member of the Legislature.
MR. ATKINSON; That is all right.
MR. GROSS. You mean ten years ago if I happened to be in the General Assembly when the office was created, even though I have been out of the Legislature ten years?
MR. ATKINSON. I don't intend it that way. He comes here and creates an office and then resigns and takes that office, you see?
MR. GROSS. That is not the law now.
CHAIRMAN ARNALL. You get the provision in the Federal Constitution and then we will get over to it. In the meantime, what is your next proposal?
MR. McCUTCHEN. On page 35, Civil Service. Action on that was deferred.
CHAIRMAN ARNALL. The question of Civil Service or the Merit System for State Employees. If the Chair may be indulged-
MR. HARRIS. Does not the Legislature have the right, under the Constitution, to set up Civil Service?
CHAIRMAN ARNALL. I think it does, but the feeling is that if it is done by the Legislature it has no permanency, and that the Legislature can tear it down. I would like to have the Assistant Secretary read a recommendation which I desire to make to the Policy Committee which advocates and recommends a Civil Service System to be put in the Constitution of the State.
MR. McCUTCHEN. (Reads) "Section I, Paragraph I. There shall be a non-salaried State Personnel Board, composed of three citizens of the State-" (continues to read recommendations which will be printed and submitted to each member of the Commission separately).
CHAIRMAN ARNALL. Gentlemen of the Commission, I request

182

RECORDS OF CONSTITUTIONAL COMMISSION

unanimous consent, if I may be permitted to, that this Policy Committee recommend to the full Committee that this proposal as a base be submitted to the full Committee for consideration, then if the full Committee, in its judgment sees fit to change it, or even delete it, that would be a matter for the full Commission, but I do think that we as a Policy Committee should go on record as recommending that a system of merit and fitness for State employees be instituted in this State. This proposal does not apply to Policy Forming Officials, merely to employees, and I know of no reason why the State Government should be deprived of efficient service, and turn out experience and replace experience with inexperience, under which system the State Government structure suffers. I would certainly like to recommend that, and, as I say, I ask consent of this group that we recommend 1his provision as a base for discussion to the full Committee, and if we do that, then the Policy Committee will go on record as favoring a provision for merit in State employment.
Now let me point out one other thing. We have a merit system now in our Welfare Organization and it works splendidly. We have a merit system in our Health Department, and it works splendidly, and in our Labor Department, and it works splendidly. The more I see the system operate the more convinced am I that it is an intelligent improvement to Government to have some system of merit or fitness for employees. I like the proposal I have submitted because it makes special provision for preference of veterans, and I believe that by all that is right they should have some preference. This does not restrict the Government in its policy forming officials. Certainly the policy forming heads should not be placed in office to where they can't be amenable to the people; but where you have some bookkeeper or some clerk, and I see them every day, that year after year works on their job, does a good job, there is nc reason why every time we have a gubernatorial election they should be kicked out of office. And I \Vant to tell you something, gentleman, something else, if you don't know it, even at the hazard of being criticized myself. When I was elected, when I found efficient, competent people working, even though they were active against me, I left them in their positions. We could call the list. There are a lot of them, but it was not right, in my judgment, to deprive the State of good service merely because they did not vote for the winning candidate for Governor. And I believe that, and I think we have a chance to do something about it, and therefore, without at this time taking up the argument or the discussion of this proposal

RECORDS OF CONSTITUTIONAL COMMISSION

183

pro and con, it is a complete system of merit that I have worked out that involves and is based upon the best systems in other States, and I would like for us to reeommend to the Policy Committee that the full Committee give consideration to this system or a similar one.
MR. HARRIS. I move we so recommond.
CHAIRMAN ARNALL. Is there any objection? Without objection, it is so ordered.
MR. LOVEJOY. Would it be wise to at least distribute among the Policy Committee, if not the whole Commission, that language and they can be studying it.
CHAIRMAN ARNALL. Mr. Assistant Secretary, will you please have mimeographed copies of that proposal made and distributed to the full Commission so at the proper time we may have an en~ lightened knowledge?
MR. HARRIS. Why not let's mimeograph all our recommendations and submit them before time.
CHAIRMAN ARNALL. That will be fine, but this particular one will form a base upon which we can discuss the personnel of the Merit System.
Now what is next?
MR. McCUTCHEN. On page 43 of the Constitution, the matter of the Constitutional Officers to be included in the Constitution. It was referred to the Policy Committee.
CHAIRMAN ARNALL. Mr. Harris told me the other day he had come to some definite conclusion about some recommendation he wanted to make to the Policy Committee about who probably should be Constitutional Officers.
MR. HARRIS. Mr. Chairman, the idea I had was all elective officers ought to be Constitutional Officers. Now we have already adopted-
CHAIRMAN ARNALL. You mean by that your State House elective officers?
MR. HARRIS. State House elective officers, those elected by the people ought to be provided for in the Constitution. Some of them are and some of them aren't and I think if we are going to provide for one we ought to provide for all.

184

RECORDS OF CONSTITUTIONAL COMMISSION

CHAIRMAN ARNALL. The Chair believes~havewe got a list here, is it available, of our elected State officials? Which ones are not now provided in the' Constitution, Mr. Attorney General.
MR. HARRIS. I think the only tw~there are only two I have in mind, and they are the Commissioner of Agriculture and Commissioner of Labor. The State School Superintendent is a Constitutional Officer.
CHAIRMAN ARNALL. Why?
MR. HARRIS. We made the Public Service Commission at the last session Constitutional Officers. The Attorney General is provided for. You see the old Constitutional Officers were the Governor, Secretary of State, Comptroller-General, Treasurer and Attorney General. That is as far as it went, and I think we have added only the Members of the Public Service Commission as Constitutional Officers, and that leaves the Commissioner of Agriculture and the Commissioner of Labor, and at the last session we created some Constitutional boards, Board of Pardons and Paroles, and those I think should be left, since they have already been put in under the peculiar condition that came about. I forgot, of course, I think I forgot to name the Justices of the Supreme Court and Judges of the Court of Appeals are all Constitutional~
CHAIRMAN ARNALL. That is right, that is judicial, and the legislative officers are Constitutional, but what we are particularly interested in and addressing this to is the officers in the Executive Department of the Government.
MR. HARRIS. That is right.
CHAIRMAN ARNALL. Is there any discussion by members of the Policy Committee, or is it the sense of this Committee that the offices of Commissioner of Agriculture and Labor should be made Constitutional Offices, since they are elected by the people and perform executive function'! Is there any discussion? Do you move that?
MR. HARRIS. I move that.
CHAIRMAN ARNALL. That all elective officers in the Executive
Department~
MR. HARRIS. To make it specific, make it that the Commissioner of Agriculture and the Commissioner of Labor be fixed as Constitutional Officers in the Constitution.

RECORDS OF CONSTITUTIONAL COMMISSION

185

CHAIRMAN ARNALL. It there any discussion?
MR. LOVEJOY. Where is it fixed, Mr. Governor, this that we are talking about? Are you talking about this Section 2-2601?
CHAIRMAN ARNALL. You will find one particular section relates to the Attorney General, and another to the Treasurer, and another to the Comptroller-General, and another to the Secretary of State, and another to the Governor, but there is no paragraph that names the Constitutional Officers. If there. is one and if we can put our fingers on it, that would be the one to amend.
MR. HARRIS. The first paragraph on page 43 says that officers of the Executive Department shall consist of the Governor, Secretary of State, Comptroller-General and Treasurer.
MR. McCUTCHEN. There is another paragraph on page 52, "Other Executive Officers, how elected."
MR. HARRIS. That does not list all the Constitutional Officers, but the officers of the Executive Department. Now it might be that we should add to this paragraph, as well as set it up separately, add to it the Superintendent of Schools, Commissioner of Agriculture and Commissioner of Labor.
CHAIRMAN ARNALL. Is there objection to amending the present Constitution so as to provide in a particular paragraph, section and article, the designation of Constitutional Officers in the Executive Department so as to include those now denoted as Constitutional Officers, plus the Commissioner of Agriculture and the Commissioner of Labor. Is there objection?
MR. HEAD. I have no objection to that. We are in this sort of a situation now, we are on record as proposing that the State Superintendent of Schools be elected by the Board of Education. If we mean that, I don't think any official that is elected by a board ought to be a Constitutional Official. If we are going to elect him by the Board of Education we ought to take him out of the Constitution; if we are going to leave him in the Constitution, the people ought to vote for him. It must be consistent.
MR. ,HARRIS. I had in mind when we got to that point making a motion that the Superintendent of Schools be elected by the people.
MR. HEAD. If you do that, all right.

186

RECORDS OF CONSTITUTIONAL COMMISSION

MR. GROSS. We have to stop somewhere on our discussion or we will be considering the Constitution again as a whole. That thing was fairly discussed in the Commission, and it might be the Commission will want to change. It seems to me from the discussion I have heard they will want to change it, but why should the Policy Committee go back and discuss the State School Superintendent, as to whether he will be elected by the board or by the people, when the Commission itself discussed it two or three days and passed on it.
CHAIRMAN ARNALL. I think you are right; but if I understand what Grady says, he says if we adopt the policy here that officials in the Executive Department of State Government be elected by the people, if those officer3 are Constitutional Officers, then if the Superintendent of Schools is not elected by the people, he ought not to be made a Constitutional Officer. That is right, is it?
MR. HEAD. That is right.
CHAIRMAN ARNALL. So, what then is the objection to Mr. Harris' suggestion being couched in this kind of language, that it is the sense of the Policy Committee that all officers of the Executive Department which are now Constitutional Officers and which 'hereafter are elected by the people be retained as Constitutional Officers, and the office of Commissioner of Agriculture and the Commissioner of Labor be denoted as Constitutional Officers. Then if you take away the election, Grady, of the Superintendent of Schools, you take him out of the Constitution.
JUDGE GRICE. The Constitution of the United States names the President, Vice-President, Senators and Representatives in Congress, and certain others, the only officers there that were elected by the people were the members of the lower House of Congress, and they are all Constitutional Officers. I don't see what the objection is. If you want to put them in, just say State Officers, recognize them as officers. That is all the effect of putting it in the Constitution has.
CHAIRMAN ARNALL. Well, in order to expedite the procedure, there is certainly no objection on the part of any member of the Policy Committee that we treat as we have treated the Governor, Attorney General, Secretary of State, Comptroller General, State Treasurer, and the Superintendent of Schools as State Constitutional Officers in the Executive Department; provided however, that if finally we provide that the Superintendent of Schools is

RECORDS OF CONSTITUTIONAL COMMISSION

187

named by the State Board (If Education, then General Head wants to move that he be deleted as a Constitutional Officer, and in ad:dition to those-that is something we can reach at the full Committee-in addition to those Mr. Harris recommends or moves that the Policy Committee recommend that the Commissioner of Agriculture and the Commissioner of Labor, since they are officers in the Executive Department elected by the people, that they be denoted as Constitutional Officers. Is there objection? The Chair hears none and it is so ordered.
All right, Pat.
MR. McCUTCHEN. Does that include the Boards?
CHAIRMAN ARNALL. Yes, we have already acted on that. Is there any question?
MR. McCUTCHEN. No. They were referred toCHAIRMAN ARNALL. We retained the Constitutional Boards that are now in existence in the Constitution. That is the Chair's understanding. Is that the understanding of the Policy Committee. It is.
MR. McCUTCHEN. One other question on page 54, reference to the Game and Fish Commission. At the time that came up the only action taken was it was referred back to Sub-committee Number 4 to be rewritten. There is some discussion as to the things named, counties named, and it was to get a better-
CHAIRMAN ARNALL. Is there objection to the Policy Committee recommending that the present constitutional provision with reference to Game and Fish Commission be adopted as it now stands? Is there objection? That is, that we recommend to the full Commission that those be adopted as they now stand. Without objection, that is so ordered.
Now the Chair at this time would like to interpose a question for consideration. Let me hastily say the Chair at this particular time, in order to expedite business, has no desire to go into a discussion of the merits or demerits of the Penal System of Georgia. The Chair would like to state that he is quite well pleased with the progress being made, and he insists as far as it is within the limits of his ability to do so, that the program of progressiveness in prison administration be carried out without diminution and without set back. But coming to the particular matter before the Commission, as Governor of the State, I have observed there is no particular State activity in which there is likelihood of politics becoming involved to a greater degree than in the operation of prison institu-

I

188

RECORDS OF CONSTITUTIONAL COMMISSION

tions. Nearly any Governor will tell you that one of the toughest jobs he has got is to administer the penal institutions. You get a certain group of prisoners who are good and want to help, and then you have some others that are dregs on society, that won't .let yolt do anything for them. I am wondering if it would not be a step forward for this Commission, this Policy Committee, to recommend to the full Commission that it give serious consideration to creating a Constitutional Board of Prisons, so that no matter what the future holds, that we have some continuity and uniformity in prison policy in this State. I am thinking of this, fo:r instance. Not many years ago there was one State administration thaJ visualized a progressive modern prison program, and to that end they bought machinery and set up industries and those kind of things in the State Prison at Reidsville. Then another administration came along-and I do not criticize the administration, I merely quote from what I understand the record is-and they determined that it was very futile and foolish to mechanize a State Prison, that the thing to do was to get rid of all the tractors and farm equipment and industrial equipment and buy mules and put the prisoners out- to farming, and therefore they tore out the machinery, or a great part of it, and depleted the resources of the prison. Then another administration came in, and that administration decided we ought to do something about industrializing the prison, and we went right back again. The point I make, and leaving personalities out of it, I am thinking about a steady, stable prison program. The point I make is that if we get outstanding citizens of the State to serve as members of a Prison Board, like the Board of Regents or State Board of Education, then you have a continuity and stable interest in prison administration that can through the years go forward until the place where we get a definite, positive, forward-looking constructive prison program in Georgia. Now I feel very keenly about that because I know how much fire there is in prison work; and since we are trying to do something to strengthen our government, I would like to be so bold as to recommend that the Policy Committee go on record as recommending to the full Committee, when we meet again, that we give consideration and recommend to the Legislature in turn that a Board be created, a non-paid Board, comprised of outstanding Georgians who are interested in the welfare of our State and also of the prison problems and the prisoners, and let that Board act as a Constitutional Board in charge of prison affairs in Georgia. I believe if we do that some Governor down the line, whoever happens to be Governor, whether you amend the

RECORDS OF CONSTITUTIONAL COMMISSION

189

Constitution where he can have a second term or whether the people could vote or not; but whoever is Governor down the line,somebody will rise up and call this group blessed, because I tell you candidly, the prison system in Georgia is the toughest nut I have tried to crack; and I would like for you to go on record and recommend to the full Commission, and they recommend to the Legislature, that we have a constitutional board, not with authority, but letting that board in turn engage an executive director, who will be clothed with a full responsibility, but a constitutional board to protect the progress we are making and give stableness to the prison program. Is there any discussion of that?
MR. GROSS. I would like to say this with reference to your suggestion, I think Governor Olin Johnson sized up the prison situation, when Speaker Hat-ris and I were visiting in the other States, by saying in order to have a good prison system the Governor must stay very close to the prison system. That is true because you are dealing with some people, who are in politics, county commissioners, ordinaries, and other officials. I think you are going to have a good prison system when you have a good Governor. I think you are going to have a poor prison system when you have a poor Governor. I am wondering if that constitutional board, if it becomes so dominated by those who are in political power in different counties, would not make it very difficult for us to correct a horrible situation that could present itself.
CHAIRMAN ARNALL. That is quite possible, Frank, and quite frankly, I would not care at that time, because it would take some while and we are trying to push along-I would not care particularly to discuss the merits or demerits of the proposal, but what I would like is for us, in a concrete way to recommend something to the full Commission, and then we can discuss the pros and cons and eliminate or keep it in, but I think we ought to give some thought to try to create something in the prison program that would be stable. Is there objection to making a recommendation along general lines?
MR. HARRIS. I have no objection to recommending that they could consider it. I think the hat-dest job in the State is handling the penitentiary system. I never had any experience with it until the President of the Senate and I got put on the spot by the Governor.
CHAIRMAN ARNALL. Roy, just a minute. The reason I bring it forth now is because we are dealing with this particular section

190

RECORDS OF CONSTITUTIONAL COMMISSION

about constitutional officers, and I did not want it to pass without bringing it up. I was just mentioning it in connection with the constitutional officers.
MR. HARRIS. It is the hardest thing in the State to deal with, because you have to have a type of personnel that can handle the worst type of citizens, and at the same time work them and keep them from being a liability that they have been on the State, and the worst thing we observed was that we were not utilizing our prisoners. Of course I recognize that a great many of them are physically incapacitated, but all of them can do something, and I am sold on the idea that prison reform is in an experimental stage, that it is going to take a long number of years to develop a sufficient personnel, and I am kind of the opinion it is one of the things that ought to be kept close under the Governor's thumb, because too many boards, especially where they serve without compensation, come up and meet but they don't have the opportunity that the Governor would have of getting thrown right in the midst of it. I have got no objection to considering it, but I think it would be right dangerous to put it in the Constitution right now.
CHAIRMAN ARNALL. Is there objection to us recommending to the full Committee that the full Committee give consideration to the proposal?
MR. HARRIS. I have no objection.
CHAIRMAN ARNALL. The Chair hears none.
MR. LOVEJOY. I suggest this. There ought to be, before the full Commission meets, the language of the Governor's p~oposal written out, if you are going to consider it.
CHAIRMAN ARNALL. Yes, Hatton. Do you know anything about a recommendation that Victor K. Meador has about workmen's compensation. Is that supposed to come up now? Do you know anything about that?
MR. LOVEJOY. I know this about it. Under the Constitution it does not authorize counties to levy taxes to pay for workmen's compensation or to come under the Workmen's Compensation System for their employees. Therefore the employees do not come, or did not come, under the Workmen's Compensation System of the State. The proper place to list it would be the purposes for which counties could levy taxes. The question is whether that purpose wants to be added or not. I am not certain that it should be, and that is

RECORDS OF CONSTITUTIONAL COMMISSION

191

a matter of decision. He raises the question of adding that as a purpose for which counties can levy taxes in order that the counties can put their employees under that.
MR. GROSS. If that were put in there, would not you of necessity have to give an injured person the right to sue the county?
MR. LOVEJOY. No. You could give him the right under the Workmen's Compensation System only if he wanted to, and he would have no more than you give him.
MR. GROSS. Suppose the county did not have insurance. Some counties might carry the policy and some might not. It looks like you would have to give the right to sue.
MR. LOVEJOY. Well, the present Workmen's Compensation Law provides that you either have to carry, have to give a bond, or satisfy the Board of your ability to meet your liability.
MR. GROSS. The point I 'lm making, if they did not carry the insurance they would be liable under the Compensation Act.
MR. LOVEJOY. I would think they would, and I think they ought to be. If you put them under it and they don't have the insurance to pay, they ought to have to pay. Now that is a question of whether the Commission would want to include that in the list of taxation by counties. That is the point he raised. I wrote him this, trying to get information. He said that the county commissioner, county authorities, wanted it, and I asked him to give me the facts on which he based that statement, and he told me he did not have any facts.
CHAIRMAN ARNALL. Do you want to consider it at this particular time?
MR. LOVEJOY. No, sir.
CHAIRMAN ARNALL. All right, what is next?
MR. McCUTCHEN. That is all.
CHAIRMAN ARNALL. That is all the Policy Committee has.
MR. GROSS. We have the question of salaries.
MR. McCUTCHEN. No, the judge's was fixed by two new paragraphs.
JUDGE GRICE. I thought the question was if we would have any salaries in the Constitution, and if so, which?

192

RECORDS OF CONSTITUTIONAL COMMISSION

MR. LOVEJOY. That point has been raised, Governor. It was not one I brought up, but there is that situation, that the county employees cannot now come under a Workmen's Compensation System because there is not in the Constitution power given to the county authorities to levy taxation for that purpose. Now if this Committee cares to take any action on it, or recommendation, or do anything-
MR. ATKINSON. Can't they come under Workmen's Compensation?
MR. LOVEJOY. No, they cannot.
MR. GROSS. A county cannot now take out insurance on their employees.
CHAIRMAN ARNALL. Why should they do it?
MR. GROSS. That is a question of argument.
CHAIRMAN ARNALL. Why should the government get involved in any more personal relations than we are in now?
MR. GROSS. Nothing, only that State government and county government have expanded to such an extent where there used to be one or two employees, especially in the road building program, they have literally dozens of employees. I happen to be county attorney, and I remember a particular case where an employee of the county was permanently injured, and there is no way in the world to get him compensation for that injury, and the Commissioner had asked me a year before that if they could take out insurance, and I told them they could not. Since they do employ so many-
MR. ATKINSON. How do you take care of an injured man?
MR. GROSS. You can't take care of them.
CHAIRMAN ARNALL. Here is what they do in my county-it is illegal. They increase the fellow's salary to pay their part of the insurance. In other words, they pay him $150.00 a month and the county's part of the insurance would be $10.00. They would pay him $160.00 and pay that $10.00 on the insurance policy.
MR. GROSS. That is a way around it.
MR. ATKINSON. Does not the compensation put counties under it?
MR. GROSS. No.

RECORDS OF CONSTITUTIONAL COMMISSION

198

CHAIRMAN ARNALL. Do you offer any recommendation? Does anyone offer any recommendation?
Now the Chair wants to bring up three or four matters for direction from the Policy Committee. Number 1: The Chair is of the distinct impression and opinion we have got to do something to strengthen county government. Since I have been Governor of Georgia I have had more resignations from county sheriffs than from anything else. They write me and say they don't make but $42.00 a month out of fees, and they just can't keep up .their family and they have to quit, and they quit and.go into some other business. Now I would like to see this Policy Committee make a general recommendation to the full Committee that we change the provision of the Constitution relating to compensation of county officers, which under the general Constitutional law places them on a fee basis-most of the big counties have changed that to a salary-to whereby we can provide that upon the recommendation of two Grand Juries a county (lfficer can either be paid on a fee basis, a salary basis, or a fee basis supplemented by salary. By doing that we can keep good county officials, and you can't get good government, I don't care how altruistic and idealistic your ideas may be, unless you can pay a man to where he can live without embarrassment to himself and his family-and I think it is a shame that we have a sheriff in charge of the enforcement of laws of this State who is not making but $30.00 or $40.00 a month and has to do something else on the side to make ends meet. Therefore, I would like to recommend as a matter of policy the Policy Committee in tum recommend to the full Committee the provision relating tocompensation of county officers be modified; something in genera] along the lines of the following language: Upon the recommendation of two Grand Juries, the fiscal authority of the county may place county officers on a fee basis, salary basis, or fee basis supplemented by salary. Is there any l,bjection? The Chair hears none.
MR. GROSS. That is another step towards home rule.
CHAIRMAN ARNALL. That is right, letting the people rule their own affairs.
The second proposition the Chair would like to have discussed is the salary of our judges. Now in order to bring the Commission up to date, in discussing the matter with the State Auditor the other day, in operating the State finances and paying traveling expenses and what not, the question arose as to whether or not the Superior Court Judges are not State Officers and as such are entitled to

184

RECORDS OF CONSTITUTIONAL COMMISSION

travel expenses and mileage when attending official business within their circuit outside of the county of their residence; and I have taken the liberty of calling upon the distinguished Attorney General for an opinion touching that particular subject matter. Now if he should hold or let me change it, if the law should be such that properly the Superior Court Judges can be compensated for travel outside of their home county on official business in their circuit, then it will be a great help and assistance to the Superior Court Judges. A member of our Commission, Tom Candler, for instance, has nine counties in his circuit, and I think with his salary of $5,000.00 a year, I doubt if he nets out of his salary as Judge over $100.00 a month. Now I tell you we will never maintain the high type of judiciary we have in this State, or in the future we will never attract to the bench such outstanding attorneys, unless we do something to relieve that kind of intolerable situation, and I hope the Attorney General, in his search, will find that the law allows it to be-let me change that, that the law is such that something can be done for Superior Court Judges. Now if that is done, of course it does not mean, as I understand it-Grady, if the law is such that we can pay the (-xpenses of the Judges, it does not mean necessarily that we can do that to the Solicitors General, because the Solicitors General can practice law outside of their courts, as I understand. That takes care of the Judges of the Superior Court, if that is the law; and if it is not the law we don't want to do it. I don't know, but we need to discuss at this time something about the salaries of our Judges uf our Court of Appeals and of our Supreme Court.
Roy, are you ready yet to get on to the questions we were discussing about the composition of the court, or you want to hold that for the full Commission?
MR. HARRIS. I think this is all right. I think this-
CHAIRMAN ARNALL. Wait just a minute, Roy. Now here is what we adopted about this salary of the Judges, that the General Assembly shall provide adequate salaries for the Justices of the Supreme Court and Judges of the Court of Appeals and the Superior Courts, the Attorney General and Solicitors General, to be paid from the Treasury of the State, which shall not be decreased during the remainder of the terms of office. Now this apparently, the article I have read which contains two paragraphs, apparently leaves to the General Assembly the fixing of salaries of the Judges of the Superior Courts, Court of Appeals, Supreme Court, Attor-

RECORDS OF CONSTITUTIONAL COMMISSION

195

ney General and Solicitors General. Now dealing only in general recommendations, the Chair won-
ders somewhat about the advisability of that. Now, Roy.
MR. HARRIS. Mr. Chairman, the Sub-committee dealing with that thing had three Judges on it. None of the Judges voted on the question, and I feel like you ought to excuse me right now. I will be back directly.
CHAIRMAN ARNALL. Certainly. I am wondering, as a matter of policy, should not these salaries of our judiciary, being fixed in the Constitution-I rather am inclined to think they should be fixed by law.
MR. HARRIS. I have no objection except this, I think we get into an issue that we should not get into.
CHAIRMAN ARNALL. Why should we not fix the salaries of the Court of Appeals, and Supreme Court exactly at the figure that is fixed now, with the present proviso they can be changed by twothirds vote of the General Assembly, not to affect anyone then in office?
MR. HARRIS. Isn't that the provision now, that, if you notice there, the present salaries are continued until changed by law. That was the impression I had, that that is the way we had already done. I have kind of got a notion it is bad policy to get in a fight over Constitutional Officers' salary.
CHAIRMAN ARNALL. I agree.
MR. HARRIS. It is not a question that should be fought out in the Constitution.
MR. GROSS. As far as I am concerned, I agree to that as presented by the Sub-committee. However, I am of the opinion our courts, from the highest down to the lowest, as far as the Judges are concerned, are very inadequately provided for in salary, and I am willing to face the proposition either in the General Assembly or in the Constitution. If the Constitution is going to name the salaries, I want to certainly urge it. If they are going to leave it to the General Assembly, I want to urge an increase at that time. Whatever the Policy Commission says.
MR. ATKINSON. You want to change that?
CHAIRMAN ARNALL. I don't care about changing it. I say this: If I was a Judge, and you are about to be one, I would want my

196

RECORDS OF CONSTITUTIONAL COMMISSION

salary fixed in the Constitution of Georgia.If it was $2,000.00 a year,

I would want to know it was fixed.

.

MR. ATKINSON. All right, salaries now in force shall be continued until changed by law, and the law says you can change them by two-thirds vote.

MR. LOVEJOY. It is in the one we just read.

MR. ATKINSON. So you have the salaries fixed now.

CHAIRMAN ARNALL. I have no comment to make unless some member of the Commission does.

MR. HARRIS. What I wanted to get at, Governor, was the proposition we had up.

CHAIRMAN ARNALL. I wish you would get Judge Grice in here. Go get the Judge before we start, and I wish we could ask the Judge if he can locate Judge MacIntyre.

MR. ATKINSON. They don't want to be around here when you are on that.
CHAIRMAN ARNALL. While they are coming let me take up here a proposition that has come to my attention and find out the wishes of the Policy Committee, whether we desire to make recommendation about it, that is retirement for Superior Court Judges.

MR. HARRIS. Can't that be handled as it is? I am for it and introduced a bill for it before .the last session; but you know we retire the Judges of the Supreme Court and Court of Appeals by statute, and my idea would be the proper way would be to amend that statute and put them all on the same basis. I think that would be the proper way.

CHAIRMAN ARNALL. All right.

MR. HARRIS. Mr. Chairman, there is one thing, Mr. Lovejoy's committee report, report of Sub-committee Number 3, on utility property owners. Several of them have called it to my attentiongot them a little excited. It is in 2-5001, Paragraph III, of that Article. In rewriting the uniformity and classification proposition it says, "All taxation shall be uniform upon the same class of subjects within the territorial limits of the authority levying the tax. Classes of subjects for taxation of property shall consist of tangible property and one or more classes of intangible personal property including money. The General Assembly shall have the power

RECORDS OF CONSTITUTIONAL COMMISSION

197

to classify property including money for taxation, and to adopt different rates and different methods for different classes of such property." The word "intangible" was left out there, which caused a little apprehension. It says they could classify intangible property in one or more classes of intangible, and the next sentence says they can classify property. Now I want to move to insert just above the word "property," in the last sentence, "to classify intangible property." I think that is in harmony with the sentence right above it anyway and clarifies it. That is on page 12.
MR. GROSS. You are clarifying the original Constitution. Mr. Lovejoy made no change there at all. The original Constitution says, ''The General Assembly shall have the- power to classify property including money for taxation."
MR. HARRIS. Is that copied from it?
CHAIRMAN ARNALL. Yes.
MR. GROSS. It is all right to clarify it, I think it should be.
MR. HARRIS. I think that is what it means, but some of them are apprehensive and some of these folks are right technical. I think that is what the paragraph really means, but so there can't be any argument, I would like to make a motion that it be clarified by inserting the word "intangible" in front of the word "property."
MR. ATKINSON. Won't that keep you from classifying tangible property?
MR. HARRIS. I think the above there takes care of property.
CHAIRMAN ARNALL. Is th~re any discussion? In other words, the gentleman moves that this Policy Committee recommend to the full Commission that it amend the article, section and paragraph, to which reference is made by doing away-
MR. HARRIS. By inserting the word "intangible" in the last sentence of that paragraph, so as to give them authority to fix different classes of intangible property.
CHAIRMAN ARNALL. Between the words "classify" and "property"?
MR. HARRIS. Yes, insert just before the word "property" the word. "intangible."
CHAIRMAN ARNALL. Is there objection? The Chair hears none

198

RECORDS OF CONSTITUTIONAL COMMISSION

and this Policy Committee will so recommend.
MR. HARRIS. I just want to give anybody time to check it.
MR. LOVEJOY. I am not certain that is exactly what Roy wants to do. It is certainly not limiting purely to the power of classifying intangible property, because we authorize classification of tangible and intangible in another.
MR. GROSS. That is taken care of in the first paragraph.
MR. LOVEJOY. I know, but I am not certain that inserting that word-
MR. ATKINSON. That is a dangerous thing to fool with.
MR. GROSS. All taxation shall be uniform. There shall be two classes, tangible and intangible, but on intangible property the Legislature has the right to classify it.
CHAIRMAN ARNALL. That is the way the law is.
MR. GROSS. It clarifies it, what Roy says.
CHAIRMAN ARNALL. Grady, you see any objection to that?
MR. HEAD. No, sir.
MR. HARRIS. The first sentence says they can divide property.
CHAIRMAN ARNALL. You can't classify tangible property. You can classify intangible in different categories for tax purposes.
MR. GROSS. And that is what his amendment does, it just clarifies it.
MR. HARRIS. It might be better, instead of putting intangible there, to put in the word "intangible" just before the word "property," the last word in the paragraph, because that says "The General Assembly shall have the power to classify property including money for taxation, and to adopt different rates and different methods for different classes of such property," might put "intangible property."
MR. LOVEJOY. You want it to include both? You have to come to the facts. They have one system for tangible and another system for intangible. You don't want to defeat that.
MR. HARRIS. No, sir. That is what we want, we want it unifonn on tangible and have different rates for intangible.

RECORDS OF CONSTITUTIONAL COMMISSION

199

MR. LOVEJOY. I think it means that now. I suggest, for instance, you can't have but one class of tangible property. "Classes of subjects for taxation of property shall consist of tangible property"one class-"and one or more classes of intangible personal property including money."
MR. HARRIS. Read on a little further. It seems in conflict.
MR. LOVEJOY. "The General Assembly shall have the power to classify property-"
MR. GROSS. It should be, "classify intangible property."
MR. LOVEJOY. If you want to class your real estate in one class, I think you better think about it.
MR. HARRIS. Since thinking about it~ it may be that to put the word "intangible" down there before property, "to fix the different rates and different methods on intangible property."
MR. GROSS. I see what Mr. Lovejoy is talking about.
MR. LOVEJOY. I suggest this, that some thought be given to your idea and bring it in writing after you think it over, because you don't want to defeat the right-
MR. HARRIS. I withdraw the motion and we will take it up.
CHAIRMAN ARNALL. Mr. Harris withdraws his motion and begs leave to submit a new one at a later date.
MR. HARRIS. Yes, sir.
CHAIRMAN ARNALL. Is there objection? The Chair hears none. Now, Pat, is there any other policy matter?
MR. McCUTCHEN. That is all.
CHAIRMAN ARNALL. I thought we had a lot of business.
MR. HARRIS. I will tell you what I had in mind on the Courts.
CHAIRMAN ARNALL. I am anxious for us to listen attentively to what Roy is going to say about the Courts because I have had quite a bit of misgiving about what we recommended.
MR. HARRIS. Since studying the language we adopted with reference to certiorari on the Supreme Court-we were hitting at the rule the Supreme Court has which I am told by some of the Justices they do not follow strictly, but under that rule it would be almost impossible to certiorari a case unless the State was a party,

200

RECORDS OF CONSTITUTIONAL COMMISSION

or the State or the people generally had in interest in the suit. That was one of the things that I was striking at, and we may have gone too far. I think the Supreme Court ought to change that rule somewhat, and I am not familiar enough with the practice or had enough experience to know, I am in position I don't know, but what we have got probably messed the Supreme Court up. What I would like to do is move that we recommend to the full Commission this, in effect, be done: That the two divisions be done away with by the Court of Appeals; that the Court of Appeals be increased to seven so that they could not be divided, to avoid any split decisions; require that all decisions be by a full bench. That-as we have already recommended, the full Commission-that there be seven members of the Supreme Court; and that we leave the rule in regard to certiorari stand as it is in the present Constitution; and that we eliminate from the Constitution any reference to the Supreme Court the present discretion for them to divide in two sections and to decide cases, so as they will be required to decide by a full bench. Of course they never have, and there will be no question about it. And I find out, since I began to study it, the only reason the Court of Appeals sits in two divisions is because of an Act of the Legislature which requires it. I think that will probably remedy the thing we were striking at, and probably save us from running into a lot of confusion that we might run into.
MR. ATKINSON. Suppose one of the Judges is sick?
MR. HARRIS. There is a provision, I think, that takes care of that, and I don't mean to say that we should have seven men sitting. Now I would like to move, Mr. Chairman, that that be adopted as the sense of this Commission, and that the Chairman appoint someone, the Attorney General or some member of the Court, or someone, to draft that, redraft those two sections to carry out that, and have that in shape to present to the full Committee with a recommendation that it be adopted.
CHAIRMAN ARNALL. Is there any discussion?
MR. GROSS. Let me ask the Speaker one question.
JUDGE MacINTYRE. I am not a member of this Committee.
CHAIRMAN ARNALL. We wanted you in here to talk to it.
MR. HARRIS. We want you to participate.
JUDGE MacINTYRE. As I stated before, you have to bear in mind,

RECORDS OF CONSTITUTIONAL COMMISSION

201

as I stated to Mr. Harris, 1 realize, 1 practiced law to some extent and 1 ran into conflicts occasionally, of course, but some member1 am not at liberty, he is not a member of our Court, 1 might say he is a man whose opinion I respect very highly-made this suggestion. I simply pass it to you for your consideration, if any. You have to bear in mind, as I stated up here before, that the Court of Appeals, evidently by Constitution, was intended for a relief court, because they did not limit the number of Judges or the division, the Legislature. It can have four divisions or ten divisions if the work requires it. If they had two thousand cases, the Court would have to have some provision made. It has to be elastic-and we have at the present time about twice as many cases as the Supreme Court-but be that as it may, I throw out this suggestion to you gentlemen, this was made to me-it did not originate with me, but they made it, the gentleman who made it, 1 am not at liberty to say. He did not tell me not to disclose his name, but I am not at liberty to disclose it. He is a lawyer-that the Court of Appeals be increased to eight, I believe, in other words, and divided in two divisions, one sitting as a criminal division alone and the other sitting as a civil division alone, and the Chief Judge be required to change the criminal division within a specified time-one year, or two years, or six months, whatever you want-then that might relieve the work of the Court to such an extent that they could give the proper consideration. In other words, the five Judges-that would eliminate your proposition of a split court-but they would only consider civil cases, and the three Judges consider criminal cases, but the Chief Judge be required to appoint new Judges on the criminal division. And of course the Judges would have to be interchangeable, and that might in some way take care of it. I simply pass that on. I am not at liberty, but he is a man who I have great confidence in, and if I could mention the name I think the Commission would have confidence in him. However, as I stated to this Commission, as long as the cases stay under five hundred, if the Court of Appeals has a chance to sit as a whole, speaking for myself, I would vote to sit as a whole, but if it runs up abnormally high, up to eight hundred or a thousand, of course you can't give them proper consideration, and we would have to wait until the Legislature meets to get relief. That might be a good idea.'1 don't know, but I simply give you that suggestion-and the gentleman who gave it to me. You would then avoid your split decision and criminal division of three. Maybe you say three is not enough. I am a lawyer, and I have been all down the line. Say, well, my case is decided by three Judges. For

202

RECORDS OF CONSTITUTIONAL COMMISSION

years the Supreme Court decided by three judges. So after all it is a question of what is in it, of what particular number the entity happens to be. I simply throw that out.
CHAIRMAN ARNALL. Judge, particularly, I wanted to ask you this question, with the indulgence of the Committee. If you have seven Judges on the Court of Appeals, that is adding one judge, and the law requires the entire court to pass upon every case, would you be able, under that situation, based on the number of cases you now have, to keep reasonably well abreast of your work?
JUDGE MacINTYRE. The number of cases they had last year, I said I would vote for the Court to sit as a whole, but next year it may jump up. When I came on the Court they had over eight hundred cases. Last year they had between four and five hundred. You see what I mean?
CHAIRMAN ARNALL. Here's what Speaker Harris is anxious to do. He takes the position that the thing we ought to do in Georgia is to do all we can from the standpoint of passing wise laws, even in the statute or Constitution, to strengthen our Appellate Court, so that when litigants and lawyers try their cases they will get what they consider a good decision, based on the law, and adequately prepared and adequately heard. Now we are pleased with our Court now; there is no criticism of the Court, except we are con- stantly trying to improve the judicial process, which is proper. Now most of the complaint in Georgia has come about, as I believe, by reason of the fact that the Court of Appeals has been forced to sit in two divisions; and a number of lawyers and litigants can't understand why they should lose a cause by two votes out of six. You understand it, and I understand it, but a lot of people can't. Now if we, under the amendment we adopted here some while ago adding one more J.udge to the Supreme Court, make it review every case that came out of the Court of Appeals, in my judgment-and I think Roy, after he has considered it, is rather inclined to that view, that is what prompts him now-in my judgment we will weaken the Court of Appeals instead of helping it because all we will make of the Court of Appeals is an intermediate court, and when a man decides his case, he knows he is going to get reviewed right away; therefore he is just a reviewing court.
JUDGE MacINTYRE. I overlooked something. The idea of the gentleman to whom I referred, his idea was that eight Judges, as I suggest that he suggested, three in the criminal division and five in

RECORDS 0' CONSTITUTIONAL COMMISSION

263

the civil division, and then requiring the Chief Judge to switch the criminal division once a year or whatever period you wanted to, and then now allow certioraries. That is his idea, I submit it to you making it a final court.

CHAIRMAN ARNALL. I want to discuss that proposal in a minute. Now, Judge, we are anxious, every man here wants to help the Court every way we can. We don't want to hamstrini the courts, or impede them, or weaken them; we want to build them up. Now under our procedure that we have adopted thus far, in hitting at an evil in the Court of Appeals which is created by law, the two divisions, we have added another Judge, not to the Court of Appeals, but to the Supreme Court, and required it to review every case by certiorari, which means that you have made just a stop station for your Court of Appeals, and it is not a court of any finality. Therefore, instead of helping the situation, I am afraid, and Roy is afraid, that we are going" to encumber our judicial process rather than straighten it out. Now another ridiculous thing to me, you can't tell a layman why you should have seven Judges on the Supreme Court and six Judges on the Court of Appeals; you can't explain why you should have a different system of procedure in each Court. Now the suggestion that Roy makes would do this, it would have the Conrt of Appeals function exactly like the Supreme Court. It would have seven Judges on each Court, so that you would not have split decision or two lines of authority in Georgia. You would still maintain your right of certiorari in the shape it is now, not an absolute right, but a right of certiorari to be reviewed, that is, to entertain or not to entertain; you would still have the right in the Court of Appeals to certify questions to the Supreme Court; you would increase the dignity of the Court of Appeals; when you lost a case in the Court of Appeals it would not be by two votes, it would be by a majority of the Count. And by starting out on that premis~, assuming the work in the C~urt does not get out of hand, and that is a question, but I think we can dignify the Court of Appeals and help definitely that Court into the position of esteem which rightfully it deserves. And in doing that we will likewise treat it as a supreme court, as a final court, except in cases of certiorari; and we won't interfere with its operation or the operation of the Supreme Court. Now that is Roy's proposal ana it has a lot of merit to me. Now the other proposal that Judge MacIntyre makes

204

RECORDS OF CONSTITUTIONAL COMMISSION

JUDGE MacINTYRE. It did not originate with me, I am passing it on.
CHAIRMAN ARNALL. The other proposal Judge MacIntyre conveys to us, not as his own proposal but as a suggestion that has been made-
JUDGE MacINTYRE. As I say, the gentleman that made it, I have a great deal of confidence in him, and if I could call his name, every member of the Commission would have.
CHAIRMAN ARNALL. The proposal the Court of Appeals be increased to eight Judges, that the Supreme Court be left as it is.
MR. LOVEJOY. May I ask one question right there? In submitting that plan, suppose you designate a Court of Criminal Appeals and a Court of Civil Appeals. You have two Courts, one of Civil Appeals and one of Criminal Appeals in that plan.
CHAIRMAN ARNALL. Now if you added the two Judges you would have eight, then you would have three of the Judges on the Criminal Division, and you would have five on the Civil Division, then you could only lose by-
MR. HARRIS. On the Criminal Appeals, you get back to the same two-judge situation.
CHAIRMAN ARNALL. That is right. and even if the Chief Judge sits on the panel. you have got a four division, that would only be half of four. Is there any objection to this motion, that a special committee on appellate composition and procedure be appointed, consisting of the Speaker of the House, President of the Senate. Judge MacIntyre, Judge Grice and the Attorney General?
JUDGE MacINTYRE. Let's put one lawyer on there to hear Wm talk.
MR. AT;"K'- :r\NSON. I am ready to vote now.
JUDGE MacINTYRE. Here is the point, I have no pet theories about it.
CHAIRMAN ARNALL. You see what I am trying to get over to you, what I want you to get over to the Court of Appeals and the Supreme Court, that every man. including the Speaker of the House-
JUDGE MacINTYRE. I have no pet theories about it.
CHAIRMAN A~ALL.-is anxious to help the Court.

RECORDS OF CONSTITUTIONAL COMMISSION

206

JUDGE MacINTYRE. I know that, even the Superior Court Judges, those now on the bench and those that are going to be on it; but suppose those cases jump up to a thousand cases. Here is what you have got to bear in mind, gentlemen, if those cases take a spurt back like they used to be. Suppose they spurt back up to one thousand cases, haven't you got to have some elasticity?
CHAIRMAN ARNALL. Gentlemen, you have the answer right there.
MR. HARRIS. I have no objection to leaving that open to the Legislature.
CHAIRMAN ARNALL. Create, Roy, your seven Judges on the Court of Appeals, with the provision the Legislature can increase it; how about that?
MR. HARRIS. That is right. You have to leave some elasticity, because it might be we would have two thousand cases here. I agree there, I agree you have to have some elasticity, and the main thing, I was afraid we went a little too far on the certiorari; and what I was trying to do was eliminate that and leave it within the discretion of the Supreme Court. And I hope somehow they will unlax a little bit on that rule 'hey have got, because unless the State is a party or there is some peculiar situation that all of the people were involved in, I don't believe under that rule you can get any-thing.
CHAIRMAN ARNALL. Under this the Judges will have more time to consider more cases.
MR. HARRIS. And getting back to the Criminal Division, you would have two right on, and after all if you are going to have five and three, it looks like you ought to have five on the criminal end, because we ought to put more value on a man's life, his liberty-it would not include capital cases-we ought to put more value on a man's liberty than on his property.
CHAIRMAN ARNALL. It leaves you in a position hard to explain.
JUDGE MacINTYRE. That is theoretically true, and that is practically true about a man's life, but there are a lot of little criminal cases that get up there for delay.
MR. HARRIS. I agree, but I have carried them up myself for the purpose of delay.
JUDGE MacINTYRE. To give my idea about the present setup: ThE"

206

"I' RECORBS CONSTITUTIONAL COMMISSION

first division is the Criminal Division, they get all the criminal cases; and the Court got together before I was on it and they agreed that the Criminal Division should take two criminal cases for every civil case, and when the criminal cases were exhausted they took a civil, but I mean from practical working the criminal' case don't take much time.
CHAIRMAN ARNALL. In practice what criminal cases are easier to handle?
JUDGE MacINTYRE. Manslaughter cases are always trouble, and if he charges manslaughter, they say he had no business charging it, and if he don't they say he should, and manslaughter always worries me.
CHAIRMAN ARNALL. Suppose you make your recommendation, Roy, so we can have it before us.
MR. HARRIS. I think everybody has the thought in mind. Instead of binding the Sub-committee, I move the Chair appoint a Subcommittee to redraft the provision with reference to the Supreme Court and Court of Appeals and submit it to the General Committee.
CHAIRMAN ARNALL. Now before doing that, in order to make progress, the Chair would like to have this expression from the Policy Committee: Number 1 : We have already authorized the creation of another Judge on the Supreme Court. The Chair is of the opinion that is wise, because it keeps down split decisions, and apparently that is what everyone agreed when we did it; so in the redrafting of the proposal we will keep seven Justices on the Supreme Court. Is there objecLion? The Chair hears none. In redrafting it we will eliminate the feature that we adopted recently which requires the Supreme Court to entertain certioraries in every case and leave it as it is. Is there objection to thl;lt? I hear none. In redrafting it we will put in a provision requiring the Supreme Court, by law, to sit as a whole Court, rather than leaving that right perm.issive to the Court. Is there any objection to that? All right, no objection. Then that disposes of the Supreme Court.
Now we come to the Court of Appeals. The Chair is of the opinion-and it is my opinion, and if anyone feels free to disagree, I am trying to state a program-the Chair is of the opinion that the Court of Appeals ought to-within the limits of its ability, its ability being judged purely on the question of volume of b\Hiness-ought to operate in the same manDer in which the Suprem.e Court oper-

RECORDS OF CONSTITUTIONAL COMMISSION

207

ates; and therefore the Chair would like to see the committee that will be appointed, if the Speaker's motion passes-
MR. HARRIS. That was the effect of it.
CHAIRMAN ARNALL. Ghc consideration to adding one other Judge to the Court of Appeals, to require the Court of Appeals to sit as an entire Court, that is to hear the cases as the Court. And let me say parenthetically that I am not familiar with procedure in the Court, the way you handled the cases back in the library and in the back; but when I was Attorney General the procedure you followed, I am not familiar with the procedure of the eminent Attorney General now in office fvllows, but I had a number of assistants, and when a question came to me, my usual policy was to take the interrogation or request for opinion, discuss it briefly with one of the assistants, and let him look up the law and render the opinion, and then I approved it. It was my opinion. Now I don't know any reason why we can't, and you can't, in the operation of the Court, leave it largely to the sole Judge to handle the case and then submit it.
JUDGE MacINTYRE. He writes it up and submits it to the other two Judges and they assent or dissent to it.
CHAIRMAN ARNALL. Now the Chair is inclined to the opinio~ if we add one other Judge on the Court of Appeals and likewise require the Court of Appeals to sit as an entire Court and decide cases as a whole, with a right in the Legislature to add an additional Judge as business might require--what is your objection to that, Mr. Lovejoy?
MR. LOVEJOY. You can add seventeen more judges, and it makes it that much harder for all of them to decide a case, Governor. I say you have to leave that open for thought because the time is going to come, I think, because it was in the past, when you have to in some way provide for hearing more cases. I don't believe adding more judges will decide more cases.
MR. HARRIS. That will cure it right now, but I think, like Mr. Lovejoy, you better leave that flexfble for the Legislature to handle by statute.
CHAIRMAN ARNALL. For the record, the suggestioll the Chair has made and those that have been agreed upon generally by this Policy Committee should he considered by the Committee in redrafting the features relating to the Supreme Court and the Cou",

208

RECORDS OF CONSTITUTIONAL COMMISSION

of Appeals. That Committee the Chair will appoint as President Gross, Speaker Harris, Judge MacIntyre, Judge Grice. The Chair is so tremendously interested in that. Is there objection to allowing the Chair to be the fifth member?
MR. HARRIS. I move he be a member.
MR. LOVEJOY. I second the motion.
CHAIRMAN ARNALL. Without objection it is so ordered.
MR. HARRIS. Is that nIl you have, Pat? Didn't we have something on George Hamilton's homestead exemption for his housing project?
CHAIRMAN ARNALL. Gentlemen, every time the Legislature passes it you tell him it has to be in the Constitution, and when you start in the Constitution you tell him it can be a statute.
MR. HARRIS. George had a round-about way, and I suggested to him he draw a provision to add, instead of having all this circuit and circumlocution of language, that he name the property in the thing, and here is what he has drawn: "Moves to amend Paragraph VII of Section II of Article VII of the Constitution of the State"-that is shown on page 13 of the report of Sub-committee Number 3 relating to homestead exemptions-"by adding there the following: Should an owner of a dwelling house on a farm who is already entitled to homest~ad exemption participate in the program ()f rural housing and obtain a new house under contract with the Local Housing Authority, he shall be entitled to receive the homestead exemption as allowance before making such contract." Under the Housing Authority scheme a man owns, well a one hundred acre farm, and the Government, before they will build him a house, requires him to deed that land to the Government; then it ceases to be his, and they build a house on it. He deeds it to the Housing Authority.
MR. GEORGE HAMILTON. May I correct that? I can tell you in a few words. He deeds one acre of the farm on which the house is built, but he does not deed the rest of the farm to the Local Housing Authority during the period of amortization; and therefore during the period of amortization he lives in a house that belongs, under the deed, to the Housing Authority, and he loses the whole exemption on the farm.
MR. GROSS. What does he get back from the Government? He

RECORDS or CONSTITUTIONAL COMMISSION

201

deeds this acre to the Federal Government?
MR. HAMILTON. No, to the Local Housing Authority.
MR. GROSS. Does he have a right to pay that off and it belongs to him?
MR. HARRIS. They hold it; he does not have a bond for title. Mr. Chairman, I move this, since George is here, I move we submit it for consideration and have it printed, and we will have an opportunity to study it.
MR. LOVEJOY. Without recommendation.
CHAIRMAN ARNALL. Is there objection? It is ordered that the matter be printed and submitted to the full Committee.
MR. HAMILTON. May I make one statement? If the Attorney General will rule as the President of the Senate says, I am perfectly willing to withdraw that.
MR. GROSS. I think it ought to be a law.
CHAIRMAN ARNALL. George, it will be printed and submitted to the full Committee, and when we have the Committee meeting if you are in town come up.
MR. ATKINSON. I want to lake up the last thing you gave me. The Constitution of the United States provides no Senator or Representative shall, during the time for which he was elected, be appointed to any civil. office under authority of the United States, which was created or the emoluments thereof shall have been increased during such term. Now my suggestion is that we add at the end of Paragraph VII the following: (That is on page 20) "Provided, however, that during the term for which he was elected no Senator or Representative shall be appointed to any civil office which has been created or the emoluments thereof increased during such term." That is just an abreviation of what the Supreme Court is.
CHAIRMAN ARNALL. Any objection?
MR. LOVEJOY. Don't you want to substitute that for the last clause? You don't want both of them, do you?
MR. ATKINSON. Well, amend the Committee's report by adding that in place of the last clause.
MR. LOVEJOY. Following the last semicolon.

210

RECO~DS OF CONSTITUTIONAL COMMISSION

MR. ATKINSON. All right. Now after the words "either house" in the eighth line of Paragraph VII of Article III, Section IV of the"Constitution, on page 25, and now known as Code Section 2:-1507, the following: "nor shall any Senator or Representative, during the tenn for which he was elected, be appointed to any civil office which has been created or the emolument thereof increased during such term." That "such tenn" is what fixes it.
CHAIRMAN ARNALL. Is there objection to the adoption of that proposal?
MR. LOVELOY. That takes the place of the language which followed the words before.
CHAIRMAN ARNALL. Without objection, it is ordered adopted as a recommendation of the Sub-committee.
Well, gentlemen, that completes the work of the Policy Committee. Now at a later date we will have a meeting of the full Committee and wind up the provisions of the Constitution.
(Whereupon the meeting was adjourned).

NOVEMBER 13, 1944
CHAIRMAN ARNALL. The meeting will come to order. Speaker Harris, I will ask you to lead us in prayer. (Prayer offered by Speaker Roy Harris).
The Assistant Secretary will call the roll. All members were present except Judge Candler, Mr. Carmichael, Mr. Durden, Mr. Gross, Mr. Holt, and Mr. Pope.
CHAIRMAN ARNALL. Lady and Gentlemen of the Commission: We have many things remaining to which our attention is required and the time is getting increasingly short. The Chair is, as I am sure each member of the Commission likewise is, anxious to expedite the deliberations to the end that we' may complete our work as quickly as possible. Is there objection to adjourning today at 1:00 o'clock for an hour at lunch? The Chair hears none, so we will set the lunch hour from 1:00 until 2 :00.
In an effort to understand the wishes of the Commission, the Chair seeks enlightenment <is to whether or not the members of the Commission are prepared to stay here for such number of days this week as are necessary to complete the work of the Commission. Is it the sense of the Commission that we will work through until we complete our atisignment during this week?

RECORDS OF CONSTITUTIONAL COMMISSION

211

JUDGE MacINTYRE. I intend to be here at every meeting san this afternoon. The Court of Appeals will be in session from 2:00 until 6 :00 and I feel I should sit with them.
CHAIRMAN ARNALL. The Chair would not in any way undertake to point out or suggest to the distinguished jurist which of the responsibilities is the greater, but the Chair is of the opinion that the work on the Constitution is of high import, and I hope that all the members of the Commission can so arrange their affairs that they can be here just as much of the time as possible.
JUDGE MacINTYRE. I hate to disagree with the Chair, but my oath and my obligation I think require me to be at the session of the Court.
CHAIRMAN ARNALL. That is a matter, of course, Judge MacIntyre, for you lo decide, and I would not undertake to have this interfere witth the duties of the members of the court, but I do think as much time as possible should be devoted to this work, and I hope you can be with us.
Without objection we will work through then and undertake t. wind up the deliberations of the Commission during this week.
The Chair, without calling names, desires to recognize a number of distinguished Georgians here today, members of the Legislature and court attaches and officials. We are glad to have you here, together with such other visitors as are present.
JUDGE SMITH. I would like to present J. H. Kennon, from Adel, Cook County.
MR. J. H. KENNON. I suppose it is in order for me to explain what I want to do right now.
CHAIRMAN ARNALL. Oh, yes.
MR. KENNON. Mr. Chairman and Gentlemen of the Commission, I am here in the interest of over half a million people in this State. It is just as well to get down to brass tacks and get through with it. I can see you are going to be crowded for lime; but first, I am here in the interest of half a million people and in opposition to the Sub-committee's report by which they have nailed the senatorial districts down to where you can't get a senatorial district. We have five counties in our senatorial district; therefore we are not getting the representation that the balance of the State is getting, and we are entitled to it. We are constitutionally approved just the same as any other county in the State. There are three districts in

212

RECORDS OF CONSTITUTIONAL COMMISSION

this State with two counties. There are six districts in this State with four counties, and there is one with five. That affects ten districts, and you have thirty-five counties. You can't run three into that, and what have you got? You have got three in each district with five left over. Taking on the other hand, or figure it the other way, everybody concedes that Fulton County, your 52d District, is large enough; I think myself it is. Therefore you have 158 counties, taking off one district you have 153. I mean you have one district. Multiply that by three. What have you got? You have got 153 counties and five left.
Now, gentlemen, we are not getting the representation that we are entitled to, and the recommendations that come in from the Sub-committee nails the head down to where you can't get one. You couldn't pass it through the House with a cannon. Now we people feel that we are not getting the proper representation, and you take it-I think I am right-the Committee had ruled that you can't have a district under ten years, every census, every time the census is taken.
MR. HARRIS. May I ask a question? Do you think the districts should be fixed in the Constitution or left where the Legislature can change?
MR. KENNON. I understand exactly that this Commission don't do anything but recommend, that is all they do. That is my interpretation of it, when we passed the resolution authorizing the Governor to appoint this Commission that the only right they had was to recommend to the Legislature.
MR. HARRIS. That is correct. I say do you think we should fix the senatorial districts in the Constitution or in the Legislature?
MR. KENNON. The Legislature is the only place you can fix it; but don't nail the thing down to where you can't get it through the Legislature.
MR. HARRIS. Now the provision that the Committee has agreed on is to fix it so the Legislature can fix the district.
MR. KENNON. How is that?
MR. HARRIS. The provision that we agreed on which we are recommending is that it be left to the Legislature to fix it.
MR. KENNON. You recommended that 52 districts, 52 senators, the number we now have-if that don't nail it down, I don't know what

RECORDS OF CONSTITUTIONAL COMMISSION

211

it does. Pardon the suggestion, but the thing the Commission should do is to say to the Legislature, "Give those people some relief who have five counties." This thing has been up here for 25 years and we have tried every way to get it, and we have always failed, and we will be here 25 more if we don't get justice. We are not getting justice. Take some counties have a senator every year, some every four years, some every six, and I have it every ten. Every ten years I get back here if my people want to send me. It is not fair. We are not getting he representation we ought to get; and for goodness sake don't nail it down to where you can't get one at all and jeopardize this many people. If this thing is analyzed to the people of Georgia, I have no doubt but what they would resent it, because the good people of this State want fair representation to every man, woman and child in Georgia.
JUDGE SMITH. What is your proposal?
MR. KENNON. My proposal is that under the conditions that you have you have got to create at least two more districts to take care of the over plus. That is the milk in the cocoanut.
CHAIRMAN ARNALL. That is to say instead of limiting the districts to 52 you propose to limit it to 54?
MR. KENNON. Fifty-four districts will take care of it, and it is not out of proportion to the Congress. Get the number of Congressmen and Senators and figure the percentage, and 54 wouldn't be out of proportion. Now we care nothing about the population. The counties are what we care for, because it takes ten years to get back here, each county. Some of them have every year, some every two years, some every four, and some every six, and it takes us ten years to get here. We don't want anything but what is right. I wouldn't be here arguing for a thing that wasn't right. What we do want is equal representation to the balance of the State.
Now I think, as I just stated, three districts in the State have got two counties; well those are in North Georgia, those three are in North Georgia, or two of them you might call Middle Georgia, Bibb and Laurens, I suppose you call Laurens middle, I don't know if you call it Middle Georgia, and the balance of them in South Georgia. We are progressive people down in South Georgia. We have our schools down there, consolidated schools built up, we have our court houses built up. We are one of the best sections of Georgia in agriculture. We can raise tobacco, com, peanuts, cotton, potatoes, cucumbers, tomatoes and anything else that we want to raise,

214

RECORDS OF CONSTITUTIONAL COMMISSION

and we do do it; therefore we need representation.
JUDGE SMITH. Would more districts make it possible to have not more than five counties in that one?
MR. KENNON. I think not, because there are five counties left over every way you count it; but there is a way. Fulton County says, "Now if you get it down to one we will take one," says that through their Senator. "We will take DeKalb out here." Good-hearted, bighearted, already have three, two annexed to them four or five years ago. Now I pass a bill creating the 53d District, I believe 52d one time and 53d the other time, passed through '42, relieving Bainbridge, which has four, taking all through and leaving three, passed the Senate. I don't think I had a single vote against it. Old Boyce Ficklin says, "I never voted for one of those in my life," but he told me standing right there, says "On your account"-I am not throwing flowers to myself-he said, "I am going to vote for this proposition because I think it is right." He voted for it. 1 passed it right in the Senate. Now, gentlemen, they see that it is just and right, and that we are not being treated right; and therefore all we are contending for is equal rights to us, the same as the others. Take Coweta up here, two. Now I can talk about Coweta County because-pardon the personal reference~my wife came from Coweta County, and I know there is one good person come out of Coweta County because I tried it for 51 years. I have not had time to check up on any more. There may be good men, 1 dare say there are. We have had one on trial here two years, a good man so far, at the end of two years and at the end of two more years I can tell you whether he is a good man or a sorry one; but if he keeps on I don't see anything but put him over on the good side. My fathe~ was born in Floyd County. 1 was born in South Georgia. Therefore I have got a big stick all over the State, and 1 can't conceive far one minute of the Legislature taking the position of, "I have got mine and I don't care anything about helping those that has not got it; 1 have got mine and I am not interested." Is that taking the right view? No.
JUDGE MacINTYRE. If you had 52 Districts in the State, could it be so arranged there would be only three counties in each Senatorial District? Could it be so arranged no district in the State would have exceeding three?
MR. KENNON. You have five over. We have got five in it now. Now50-

RECORDS OF CONSTITUTIONAL COMMISSION

215

JUDGE MacINTYRE. Under the proposition that you are advocating it could be so arranged that no senatorial district in the State would'have over three counties?
MR. KENNON. Yes, sir, that could be done. It probably might be worked on 53 some way. [t would be one county over. Not to exceed 54.
Now, gentlemen, I think I have about covered the ground, and I hope you gentlemen will take this into consideration, not nail it down to where we can't come in here and get a senatorial district. That is all I am after. You are taking the cue of our forefathers who wrote the present Constitution; therefore I have got confidence in you that you will fix this thing so all the people of this State will have equal representation. What would our forefathers think if part of the people was getting more representation than the others? Gentlemen, they would turn over in their graves, and I beg of you to fix this thing whereby we can come in here and get our equal representation. I thank you.
CHAIRMAN ARNALL. Thank you, Senator Kennon. We are glad to hear from you.
MR. FOLEY. I would like to request premission for a group of lawyers to briefly address the Commission.
CHAIRMAN ARNALL. Is there objection? The Chair hears none. Let the Chair say, for the henefit of Senator Kennon, that we are hearing from various people who have matters to bring before us at this time, and at a later time we will submit your request to the Commission for consideration.
MR. FOLEY. I present Arthur Copeland, Member of the House of Representatives, and presently Solicitor General of the Chattahoochee Judicial Circuit.
MR. COPELAND. Ladies and gentlemen. I am not going to take very much of your time in outlining the objection which the Lawyers Club of Columbus has to make with reference to the report of the revised Constitution, and that is in relation to the judicial question of divorce matters. This question arose from Muscogee County about 1939. First I will tell you what it is all about. Our Constitution, before it was amended at the last session, provided that a person had to be a resident of the State of Georgia for a period of twelve months prior to the filing of any suit for divorce. We had a case that went to the Muscogee Superior Court there in which ..

218

RECORDS OF CONSTITUTIONAL COMMISSION

officer who had been established at Fort Benning for two or three years, and he and his wife came to the parting of the ways, and he filed suit for divorce, and it was granted by the Superior -Court, and that case was taken to our Supreme Court on the jurisdictional question, and the Supreme Court very properly ruled that a member of the armed forces, being stationed on a military reservation, did not acquire jurisdiction. They were not there as a matter of their own choice, but subject to being transferred by higher authority, and that stopped any relief that the armed service people might obtain. Following that the Columbus Lawyers Club appointed a committee of several distinguished lawyers from our City, and I believe that Judge Foley was on that committee, and they made an investigation of the law, and studied some cases that had gone UF from the State of Kansas dealing on that same question, as to the constitutionality of the bill. They finally entered upon a compromise, which I believe the 1939 Legislature passed, which provided that any person who is a member of the armed forces stationed on an army post or military reservation in the State of Georgia for a period of twelve months may bring a suit for divorce in any county adjacent to that post or reservation. We opera~ed under that statute for a couple of years, or for several years, until a couple of years ago there was a con~est made on that statute, and that case went to the Supreme Court, and the Court again very promptly held that that statute was unconstitutional because it was right in the face of a constitutional provision that required the twelve months residence. So I proposed at the last General Assembly,and it passed the House and Senate, a resolution that incorporated an amendment to the constitutional provision, that is the Code Section 2-4301, and used the same language that had been in that statute. It was passed and was ratified by the last General Election in 1943. Now the Constitution Commission has seen fit to leave out, either by oversight or by intention, that amendment that had just been added to that section 2-4301.
You might say, "Why be so interested and excited over that section," and I will give it to you very briefly. Columbus and the trade area has Fort Benning. Georgia, which is one. of the largest schools of its kind in the country, and we have a good many men stationed there who are officers, and who are graduates of West Point, who make army life a lifetime career. They come from the State of Washington, and the State of New York, and the State of California and practically every other State, and they are sent from station to station and never have any permanent residence other than that

RECORDS OF CONSTITUTIONAL COMMISSION

217

from which they entered the service; and the chances are that those men never go back to their original homes from which they entered the service; so if anything happens to them or should they be so unfortunate as to wish to break their marriage, they are placed in the situation where it is practically impossible to do so. You might say they can do so by deposition in their own State, but most of you don't like depositions. I have had considerable experience and been associated with law firms handling very large commercial claims, and you can incorporate what you think is necessary in the deposition to make out your case, but subsequent to. that the defendant will file an amendment to his answer, and then you have got to have another deposition or either travel with what you have got, and the defense as a general rule can always bring witnesses on in to court, and don't have to rely on depositions. You know the effect of that; and a well contested suit, where traveling on depositions against the witnesses for the person has got practically a hopeless situation.
That is true in referenCe to divorce matters. Any soldier who might be stationed in a foreign camp that filed suit back in his home State, if for any reason his wife felt she wanted to contest it. could have witnesses appear in person and make it not impossible, but impracticable to obtain a divorce.
CHAIRMAN ARNALL. Arthur, allow me to interrupt you. What Sub-committee dealt with that particular article?
JUDGE GRICE. Number 1.
CHAIRMAN ARNALL. Judge Grice, for the enlightenment of the Chair and the Commission, was that provision omitted by oversight?
JUDGE GRICE. It was not overlooked. It was discussed in the Committee.
CHAIRMAN ARNALL. And you determined to omit it. All right. I wanted to see whether it was an oversight.
MR. COPELAND. Our local Club has appointed a committee to appear before this Commission and authorized this committee to take whatever action it saw fit to bring it squarely before the Commission and argue our point and set forth our objections. Our committee has sent telegrams to all the cities in Georgia that we recall had a post of any size-Macon, Atlanta, Savannah, Augusta, Bainbridge, Toccoa. Valdosta, Moultrie. and probably others, and Americus

218

RECORDS 01' CONSTITUTIONAL COMMISSION

should be represented probably. Well, there are others possibly that we have overlooked.
Now there are several things that enter into this. You might say offhand from a lawyer's shndpoint it is a selfish matter. I am not going to argue that. If you were to put it on that basis I would make this reply to it: It is high time the lawyers should get selfish and look after their own interests. But this is not from the standpoint of the lawyers earning money, but it is affording relief to men we think are entitled to it, the boys that come out of West Point, they are sent all over the country, to Fort Benning for a couple of years and then transferred over the country, and unless it is possible for those men to acquire jurisdiction there, they can remain married for the rest of their life and still not have a wife. Those are the things to consider. Another bad situation is that enlisted personnel are required to make an allotment to their wives, provided they are man and wife. They may have been separated ten years, the wife might be in California and the husband in Georgia, but they have still got to make that allotment for $50.00, and unfortunately a good many of the wives that I particularly have reference to now are what we can term "camp followers." We have had considerable trouble with them in our city. They will come to Columbus and stay until they get in trouble with the police there; then they leave our camp area and go to Macon, in Charlie Bloch's territory, and when they get in trouble there with the police they will probably come to Atlanta, and stay until they have trouble here; and so on. Bear in mind those women are getting $50.00 a month from these boys, and $22.00 of it is being deducted from that soldier's pay. Maybe he is having to support a woman whom he cannot live with and who doesn't deserve it. You might draw this conclusion: Why do we undertake to wash the dirty linens of citizens from other States in our State courts? To me that is a rather high minded way of looking at it. I can appreciate that angle of it, but I also want to be practical enough to realize that something should be done about it. If there were only four cases meritorious out of ten, if it was on that small a margin, I would still say let's do something about it; but I think the percentage is considerably higher.
And another reply to that is if that amendment is left in our State Constitution, Georgia wouldn't be the only State that affords that relief to the people in the armed service. The State of Kansas, on which this original statute was patterned, so affords that relief. The State of Nevada also affords that relief. And now with reference to the depositions, we have some States, two of which J

Rl:CORBS OF CONSTITUTIONAL COMMISSION

219

remember at the present time, Pennsylvania and California, where it is impossible to obtain a divorce unless there is personal appearance; unless the plaintiff appears in person they cannot obtain divorce, so that takes off your proposition of why wash the dirty linen here, that we are undertaking to look after another State's business and citizens.
Another thing I wanted to call your attention to is that we ought to place it on the same footing that we would civilians. Civilians coming from the State of California and residing in the State twelve months are entitled to sue for divorce, and let's not leave the soldiers out, let's not discriminate against them, they are entitled to consideration.
And another thing I wanted to point out to this Commission, of course it is no mandate. I don't believe in mandates. I think I am old enough that propaganda and publicity and so forth don't affect me, but the question of a mandate is something left up to the Commission and their own conscience about it, but I want to say this, this was an amendment passed in 1943 and it was ratified by the people of the State of Georgia. Now I want the Commission to consider that and ask whether or not they should undertake to leave something out of the Constitution which has been so recently ratified by the people of our State.
Unless there are some questions I am going to stop at this point. Are there any questions?
CHAIRMAN ARNALL. Anv questions, gentlemen?
MR. ATKINSON. As I understand it, the two main points in putting it back in the Constitution are, first, under the old law, although a soldier may have resided in Georgia for more than a year, if he resided on one of these camp sites, why then he couldn't sue for divorce in Georgia. Is that right?
MR. COPELAND. Would you state that again? I am not sure I followed it.
MR. ATKINSON. I think the Supreme Court held that if a soldier lived on the fort site or camp site for a year or more and that camp site was located in Georgia that that did not give the Georgia court jurisdiction.
MR. COPELAND. That is correct.
MR. ATKINSON. Because the Government moves him there, and lie couldn't exercise any choice in the chOOling of his residence?

220

RECORDS OF CONSTITUTIONAL COMMISSION

MR. COPELAND. That is correct.
MR. ATKINSON. All right, this amendment would fix it 80 that a soldier who resided in Georgia for one year could bring the suit in Georgia court, or would give the Georgia court jurisdiction?
MR. COPELAND. That is correct.
MR. Atkinson. Now if all the States were like Georgia he probably couldn't get a divorce anywhere. All right now, the next question is that under the law as it was amended, but it has been taken out, that where there was a camp site-you didn't call them camp sites, what was it you called them?
MR. COPELAND. Military reservation.
MR. ATKINSON. Where there was.a military reservation or army post that extended beyond one county, that any county over which that army post extended in part could have jurisdiction of the trial?
MR. COPELAND. That is correct. The language of it is, "adjacent to"-"may bring an action for divorce in any county adjacent to said United States Army Post or Military Reservation."
MR. ATKINSON. Why was that? Was that because some of those men did not know what county they were living in if they were living on the army post?
MR. COPELAND. That is correct, if they are living on an army post. I take this position, that if they are living on an army post that is a military reservation and is property ceded by the State to the United States Government and therefore is not a part of the county, but it is adjacent to those counties surrounding or adjoining it.
MR. ATKINSON. But really for practical purposes it is not a part of the county.
MR. COPELAND. That is correct.
MR. ATKINSON. Those are the two main questions?
MR. COPELAND. I might add further that Georgia is not letting down the gap and just saying, "Come into Georgia and get your divorce," because we are leaving in there that 12 months restriction as to residence, and you know there are any number of States that have only a three months residence requirement in order to acquire jurisdiction.
JUDGE MacINTYRE. Take Fort Benning, there may be six counties adjacent to it.

RECORDS 01' CONSTITUTIONAL COMMISSION

221

MR. COPELAND. That is possible, any county that joins.
JUDGE MacINTYRE. It did not say any county a part of which is in the reservation over which the army post is territorially extended. In other words, in the three counties over which it extended, he could bring suit in one of the three? Under your bill there might be six counties adjoining and he might bring it in anyone of the nine, six plus three. Just why should he be allowed to bring suit in the extra six? Why couldn't he be restricted to the counties whose part of the territory is incorporated?
MR. COPELAND. I can explain that this way. In Muscogee we have four terms of court a year, and under our present law it requires two verdicts by separate juries and separate terms of the court, you have to go through two terms of court. In the smaller counties of lesser population they have court only twice a year. You have still got to go through two terms of court. You can obtain a verdict in Muscogee County much quicker.
JUDGE MacINTYRE. If they said any part of the territory formerly included in Chattahoochee County or Marion County or Muscogee County, so then if you were anywhere on that post to bring suit in Chattahoochee County or Marion County or Columbus.
MR. COPELAND. Columbus or Muscogee.
JUDGE MacINTYRE. Suppose you said, "Limited to the counties a part of whose territory the post is carved out oC'? In other words name the three counties there now, or any other number of counties that might be added?
CHAIRMAN ARNALL. Judge MacIntyre is asking, as I understand, why should you say adjoining counties?
JUDGE MacINTYRE. Instead of saying counties a part of which or out of which a post has been carved, or something like that.
MR. COPELAND. I can't see that that matters or makes any difference, for the reason the counties out of which it is carved it ceased to be a part of the counties. It is ceded to the Government and then becomes Government property.
JUDGE MacINTYRE. The original part, I am talking about the three counties, a part of the land of the three counties. Now why should it extend beyond those three counties, unless it took out of part of another county?

222

RECORDS OF CONSTITUTIONAL COMMISSION

MR. COPELAND. As it stands those are the only three counties adjacent to Fort Benning.
CHAIRMAN ARNALL. In other words when you use the word "adjoining," you mean adjoining the camp and not adjoining counties?
MR. COPELAND. That is right, it has to be brought in the counties adjoining the camp. That gives them the right, if they wanted to, to go to Chattahooche or Marion or Muscogee. It says, "adjacent to or adjoining."
CHAIRMAN ARNALL. He is working on the theory that the military reservation ceases to be a part of the county.
MR. COPELAND. Judge, I might say this. There are no markers inside the military post to designate what formerly was part of one county. The soldiers on the post have no way of knowing whether it was formerly Marion, or Chattahoochee, or Muscogee. Here is the language which was deleted: "provided, that any person who has been a resident of any United States Army Post or Military Reservation within the State of Georgia for one year next preceding the filing of the petition may bring an action for divorce in any county adjacent to said United States Army Post or Military ReseI'Tation." Adjacent means adjoining the post.
CHAIRMAN ARNALL. Any further questions, gentlemen.
MR. COPELAND. Mr. Chairman, I would like to call on Mr. Charlie Bloch, who is President of the Georgia Bar Association, and also representing the delegation from Macon.
CHAIRMAN ARNALL. Is there objection to hearing from Mr. Bloch? The Chair has no desire to cut off anyone who wants to be heard about this matter, let me make that plain, but the Chair is most anxious to expedite the deliberations. We are delighted to hear from Mr. Bloch at this time, unless there is objection, but as I understand it, the whole issue that is being submitted is whether or not we will carry forward into the proposed new Constitution the amendment that was adopted in 1943, or whether we shall delete it. The Commission has at this stage of the proceeding deleted it and you are advocating that the provision be reinserted.
MR. BLOCH. I don't think I can add to what Mr. Copeland has said. I do want to make clear to the lady and gentlemen that this is not purely a Muscogee County matter. It affects some eight or

RECORDS OF CONSTITUTIONAL COMMISSION

223

ten counties in the State at present-Bibb, Richmond, Chatham, Stephens and several other.s. In view of the legislative history of the amendment in 1943, I certainly hope the lady and gentlemen of the Commission will see fit to carry it forward into the new Constitution.
CHAIRMAN ARNALL. Is there any further discussion of that request?
MR. FOLEY. I want to deny my friend's assertion that I drew that original bill. I don't want Judge Grice to think that I tried to amend the Constitution by legislative act.
MR. COPELAND. Judge Foley, I apologize. I thought you were OI that committee. I know it was composed of distinguished attorneys from Columbus and I thought you were on there.
CHAIRMAN ARNALL. The Chair has made a notation of that matter, and at the proper time it will be submitted and your request will be submitted to the full Commission. Now is there any further hearing to be had on any proposal. Charlie Bloch, you had a real estate matter that you wanted to bring up. Is there objection to hearing from Mr. Bloch?
MR. BLOCH. Mr. Chairman, on this matter I don't appear as President of the Georgia Bar Association. This i& a matter with which the Bar Association has nothing to do whatever. It is purely a personal relationship. I know the difficulties under which this Commission is laboring, particularly as to time, and I am not going to take up the time of the Commission to go into the suggestions which are embodied in the pamphlets which are now being handed out by the Assistant Secretary. The suggestions of the Georgia Association of Real Estate Boards to your Commission on the following subheads are: first, State Ad Valorem Tax; second, Limitations on the Power to Levy; and third, Creation of Boards of Tax Adjustments and Appeals. In a nutshell, the State Association of Real Estate Boards is asking that you include in the Constitution a provision that the State shall have no right to tax real estate ad valorem. As the Constitution now is, the State has the right to levy ad . valorem tax of five mills on real estate. We ask in these suggestions, which are urged rather thoroughly, that that be eliminated; that the ad valorem tax be relegated to the counties and municipalities, with an overall limitation of thirty-five mills on the powers of the subdivisions of the State to levy taxes; and thirdly, that you pro-

224

RECORDS OF CONSTITUTIONAL COMMISSION

vide for the creation of a Board of Tax Adjustment and Appeals. I repeat that I am not going to take your time now to discuss
those phases of our suggestions in detail, but I do ask that sometime during your deliberations that you read these suggestions carefully, and if, after you have read them, your Chairman would like for me to come back and answer any questions that may occur to you, I will be glad to do so.
CHAIRMAN ARNALL. Charlie, I want to ask one question, if I may do so. If you eliminate State ad valorem tax, then how would the State collect any tax from absentee owners of realty in this State?
MR. BLOCH. That question bothered us considerably, Governor, and there was a suggestion made that it not apply to absentee owners, that the absentee owners be taxed. I was somewhat bothered about the constitutionality of that, whether it would be a valid constitutional distinction, and therefore I did not discuss it in these suggestions. I do point out we would have to be careful. I say "we"; the Commission would have to be careful with respect to tax on utilities, and I specifically point out we are not carrying the ball for public utilities. I point out what effect the proposed amendment might have. You might want to safeguard that too.
We point out in this brief, if you may call it that, just what it would mean to the State of Georgia in dollars and cents, what percentage of the State revenue is raised by ad valorem tax and how that is supplied.
MR. GOWEN. Has your Board given any consideration to how this thirty-five mills limit would be divided between cities and counties?
MR. BLOCH. Yes, you will find that thoroughly discussed. I could very readily cite, under the charter of the City of Macon we have a limitation of fifteen mills. Of course there are restrictions on the county rate, but they are not so restricted, though we would have the practical problem of the city still repaying that fifteen mills, then there would be only twenty left to the county. That is taken care of.
CHAIRMAN ARNALL. Thank you, Mr. Bloch. Does any of the delegation from Macon and Savannah desire to be heard?
MR. COPELAND. We have a telegram from Savannah-they are in accord.

RECORDS OF CONSTITUTIONAL COMMISSION

225

CHAIRMAN ARNALL. That is on the jurisdictional matter of divorce?
MR. COPELAND. Yes, sir.
CHAIRMAN ARNALL. Now, with the permission of the Commission, we are about to close down on any other hearings and Mr~ Fortson desires to be heard.
MR. BEN FOHTSON. Yes, sir, I would like to be heard.
CHAIRMAN ARNALL. We appreciate the attendance of you gentlemen on the deliberations of the Commission, and your suggestions will receive consideration by the Commission.
MR. FORTSON. Mr. Chairman and Lady and Gentlemen Of the Commission: I have handed the Secretary a short, pencil-written suggestion as to a change in the Constitution which is very simple; yet it does a great deal. I think that it could mean much for this State. I would like to call Jour attention to one fact. Paragraph I of Article I, Section I, states: "Origin and foundation of government. All government, of right, originates with the people, is founded upon their will only, and is instituted solely for the good of the whole. Public officers are the trustees and servants of the people, and, at all times, amenable to them." That of course was in the old Constitution and is carried forward in the Revised Constitution. My suggestion is simply this, on page 24, Article V, Exec:-' utive Department, Section I, Paragraph I, the fourth line, beginning with the word "after," to delete that entire sentence through the word "thereof," and these are the words: "After qualifying for a four-year term, he shall not be eligible to be reelected for the next succeeding four-year term or any part thereof." My idea is this. No other office holder in the State constitutional office holders is limited by law not to succeed himself. The people have not been barred or limited in any way the right to change the man they want for the office. You are setting up a democratic government, you are revising the Constitution for the people themselves to decide upon and to adopt. It seems to me that in all reason and in all right we can't go before the people, or you can't submit to the people a Constitution revised to limit them in their right to choose the man they want. That is democratic. That is right, and I believe firmly that the people of this State will adopt it if you see fit to strike these words. I am not going to take up any more of your. time. I think you are all familiar with what it does. The principle

226

RECORDS OF CONSTITUTIONAL COMMISSION

does one thing, it gives the people the right, without any limitation, to choose the man they want for the highest office in the great State of Georgia. Thank you.
CHAIRMAN ARNALL. Thank you, Mr. Fortson. Any questions? If not, the Chair will put your proposal on the agenda and when we reach it it will be brought to the attention of the Commission. Thank you so much.
CHAIRMAN ARNALL. Now does the Chair hear a motion that we proceed? I am apprehensive that if we continue, at each meeting, to hear suggestions, without going on with our work, that we will fall short of completing it. The Chair would like to see a motion carried by the Commission, or some discussion on the limiting or restricting of hearings now and let us proceed with our work, unless the Commission decides by appropriate action to allow people to be heard. I am very anxious to get along with the work. What is the sense of the Commission about that?
JUDGE MacINTYRE. Any hearings from outsiders, or people not members of the Commission?
CHAIRMAN ARNALL. That is right.
MR. LOVEJOY. Mr. Chairman, I move we discontinue any public discussions or hearings except in writing. If anybody wants to submit anything, let them submit it in writing.
CHAIRMAN ARNALL. Is there a second to that motion?
JUDGE GRICE. I second it.
CHAIRMAN ARNALL. Any objection? Without objection it is ordered adopted. Now, Mr. Assistant Secretary and Members of the Commission, the Chair would like to seek enlightenment from the Assistant Secretary as to what remains yet to be done. The Chair understands that these proposals that have come in here this morning will receive the attention of the Commission. The Chair under$tands the recommendations of the Policy Committee that were made at a meeting heretofo::-e held will receive the consideration of the Commission; now, other than those items, what else remains, Mr. Assistant Secretary, to be done?
MR. McCUTCHEN. There are a few other suggestions in writing. That is all that is left except anything the Commission might want to bring up.

RECORDS OF CONSTITUTIONAL COMMISSION

227

CHAIRMAN ARNALL. Without objection, we will now turn our consideration to receiving a report of the Policy Committee to this Commission, which was composed of the Chairman, Speaker Harris, President Gross, Justice Grice, Judge MacIntyre, General Head, Mr. Lovejoy, Judge Atkinson and Mr. Carmichael. The report follows a meeting held of the Policy Committee on October 10, 1944. Is there any objection to consideration of the report of that Com~ mittee at this time? Does~very Member of the Commission have a copy of the Policy Committee's report?
MR. HEAD. Mr. Chairman, before you get into the subject of the Policy Committee's report, I want to call the attention of the Commission to the act recently passed by Congress known as the War Mobilization and Reconversion Act of 1944. Under the language of that Act, Section 401, it is proposed that there is going to be considerable money expended by the Federal Government at the conclusion of the present war. The proposal is that the cities, municipalities, counties and States that participate in the funds that are. furnished by the Federal Guvernment will receive those in the nature of a loan or an advancement, particularly those funds that are used for preliminary surveys, estimates, and matters of that nature, for a period of five years. At the termination of that five-year period those funds would have to be repaid with interest at 2-112%. I have had some considerable correspondence with membe:rs of Congress and with the members of the Senate from this State about the language of this bill. It was brought to my attention too late and we couldn't succeed ill getting the language modified-to the extent that we would have liked to have it modified. I am now concerned with the proposition, if we retain the language on the limitation of county and municipal debts in the proposed Constitution as we now have it, there are going to be many COUllties, municipalities and towns in this State that will not be able to participate under the provisions and terms of the War Mobilization and Reconversion Act of 1944. I call this to your attention at this time because I want the Commission to consider, and consider seriously, the language of the War Mobilization and Reconversion Act, the Conference Committee's Report, and the language of our Constitution, and that we make some provision so that we will not bar the counties and municipalities of this State under the terms of this bill. I don't consider that this is the right time or the right place to go into this particular feature of the Constitution, but I wanted to call it to your attention and to the attention of the Com-

228

RECORDS OF CONSTITUTIONAL COMMISSION

mission, and later I propose to insist that we make some changes and some modification in the language of our Constitutional provision with reference to debts as applied to counties and municipalities.
CHAIRMAN ARNALL. Thank you, General Head. The Chair will place that on the-agenda and at the proper time it will be considered.
l\lR LOVEJOY. May I ask General Head to put in writing and present to the Commission the language which he thinks will meet what he has in mind.
MR. HEAD. I will be glad to do that.
CHAIRMAN ARNALL. Without objection we will pass to the report of the Policy Committee. The Policy Committee recommends that Article II, Section II, Paragraph I, relating to a wife's separate estate be placed in an appropriate article, proabbly one of the articles dealing with property. The Assistant Secretary will read Paragraph I, Section II, Article III.
MR. LOVEJOY. May I ask this, that is automatically going to be considered by our Editing Committee or whatever you call it, is it not?
-CHAIRMAN ARNALL. That is right.
MR. LOVEJOY. Why is there any use of our saying anything about it when the Editing Committee will give it attention?
CHAIRMAN ARNALL. Is there objection on the part of the Commission to adopting Paragraph I of the Policy Committee's report? That is, will the full Commission adopt that recommendation that the provision be put in an appropriate place? It is already in the Constitution. Is there objection? Without objection it is so ordered.
The same thing is true of the next recommendation, that Article III, Section XII, Paragraphs I through V inclusive, Insurance Companies, that this particular provision in these paragraphs be deleted from the Article dealing with the Legislature and placed in the Constitution at an appropriate place, or else in a separate article. Is there objection to that recommendation being adopted? Without objection it is so ordered. That merely relates to arrangement, those two provisions.
Number 3. Article III, Section VII, Paragraph XXVIII.

RECORDS OF CONSTITUTIONAL COMMISSION

229

MR. LOVEJOY. I think it is Paragraph XXI, if you will check that, in the Revised Constitution.
CHAIRMAN ARNALL. It is Paragraph XXIII in the old Constitution. The present provision is as follows: "No provision in this Constitution for a two-thirds vote of both houses of the General Assembly, shall be construed to waive the necessity for the signature of the Governor, as in any other case, except in the case of the twothirds vote required to override the veto, and in the case of prolongation of a session of the General Assembly."
The proposed new paragraph would read as follows: "No provision in this Constitution for a two-thirds vote of both houses of the General Assembly shall be construed to waive the necessity for the signature of the Governor, as in any other case, except in the case of the two-thirds vote required to override the veto, to submit Constitutional Amendments, and in the case of prolongation of a session of the General Assembly." The amendment is simply this, that it does away with the right of the Governor, if the right now exists, to veto a proposed Constitutional Amendment. Is there any discussion of that provision? Is there objection to the adoption of the provision? The only change being that we make it plain in the new paragraph that the Governor does not have the right to veto a proposed Constitutional Amendment. Is there objection? Without objection it is ordered adopted.
Paragraph IV of the Policy Committee report. Article III, Section IV, Paragraph VI. Eligibility, appointments forbidden; recommendation that the following paragraph be substituted for the paragraph appearing in the Revised Constitution of the report of the Sub-committee Number 5. Now this is a proposed new paragraph: "Eligibility, appointments forbidden. No person holding a military commission or other appointment, or office, having any emolument, or compensation annexed thereto, under this State, or the United States, or either of them, except Justices of the Peace and officers of the militia, nor any defaulter for public money or for any legal taxes required of him shall have a seat in either house; nor shall any Senator or Representative during the term for which he was elected, be appointed to any civil office which has been created or emolument thereof increased during such term; nor shall any Senator, or Representative, after his qualification as such, be elected by the General Assembly, or appointed by the Governor, either with or without the advice and consent of the Senate, to any office or appointment having any emolument an- \

230

RECORDS OF CONSTITUTIONAL COMMISSION

nexed thereto, during the Hme for which he shall have been elected, unless he shall first resign his seat, provided, however, that during the term for which he was elected no Senator or Representative shall be oppointed to any civil office which has been created or the emoluments thereof increased during such term."
MR. LOVEJOY. The last three lines is a duplication. What we meant to do was to add a provision that Senators or Representatives couldn't be appointed or elected by the General Assembly to an office that was created during their term, and I think if you will take this paragraph that is printed and just add to it, "Nor shall any Representative or Senator be appointed to any civil office which has been created or the emoluments thereof increased during such term," that will not make a repetition, and will take care of that situation. In other words, we were trying to put in this section the same provision that is in the Constitution of the United States.
MR. HARRIS. If you strike the last four lines on the first page?
MR. LOVEJOY. Wouldn't this be the simplest way, add to the present language the proviso in the last three lines of the proposed paragraph?
CHAIRMAN ARNALL. So that when amended it will read as follows:
MR. LOVEJOY. I am not reading what is already in there.
CHAIRMAN ARNALL. What I am trying to do is get you to read from the present Constitution and from the last three lines of the Committee proposal a completed paragraph to express what we are trying to express.
MR. LOVEJOY. (Reads) "No person holding a military commission, or other appointmen!, or office, having any emolument, or compensation annexed thereto, under this State, or the United States or either of them, except Justices of the Peace and officers of the militia, nor any defaulter for public money, or for any legal taxes required of him, shall have a seat in either house; nor shall any Senator or Representative, after his qualification as such, be elected by the General Assembly or appointed by the Governor, either with or without the advice and consent of the Senate, to any office or appointment having any emolument annexed thereto, during the time for which he shall have been elected."
Now the proviso or the suggestion I made was that you add, "Dur-

RECORDS OF CONSTITUTIONAL COMMISSION

231

ing the term for which he was elected no Senator or Representative shall be appointed to any civil office which has been created or the emoluments thereof increased during such term."
CHAIRMAN ARNALL. You heard the reading of the proposed paragraph. Is there objection to its adoption? Any discussion? Without objection it is ordered adopted as read.
Number 5. Article III, Section VII, Paragraph XXVII. Civil Service. The Policy Committee recommends that the attached proposed article on Civil Service and preference to veterans be submitted to the full Commission as a base for its consideration, and that this committee go on record as favoring a proposition for a system of merit and fitness for Sbte employees. The Assistant Secretary will pass out a copy to the members of the Commission. There are one or two minor changes. Now, Mr. Assistant Secretary, will you read the proposal? Paragraph I.
MR. McCUTCHEN. (Reads) "Paragraph I. There shall be a nonsalaried State Personnel Board composed of three citizens of this State of known interest in the improvement of public administration and in the impartial selection of efficient personnel on the basis of merit and fitness. The members of the State Personnel Board shall be appointed by the Governor. The first members shall be appointed for terms of three, five, and seven years, respectively, to be designated by the Governor, and all subsequent appointments shall be for a period of seven years, except in case of an unexpired term. Neither the Governor nor any other State employee shall be a member of the State Personnel Board."
CHAIRMAN ARNALL. Now read Paragraph II and the rest of it.
MR. McCUTCHEN. (Reads) "Paragraph II. The State Personnel Board shall have jurisdiction over all positions in the State Service except those positions filled by popular elections; heads of general departments of State Government; all persons in the Military and Naval forces of the State; members of Advisory Councils, Boards, and Commissions, or similar bodies; part-time employees rendering professional services, or serving ex-officio and performing incidental duties; judges and other employees of courts of records; members and employees of the legislature; positions occupied by all employees and teachers in county and municipal school systems and in educational institutions not reformatory or charitable in character; and not to exceed six other exempt positions for each elected State administrative officer in the whole of his depart~

232

RECORDS OF CONSTITUTIONA.L COMMISSION

ment, or not to exceed two other exempt positions in the whole of each general State Department, Board or Commission headed by an appointed official.
"Paragraph III. The State Personnel Board shall classify all positions in the State Service except exempt positions as specified in Paragraph II, according to their respective duties and responsibilities; fix rates of compensation for positions in the classified service; approve or disapprove disbursements for all personal services; determine by examination on the basis of merit and fitness the qualifications of all candidates for positions in the classified service, provided that the permanent status of employees under any existing State merit system which substantially conforms to the standards established by the State Personnel Board be preserved, and incumbents of positions not heretofore under the merit system who have held such positions and performed satisfactorily the duties of said positions for a period of one year or more immediaately preceding the effective date of this examination shall be given permanent status upon passing a qualifying examination. The State Personnel Board. No removals from or demotions in the classilations covering all personnel transactions; and regulate all conditions of employment in the classified service. No person shall be appointed to or promoted in the classified service who has not been certified as so qualified for such appointment or promotion by the State Personnel Board. No removals from or demotions in the classfled service shall be made for political or religious considerations."
"Paragraph IV. The administration of the powers of the State Personnel Board shall be vested in a state Personnel Director whose position shall be included in the classified service, and who shall be selected by and responsible to the State Personnel Board.
"Paragraph V. The legislature shall establish an actuarially sound retirement system for persons holding positions in the classified service.
"Paragraph VI. Adequate appropriations shall be made by the legislature to carry out the purposes of this provision. There is hereby continually appropriated from the State Treasury suflident funds to pay the salaries and expenses of the employees of the State Personnel Board, and the expenses of the members of the Board.
"Section II. Paragraph I. Any Civil Service plan, agency, commission, board, organization or administration that will be established or is already in force in the State Government of Georgia or any political sub-division thereof shall provide the following

RECORDS OF CONSTITUTIONAL COMMISSION

233

preference for all persons honorably discharged from the anned forces of the United States after service with such forces during the period of a war:
"Five points shall be added to any passing earned rating that may be achieved in an examination for entrance into the civil service by an honorably discharged veteran, or by the widow of a veteran separated from the armed forces under honorable conditions provided she was the wife of such veteran before his separation from the armed forces and provided she has not remarried.
"Persons who have established veterans status as defined above and who, in addition, established by official records of the United States Government the present existence of a service connected disability and because of disability are entitled to pension compensation or disability allowance under laws, as now exist, and qualified wives of such persons who are themselves not qualified because of service connected disability shall have ten points added to any passing earned rating they achieve in an examination for entrance into the civil service."
CHAIRMAN ARNALL. Now, gentlemen of the Commission, this recommendation from the Policy Committee comes as a proposal and has been read to be utilized as a basis for consideration by the Commission of a merit system for State employees. The Chair, at the outset, would like to seek the general idea and opinion on the Board, on whether or not this Commission favors a type of merit system or civil service for State employees. I believe that would be proper, because if we do, we can undertake to perfect a measure; if we don't, the perfection of the measure would be of no purpose or avail. Is there objection to inquiring as to whether or not the Commission is in favor of a merit system or civil service for State employees?
MR. HARRIS. I move the Commission go on record as being in favor of a merit or civil service system for employees.
CHAIRMAN ARNALL. Mr. Harris moves the Commission go on record as favoring a system of merit.
MR. LOVEJOY. I second the motion.
CHAIRMAN ARNALL. Mr. Lovejoy seconds the motion. Is there any discussion? Is there any objection? The Chair hears none and it is the sense of this Commission that we do favor a system of merit and fitness of civil se~ice for State employees.

234

RECORDS OF CONSTITUTIONAL COMMISSION

The Chair would like to, at the outset, point out, if he may be indulged, three things that occur to me in reference to this proposal that we now have under consideration. First, in reference to veterans preference-now I think everyone agrees that a veteran is entitled to some preference in the matter of credit on a civil service examination for his services to this country. There are two ways we can approach the problem: one is, we can give to that veteran earned points for service in the military forces, which if added to his grade on examination will give him a passing grade; or we can credit it from the standpoint that the veteran must make a passing grade before his service can be added to the grade. Now does everyone understand those two propositions?
MR. GOWEN. What was the last?
CHAIRMAN ARNALL. Let's explain it. Suppose we give a veteran 5 points for his service as preference and post 70 as the passing grade. We can, by amendment, provide that the 5% credit can be added to his grade so as to bring about a passing grade. That is, if he made 65% and we add the veterans preference, then he would pass; or we can provide that the veteran must make a passing grade and then the 5% shall be added to it in considering it. The one argument is that the veteran gets additional credit for his service; even if he did not pass it, he gets a passing grade by reason of the service. The other is that the veteran must make a passing grade, then he gets an additional 5 points for his veterans service.
MR. HARRIS. Wouldn't that be a detail for the final commission to work out? They have the right to fix the passing grade. They might made it 60, or 65 or 70. Whatever we did they could obviate by merely changing the passing grade, so it doesn't seem it makes any difference. I think it would simplify it to follow the Federal System, to add a certain number of points to the grade he makes.
MR. ATKINSON. What is the present law like it is written in here?
CHAIRMAN ARNALL. The present law in Georgia provides he shall have an absolute credit for being a veteran, whether he makes a passing grade or not, whereas this new proposal is based on the idea he has got to pass before he gets credit for the veteran work, but if four people pass and one is a veteran, then the veteran gets the highest grade by virtue of being a veteran.
MR. ATKINSON. Wasn't the present law presented by the Veterans Association?

RECORDS OF CONSTITUTIONAL COMMISSION

235

CHAIRMAN ARNALL. It was, and there is a lot of interest by the veterans. The second thing I want to point out, I am in favor of a system of merit, speaking for myself, but likewise I would hate very much for any system of merit to go into effect in this State and freeze into office public employees while so many of our citizens are away fighting to preserve this government. In other words, what I am saying is that while I favor the civil service and merit system and hope we can enact and set them up, yet there is some question in my mind which I convey to this Commission, if we should not provide that the examination for permanent classification shall not be held until some interim after the war has been terminated.
The third thing I point out about the draft is that it undertakes to make continuing appropriation from the State Treasury to this Civil Service Board. While I realize why that is included, yet as far as the Chair is concerned, if we ever start in this State freezing into the Constitution continuing appropriations you are going to have to freeze them in there for schools, for roads, for every department of the State, and it will be utterly impossible to administer the finances of this State. I point that out.
Please don't think because I point out these things for your specific attention, please do not think that I am in any way inclined not to favor a system of merit or civil service for State employees. I think it is perhaps the most important thing we can do, and if any of you gentlemen ever serve as Governor of this State and we do put in a system of merit or fitness you will look back and will call whoever did it blessed. While right now they don't seek patronage so much, when times are bad they do, and it gets to be a terrible condition. I know of no reason why we should swap experience for inexperience in policy forming positions, and I urge the Commission to adopt a system of merit to guide the employment of people in State government. However, I wanted to call out those three things that I think are worthy of serious thought, how the veterans preference shall operate, whether we shall delay the classified service until the veterans return home and have a chance to become classified under the merit system. I don't mean to delay the operation of the system, but not to freeze out the veterans while the war is on. And the third thing, I am somewhat inclined to question adopting appropriation writing into the Constitution. Of course what the advocates of the merit and civil service system are thinking of is that some Governor or Budget Commission might cut out the appropriation to the Personnel Board and undertake to dom-

236

RECORDS OF CONSTITUTIONAL COMMISSION

inate it in that way, but I believe if civil service is ever put into operation in this State it will prove so popular with the people that no Governor or Budget Authority would undertake to hamstring it by indirect action.
MR. THRASHER. On page 20 of this revised Constitution, doesn't that civil service with equal preference to veterans cover this without putting another provision in?
CHAIRMAN ARNALL. Read that.
MR. THRASHER. (Reads) "Neither the State of Georgia, nor any political subdivision thereof, shall inaugurate or maintain any civil service scheme of any nature whatever which fails to provide for honorably discharged veterans of any war, and the said State of Georgia, or any political subdivision shall, if a civil service scheme is originated or is already in force, shall provide equal perferences accorded to such veterans as now exist under Federal Civil Service Laws." Doesn't that cover it?
CHAIRMAN ARNALL. The Chair would like to point out that the Chair has received a number of communications from veterans organizations in this State insisting that that provision which was adopted in 1943 be carried into the new Constitution.
MR. THRASHER. It is in our Revised Constitution. Wouldn't it cover this provision here?
CHAIRMAN ARNALL. The Chair is of the opinion it would.
MR. THRASHER. I would like to make a motion that be stricken and this be left as it is, this committee report, Section II, be stricken and this be left as it is.
CHAIRMAN ARNALL. Your motion is that Section II be stricken?
MR. THRASHER. That is right.
CHAIRMAN ARNALL. Is there objection?
MR. ARNOLD. I don't know what the Federal statute provides, and I assume that an examination is given for civil service employees to determine whether or not they are competent and qualified to hold the position which is open, and I certainly think that whether or not the Federal statute provides it, that the Constitution should provide that anyone, whether he is a veteran or not, furnish the proof that he is competent and qualified to hold a position before he could fill it, and that would require a passing grade.

RECORDS OF CONSTITUTIONAL COMMISSION

237

MRS. HAAS. Mr. Chairman, I don't think we are clear in what the Federal statute provides. I think by Presidential order there are numbers of departments that must take veterans without any choice. It is changed quite' frequently.
CHAIRMAN ARNALL. Without objection, at this time the Chair would like to read for the enlightment of the Commission extracts from a letter from the Director of the State Merit System. As you know, we already have this in effect in a number of our State Departments. This is from Mr. Swain, who is Director of the Merit System, Personnel Administrator.
(Reads) "There are few subjects in the foreseeable future that will command as much serious attention as the effect of reestablishment of returned war veterans in civilian life. Everyone shares interest in seeing it done quickly and well. So far as the various branches of our State and local government are concerned, however, the subject is not confined solely to the fulfillment of their obligations to former employees who return from military service. Beyond this is the major question of how much and what preference should be given to returned veterans who through a merit system seek employment in the State of Georgia or any political subdivision thereof.
"As you know, the people of Georgia on August 3, 1943, ratified an amendment to our State Constitution which gave preference toveterans of any war equal to that given by the Federal Civil Service Laws that existed on the effective date of the amendment. It is my belief it was unwise to accept completely the veterans preference laws written by the United States Congress exclusively for the several branches of the Federal -Government without analyzing it in the laws of practical application to the needs of Georgia.
"During my experience in administering the Federal preference laws of our State System, I have found them to be unnecessarily complex, confusing, and not practicably applicable to meet the needs of our jurisdiction. The many capable and intelligent members of the Constitution Commission can and should develop a veterans preference provision that will deal fairly with the Georgia men and women members of our armed forces, and at the same time maintain the efficiency of the various departments of our State Government and our local governments.
..It is estimated that more than 450,090 veterans will return to Georgia following the war. Most of them will enter or return to industrial or commercial, or agricultural, or other occupations out-

238

RECORDS OF CONSTITUTIONAL COMMISSION

side of public service, but more than ever there will be a disposition on the part of large numbers of them to compete for positions in public service. This will be due in a large measure to the kind of training and experiences they will have gained in the armed forces and to the growing complexity of State and local government.
"I am mindful that we shall have young men and women with fine minds and all types of aptitudes and skills. Most of them will return with their capacities unimpaired and with increased appreciation of our way of life. 1 am confident with them we can build a public service better than we have ever known, but in doing so we must be wise enough not to blunder into excesses of administrative practices and special privileges, which experience shows would critically impair the efficiency of public service and thereby damage the very institutions which the veterans have risked their lives to preserve.
"Upon analysis it appears the problem resolves into: "(a) A development of equitable and administrative policies practicable for the reinstatement of employees who left their positions to enter the service; "(b) Development of sound and reasonable policies to afford certain degrees of preference to war veterans; "(c) Adjustment of administrative policies and procedures to facilitate veteran rehabilitation." In the light of these problems the following recommendations are respectfully submitted: "(1) Recommendation regarding reinstatement of former employees. "(2) Recommendation regarding veterans preference policy," and I shall read from that. " (a) Veterans preference policy should recognize the democratic principle of 'Jpen competition for public employment on the basis of merit and fitness and should not by their terms of operation serve to exclude unduly the rising generation from its rights and opportunities for public employment. "(b) The term 'veteran' must be understood to be a person who has been .a member of the armed forces during the period of actual
hostilities. "(c) Veterans preference policies should include maintenance of
minimum qualifications for standards into public service. "(d) Veterans should be. required to obtain a passing mark in
competitive tests before being entitled to consideration. "(e) Preference should be confined for examination for entrance

RECORDS OF CONSTITUTIONAL COMMISSION

239

into service and should not be applied to promotion within the service.
"(f) Preference should be expressed in terms of credit points added to the earned examination rating; and the veterans' standing on the list of eligibles should be determined on the basis of mental rating of such augmented rating. While the disabled man should be given an added margin in the form of an added number of points added to his earned rating, no veteran should be entitled to be placed :mtomatically at the top of the eligibility list unless his augmented rating places him there.
"(g) The amount of preference credit should be five credit points on the basis of 100 and the amount of preference credit given disabled veterans should be placed ten credit points on the same basis.
"(h) The right of a veteran to additional points preference for disability should be based on findings of the United States Veterans Administration and should be accorded only those veterans who have at least a ten per cent compensable disability rating.
"(i) Retention in the service in the case of reduction in force or the abolition of positions for lack of work or funds should be based solely on ability properly to perform the duties of a position and on relative length of efficient service."
Those are the particular parts of that letter I wanted to read. It possibly is quite a problem, as you can well recognize.
MR. ATKINSON. Haven't you got letters from the American Legion recommending this be kept in as it is?
CHAIRMAN ARNALL. Yes, we have a letter signed by Hugh Howell and a Committee of the American Legion called the Americanism Committee. I will read it. (Reads) "On behalf of the American Legion we desire to call your attention to the importance of maintaining in the Constitution Paragraph XXVII, Section VII, Article III of the present Constitution with reference to civil serviceequal preferences to veterans.
"You will recall Speaker Harris stated that this was inadverently left out of the printed draft of the Constitution and it would be included in the new Constitution without question. The only dig. senting vote was by Mrs. Haas.
"We feel sure the Legionnaires over the State would be very much hurt if the Constitutional AmendJ1)ent is not included in the new Constitution. That is the reason we ~ e~Uing your attention
to this provision now before the final prijlting is made."

240

RECORDS OF CONSTITUTIONAL COMMISSION

We have also received a number of letters from veterans want~ ing it left as it is.
We will entertain Mr. Thrasher's motion now.
MR. HARRIS. There is one point I would like to call. to the Commission's attention. I don't think the veterans had that in mind as drafted. Take the Highway Patrol, for instance, or the police department of every city, or the fire department, where they require certain physical standards. Isn't this broad enough as it now stands to do away with that? We wouldn't want to be able to give a cripple who is not able to walk a place as a policeman or fireman, to give him the advantage. Shouldn't some saving clause be put in there in regard to that? The point I am making, a man with one leg standing an examination for fireman, and all these civil service systems set up by your cities or set up by statute and amendments to charters, wouldn't this Constitutional provision invalidate every one of them?
GOVERNOR ARNALL. Which Constitutional provision?
MR. HARRIS. The one proposed and the one we have got now, either one.
MR. GOWEN. Wouldn't the one suggested do away with that? Isn't a physical examination as much a part of the examination as a mental examination?
MR. HARRIS. That might be true.
MR. HAND. Wouldn't that be a question for the Board to set up in the rule?
MR. HARRIS. This proposed one may cover that. I am afraid the old one as it stands invalidates your law with reference to your State Highway Patrol and all physical requirements for police and firemen. This probably by requiring them to stand an examination and all might cover the matter anyhow. It is something somebody should study.
CHAIRMAN ARNALL. Certainly no court would hold that that pro'vision was so restrictive or compelling as to say you had to have a one legged fireman just because he was a veteran. I think it would all be based on his fitness, and certainly in that case he wouldn't be physically fit to be a fireman.
MR. THRASHER. The situation is that we should eliminate one or the other.

RECORDS OF CONSTITUTIONAL COMMISSION

241

CHAIRMAN ARNALL. Mr. Thrasher moves we maintain in the new Constitution the present provision in reference to civil service which was adopted by the people in 1943.
MR. GOWEN. I would like to direct attention to the fact that the effect of that would be to do away with any preference for veterans' wives. Whether that is good or bad that would be the effect of it.
MR. LOVEJOY. Repeat that.
MR. GOWEN. The suggested new provision gives preference to veterans' wives, the old provision does not.
JUDGE GRICE. I am not familiar with the present provision.
CHAIRMAN ARNALL. The present veterans' law gives preference only to veterans. This proposed committee report, if adopted, would give it not only to the veterans but to their wives and widows.
JUDGE GRICE. Is the present provision general in its term?
CHAIRMAN ARNALL. The present provision is general in its terms.
MR. THRASHER. May I change my motion?
MR. HARRIS. Mr~ Chairman, I have read this provision as it now stands and my proposition I think, about the physical examination, is eliminated. I don't think it would be affected at all. The one written in the present Constitution doesn't apply to widows or wives. The one proposed, in Section II, the veteran and wife both get on the eligibility list and get ten points, but doesn't say his widow. It says he and his wife. Originally the Constitution as it now stands applies only to veterans and that was as written by the American Legion Committee.
MRS. HAAS. I would like to ask why the present one wouldn't cover it?
MR. HARRIS. I said it would.
CHAIRMAN ARNALL. Mr. Thrasher, do you withdraw your motion?
MR. THRASHER. No, sir. I will stand by that original motion that this present provision as proposed has been passed and ratified.
CHAIRMAN ARNALL. Is there a second to Mr. Thrasher's motion that the present Constitutional provision with reference to veterans preference be retained?

242

RECORDS OF CONSTITUTIONAL COMMISSION

JUDGE SMITH. Does that exclude the widows of veterans?
CHAIRMAN ARNALL. It makes no provision for widows.
JUDGE GRICE. Does that contemplate doing nothing with this?
MR. FOLEY. That does away with the points allowed.
CHAIRMAN ARNALL. What it does, under the present Constitution of Georgia we give veterans preference and we give them such preferences as are given veterans by the United States Government
JUDGE GRICE. Mr. Chairman, does that make them eligible whether competent or not.
CHAIRMAN ARNALL. Yes. In other words, under the Federal Government laws whether a veteran passes or not his veterans preference is added to the grade he makes to determine whether he passes or not.
MR. LOVEJOY. Mr. Chairman, the trouble with the present law first, is, we don't know what it is. Certainly I don't know what the Federal Civil Service Laws are. In the next place it freezes those qualifications as of the date of our adoption. There is no possibilityof a correction in the future if correction should be found to be necessary in the administration. We are bound by whatever happened to be the Federal Civil Service Law at that time. It seems to me these are fatal objections. First, I want to know what we enact when we adopt Federal Civil Service Laws. I want to know what it is. I am opposed to adopting any rule to fix today the regulations so they can't be changed tomorrow. I think we can be more helpful to the veterans by writing something now rather than carrying forward these general provisions as stated in the old law. I am in favor of trying to write something better. The only point is, in writing what is in Section II at this time, I certainly am not in favor of any man or woman being employed unless he or she is first found to be competent, and then give them the preference. I don't know enough about it, and I am not entirely impressed with the enlightenment of the rest of the folks who are talking. I want to ask this question-maybe we could get somebody to write what we need. Certainly I would rather have what is in the proposal as a substitute for the provision of the old law, but wouldn't it be better to have somebody-familiar with this thing to. possibly write something more?
MR. HAND. Do you know whether or not the Veterans Civil Ser-

RECORDS OF CONSTITUTIONAL COMMISSION

243

vice Law has had any changes put in there?
MR. LOVEJOY. I don't. I know they have various provisions for different departments, and what they have for any I don't know. I certainly am not in favor, I want to repeat, of forcing an em'ployee on the State or any subdivision who is not competent. I am asking the question whether we could not do better by getting somebody to write something?
MR. THRASHER. I propose to make a motion to adopt .the original.
CHAIRMAN ARNALL. The question is whether or not we shall adopt the present provision in reference to veterans preference. The Clerk will read that provision.
MR. LOVEJOY. That assumes if we do not carry that forward we will try to substitute something better.
MR. McCUTCHEN. (Reads) "Civil service-equal preferences to veterans. Neither the State of Georgia, nor any political subdivision thereof, shall inaugurate or maintain any civil service scheme of any nature whatever which fails to provide for honorably discharged veterans of any war, and the said State of Georgia, or any political subdivision shall, if a civil service scheme is originated or is already in force, shall provide equal preferences accorded to such veterans as now exist under Federal Civil Service Laws."
CHAIRMAN ARNALL. You have heard the reading of the present provision. So many as favor the retention of that provision make it known by saying "aye"; opposed "no:' The noes seem to have it; the noes have it and that provision is rejected.
MR. THRASHER. I would like fo make a motion to,adopt Section II as written and also delete Paragraph XXIV, page 20, of the Revised Constitution.
CHAIRMAN ARNALL. Paragraph XXIV is deleted if this is adopted.
MR. ARNOLD. That eliminates following the Federal Law, is that right?
CHAIRMAN ARNALL. Yes. Now the Clerk will read Section II.
MR. McCUTCHEN. (Reads) "Section II. Paragraph I. Any Civil Service plan, agency, commission, board, organization or administration that will be established or is already in force in the State Government of Georgia or any political subdivision thereof shall

244

RECORDS OF CONSTITUTIONAL COMMISSION

provide the following preference for all persons honorably discharged from the armed forces of the United States after service with such forces during the period of a war:
"Five points shall be added to any passing earned rating that may be achieved in an examination for entrance into the civil service by an honorably discharged veteran or by the widow of a veteran separated from the anned forces under honorable conditions, provided she was the wife of such veteran before his separation from the armed forces and provided she has not remarried.
"Persons who have established veterans status as defined above and who, in addition, establish by official records of the United States Government the present existence of a service connected disability and because of disability are entitled to pension compensation or disability allowance under laws, as now exist, and qualified wives of such persons who are themselves not qualified because of service connected disability shall have ten points added to any passing earned rating they achieve in an examination for entrance into the civil service."
JUDGE GRICE. Mr. Chainnan, I move to add the following language to the end of Paragraph I of Section II. "Provided nevertheless to the end that no incompetent shall enter the service, the veteran must obtain a passing mark before the added rating is given hn n."
CHAIRMAN ARNALL. The Chair is of the opinion that since the language of this provision &peaks of "five points shall be added to any passing earned rating" that that provision is actually included in the present draft.
MR. MAJORS. There is no provision in here that bars both husband and wife. Can both of them get the veterans preference?
CHAIRMAN ARNALL. No, as the Chair reads it the husband and wife can't each get the veterans preference.
MR. MAJORS. They can under this language.
CHAIRMAN ARNALL. Show me where that is true.
MR. GOWEN. It says, "and qualified wives of such persons who are themselves not qualified." That means where a veteran is disabled to where he can't engage in. public service then his wife can get the preference. Let's writ~ it so it says that.
MR. MA.fORS. That is what I say.

RECORDS OF CONSTITUTIONAL COMMISSION

245

CHAIRMAN ARNALL. "Persons who have established veterans status as defined above and who, in addition, establish by official records of the United States Government the present existence of a service connected disability and because of disability are entitled to pension compensation or disability allowance under laws, as now exist, and qualified wives of such persons who are themselves not qualified because of service connected disability shall have ten points added to any passing earned rating they achieve in an examination for entrance into the civil service."
MR. HARRIS. I move to strike the word "persons" and insert the word "veterans" so that it would read "and qualified wives of such veterans who are themselves not qualified because of service connected disability."
MR. MAJORS. That is all right.
MR. HARRIS. I think that qualifies it. (Chairman Arnall leaves the Chair and Mr. Foley is Acting
Chairman).
MR. FOLEY. Say that again.
MR. HARRIS. I move we strike the word "persons" and insert the word "veterans" and then it would read as follows: "and qualified wives of such veterans who are themselves not qualified because of service connected disability."
ACTING CHAIRMAN FOLEY. Is there any objection to that motion?
MR. GOWEN. I still don't think that clears it.
MR. ATKINSON. Mr. Chairman, I make the following motion and I want to address the Commission. The Assistant Secretary will read my motion.
MR. McCUTCHEN. Mr. Atkinson moves to strike the word "Passing" in the 7th and 19th lines of the proposal under consideration.
MR. ATKINSON. Gentlemen of the Commission: The way this recommendation is written it will more or less freeze in office those people who are in there. These boys, the veterans who we are trying to protect by this Section II are off fighting the battles of this country, giving their lives or giving the best part of their lives there for their nation, and maybe some of them their intelligence. They are entitled to consideration. They ought to be taken care of by the

246

RECORDS OF CONSTITUTIONAL COMMISSION

Government. These people staying here, whether they are slackers or whether they have something wrong with them, they can go to school and check up and get jobs and fit themselves to stand examinations. But when a boy comes back from France or the Pacific he has had no chance and no opportunity to do those things and he ought to be protected. Now I was in favor of that old provision because the American Legion wrote it and brought it here and asked us to pass it, and that has been voted down, and they come with this proposition. I knew it was in the air and I know where it is coming from. These people want to set it up so as to keep the boys out. They don't want to be shoved out of their jobs by any veterans coming back out of the service. They can make the passing mark so high no veteran or anybody that has not studied can pass it.
JUDGE GRICE. Senator, how about adding to the end of Paragraph II, this: "provided no such classification shall be made until the elapsing of a reasonable time after the war in progress has ended, that no person in the armed service will be deprived of the opportunity to fill a position in the classified service."
MR. ATKINSON. I think that ought to be in there too. If you say ten points makes them incompetent, put the grade up so as to let your ten points make the man competent giving the credit for ten points, but don't take away his ten points. Give him an opportunity to go in there with that advantage. If you don't want to recognize the soldiers don't do it, but don't try to cover it up by making out like you are handing him something when he is not getting anything or is not getting as much as he should get. I am going along with the American Legion. They are looking after the soldiers and this is what they want. This is not exactly what they want, but they certainly don't want the other. I think we ought to recognize these boys. I am speaking personally because I have got a boy that is there. I know he has not had the opportunity of studying, and he was taken out of his law practice. He has not been practicing law, and what will he know about law with somebody who ducked the war and stayed in the law. What does a boy know about accounting if he has been over there running a ship, or getting shot, or killing people, even if he was working here somewhere before at accounting. They are over there killing people, or getting shot themselves, and let me tell you those boys say when you feel a man next to you and know he is dead, why there is something that comes over you. Gentlemen, you can't treat those boys that way, and I hope you won't.

RECORDS OF CONSTITUTIONAL COMMISSION

247

MR. HARRIS. Your motion is to strike the wor~ "passing."
MR. ATKINSON. Strike "earned passing."
JUDGE MacINTYRE. If the passing mark was 60, for instance, do you construe under the present act the boy would have to make over 60 before he gets any credit at all?
MR. ATKINSON. Yes, sir.
JUDGE MacINTYRE. Under your provision if he made 50 then he could get credit for 10 points, and then he would have 50 plus 10, making 60, and he would pass?
MR. ATKINSON. Yes. They can raise it up to 70, but if they want him to be sure to make 60, make the passing mark 70.
MR. ARNOLD. I agree with the Senator about what he says that we can't let those boys down; we can't do that, but if a mark of 60 is the proof that a man is qualified to fill a position, and a mark of 50 is proof that he is not, can we afford to put people in governmental positions who are not qualified on account of a veterans status? We have an obligation, but if they can't qualify, we have got to take care of them some other way, and we have still got to have qualified people running our government.
ACTING CHAIRMAN FOLEY. Gentlemen, you have heard Senator Atkinson's motion. The Clerk will read it.
MR. McCUTCHEN. Mr. Atkinson moves to strike the words "passing earned" from the 7th and 19th lines of Section II.
ACTING CHAIRMAN FOLEY. Is there objection to the adoption of Senator Atkinson's motion?
JUDGE GRICE. Yes.
ACTING CHAIRMAN FOLEY. Is there a second?
JUDGE MaciNTYRE. I second it.
ACTING CHAIRMAN FOLEY. So many as favor the adoption of the motion make it known by saying "aye"; opposed "no." The noes seem to have it.
MR. ATKINSON. Call for a division.
ACTING CHAIRMAN FOLEY. So many as are in favor of Senator Atkinson's motion make it known by rising and standing until counted; reverse your positions, those opposed. The motion is lost.

248

RECORDS OF CONSTITUTIONAL COMMISSION

JUDGE GRICE. Can I move to add at the end of Paragraph II the following: "Provided nevertheless no such classification shall be made until the lapse of a reasonable time after the war now in progress, to the end that no person in the armed service will be deprived of the opportunity to file application in the classified ser~ vice."
MR. HARRIS. The only trouble there, the Army of Occupation may put it off five or six years.
(Chairman Arnall returns and resumes the Chair).
CHAIRMAN ARNALL. The question is on the adoption of Judge Grice's proposed amendment, is there objection? The Chair hears none, and it is adopted. The Chair raises this point: Is it best to say "a reasonable time" or put a specific time after the duration of the war is over?
JUDGE GRICE. I think we have got to trust someone's discretion.
CHAIRMAN ARNALL. And the Personnel Board could have that discretion.
JUDGE GRICE. What are you going to do, Governor, about the suggestion about appropriations?
CHAIRMAN ARNALL. If you will allow me, let me perfect Section II. The Chair moves to strike the language "during the period of a war" from the first paragraph of Section II. In other words, the Chair doesn't think veterans preference should be accorded to a veteran who served only during the entire period of the war. If he served and was honorably discharged, he is entitled to preference. The way this is written "during the period of a war" would exclude that.
MR. GOWEN. If you strike that language, wouldn't it mean then any man that served in peace time would get a veterans preference?
JUDGE GRICE. Maybe he lS entitled to it.
JUDGE SMITH. You might add the word "some" in there, during some period of a war."
CHAIRMAN ARNALL. I think that would perfect it, is there objection to;---
MR. ARNOLD. Why not say "after service with such forces during the period of emergency"?

RECORDS OF CONSTITUTIONAL COMMISSION

248

CHAIRMAN ARNALL. Or "all persons honorably discharged from the armed forces of the United States after service with such forces during war", is there objection to that language?
JUDGE SMITH. What is the language?
CHAIRMAN ARNALL. "During a war", strike out "the period of."
JUDGE SMITH. That is the proposition you were trying to get rid of.
CHAIRMAN ARNALL. During the war may mean the entire period. Judge Smith suggests we say "some period during a war", that would carry the meaning not necessarily all the period, but some part of the period. Is there objection to adopting Judge Smith's proposal which reads as follows: "All persons honorably discharg~ ed from armed forces of the United States after service with such forces during some period of a war"?
MR. LOVEJOY. That is clear.
CHAIRMAN ARNALL. Is there objection? The Chair hears none. and it is so ordered. Will you send up your amendment, Judge Grice?
JUDGE GRICE. Yes, sir, the one adopted.
CHAIRMAN ARNALL. Is there objection to adopting Paragraph I, Section II, as amended?
MR. GOWEN. I would like to offer an amendment. I was preparing to make ten points for the wives applicable only to wives of totally disabled veterans. I believe that is the spirit of that; if the veteran is unable to hold the job himself, the wife should not automatically have ten points preference. In other words, the wife of a veteran who had only 10% disability, which I believe under the present law entitles him to free license, he would not only get ten points preference but his wife would get ten points preference, which would probably mean both could secure a State job at the same time, where a widow with a lot of children to support would probably get only five points.
CHAIRMAN ARNALL. Mr. Gowen moves that the preference afforded to the wife of a veteran be afforded only to the wives of totally disabled veterans.
JUDGE SMITH. I second that.

250

RECORDS OF CONSTITUTIONAL COMMISSION

CHAIRMAN ARNALL. Is there any discussion, or is there any ob jeetion to its adoption. The Chair hears none, and it is so ordered.
MR. MAJORS. Mr. Chainnall, I move that widows of veterans be also given the same preference.
CHAIRMAN ARNALL. It is moved that widows of veterans be ac corded a ten point preference.
JUDGE SMITH. I second the motion.
CHAIRMAN ARNALL. Is there any discussion?
JUDGE GRICE. What is the reason for that? No reason why they are disabled.
MR. MAJORS. You are giving the wife of a disabled veteran and a widow of a veteran the same preference.
CHAIRMAN ARNALL. Here's what you are doing though. You are giving a widow a greater preference than you are giving a veteran.
MR. ATKINSON. They need it.
CHAIRMAN ARNALL. The question is whether a widow be accord ed ten points preference.
MR. FOLEY. Wouldn't that mean the widow of a disabled veteran who is dead, she should have ten points?
CHAIRMAN ARNALL. Do you mean the widow of a disabled veteran or any veteran?
MR. MAJORS. I mean the widow of any veteran, because nine times out of ten they have got the children to raise.
CHAIRMAN ARNALL. In other words, the Commission then, if that motion carries, would put itself on record as believing that the widow of a veteran is entitled to greater veterans preference rating than the veteran himself.
MR. GOWEN. They are widows. We are apt to think of the woman who has got a lot of children to raise, but we are overlooking the camp followers. How are you going to get rid of them? It don't classify them.
JUDGE SMITH. I think that is the Federal law, that all widows are entitled to preference.
CHAIRMAN ARNALL. They are entitled to the same preference

RECORDS OF CONSTITUTIONAL COMMISSION

251

as veterans, as I understand the Federal law. Isn't that true?
MR. HARRIS. That applies only to veterans.
CHAIRMAN ARNALL. You have heard the motion.
MR. LOVEJOY. Mr. Chairman, should there be any minimum disability requirement before the veteran is entitled to this preference? CHAIRMAN ARNALL. Do you mean this 10%?
MR. LOVEJOY. The 10% is not in there, should there be any minimum disability before they get this preference?
MR. HARRIS. Has to be 10% under this provision.
MR. LOVEJOY. To be entitled to a pension?
CHAIRMAN ARNALL. He must have a service connected disability as attested by the records of the United States Government.
MR. HARRIS. They don't pay for a disability of less than 10%.
MR. LOVEJOY. "And because of disability are entitled to pension compensation or disability allowance", and Mr. Harris says in order to get that they must be at least 10% disabled.
CHAIRMAN ARNALL. That is right. Is there objection to adopting Section II as amended?
MR. LOVEJOY. We add a certain number of points to what?
CHAIRMAN ARNALL. To the passing grade.
MR. LOVEJOY. Right, but suppose you mention the fact you assumed that was on the basis of 100%.
CHAIRMAN ARNALL. That is right.
MR. LOVEJOY. But suppose they made it 150% or 2OO%? I am just asking the question, adding five points to whatever the earned rating is, does that do what you want or not? I am just asking the question. CHAIRMAN ARNALL. We can include very easily in there this language: "Five points shall be added to any passing earned rating," and this is the part to be included, "on a basis of 100 points."
MR. LOVEJOY. You missed it while ago yourself.
CHAIRMAN ARNALL. Is there objection to that provision? That

252

RECORDS OF CONSTITUTIONAL COMMISSION

sets up the basis as 100 points, and they get five points on the 100 if not totally disabled.
MR. ARNOLD. I think we ought to make that ten points. I think if they are qualified, we ought to do everything we can to fill the position with a veteran.
CHAIRMAN ARNALL. The question here is on the question of whether we include after the word "rating" in the first line of the second paragraph of Section II the words, "on a basis of 100 points." Is there objection to that? The Chair hears none, and it is so ordered. Now Senator Arnold moves to raise the preference from five points to ten points.
JUDGE SMITH. I second the motion.
CHAIRMAN ARNALL. Is there any discussion on that? If you adopt that with no further change, you give your disabled veterans the same preference you give a veteran who is not disabled. The question is, shall the five points preference be extended to reach to ten points preference. Is there any discussion?
MR. FOLEY. Why not make it seven and a half?
CHAIRMAN ARNALL. Is there objection? The question is on whether the five points shall be raised to ten points preference. So many as favor that make it known by saying "tye"; opposed "no." And the noes have it.
Now the question is on the adoption of Section II, Paragraph t
as amended.
MR. MAJORS. I move the disabled veterans points be raised to fifteen.
CHAIRMAN ARNALL. The motion is that disabled veterans preference points be raised from ten to fifteen points. Is there any discussion? Is there any objection?
MR. CULPEPPER. There is objection.
CHAIRMAN ARNALL. Is there a second to the motion?
JUDGE SMITH. I second the motion.
CHAIRMAN ARNALL. So many as are in favor of the motion make it known by saying "aye"; opposed "no." The noes seem to have it. The noes have it. The question is on the adoption of Section II as

RECORDS OF CONSTITUTIONAL COMMISSION

253

amended. Is there objection? The Chair hears none, and it is ordered adopted.
MR. THRASHER. Mr. Chairman, which way are you going, backwards or forwards?
CHAIRMAN ARNALL. Going backwards. Now Paragraph VI of Section I.
MR. THRASHER. The second sentence there is "There is hereby continually appropriated from the State Treasury sufficient funds to pay the salaries and expenses of the employees of the State Personnel Board, and the expenses of the members of the Board." There are two things there, one is the continual appropriation and the Legislature has nothing to do, and the second is, they are not going to have expenses of the Board other than salaries of employees. I would like to amend that sentence by saying this: "There shall be appropriated from the State Treasury sufficient funds to pay the salaries and expenses necessary for the operation of the State Personnel Board."
CHAIRMAN ARNALL. Would that be an automatic appropriation?
MR. THRASHER. No, sir, it says, "shall be appropriated."
CHAIRMAN ARNALL. Read the first sentence.
MR. THRASHER. "Adequate appropriations shall be made by the legislature to carry out the purposes of this provision." I move the second sentence be stricken.
CHAIRMAN ARNALL. Is there any discussion or objection to striking the second sentence? The Chair hears none and it is stricken, so that Paragraph VI, Section I, as amended reads as follows: "Adequate appropriations shall be made by the legislature to carry out the purpose of this provision."
MR. HARRIS. Mr. Chairman, I would like to know what the Chair thinks of the advisability of instead of letting this in the Constitution and the general provision, making it mandatory for the Legislature to set up a system? Here is one of the things I have in mind. Look at Paragraph III. "The State Personnel Board shall classify all positions in the State Service except exempt positions as specified in Paragraph II, according to their respective duties and resPQnsibilities; fix rates of compensation for positions in the classified service"-that gives the right to fix everybody's salary, anyone working for the State-"approve or disapprove disbursements for

254

RECORDS OF CONSTITUTIONAL COMMISSION

all personal services," then there at the bottom, "and regulate all conditions of employment in the classified service." Looks like we are setting up in the Constitution a supergovernment within the government that has greater authority than the Legislature or anybody else and under this authority this Board could come into any department and run the affairs when they fix the conditions of employment and fix the duties and fix the pay. It looks to me like there would be nothing for the department head to do.
CHAIRMAN ARNALL. The Chair is inclined to agree with the Speaker, that this is too much authority vested in Paragraph II in this Board.
MR. HARRIS. Yes, sir. I think this, I think you have to vest lots of authority in the Board, but the trouble is, if you are going to make it effective, and if you don't give lots of authority, the department heads will do like the Federal Government has done. The civil service system don't amount to anything, it is a continual system, that is the only thing it amounts to; and taking advantage of one crisis in the Government after another, and with war conditions coming along, the Civil Service Commission System doesn't amount to anything as far as selecting employees on the basis of merit is concerned. That long since ceased, and I doubt seriously if you will have it returned; consequently I think you have got to give it lots of authority; but in this you have got them above the heads of every department of the State government, and you just as well abolish the Legislature and everything else. It strikes me the best thing to do is to write the rules governing your Board and your civil service system by enactment by the Legislature, and if they go haywire it can be changed from time to time. I am strong on keeping that authority in the Legislature, because there is one thing you can say about the Legislature, the people get a lick at them every two years, and they don't have to wait so long to take a lick at them, consequently the Legislature, if it goes haywire, can very easily handle or change that. As a matter of fact, I have been checking the record, and for thirty years the highest number of the House ever repeated is 80, so there is a big turnover there.
It looks to me like it would be better to insert in here a system, or to provide the setting up of a system of civil service, and let the Legislature write the rules.
CHAIRMAN ARNALL. Let's start with the first paragraph and try to do that, if that meets with approval. All right, Mr. Assistant Sp.c-

RECORDS OF CONSTITUTIONAL COMMISSION

255

retary, read the first paragraph.
MR. McCUTCHEN. (Reads) "Paragraph I, Section I. There shall be a non-salaried State Personnel Board composed of three citizens of this State of known interest in the improvement of public administration and in the impartial selection of efficient personnel on the basis of merit and fitness. The members of the State Personnel Board shall be appointed by the Governor. The first members shall be appointed for terms of three, five, and seven years, respectively, to be designated by the Governor, and all subsequent appointments shall be for a period of seven years, except in case of an unexpired ternl. Neither the Governor nor any other State employee shall be a member of the State Personnel Board."
CHAIRMAN ARNALL. You have heard the reading of Paragraph I, any discussion of that paragraph?
MR. LOVEJOY. Is it implied from the statement that the members of the State Personnel Board shall be appointed by the Governor, is it implied that the Governor will fill vacancies? There is no express statement as to who shall make the appointments to fill vacancies.
JUDGE GRICE. I think there is a provision in the Constitution.
CHAIRMAN ARNALL. The question is on the adoption of Paragraph I. Is there objection? The Chair hears none and it is adopted. Now Paragraph II.
MR. McCUTCHEN. (Reads) "Paragraph II. The State Personnel Board shall have jurisdiction over all positions in the State Service except those positions filled by popular elections; heads of general departments of State Government; all persons in the Military and Naval forces of the State; members of Advisory Councils, Boards and Commissions, or similar bodies; part-time employees rendering professional services, or serving ex ofIicio and performing incidental duties; judges and other employees of courts of records; members and employees of the legislature; positions occupied by all employees and teachers in county and municipal school systems and in educational institutions not reformatory or charitable in character; and not to exceed six other exempt positions for each elected State administrative officer in the whole of his department, or not to exceed two other exempt positions in the whole of each general State Department, Board or Commission headed by an appointed official."

256

RECORDS OF CONSTITUTIONAL COMMISSION

JUDGE GRICE. At the end of the sixth line, would you mind putting in the word "justices", and in the seventh line would you strike out the word "other."
MR. ATKINSON. What does that mean when it says, "municipal school systems and in educational institutions not reformatory or charitable in character"?
CHAIRMAN ARNALL. The Chair is of this opinion, and I want to be frank, I am very apprehensive of the provisions in Paragraph II. It is my judgment the State Personnel Board shall have jurisdiction over such positions in the State service as are not policy forming and as may be delegated.
MR. HARRIS. The word "jurisdiction" is bad.
MR. HEAD. Mr. Chairman, what are you going to do with or about your technical men such as engineers in the Highway Department and nurses in the State Health Department?
JUDGE GRICE. And law clerks in the Supreme Court.
MR. HEAD. I think I am as well qualified to say who I want to work for me in the Law Department as any Personnel Board. I am concerned about these technical positions. I think they ought to be excluded.
CHAIRMAN ARNALL. The group of people I am fighting for under the merit system or selective service is not the big salaried people, the ones I am thinking about are the stenographers, the clerks, your highway engineers, those in the lower brackets, the clerical help, not the policy forming help. I quite frankly tell you I am not sure that Paragraph II does what we want or not. I think the Board ought to have such control over State positions as is delegated to it by the General Assembly, after proper consideration.
MR. CULPEPPER. That was the very point I was going to suggest. I think Paragraph II and III ought to be stricken and one paragraph written saying, "The Personnel Board shall have such duties and powers and authority as may be prescribed by law," then I think the Legislature, as my friend here suggested, could be trusted to fix it up.
CHAIRMAN ARNALL. I am afraid we will get something in the Constitution that will hamstring us.
MR. CULPEPPER. That is the point exactly.

RECORDS OF CONSTITUTIONAL COMMISSION

257

CHAIRMAN ARNALL. And no one has had time to think it through in every position. State your motion again, Mr. Culpepper.
MR. CULPEPPER. I move we strike Paragraphs II and III and in sert, "The State Personnel Board shall have such duties and powers and authority as may be prescribed by law."
CHAIRMAN ARNALL. You have heard the motion. Mr. Culpepper moves to strike Paragraphs II and III and insert in lieu thereof a new paragraph to read, "The State Personnel Board shall have such duties, powers and authority as may be prescribed by law." Is there any discussion? Is there any objection to the adoption of Mr. Culpepper's motion? Without objection it is ordered adopted, and Paragraphs II and III stricken. Now Paragraph IV.
MR. THRASHER. May I make a motion that Paragraph IV be stricken?
a MR. McCUTCHEN. (Reads) "Paragraph IV. The administration
of the powers of the State Personnel Board shall be vested in State Personnel Director whose position shall be included in the classified service, and who shall be selected by and responsible to the State Personnel Board."
CHAIRMAN ARNALL. Just a minute. If we strike that paragraph or that provision you don't have any administrative officer of the Board.
MR. HARRIS. The Legislature can fix that. I second the motion.
CHAIRMAN ARNALL. It has been moved and seconded that Paragraph IV be stricken. Is there any discussion?
MRS. HAAS. I don't quite nnderstand the reason for striking that.
CHAIRMAN ARNALL. Because that is merely a detail of the administration of the Board. The Board can either provide for itself, or the Legislature.
MRS. HAAS. Could they provide for themselves?
CHAIRMAN ARNALL. Sure. They could provide anybody to do anything they want to.
MR. LOVEJOY. If the Legislature gives them the power.
CHAIRMAN ARNALL. If the Legislature doesn't restrict them.
MR. LOVEJOY. I think if we give them any power to select. As we

!58

RECORDS OF CONSTITUTIONAL COMMISSION

leave it they have no power.
CHAIRMAN ARNALL. As I understand it, any Board that is created by law has the right to discharge the responsibilities placed upon it by law, through su~h employees as they might see fit to employ, provided the funds are provided.
MR. CULPEPPER. After the Legislature acts.
CHAIRMAN ARNALL. Is there objection to striking Paragraph IV? The Chair hears none. It is stricken. Paragraph V.
MR. McCUTCHEN. (Reads) "The Legislature shall establish an actuarially sound retirement system for persons holding positions in the classified service."
MR. LOVEJOY. I move we amend that by striking the word "shall" and substituting the word "may", so that it will read: "The Legislature may establish an actuarially sound retirement system for persons holding positions in the classified service."
CHAIRMAN ARNALL. We don't refer to the classified service. The Chair would like to suggest we say, "persons holding positions under the merit system," so the paragraph as amended would read, "The Legislature may establish an actuarially sound retirement system for persons holding positions under the merit system."
MR. THRASHER. Mr. Chairman, if you are going to make these words "may" all the way through, what about making the first paragraph say "There may be a non-salaried State Personnel Board."
CHAIRMAN ARNALL. What is that?
MR. THRASHER. In the first paragraph, change "shall" to "may."
CHAIRMAN ARNALL. I think we ought to set it up in the Constitution.1f you don't do that you have not done anything. The question is on adopting Paragraph V as amended. Is there objection? The Chair hears none and it is ordered adopted. Paragraph VI has been completed. Now what is the next paragraph?
Paragraph VI of the Policy Committee Report, Article V, Section I, Paragraph I, Sections II and IV. Constitutional Officers. The Policy Committee recommends to the full Commission that the State Constitutional Officers in the Executive Department be the Govemor, Attorney General, Secretary of State, Comptroller General, State Treasurer, Commissioner of Labor, Commissioner of Agriculture, and Superintendent of Schools. If the latter be named by the State



RECORDS OF CONSTITUTIONAL COMMISSION

259

Board of Education, then the Superintendent of Schools should be deleted as a Constitutional Officer. It is also recommended by the Policy Committee to the full Commission that all constitutional boards and commissions that are now in existence in the Constitution be retained, and further, that the full Commission adopt as it now stands the present Constitutional provision with reference to the Game and Fish Commission.
In other words, this recommendation is simply this, that in Article V, Section I, Paragraph I, and Sections II and IV, that in denoting the Constitutional Officers of the State the Office of Commissioner of Labor and the Commissioner of Agriculture should be included in the Constitutional Officers of the State.
MR. HARRIS. That is the only change?
CHAIRMAN ARNALL. That is the only change. They are elected by the people and both have heavy responsibilities. Is there objection? The Chair hears none. It is ordered adopted.
Paragraph VII. It is also recommended by the Policy Committee to the full Commission that serious consideration be given to the matter of creating a Constitutional Board of Prisons, so that no matter what the future holds, that there will be some continuity and uniformity in prison policy in this State, and this Committee goes on record as recommending to the full Commission the consideration, and recommendation to the Legislature in turn, that a Board be created, a non-paid board, comprised of outstanding Georgians who are interested in the welfare of our State and also of the prison problem and the prisoners, and let that board act as a Constitutional Board in charge of prison affairs in Georgia.
MR. THRASHER. Mr. Chairman, would you say in the first section up there, Paragraph VI, the Commissioner of Agriculture up there?
CHAIRMAN ARNALL. Yes.
MR. THRASHER. It is not listed.
CHAIRMAN ARNALL. If it is not in this it should be. We discussed it, both the Commissioner of Labor and the Commissioner of Agriculture.
CHAIRMAN ARNALL. The hour of 1:00 o'clock is approaching. I don't think we will have time to go into the discussion of the prison problem at this time. Is there objection to adjourning our labors

260

RECORDS OF CONSTITUTIONAL COMMISSION

until 2:00 o'clock? The Chair hears none. We will adjourn now and reassemble at 2:00 o'clock.
Just a minute please. Tonight Mr. Wiley L. Moore will entertain the members of the Commission at 6 :30 at Lakemore. All members who do not have transportation meet at the Henry Grady Hotel at 6:00 o'clock in the lobby and transportation will be furnished you. The Chair would like to find out how many would be interested in attending the barbecue at Lakemore tonight at 6:30.
The Chair wants to point out, before we leave, the changes that remain to be considered. One is the proposed Constitutional Commission to handle prisons; another is the payment of county officers; another proposal we have before us is to deal with the Court of Appeals and Supreme Court of Georgia; another proposal is Homestead Exemptions, relating to the Rural Housing Administration. Mr. George Hamilton is interested in that. Another thing we have to consider at the proper time is the salary of the judges. The Chair, as no one else will take action on that, is going to propose to the Commission at a propitious time that we do something about judges' salaries. The question has been raised as to the qualification of voters. Some believe we should leave it in the Constitution. Discussion on Home Rule; and amendment to our law to the end that
we can create a hospital here in Atlanta, a health center. Mr. Fortson
has proposed some action be taken in reference to the Governor's term of office; and there is Senator Kennon's proposal about more Senatorial Districts; also Mr. Copeland's proposal about jurisdiction in divorce cases; and Mr. Bloch's proposal on ad valorem tax; and Attorney General Head's proposition in regard to counties and cities taking advantage of the Federal.funds on. bond issues. Also a communication from the J. P.'s Association opposing the recommendation of the Commission that we do away with J. P. Courts. There will come before the Commission a reconsideration of our proposal to make the county school superintendents elective by the County Board of Education and the State Superintendent elected by the State Board of Education.
Those are fue matters that are on the Chair's desk. If we get back promptly at 2:00 o'clock we will undertake to wind them up as promptly as possible. Thank you, gentlemen.
(Whereupon the meeting adjourned at 1:00 o'clock for one hour.)

RECORDS OF CONSTITUTIONAL COMMISSION

261

AFTERNOON SESSION
NOVEMBER 13, 1944
CHAIRMAN ARNALL. The Chair desires to apologize for his lateness. I got caught in a traffic j am over across town and couldn't get here.
We are now on Paragraph VII of the Policy Committee's Report, ill which it is recommended that consideration be given to the matter of creating a Constitutional Board of Prisons to have jurisdiction and control of the Department of Corrections. The Policy Committee made no recommendation on it, but merely pointed out that consideration should probably be given to it.
The Chair would like to move that a Constitutional Board be created, modeled after the Board of Regents, to administer the State Department of Corrections.
If the Commission will indulge the Chair, the Chair wants to state this, that in the opinion of the Chair our prison program is getting along as nicely as could be expected under the circumstances. I am pleased with the progress being made. We still have a long way to go, and I believe that if we had a Board modeled after the Board of Regents, with high type Georgians to serve on it, we could give to the prison administration continuity and uniformity and stableness that is desired. So, if the Chair may, he will propose a suggested paragraph to read as follows:
"There shall be a Board of Corrections, in charge of the management, government and control of the Prison System of Georgia, and all of the said power and control shall be vested in the said Board of Corrections. Said Board of Corrections shall consist of one member from each Congressional District in the State. The Governor shall not be a member of the Board. The Governor shall make the first appointments to the State Board of Corrections. Members of the Board shall be appointed for a term of seven years. Vacancies upon the Board caused by experation of terms of office shall be filled by appointment and confirmation of the Senate. In case of a vacancy on said Board caused by death, resignation of a member or from any other cause other than the expiration of such member's term of office, the Board shall by secret ballot elect his successor, who shall hold office until the end of the next session of the General Assembly, or if the General Assembly be then in session, to the end of that session. During such session of the General Assembly the Governor shall appoint the successor member

262

RECORDS OF CONSTITUTIONAL COMMISSION

of the Board for the unexpired tenn and shall submit his name to the Senate for confirmation. All members of the State Board of Corrections shall hold office until their successors are appointed. The said Board of Corrections shall have the powers and duties as provided by law."
Is there any discussion of that proposal? Is there a second to the motion of the Chair?
MR. MAJORS. I second the motion.
MR. LOVEJOY. May I ask this question, Governor? Of course that leaves it entirely up to the Legislature?
CHAIRMAN ARNALL. To say what the powers and duties will be.
MR. LOVEJOY. Do you think that will give you an effective Board in continuity and uniformity?
CHAIRMAN ARNALL. I believe so. You take the Board of Regents, the Legislature can change the authority and duties, but not the Board. Is there any discussion? If not the question is on the motion. So many as favor adoption of the motion make it known by saying "aye"; opposed "no." The "ayes" seem to have it. The "ayes" have it.
MR. HARRIS. Didn't we have one thing-didn't we promise the Legislature-in putting this bill through, I asked them to give us the set-up we have and fix the office of directing the service at the pleasure of the Governor, because we knew that we probably would have to try four or five men before we ever got somebody to handle the job satisfactorily. It is the hardest job in this State to fill. I think a man can make a success as Governor easier than in this penal system. It is in the experimental stage, and I think we had better keep it that way, and keep it responsive, because when you create a Board and say it Jhall have such powers and duties as the Legislature give it, and if it doesn't meet it, you are going to have the conflict of the Legislature not giving it any money, and while you can't take it away from them, you can't give them anything to do except just sit there. I think that at this stage where we are it would be dangerous to do that, and that is the reason I think we ought to keep it like it is until we do work out a system. I know it is going to take some time, and it is certainly going to take until after the war when we can get equipment and the things that are necessary. Another thing loo, I would rather trust the Legislature than any Board, because they can get rid of it.

RECORDS OF CONSTITUTIONAL COMMISSION

263

CHAIRMAN ARNALL. Allow the Chair to point out, if the Commission adopts the Chair's motion it then goes to the Legislature and the Legislature can do with it what they want to. Even if the Legislature adopted the proposal it can outline its duties and limit the powers before submitting it to the people.
MR. HARRIS. That is right. At the same time it is hard to limit if you are going to turn over the management of the penal system. You have got to trust somebody to handle it, and thrust broad powers in their hands. If you can't control the Board, you have lost control right on, and I think it is a dangerous step right now, and when it took a pretty good person in asking that they follow us in setting it up. I still think like Governor Johnston of South Carolina says, and everywhere we went, if the Governor does not keep right in behind it, it will get away from him. Any Board you appointwe have never had one in Georgia that has ever given satisfaction. I don't think putting it in the Constitution will change its color.
MR. GOWEN. The last Board we had was elected by the people and that Board did not work, did it?
MR. HARRIS. No. And I am fraid if we freeze a Board in the Constitution, and while you can't take the penal system away from them, you have got to trust them and give them discretionary powers because it is something that can't be controlled by an act of the Legislature; and if we had had the last Board we had in the Constitution we would still have it now. I think until we do know that we are going to have a set-up that will work and function as we hope it to and as we believe it will be able to work out, I think we better go slow about freezing it in the Constitution.
CHAIRMAN ARNALL. Thank you, Mr. Harris.
MR. CULPEPPER. Governor, I am very much like my friend, Mr. Harris, from Richmond. I realize that this is a hard problem to deal with. I have been watching it throughout the years I have been in the Legislature and there has been more trouble over our convict system than anyone thing. I reached the conclusion some time ago the more you narrow this thing down to a few to manage it the better off the system is. I think you are doing a wonderful job with it now. I would hate to see that interfered with. You take a Board of twelve, we have tried a Board of three men, and as the gentleman has suggested, they made a miserable mess of it and the result was that you had to take the bull by the horns and come up here and ask for a change, and the Legislature very promptly vo-

264

RECORDS OF CONSTITUTIONAL COMMISSION

ted the change. Now if you want a Board, I don't see any reason why you can't have one now under the Constitution as it now stands. I would hate to see it frozen in there because you did have a Board without a Constitutional provision specially setting them up, and you can have that now as easily as not, and it might work and it might not, and as the gentleman from Richmond suggests, if it don't work you have got it frozen in the Constitution and you are hooked. I think this matter ought to be left alone for the present at least. I think you have a fine system going here, or will have before you go out of office, and will have this matter as much under control as it is possible to get it. As far as I am concerned, I think we ought to let it alone now. I ~hink to get a Board in here and scattered all over twelve Congressional Districts in Georgia, you wouldn't get it done half as well as it is being done now. In deference to the Governor's wishes, I hate to oppose putting this in the Constitution, but I don't think it is necessary. You will remember when we had the matter in the House, discussing the convict law, and a Board was suggested, and I am not certain but what the bill originally provided for the Board, I know it provided for continuation of the old Board until the Legislature decided we had had enough Boards handling the prison system. I remember the amendment offered by my good friend from Wilkes, and the Legislature just overwhelmingly voted on the idea we had had enough Boards running the prison system in Georgia, and that we would narrow it down to one man and put the whole responsibility on him, and we could find out where the trouble was. You put a Board in and go to interfering and the Lord knows where we will land. I think we had better just hold to what we have got, and if it is necessary to have a Board, the Legislature can give the Board capacity without hooking the Legislature and the people of Georgia forever and eternally with a provision in the Constitution. It proved a failure before, and I am afraid to risk it again.
CHAIRMAN ARNALL. Any further discussion?
JUDGE MacINTYRE. What was the motion?
CHAIRMAN ARNALL. The question is the Chair moved that a Constitutional Board be created to handle the prisons of Georgia and that is before the Commission, a Board modeled after the Board of Regents, with one member from each Confressional District.
JUDGE MacINTYRE. Did the motion say how many members?
CHAIRMAN ARNALL. Yes, one from each Congressional District,

RECORDS OF CONSTITUTIONAL COMMISSION

265

and those who oppose the motion take the position it is best to have it under one man, rather than under ten, that is about the size of it.

MR. THRASHER. Just as a matter of information, in creating these Constitutional Boards, you have about a dozen now, the Board of Regents, Board of Education, Board of Pardons and Parole, and now the Board of Corrections. Next will be a Constitutional Highway Board and Constitutional Health Board. What is going to be the operation of the State? What good is the Governor? It leaves no duties.

CHAIRMAN ARNALL. I can't speak for other Governors, but this

one likes for the Boards to operate.

_

MR. THRASHER. We fought for ten or fifteen years to get away from the Highway Board; now we are going to be confronted with putting the Board of Corrections in the Constitution. What does

it all mean?

CHAIRMAN ARNALL. I judge the geneleman is not in favor of a Constitutional Board of Corrections.

MR. THRASHER. I am against all Boards.

JUDGE MacINTYRE. I want to make this observation as a start. We have a lot of other boards, but here you are dealing with human beings and human liberty, not property. Of course they say it might not work, but I don't believe it could work any worse than the one man system has at sometime in the past, I don't believe any board could work any worse than it has sometimes in the past, and I say this ought to be an exception to the general rule when we are dealing with human beings and human liberty, and we ought to give it a different sort of trial. If it don't work, we can repeal it.

MR. HARRIS. As it now stands it is amenable to the Governor and it is amenable to the Legislature. This Constitutional Board puts everything beyond the control of the Governor, and beyond the control of the Legislature, and sets it up where they are above the Legislature, and above the Governor, and above the prisoners and everybody else, and you would have to wait until you could elect two or three governors to change it.

CHAIRMAN ARNALL. The Chair would like to recognize Mrs. Guerry, member of the Legislature from Macon County, Montezuma; Mr. Hicks from Floyd; Mr. Fortson from Wilkes.

MRS. HAAS. Mr. Chairman, it seems to me that in Georgia our

26ft

RECORDS OF CONSTITUTIONAL COMMISSION

whole prison system has been one of the most disgraceful parts of our State Government and by attempting this method of removing it some degree from political control this Commission is saying that we recognize the bad conditions, we approve of the Governor's way of trying to correct them, and we want to see the reforms carried out. I don't see how we can attempt to foil his efforts, and a Constitutional Board made up of representative people I feel sure will give us the kind of prison system we want. I would like to see us follow the Governor's leadership on this matter.
CHAIRMAN ARNALL. Thank you, Mrs. Haas. Is Dr. Coleman in the hall? The Chair, in order to explain his position a little better seeks the indulgence of the Commission. Now please understand that I don't talk about any ex-Governors, I have quit doing that because one of these days I am going to be an ex-Governor myself, so what I say has nothing to do with any ex-Governor. It is just a statement of fact. You go along and you elect one Governor who has one attitude, for instance, about the prison system, and another who has another attitude. There was a time, for instance, when Tattnall was heavily mechanized; then another administration came in and they believed it was best to do away with the machines and utilize each man hour of work for the prisoner, for instance doing away with the tractors and getting mules and let them use mules. That may have heen a wise system or it may not. I don't know, but there in the course of some four years we completely reversed the theory upon which Tattnall Prison was operated. What I am saying is that it is pretty expensive in a State when you lay out an outlay to do one way, get that started, and then another change of administration comes along and says that is all wrong and throws that away and does it another way, and another way. What I am suggesting, by a Constitutional Board you can shape long term prison programs whereby you can gradually work for perfection on a program, and no matter how the winds of politics shift and change, you don't retard the continual development along a certain line of your prison program. That is the greatest reason for advocating the Board. Is there any further discussion?
JUDGE SMITH. Governor, what would be the advantage of having the Board for the Director of Correction? You could have him in office and get away from the idea, what is everybody's business is nobody's business.
CHAIRMAN ARNALL. That would answer the same purpose except

RECORDS OF CONSTITUTIONAL COMMISSION

287

you wouldn't have as many people advising you about your problems.
JUDGE SMITH. I presume as is the general situation, usually when it is poor pay it is poor work.
CHAIRMAN ARNALL. Any further discussion, gentlemen? If not, the question is on-
MR. LOVEJOY. Of how much value is the Governor's thought and attention to the prison system? 1 will say this, we are eliminating the Governor as a possible member of the Board. Mr. Harris says the advice that they had was as a matter of fact the success depended upon the intimate control of the Governor, and by this you are eliminating the Governor from having anything to do with it. As far as I am concerned, I thnk it was a mistake to take the Governor of the Board of Regents. I think he ought to be on the Board. You have already done that, and played hell, and that is that. 1 know so little about it I am asking a question. Looks to me like your Governor, with his responsibility and all, ought to be on the Board if you are going to have the Board.
CHAIRMAN ARNALL. The only trouble in being Governor is finding enough hours in the day to do the job decently. Any man who wants to can make a reasonably good Gvernor if he can find time to attend to the State's business, but it is the hardest thing in the world to do, to attend to the State's business. 1 left here at 1:00 o'clock to speak to the South Altantic Druggists, and got snarled up in traffic, and was late getting back. To those people that was the most important thing 1 could do today, whereas to my way of thinking this Constitution is mighty important itself. As you go along and see the tremendous demands on the Governor's time, it is utterly impossible for him to run down all the State's business and keep it right under his thumb. He just can't find the time. When you seek information about things you can't always get the truth. For instance, 1 have got on appointment to make of a city court judge in a county in this State, and I called the leading citizens and lawyers and members of the bar and my friends down there who had helped IDe, the editor of the newspaper and the court house officials, to come up here. I said, "I want to appoint a good man judge. That is what 1 want to do. I don't want to appoint a sorry man." They all said, "All right, here is your man," and named him, and then they left, but as they were leaving one of them said, "I want to see you a minute," and then he comes in and says, "Don't appoint that feI-

268

RECORDS OF CONSTITUTIONAL COMMISSION

low judge, it will ruin you. He is the sorriest man in the county." The phone rang and one of them was calling from a telephone booth, and another and another, until I don't know who to appoint judge. Unless the Governor can go into a county or send in and scout around, you have all that kind of business, and they get mad if you do that. Theoretically the Chief Executive ought to keep up with every function of the State Government, and I try to do it, but there is not enough time to do it. We have got about eighty-five penal institutions in this State, and one man goes down and looks at it and he gets one impression, and another man a different impression. It is one of those things that is hard to handle. I am not trying to shirk my duty, and I will do anything I can, but unless we can find more hours in the day, I am not going to be able to do it, and the more help I can get as Governor, the more help I want. It is true with the help of the people interested in the various units of government you can get .mmething accomplished. You talk about it being a mistake for the Governor not to be on the Board of Regents. I think it is the best thing in the world that he is not on the Board. If I was on the Board, when they got ready to get money they would talk to me and say that I agreed. Like it is now they can get up their own regulations and then I conside.r it. I like the idea of letting the Boards take first lick at a problem and then let the Governor take their recommendations. I think the Prison Board would do a great deal towards stabilizing it. I am pleased with what we are doing. It is not perfect, but it is lots better than what we have been doing, and every time I ride over Georgia and see people working on the roads without being dressed up like zebras, it makes me take pride in the State. If we have not done anything but take the chains and stripes off, we have made progress.
Please let me explain to the Commission that I am not wedded to these ideas. I am just suggesting what I think ought to be done. Any member of this Commission can vote like they want to and it is not going to offend me. I want you to do what you think is right.
MR. GOWEN. Isn't the argument you just made an argument against it. If we had had a Constitutional Board when you took office, and if that Constitutional Board would not agree, wouldn't the convicts now be wearing stripes and chains and you couldn't do anything about it without asking the people to amend the Constitution. As I recall, the act that was passed and under which we are now operating, the Director holds the office at the pleasure of and is directly responsible to the Governor. You selected a good

RECORDS OF CONSTITUTIONAL COMMISSION

289

man and turned it over to him and gave him the opportunity to carry it out. If he is a bad man the people know exactly where the responsibility is; it is back of the Governor. Personally I don't believe you could divorce the Governor from it as to whether good or bad, and the Governor ought to have more important duties to do than to appoint city court judges and make speeches. He has got to take the responsibility, and he is entitled to credit when it is good, and when it is bad he is entitled to criticism or discredit.
CHAIRMAN ARNALL. Thank you, Charlie. Any further discussion? If not, the question is on the proposed amendment offered by the Chair that a Board of Corrections similar to the Board of Regents be created as a Constitutional Board of Corrections in charge of the Department of Corrections. So many as favor it make it known by saying "aye"; opposed "no." The noes seem to have it. The noes have it and the proposal is lost.
Number 8. It is recommended by the Policy Committee to the full Commission that the provision relating to the compensation of county officers be modified in general along the lines of the following language: "Upon the recommendation of two grand juries the fiscal authorities of the county may place county officers on a fee basis, salary basis, or fee basis supplemented by salary." The purpose of that proposal is that some of the county officers on a fee basis are not making enough upon which to live. I have received more resignations from sheriffs than any other officials of this State because they are only making $20.00 or $30.00 a month, and I think I have received more resigantions from them than have ever been handed in to a Governor, and this would allow two grand juries of the county to recommend it, if these fees should be supplemented by salary, or if they think the fees should go into the county treasury and the officers put on a salary, or whatever basis they determine on, upon the recommendation by two grand juries can be effectuated by the fiscal authorities.
MR. HEAD. Mr. Chairman, I wanted to ask, under that Constitutional language as it reads, wouldn't the grand juries be able to change the compensation of a man after he is elected? The man might be elected under the theory that he is to receive a salary and fees, and then they might cut out the salary or the fees. I think there should be some provision it couldn't be changed after the man takes over the duties of the office or during that term.
CHAIRMAN ARNALL. Here is the evil we strike at in this proP08-

279

RECORDS OF CONSTITUTIONAL COMMISSION

al. Here is the sheriff of Chattahoochee County: I assume he has only little income from his fees. He may make a disclosure to the grand jury and the fiscal officer of his county where last month he took in $50.00 and say to them, "Unless some help is accorded me, I can't continue to serve as sheriff of this county"; then in that event two grand juries, upon their recommendations, the fiscal officers could say, if they saw fit, '''We will pay you an additional $100.00 a month for the discharge of your duties until your fees begin to increase or until they are where this amount will be absorbed."
lVIR. HEAD. In that event I would be willing to increase it but not to decrease it.
CHAIRMAN ARNALL. The Chair will gladly accept other amendments.
JUDGE GRICE. Wouldn't you say, "two successive grand juries"?
CHAIRMAN ARNALL. Successive I think is better.
MR. LOVEJOY. I have an amendment to cover that point. I move it be amended to read as follows: "Upon the recommendation of two successive grand juries," inserting the word "successive," "the fiscal authorities of the county may place county officers on a fee basis, salary basis, or fee basis supplemented by salary, and may change such basis from time to time upon the recommendation of two successive grand juries." "And may change such basis from time to time upon the recommendation of two successive grand juries" is added to the paragraph.
CHAIRMAN ARNALL. Now what about your amendment, Mr. Head?
MR. HEAD. I would like to have that taken care of.
CHAIRMAN ARNALL. Let the Chair point out this one thing. Suppose in the instance of the sheriff, as an example, of Chatta.. hoochee County, is now making $50.00 a month on fees and two grand juries successively recommend that he be paid out the county treasury $75.00 in addition; then suppose his business picks up and they decide he is making $125.00 out of fees and they want to do away with the supplemented salary. We wouldn't want to fix it to where they couldn't do that. In other words, what I am trying to do is to help the county officers who need help, because some of them do. Some of them are making good money but others are not.
JUDGE GRICE. Would you apply that to sheriffs and clerks.

RECORDS OF CONSTITUTIONAL COMMISSION

271

CHAIRMAN ARNALL. All eourt house officers.
MR. FOLEY. Haven't you got enough protection with two successive grand juries and the fiscal authorities passing on it?
CHAIRMAN ARNALL. I am afraid if we limit it we will do away with what we are trying to do.
MR. HEAD. I withdraw my objection.
CHAIRMAN ARNALL. The proposed amendment of Mr. Lovejoy is as follows: "Upon the recommendation of two successive grand juries, the fiscal authorities of the county may place county officers on a fee basis, salary basis, or fee basis supplemented by salary, and may change such basis from time to time upon the recommendation of two successive grand juries." Is there any discussion? The question is on the adoption of the amendment proposal. Is there objection? The Chair hears none. It is so adopted.
Now we come to number 9. Let's skip number 9.
MR. HARRIS. Let me ask one question about that. Now I am not against it, I am for it, but the thing that strikes me, taking a county like Fulton or Richmond, maybe in one office you have twelve or fifteen employees. Would that be broad enough language to let the county pay the salaries of employees in the office and put on a salary, changing the fee to salary? For instance, where they are under the fee system. Take the tax collector, for instance, or the clerk of the court, you see where they are under the fee system he pays all the help out of the fees. When you change over to the salary system-I had that when we changed over in Richmond, then we had to fix the salaries of each of the county officers, and we had to fix the number of employees in their offices, and their salary and payout of the salary, and convert the fees to the treasury. I don't think this would probably affect those counties where they have those special amendments. Suppose you say Coweta County, and they probably have at least two clerks. Would the county have the authority to furnish those clerks under this authority here? It looks to me like if we have not done that it should be broad enough.
CHAIRMAN ARNALL. My belief is that in fixing salary basis of fees the grand juries could say how it be paid. I believe so. However you might give some consideration to that, and if necessary we can consider it. I believe it is broad enough to allow the salary operation.
MR.HEAD. I think the words "salary basis" will take care of it. .

272

RECORDS OF CONSTITUTIONAL COMMISSION

CHAIRMAN ARNALL. Without objection the Chair will pass over number 9, which relates to the Courts, since the committee must meet on that.
Number 10 relates to homestead exemptions. The clerk will read number 10.
MR. McCUTCHEN. (Reads) "The policy committee recommends to the full Commission for its consideration as an amendment to Article VII, Section II, Paragraph VII, and that shown on Page 13 of report of Sub-Committee No.3, relating to Homestead exemptions, by adding thereto the following: 'Should the owner of a dwelling house on a farm, who is already entitled to homestead exemption, participate in the program of rural housing and obtain a new house under contract with the local housing authority, he shall be entitled to receive the same homestead exemption as allowed before making such contract."
CHAIRMAN ARNALL. That is th Homestead Exemption for Rural Housing.
MR. HARRIS. If you recall, Mr. Hamilton, State Treasurer, appeared with a provision to take care of Rural Housing not now covered by the Homestead Exemption Law. He had a long description, and I suggested to him that he go back and call his baby by name, instead of describing it, which he did. The necessity for it is this: Under the Rural Housing System a farmer wants a house and he deeds an acre of land to the Government. The Government then builds him a house and enters into a lease contract and leases back at so much a month or year; and when a certain amount is paid, they deed it back to him, and technically it did not come within the exemption. And the object of this is to enable him to still get exemption on his house when it is built under that kind of scheme.
CHAIRMAN ARNALL. Does the Commission understand the purpose of this amendment? Is there any discussion of it? Does Mr. Harris move its adoption?
MR. CULPEPPER. I would like to ask this question. There is nothing in that language that would allow a homestead exemption except on the one house? He couldn't build two houses? Suppose he keeps his old one. Does he deed the Government another acre somewhere?
MR. HARRIS. I don't think it makes any difference. Say he had 500

RECORDS OF CONSTITUTIONAL COMMISSION

273

acres of land, he would get $2,000 exemption. That is all he would get.
MR. CULPEPPER. It wouldn't give him two exemptions?
MR. HARRIS. No, sir.
CHAIRMAN ARNALL. Any discussion of this proposal?
JUDGE SMITH. How would be be entitled to homestead?
MR. HARRIS. That is the object of this amendment, it is to give him the right to homestead while the Government holds the title to the land. They take title and give a lease on which he agrees to pay so much per month and so much a year until a certain amount is paid, then it becomes his.
MR. LOVEJOY. May I ask the Attorney General this question? If the man borrows money to secure debt, does that defeat his homestead?
MR. HEAD. No, sir.
MR. LOVEJOY. I don't see how this defeats his homestead. It is a lease that says after so many dollars are paid you get title.
CHAIRMAN ARNALL. It has not been construed as entitled to homestead exemption. Any objection to the adoption of the proposal. Without objection it is ordered adopted.
At this time we have before us a request from the Ministerial Association of Atlanta that parsonages be allowed to come under the homestead exemption provision. Is there any discussion or consideration of that?
JUDGE GRICE. I object to that.
MR. LOVEJOY. Which one it that?
CHAIRMAN ARNALL. You remember we had it up once before, and we couldn't write a provision exempting parsonages without exempting a lot of people, because in some churches everybody in the church is a Member of the Gospel. Is there any discussion of it? Anyone move that we consider it? If not, it is tabled.
CHAIRMAN ARNALL. Now we have a committee appointed of Judge Grice, Judge MacIntyre; Mr. Harris, Mr. Gross and myself to work on the provision relating to the Supreme Court and the Court of Appeals. That committee will undertake to meet before tomorrow.

274

RECORDS OF CONSTITUTIONAL COMMISSION

MR. FOLEY. May I suggest this for the consideration of that committee. I understand there is some question whether the statute providing for the retirement of Justices and Judges is Constitutional or not.
CHAIRMAN ARNALL. Mr. Justice Grice and Judge MacIntyre, will you make a mental note to consider that when we meet?
I have a communication from Mr. William E. Bush, of Augusta, who wants us to revamp the Constitution where any stockholder in any Georgia corporation has one accumulative vote for each share of stock owned. That relates in internal management of corporations, and the Chair would be of the opinion we should not get into that. Apparently he needs some votes.
I also have a communication from the Revenue Commissioner which the Assistant Secretary has given me in which he says he is enclosing some suggested changes to the Constitution which we might desire to consider: "These suggestions were made as a result of the study of the Tax Advisory Committee. Our attention has been called to the wording of Section II, Paragraph IV, Article VII, regarding proposed poll tax. It leaves poll tax levy discretionary with the Legislature. If it is the thought of the Committee that a poll tax should be levied it occurs to us the wording should be changed. We also believe that specific exemption should be included in Article IX, Section I, relating to homes occupied by preachers." Those are excerpts from the letter. Now we have disposed of the preachers' homes, and the Chair is of the opinion we ought not to levy a poll tax in the Constitution of Georgia. Is there objection? The Chair hears none.
Now the question comes as to whether this Commission will reconsider its action in doing away with voters in the Constitution. Mrs. Haas, did you desire to be heard?
MRS. HAAS. We have taken out that one provision as to who is qualified to vote in the primary. It seems to me that is the forerunner of eliminating all statute on the subject, and we are doing something that is endangering our primaries. Evidently primaries needed regulation, or regulation never would have been enacted by the Legislature, and we are taking the one regulation out of the Constitution. I know we considered this before, but it seemed to me so particularly dangerous and such an unwise thing to do it that I hoped the Committee might reconsider. There are statutes about primaries, and I don't see how they could be replaced by

RECORDS OF CONSTITUTIONAL COMMISSION

275

party regulations. I think we should go into it very thoroughly to see what we are doing.
CHAIRMAN ARNALL. Is there any further discussion? In our work we have eliminated from the Constitution the provision which says that in order to vote in a primary you have got to be qualified to vote in the general election. In other words, we took it out of the Constitution and left it to the Legislature or party authorities. Now Mrs. Haas, as I understand it, suggests that we reconsider our action and rewrite into the Constitution the provision that no one shall be qualified to vote in the primary who is not qualified in the general election. Is there a second to that motion?
JUDGE MacINTYRE. As I understand it the Legislature in its wisdom could pass it; it is not hog tied.
CHAIRMAN ARNALL. That is right. If there is no second to Mrs. Haas' motion we pass from that.
The next proposal that the Chair desires to bring to the attention of this eminent Commission is the complaint of the Justices of Peace Association of Georgia directed at our recommendations whereby this Commission is in effect doing away with J. P. Courts in Georgia. The Chair is of the opinion that if the Justices of the Peace become aroused about doing away with J. P. Courts we will be in the likelihood of running into real trouble in the adoption of the Constitution.
MR. HARRIS. Does the Chair have that section?
CHAIRMAN ARNALL. Paragraph I, Section VII, Article VI, Code Section 2-3501 of the old Constitution and page 45 of the Revised Constitution.
MR. GOWEN. The only change that was made in that, the present Constitution provides that the Legislature can abolish J. P. Courts in any county of Georgia that has a city of a population of over 20,000, and the Committee changed it to any county having a populatiaon of over 20,000. I personally don't think it makes a great deal of difference, except you might have some local members some time in the future, and I think I redrew that section.
HR. HARRIS. How does it read now?
MR. GOWEN. If a county has a city of over 20,000 population in its border.
MR. HARRIS. Is there any objection to putting it back? Mr. Chair-

276

RECORDS OF CONSTITUTIONAL COMMISSION

man, in the new proposal it says, "in any county of this State having a population of over twenty thousand." I move the words be ill serted "applying to any city."
CHAIRMAN ARNALL. Is there objection to striking the report of the Committee in reference to Paragraph I, Section VII, Article VI, and inserting in lieu thereof Paragraph I, Section VII, Article VI of the present Constitution, which would leave it exactly like it is?
MR. GOWEN. I think we could shorten the language some. It is kind of cumbersome. I think you could just put the words the Speaker said and leave that part like it was.
MR. LOVEJOY. Is that the only change in this paragraph?
CHAIRMAN ARNALL. No, sir, there is another change. We do away with ex-officio J. P.'s. Let me read it so that you may understand (Reads letter from the Justices of the Peace Association). Those are the two objections. One, that it makes it impossible for the Legislature to abolish J. P. Courts in any county having a population of 20,000, whereas under the present Constitution they can abolish in any county having cities of 20,000.
MR. GOWEN. Abolish them in the whole couny if there is a city of 20,000.
CHAIRMAN ARNALL. And the other objection is we provide in these militia districts that have commissioned notary publics not to exceed one in each district; they may be appointed upon the recommendation of the grand juries of the several counties; they shall be commissioned by the Governor for a term of four years.
MR. HARRIS. Mr. Chairman, I move the Chairman be authorized to rewrite this paragraph so as to take care of the ex officio J. P.'s.
MR. GOWEN. GOWEN. I drew this. I have some responsibility for it. It says those militia districts for which Justice of the Peace is authorized. Now whether the office is vacant or not, if a Justice is authorized you can have N. P. and ex officio J. P. The third objection, he has got no uniformity in the city courts of Georgia; most every county has a city court.
CHAIRMAN ARNALL. Is there objection to rewriting this provision? You could maintain the shortened form you provided, Mr. Gowen, and yet provide that the General Assembly can abolish J. P, Courts only in counties where there is a city of 20,000.

RECORDS OF CONSTITUTIONAL COMMISSION

277

JUDGE GRICE. Would that leave it like it is?
CHAIRMAN ARNALL. Except it would be shortened, doing away with the surplus. Is there objection? The Chair hears none and it is adopted.
Now with the indulgence of the Commission, Paragraph III, Section VI, Article VII, of the Constitution, page 96 in the yellow book-The Chair understands that here in Atlanta and Fulton County an effort is being made to build a great medical center, and the Chair is of the opinion that certain charities are very desirous of contributing towards effectuating that medical center. The present Constitution provides a limit not exceeding thirty years on contracts that can be made between cities, towns, municipalities, or counties, or public agencies, or corporations for creating hospital facilities. Now some of these charities that are desirous of contributing to this health center will contribute, as the Chair understands it, if the life of the contracts are longer than thirty years, but they want some assurance that when they make the contracts they will continue for longer than that period. And I have been requested by those who are so very interested in this work to recommend to this Commission that we extend the period of these contracts from thirty to fifty years. They tell me that if that is done these charities will give more bountifully to this hospital work. Of course anything that promotes better hospitals and better health work for our people we are interested in; so the Chair moves to amend Paragraph III of Section VI of Article VII by striking out the words ..thirty years" where they appear and substituting in lieu thereof the words "fifty years." Is there any discussion?
MR. THRASHER. Is there any particular reason for that period being there at all? Why not just authorize them?
CHAIRMAN ARNALL. As I understand it, you have got to have some period at which time these contracts will terminate.
I have a communication from Mr. Robert Strickland who makes this proposal, and he discussed it with me at some length, and he believes if this extension is granted that more money from these charitable foundations will be made available for this hospital work in this area. The proposal is to extend the thirty year period to a fifty year period. Is there any discussion? Is there objection to the proposal? Without objection it is so ordered.
The Chair would like to now take up the question that was brought to the attention of the Commission thi& morning by Sena-

278

RECORDS OF CONSTITUTIONAL COMMISSION

tor Kennon in which he insists that we provide for fifty-four Senatorial Districts instead of fjfty-two and leave it to the Legislature to arrange to what counties shall constitute and comprise those Senatorial Districts. What is the pleasure of the Commission?
JUDGE SMITH. Mr. Chairman, I myself am very much interested in the movement to give some relief to the larger Senatorial Districts. Senator Kennon and myself both come from the same Senatorial District, and our Senatorial District is comprised of five counties, I think the largest one in the State. I don't think there is another one in the State that has five counties, and just what solution can be worked out I don't know, but as Mr. Kennon said this morning, it is certainly not fair to our Senatorial District to give us five so that any particular county in the District wouldn't have a voice in the Senate except every ten years, and then other counties would be two, some three and some four. As pointed out by Mr. Kennon this morning, and as he pointed out to me yesterday, he says that there are Senatorial Districts in North Georgia with two counties with a total population of less than half of the population of our Senatorial District, and he said that there are others with three counties with a total population of less than half of our total population. Just what can be worked out, I don't know. I don'. think anything can be worked out except to render some Senatorial District more authority to work on than others. In other words, there is not room for our number of counties to be reduced unless we increase the number of Senatorial Districts. I think that is the only solution that we can resort to, is to increase the number of Senatorial Districts and let the Legislature work it out. '
CHAIRMAN ARNALL. Do you so move, Judge Smith?
JUDGE SMITH. Yes. I make that motion.
CHAIRMAN ARNALL. Judge Smith moves to increase the number of Senatorial Districts from 52 to 54. Is there any discussion?
JUDGE GRICE. My District has got four, and Bibb is one of the larger counties, but it seems to me when we have 52 and the Legislature redistricts it every ten years, that is as good as we can do unless you want to increase numerically the Senate. I don't care to do that.
CHAIRMAN ARNALL. Of course the situation we have now came about largely by the consolidation of Fulton and Campbell and Fulton and Milton several years ago. That cut two counties out and left

RECORDS OF CONSTITUTIONAL COMMISSION

279

two Districts with two counties each. It so happens that my county is one of those, and Meriwether is in that District. I don't know any reason why the General Assembly couldn't rearrange the Senatorial Districts if they want to. If there are five in one District and two in another, it looks like they would work out a rearrangement.
MR. CULPEPPER. Isn't there another District of Clayton and Henry - - give that three instead of two.
CHAIRMAN ARNALL. That is right. It seems to me when the matter goes to the General Assembly, the General Assembly can do what they want to do on Senator Kennon's suggestion. Judge Smith moves we say intead of 52 Senatorial Districts we say 54, that is the motion. Is there a second?
MR. HEAD. I second the motion.
CHAIRMAN ARNALL. So many as favor the. motion make it known by saying "aye"; opposed "no." The noes seem to have it. The noes have it and it is lost.
Now on the question of divorce, the jurisdictional question that was submitted by a delegation of lawyers this morning whereby they want to reinsert in the new Constitution the 1943 amendment. Judge Grice, are you familiar witth that?
JUDGE GRICE. Yes, sir. I want to say this, that the committee did not overlook the fact that two years ago the people ratified that amendment, but we did not overlook the fact also at the same time they ratified a local amendment for Grady County when the people of Grady County did 110t want it; so we did not pay very much attention to that. The views of the committee were-and I simply want to submit their views--that we have now the venue for said residence fixed in the Constitution, and it has been fixed in the Constitution since 1789 where a suit can be brought, and we said when it came to a divorce it said a party reside twelve months. Every State in the Union that I know anything about has a provision as to how long a party must reside there. Now there are some that have put in there that a soldier stationed anywhere on a military reservation can use the courts of the State where he is ordered to be in preference to his home State, and we did not see any reason why a man from Michigan couldn't as well get his divorce in Michigan as in Georgia. I don't think anybody on the committee has any great feeling on the subject, but it was not an oversight, it was not overlooked, we just thought it wasn't any sense in letting those

280

RECORDS OF CONSTITUTIONAL COMMISSION

people come here and get their divorces. The situation is not altogether new. We have had Fort McPherson on the edge of Atlanta for fifty or sixty years with 1000 or 1200 soldiers out there, and had a camp down at Savannah long before this last war came on, so the thing has not just recently come up. We have had this situation in Georgia for fifty years at least.
MR. HARRIS. Mr. Chairman, we have a right complicated situation where army posts and camps are. If I understand the Supreme Court decision, and J read it when it came out, if a man had been in the Army twenty years, as far as Georgia is concerned, the State of his residence was where he was when he went into the military service, and as far as Georgia is concerned he would have to go back there to get a divorce. We have people that have lived for two or three years in Augusta that are on military duty, been in the Army for years, and they move their families there, they register and vote and become citizens for every other purpose, except under that decision they can't get a divorce in Georgia; they have got to go back to the original state in which they were living when they became a part of the military forces; and while it involves a lot more than just these hasty marriages and hasty divorces in war times, where you have got these permanent posts, it is a situation that has existed for a long time, but it was one that had never been given much attention. I imagine lots of folks got divorces which were not contested, and that was the first one that found its way to the Supreme Court. My recollection is that the man at Fort Benning in that case had lived there several years. I don't recall whether his family lived there. We have that situation, where they establish citizenship for every other purpose except getting a divorce, and probably they have lost their citizenship in their original State.
CHAIRMAN ARNALL. Does the gentleman move readoption of the 1943 amendment?
MR. HARRIS. Yes, sir.
CHAIRMAN ARNALL. Any discussion? Is there a second?
MR. FOLEY. I second the motion.
CHAIRMAN ARNALL. So many as favor readoption of the 1943 amendment make it known by saying "aye"; opposed "no." The ayes seem to have it. The ayes have it and that is adopted.
Without objection, the Chair would like to propose to the Com-

RECORDS OF CONSTITUTIONAL COMMISSION

281

mission at this time that we adopt a provision to be included in the Constitution of Georgia relating to the so-called subject of home rule. The Chair is going to read the proposal that the Chair will offer unless there is objection to the Chair doing so, this provision, if adopted, to be inserted in an appropriate place in the Constitution. (Reads) "Paragraph I. In addition to all other powers granted by this Constitution, any county or municipality shall have the power to amend any existing law relating to its organization and to exercise every power not inconsistent with the general law in this Constitution in the following manner:
"(a) A proposal to adopt, amend or repeal any form of government may be submitted for a vote of the people of the county or municipality when a majority of the governing authority vote by resolution to submit same at the next regular county or municipal election. Such proposal must be passed by the governing body at least 60 days before the next general regular county or municipal election, and the proposed amendment or proposition shall be advertised in full once a week in the official gazette for four weeks next preceding such regular election. The caption of the resolution contaning such amendment or proposition shall be placed on the official ballot whereby the voters will be permitted to vote 'yes' or 'no' to said proposal. If a maj erity of the voters voting at the election vote 'yes' the amendment or the proposition shall be proclaimed within five days thereafter by the governing authorities as being passed, and a certified copy of the same must be filed with the Secretary of State in order to validate the enactment.
"(b) When a written petition is submitted to a governing authority setting out a proposed resolution for the adoption, amendment, alteration, addition to, or abolishment of any laws governing such county or municipality which is signed by at least 20 per cent of the registered voters of said county or municipality, it shall be the duty of such body to submit such proposal at the next regular election, and said submission shall be in the same manner as is provided for in paragraph (a) of this section.
"(c) It shall be the duty of the Secretary of State to publish in a bound volume, in the month of May each year, charter amendments of all towns and cities that have been filed in his office for one year preceding the first day of May.
"(d) The term 'regular election' as used in this section shall mean the election in which officers of the municipalities or counties are

282

RECORDS OF CONSTITUTIONAL COMMISSION

elected, but in the event any municipality or county does not have a regular election of officers in this one year from the date of filing of a petition signed by at least 20 per cent of the registered voters setting out a proposed resolution for adoption, amendment or repeal of any laws govering such county or municipality, it shall be the duty of such municipality or county governing authority to submit amendments or proposals for ratification or rejection at a special election which shall be held at a date not earlier than sixty days nor later than six months from the date said proposal is submitted by the governing authority."
Now, gentlemen of the Commission, the proposal broken down is simply this, that in addition to the powers granted to any county or municipalitiy under the Constitution or general law of the State, if the people in a particular city or county desire some amendment to the law governing that city or county, the governing authorities of the city or county can cause the proposal to be plac-
ed upon the ballot at the next regular election. That is the first recourse. The second recourse is, if a petition is submitted to the governing authorities signed by 20 per cent of the registered voters in the particular city or county affected, then it shall be the duty of the governing authorities to place that on the ballot at the next regular election, provided however that the election is not more than one year off, but if it is more than one year off, then the governing authorities shall call a special election not less than sixty days, or closer than sixty days from the time the petition is filed, and not longer than six months from that time the people will vote "yes" or "no" on the proposed change. Then in order for these changes to be effective a certified copy must be filed in the office of the Secretary of State if the people vote for it. The reason for doing that is that the people can keep up with the changes made in local government, and then the Secretary of State is charged with the duty of once a ye~r publishing a bound volume containing the local amendments relating to the cities or counties enacted by the people during the last year's time.
Now that is the proposal, and the Chair desires to make this further statement, with the permission of the Commission. Ever since the Chair can remember we wrangled over local legislation and is has taken lots of time. Now the Chair is of the opinion that with all our talk about centralized government, it would be a fine thing if we left the local government a large share of local government. If we make it possible to let the people vote on the changes at the regular election, we get an expression from the people. If

RECORDS OF CONSTITUTIONAL COMMISSION

283

the people want a change that the governing authorities don't sanction, then by petition they have the right to put it on the regular or special election, depending on the dates involved. And then to keep down the question of not knowing what the law is we provide that in order for the amendments to be carried, to be legal and valid, they must be certified and placed on record in the Secretary of State's Office.
We have given great thought to the home rule provision, and I want to tell you now that the League of Women Voters has done a great deal in working out this proposal. It is simple, and I believe if submitted to the people the people would approve it. I certainly would like to see the Commission go on record as favoring a type of home rule. This is the simplest type of home rule we could draw. It doesn't undertake to take away from the present machinery and powers and duties, except ill the event that the governing authorities of the municipality or county want them submitted to the people, or in the event the people themselves, by petition, want a chance to vote upon them. I think this will do a great deal towards restoring the democratic government and keeping it restored in local communities. It will bring the government close to the people. It will give us more time in the Legislature to devote to statewide matters of some superior importance in the eyes of the whole people of the State, and I belIeve it will enable this State to go forward by giving to local communities, counties and cities a better type of representation in that they can keep their representation close to the wishes of the people. This wouldn't interfere with the Legislature enacting local legislation if the people wanted it to, it merely is an alternative way, it is a type limited home rule. Is there any discussion?
MR. ARNOLD. Mr. Chairman, did I understand the Legislature could still enact laws that would make local changes?
CHAIRMAN ARNALL. Yes.
JUDGE SMITH. Like the local authorities did?
CHAIRMAN ARNALL. There is nothing in this provision that restricts the Legislature from doing what it wants to do about local matters. This is an alternative proposal as the Chair understands it. If the Legislature passed it and the Governor signed it, I believe you could repeal whateyer the law was on the book.
MR. HAND. Don't you think that would cause confusion?

284

RECORDS OF CONSTITUTIONAL COMMISSION

CHAIRMAN ARNALL. No, I don't. I think after they voted on it, I think if they had an election in Mitchell County and said we want this, you wouldn't want to come up here and change it.
MR. LOVEJOY. Mr. Chairman, would you explain just how the subject matter is defined of what they can vote on?
CHAIRMAN ARNALL. In addition to all other powers granted by this Constitution, any county or municipality shall have the power to amend any existing law relating to its organization and to exercise every power not inconsistent with the general law or with this Constitution.
MR. LOVEJOY. That is the first provision. There are many general laws which govern counties. Does that mean that a particular county can amend the general laws applying now to counties?
CHAIRMAN ARNALL. No, because if you do that it would be inconsistent with the general law.
MR. LOVEJOY. I don't know how far that limitation goes. The first provision is that they can amend any law that applies to them?
CHAIRMAN ARNALL. That is right, and to exercise every power not inconsistent with the general law or with the Constitution.
MR. LOVEJOY. Let's leave out "and to exercise every power" and read it without that.
CHAIRMAN ARNALL. It would read this way, "In addition to all of the powers granted by this Constitution, any county or municipality shall have the power to amend any existing law relating to its organization not inconsistent with the general law or with this Constitution."
MR. LOVEJOY. That means the form of government?
CHAIRMAN ARNALL. Yes.
MR. HARRIS. Abolish the city court?
CHAIRMAN ARNALL. I think so.
JUDGE MacINTYRE. Boiled down, don't it amount to a recommendation to the Legislature or a ratification of what they have already done?
CHAIRMAN ARNALL. I think, Judge, if this were adopted, assuming it was put in the Constitution as written, that then the govern-

RECORDS OF CONSTITUTIONAL COMMISSION

281

ing authorities of the county or city, by a vote of the people on the proposal, could do everything relating to local government that the Legislature could do.
JUDGE MacINTYRE. The Legislature couldn't change it?
CHAIRMAN ARNALL. Oh, yes, but I think they would have just as full and complete power as the Legislature.
MR. HAND. Did I understand the governing authorities could pass these laws?
CHAIRMAN ARNALL. The law cannot be passed any way unless the people vote on it. The governing authorities can put it on the ballot by their own volition, or the people can petition, in which event they have to put it on.
MR. HAND. They have to be voted on by the people?
CHAIRMAN ARNALL. That is right.
JUDGE SMITH. If Fulton County wanted to create a city court, who is going to prescribe its manner of operation and jurisdiction and things like that, what kind of city court if is and its jurisdiction?
CHAIRMAN ARNALL. If the county wanted to create a city court the procedure would be, for instance, for the county aHorney to draw a bill creating a city court, submit it to the county commissioners, then they would put it on the ballot at the next election, then if a majority of the people voted to create the court as proposed by the county commissioners it would be created. That is the way it would work.
MR. HARRIS. I don't think you could do it under the wording. It only applies to county government. The only thing it could apply to would be the county commissioners, looks like.
CHAIRMAN ARNALL. This language would be even broader "In addition to all other powers granted by this Constitution, any county or municipality shall have the power to amend any existing law relating to its organization and to exercise every power not inconsistent with the general law or with this Constitution."
MR. ARNOLD. Mr. Chairman, would that give a city the right to extend its corporate limits without an act of the Legislature?
CHAIRMAN ARNALL. Yes"it would. It would leave it up to the people, and if they voted to do it, it would be extended, in my opinion.

286

RECORDS OF CONSTITUTIONAL COMMISSION

MR. ARNOLD. You would have people in the county involved, as well as the city.
CHAIRMAN ARNALL. They have to vote on it in the county, if it affected extraterritorial jurisdiction. If that went through the county you could change its limits.
MR. FOLEY. Haven't we ~lready got a provision in the Constitution about increasing corporate limits?
CHAIRMAN ARNALL. I don't think the city could legislate on matters outside of its jurisdiction, no sir.
MR. GOWEN. How would you go about creating a municipality?
CHAIRMAN ARNALL. You couldn't create one except by the Legislature.
MR. GOWEN. Couldn't the county commissioners?
CHAIRMAN ARNALL. They couldn't create any government other than county government. They couldn't go out and create cities.
MR. HARRIS. Suppose the Legislature abolished the county commissioners?
CHAIRMAN AHNALL. Then the ordinary would be the governing authority. Any further discussion? You have heard the reading of the proposal. Is there a second?
MRS. HAAS. I second it.
CHAIRMAN ARNALL. There is a second. So many as favor it say "aye"; opposed "no." The noes seem to have it.
MR. LOVEJOY. I think this way about it. I think if we had defined in there really the subjects upon which they could vote you would have an entirely different situation. I would like to give it some thought.
MRS. HAAS. May we have a count on that, the notes holloed so loud.
MR. LOVEJOY. I reserve the right to consider it. I would like to think about the situation, but honestly, or rather frankly, I don't think that is drawn in such a way as to define sufficiently clear the matters upon which they can vote, the things upon which they can make changes. I think that is one reason of all these noes. I believe if we had a clear-cut statement of what we could do then we might have a different vote on it. Frankly, I would like to consider it. If

RECORDS OF CONSTITUTIONAL COMMISSION

287

there is some way to give the local authorities power to adopt some of the things they want-but that language is rather indefinite to me, and it raises so many questions that were asked here, I think it has not been fairly submitted.
CHAIRMAN ARNALL. Here is the limit of the authority. If the Commission will listen very carefully I will undertake to enumerate. "In addition to other powers granted by this Constitution, any county or municipality shall have the power to amend any existing law relating to its organization-"
MR. LOVEJOY. Give an illustration of what it might do under that.
CHAIRMAN ARNALL. Well, if the city of LaGrange-
MR. LOVEJOY. I understand about the city, how would a coun-
ty do it?
CHAIRMAN ARNALL. If the county has a five man board of commissioners and you decided you wanted to change the organization of the county, you could put in three, or you could do away with the whole board and leave it in the hands of the ordinary, you could do that. The second provision is the composition, 'structure, office, authority and powers. Any power, authority, structure or office that is created in a county can be changed under this proposal if it is not inconsistent with the Constitution.
MR. THRASHER. Does that cover the bonding law?
CHAIRMAN ARNALL. It wouldn't cover the bonding issue, that is general law.
MR. LOVEJOY. Does it have to get an amendment to the existing law?
CHAIRMAN ARNALL. No, sir, can adopt a new law. So many as favor the adoption make it known by rising and standing until counted; reverse your position, those opposed. Eight for and seven against. Is there objection, in view of that vote, to consider this adopted in substance, with a proviso that the committee on final revision consider the purport of its closer.
MR. LOVEJOY. And clarify it.
CHAIRMAN ARNALL. Without objection, it will be recommended to the Legislature as written, with the proviso that the committee on final revision give thought to clarifying the purport of it so the General Assembly can have that benefit.

288

RECORDS OF CONSTITUTIONAL COMMISSION

MR. ARNOLD. I would like to suggest that something might be added to that to provide that if we submit that as a recommendation to the Legislature that any local measure passed by the Legislature must have a referendum clause attached to it. Then you have made a step towards giving them real home rule.
CHAIRMAN ARNALL. You have heard Senator Arnold's proposal that this Commission also recommend to the Legislature that any local measure passed by the General Assembly, before being effective, shall require a referendum on the part of the people in the area affected. Is there a second?
MR. MAJORS. I second.
CHAIRMAN ARNALL. Any discussion? Is there objection? If not, it is adopted.
MR. LOVEJOY. I object.
CHAIRMAN ARNALL. Thcl'e is objection. So many as favor the proposal make it known by saying "aye"; opposed "no." So many as are in favor of it make it known by rising and standing until counted; reverse your position, those opposed. Six for and nine against, and the proposal is lost.
CHAIRMAN ARNALL. The Chair wishes to revert back to the veterans' preference proposal. During the lunch hour there were some Legionnaires up here to see us about what we did. Does the Commission desire to ge back into the veterans' preference proposal?
MR. HARRIS. I move we go back into it.
MR. HEAD. I second the motion.
CHAIRMAN ARNALL. It is moved and seconded, so many as favar it make it known by saying "aye"; opposed "no." The ayes have it and it is so ordered.
MR. LOVEJOY. I don't think we ought to proceed without Senator Atkinson.
CHAIRMAN ARNALL. The Chair moves that we strike the proposal adopted this morning in reference to veterans' preference and insert in the proposed Constitution the amendment which the people adopted and ratified in 1943 in reference to veterans' preference. Is there a se~ond.

RECORDS OF CONSTITUTIONAL COMMISSION

28'

MR. HARRIS. I second.
MR. LOVEJOY. Mr. Chairman, will you see if it fits in?
CHAIRMAN ARNALL. It fits in perfectly. I looked at it.
MR. LOVEJOY. Fits your vision for civil service?
CHAIRMAN ARNALL. Yes, sir. Here is the Chair's position about that. I have seen it happen so much. We are trying to give the veterans preference, but if the veterans think we are not trying to give them preference they are going to get out and lampoon what we are trying to do, and since the people ratified this amendment the last time, I am rather of the opinion that since they have condoned and approved what we did about veterans' preference, we had better carry it over. Now 1lhe Personnel Board can, in the system of examinations it gives, see to it that incompetents are not going to get in the State service. I think it is a discussion about a difference without a distinction. It is moved and seconded, is there any discussion? It not, those in favor of the motion will make it known by saying "aye"; opposed "no." The Chair is in doubt. Those in favor of the motion make it known by rising and standing until counted; reverse your position, those opposed.
MR. CULPEPPER. That strikes what we did this morning and in-. serts in lieu thereof the Constitutional amendment adopted at the last election.
CHAIRMAN ARNALL. Eight for and seven against, and the change will be recorded.
General Head, of course you have not had a chance to prepare your proposal, have you?
MR. HEAD. Yes, sir, I have got something I am thinking about.
CHAIRMAN ARNALL. Do you desire to submit it at this time?
MR. HEAD. Yes, sir. Under the War Mobilization and Reconversion Act of 1944 the language dealing with public works under Section 4401, I want to read two p~rtinent paragraphs of that so you can understand what we are d:rlving at. Subsection (a) reads as follows: "In order to encourage States and other non-federal public agencies to make advance provision for the construction of federal public works, the Federal Works Administrator is hereby authorized to make, from funds appropriated for that purpose, loans or advances to the States and their agencies and political subdivision.

290

RECORDS OF CONSTITUTIONAL COMMISSION

to aid and assist in the cost of architecture, engineering, economic investigations, studies, surveys, designs and plans, drawings, specifications and procedures and other actions preliminary to the construction of public works; provided the making of loans or advances hereunder shall not permit the Congress to appropriate the funds necessary for the project so planned." Then subsection (c), dealing with loans, rate of interest, and how repaid: "Loans or advances under this section to any public agency shall bear interest at the rate of 2 1-2% per annum and shall be repaid by such agency within five years of the making of the loan or advance for the construction of public works so planned. If the public works so planned is undertaken prior to such five years it shall be repaid when so undertaken. Any sum so repaid shall be covered [?] into the treasury under miscellaneous assets."
Now in order to get the advantage of federal funds for a great many of our counties and cities and municipalities, it will be necessary that a lot of preliminary work be done which they describe as architectural and economical engineering, designs, drawings, specifications, procedures, etc. Those funds used for that purpose shall be paid back by the county or city or municipality within a period of five years. That wouldn't give time for the passing of a bond issue for the purpose of doing the things that they have specified here. Now under the limitations of our Constitution as we have laid it down under Section VII, Article VII, Paragraph I, we have limited the debts of a county and municipality to 7% of the assessed valuation. Then in Paragraph III we have made provision for an additional 3%. I think the limitations under the Constitution are such "that we wouldn't be able to take advantage of the things they are talking about here under public works under the War Mobilization and Reconversion Act. I think it might be cured by adding some language, either to Paragraph I, or by inserting a new section in Article VII, and I suggest that the language, if added to Paragraph I, should be in this form: "Provided, however, that any county or municipality of this State may accept and use funds granted by the Federal Government or any agency thereof, to aid in financing because of architectural engineering, economic investigation, studies, surveys, designs, plans, drawings, specifications and procedures or other actions preliminary to the construction of public works where the funds so used for the purposes herein specified are to be repaid within a period of ten years." I think with that addition that we would not be precluded by the language of the Constitution on the creation of a debt. I think that it is neces-

RECORDS OF CONSTITUTIONAL COMMISSION

291

sary, members of Congress thought it was necessary, and Senator George thought there should be some change in it, and he undertook to get a change in the Conference Committee Report, but the language of the Conference Committee Report is practically the language I read to you. I think it -is necessary that we have some provision so that we can take advantage of the preliminary funds
to be used for determining whether or not we will have a public
works improvement program in this State, and I think that language should be either added on to Paragraph I or be incorporated as a new paragraph in Section VII of Article VII of the Constitution.
CHAIRMAN ARNALL. Thank you, General Head. You have heard General Head's reading of the proposed amendment.
MR. LOVEJOY. General Head, let me see that, just the text of your proposal.
MR. HEAD. There are several there. That is the one I read and these are the two others.
MR. LOVEJOY. This would not require enabling in the Legislature?
MR. HEAD. I don't think it would.
MR. LOVEJOY. Don't you want any provision as to who would act. the authorities of the county or city, who might incur this indebtedness?
MIt HEAD. They are only going to deal with the Constitutional Authorities of the county or city anyhow.
CHAIRMAN ARNALL. The Clerk will read the proposal.
MR. HARRIS. Are these funds to be repaid out of it by grant?
MR. HEAD. Might be, or if they did not get a grant would have to be paid out of other funds.
CHAIRMAN ARNALL. The Clerk will read the proposal.
MR. McCUTCHEN. (Reads) "Provided, however. any county or municipality of this State may accept and use funds granted by the Federal Government or any agency thereof, to aid in financing because of architectural engineering, economic investigation. studies, surveys, designs, plans, drawings, specifications and procedures or other actions preliminary to the construction of public works where the funds so used for the purposes herein specified

292

RECORDS OF CONSTITUTIONAL COMMISSION

are to be repaid within a period of ten years."
CHAIRMAN ARNALL. You have heard the reading of the proposal. Is there a second to his recommendation?
JUDGE SMITH. I second the motion.
CHAIRMAN ARNALL. Is there any discussion? If not, is there objection to the adoption. The Chair hears none. It is ordered adopted. Thank you, General Head.
CHAIRMAN ARNALL. The question comes up about the election of county school superintendents. The Chair brings that to the attention of the Commission }Jecause the Chair has been besieged by letters and telegrams and visitors bemoaning and deploring the fact that we are not going to let the people elect their school superintendent in the particular counties of Georgia, and we are not going to let the people elect their Superintendent of Schools. The Chair brings that to the attention of the Commission because the Chair heard more repercussions from that provision than anything else.
MR. HARRIS. I have been hearing from members of the Legislature who are not in favor of it. I move we go back to the old provision of electing both the county school superintendents and the State Superintendent.
J
MR. HEAD. I second the motion.
CHAIRMAN ARNALL. Any discussion?
MR. ATKINSON. You know there are six counties, or four counties that don't elect.
MR. HARRIS. We have a provision to take care of that.
CHAIRMAN ARNALL. Leave you like you are. Is there any objection?
MRS. HAAS. There is objection. I object. That is both the State and county.
JUDGE SMITH. There is not any doubt about it being the wise thing to do, about the respective boards naming the county school commissioner, but it is very unpopular and the people will not vote for it. I would vote for it, but the rank and file of my people would not. It is the wise thing to do if we can pu~ it over.
CHAIRMAN ARNALL. The question is on the adoption of Mr. Har-

RECORDS OF CONSTITUTIONAL COMMISSION

291

ris' motion, that we put in the Constitution the present provision, that is, in the new Constitution, the present provision of the Constitution which allows the people of the county to elect the county school superintendent and the voters of the State to elect the State School Superintendent.
JUDGE MacINTYRE. I realize that what Judge Smith says is true, but back in the Cnstitutional Convention, my grandfather sat there, and a very simple proposal came up, and they said the wise thing to do was to do so and so but the public wouldn't accept it, but two members voted for what they thought was wise. I don't think two will vote with you.
CHAIRMAN ARNALL. Thank you, Judge. So many as are in favor of the adoption of Mr. Harris' motion make it known by saying "aye"; opposed "no." The Chair is in doubt. So many as favor the motion of the gentleman from Richmond make it known by rising and standing until counted; reverse your position, those opposed. Eight for and five against, and the motion prevails.
MR. THRASHER. Mr. Chairman, let me point out this one thing. You have got a Constitutional Board of Education and nobody seems to want anybody elected by it, can't name its executive officers.
CHAIRMAN ARNALL. Leave it exactly like it is now. They have never had the authority to name their executive officers, and this Commission recommends they still don't have that authority.
MR. LOVEJOY. How about letting the convention vote?
MRS. HAAS. They wouldn't be Constitutional voters.
CHAIRMAN ARNALL. Now the question comes on Mr. Fortson's proposal that the Commission delete from the Revised Constitution the sentence on page 25, Article V, Section I, Paragraph I, line 4, beginning with the word "after" and ending with the word "thereof." The effect of this deletion would be to remove any limitation on the right of the people to select the Governor they might desire.
If the Commission will again indulge the Chair, the Chair would like to make a statement.
MR. LOVEJOY. Governor, we would like to hear from you, but I want to say that I sincerely hope-
CHAIRMAN ARNALL. The Chair is of the opinion that in a well

294

RECORDS OF CONSTITUTIONAL COMMISSION

ordered government, whether that be a city government or a county government or state government or national government, that there is no rime or reason why the people should be restricted in their right to elect whom they want to any office they want. Any restriction that tells the people they can't elect certain people to public office or re-elect people to public office violates, in my judgment, the sound principle of democratic government. If the wishes of the people can be disregarded by artificial prohibition in the Constitution, then we don't have democratic or representative government either. Therefore I say that as far as I am concerned, or as far as one member of this Commission is concerned, I am in favor of the abolition of any prohibition against the rights of the people to elect or reelect whom they desire to office just as many times as they want to. That is their right. If the people don't want a man re-elected, they will make that known. The argument that when a man gets in office he can't be defeated is illogical and unsound. We have witnessed incumbents, even in the office of Governor, being defeated in this State. In addition, the argument that a machine is set up is likewise falacious. If we press forward. under a civil service provision there is going to be no State machine.
I say that, please understand, with no reference to my own future. If there is any man in Georgia who is desirous of getting out of politics it is your humble servant, and I don't think it will take a vote of the people to get me out of politics. I enjoy my service, but I know of nothing at the moment I would rather not do than be a candidate for Governor; so the remarks I make must not be construed to refer to any ambition I have or to my future, but merely the remarks I make are addressed to the principle involved. I tell you if you ran a bank on the theory that after a man served as president of the bank for a certain period he had to get out, or if you ran your courts or Congress or counties or cities on that principle you wouldn't have, in my judgment, real democratic government. I know of no sound, legitimate reason why the Governor should be penalized, and assuming the people want him, why the people should be restricted in saying whom they want for their Governor. However, I will conclude that statement by saying this, just as strong as I know how to say it, I am not a candidate for Governor of Georgia. I am not a candidate for re-election, but I know of no reason why the people should be restricted in their right to elect whom they want as their Governor. I wanted to say that because I wanted you to know my thinking about it, and in

RECORDS OF CONSTITUTIONAL COMMISSION

285

saying that let me again say it has no reference to me, it is merely a broad democratic principle. I don't know of any sound reason why restriction should be placed on the right of the people to elect or re-elect whom they want to public office. Certainly if ~ou make it apply to the Governor you ought to make it apply to every State official and county and city official.
Over in Alabama I believe they have a provision that no State House Officer can succeed himself. That is that the Treasurer, after he serves one term as Treasurer, he can't be re-elected, nor the Attorney General, nor the Comptroller General, nor the Commissioner of Agriculture, so over there they play ring-around-theroses. The Treasurer becomes a candidate for Comptroller General, and the Comptroller General becomes a cahdidate for Treasurer, and the Attorney General and some of the others swap offices, and they just all swap offices every four years as long as the people want them. I don't recommend the Alabama system. I merely say that in a democracy the right of the people to elect or re-elect whom they want should not be restricted by artifice or artificial procedure.
Whether the Commission recommends it to the General Assembly or whether it doesn't, it is purely a matter up to the Commission and I am not going to move that it be done, and I am not going to vote that it not be done. However, if anybody moves it or it comes to the vote, I am going to vote to take the restriction upon the people off. The matter is brQught up upon the recommendation of Senator Fortson. Is there any motion?
MR. FOLEY. I make the motion that the sentence be deleted.
CHAIRMAN ARNALL. Mr. Foley moves the prohibition be deleted, whereby the people can elect or re-elect-
JUDGE SMITE-I. The provision in the Constitution providing that a Governor could not succeed himself is wrong in principle, for the first and main reason that it would destroy a Governor's ambition or incentive to make a good Governor, and for that reason he should not be precluded by the Constitution. If he has made a good Governor and the people want to vote for him again and re-elect him again, I feel like they ought to have that privilege.
CHAIRMAN ARNALL. Is there a second to the motion?
JUDGE SMITH. I second the motion.
CHAIRMAN ARNALL. Any discussion?

296

RECORDS OF CONSTITUTIONAL COMMISSION

JUDGE SMITH. I would like to say this in addition to what I have said, the very fact that this can be changed by amendment to the Constitution at some future time, the very fact that it can be changed is almost a guarantee that it will be changed. It will not stand like it is. If we permit it to stand like it is, it wouldn't remain that way. The very sorry Governor we had that made a racket out of everything that come along, he would build himself a sufficient machine and have it changed, and then be a menace himself in another term of office. Inasmuch as it can be changed, I think we should change it so we can provide that the Governor can succeed himself. It is going to be changed.
CHAIRMAN ARNALL. Let the Chair make one statement to keep the record straight, since I have been talking about this thing. I have never advocated the four year term for the Governor. I was one of the few State officials who opposed the four year term. There are those who would make it appear I was the one who advocated the four year term. That is not true. I state that merely for the sake of the record.
MR. THRASHER. I would like to make this observation. Over the period of the last fifteen years most of the Governors-and you would come into that time now-in the last two years of the administration is when things have gone wrong. They have invariably made a bad record of the Jast two years. Maybe the prospect they could get re-elected for the next four years might keep it on an even keel.
CHAIRMAN ARNALL. Any further discussion?
JUDGE MacINTYRE. I was like you before, except I was in favor of the four year term and you were against it. You don't see any reason why you should change, and I don't see any reason why I ihould change. When the time comes to vote I am going to vote to leave it as it is.
CHAIRMAN ARNALL. I want every member to vote as they see fit. As the Chair has undertaken to make plain, the Chair is not a candidate for Governor.
MR. GOWEN. As a matter of information, how long has there been a provision in the Constitution that limited the number of terms the Governor could serve? As I understood it, under the old provision the Governor could serve two terms and then layout two years. Prior to this Constitution of 1877, what were the pro~'isions?

RECORDS 01' CONSTITUTIONAL COMMISSION

217

CHAIRMAN ARNALL. I am not familiar with those, Charlie.
MR. MAJORS. I am in favor of taking the provision out which limits the term of the Governor. I wasn't in favor of putting it in. I still think we should eliminate it and give the Governor an opportunity to serve again if the people want it. I don't think there should be any restl'iction.
CHAIRMAN ARNALL. The question is on the motion. So many as favor the motion make it known by saying "aye"; opposed "no." The Chair is in doubt. So many as are in favor of the motion make it know by rising and standing until counted; reverse your postion; those opposed. Eight for and seven against, and the motion prevails.
CHAIRMAN ARNALL. The question now is on the State Tax on realty, which is a proposal of Charlie Bloch. We all have those pamphlets available, I think.
MR. THRASHER. Did Mr. Blooch say anything ~bout making a proposal for replacing this tax?
MR. FOLEY. Will you defel' action on this and give us a chance to read the pamphlet.
CHAIRMAN ARNALL. Is there objection to deferring this matter in order to give the Members of the Commission an opportunity to read Mr. Bloch's brief.
MR. ARNOLD. I would like to make a very short statement before it is deferred. I have no objection to it being deferred, but I would like to give the Commission a thought that has come to me that might be worth while or it might not. They can consider it. If the ad valorem tax for State purposes is abolished you will have taken a step that will go a long ways towards providing proper common school financing. Under the present system of leaving ad valoreum tax for state purposes, every county in the State is competing with the other counties to see which can get its assessments on the lowest basis and pay the least into the State Government. If you remove that feature, where there will be no funds going out of the county for ad valorem tax purposes, you will see tax assessments raised in the counties, and more local funds will be raised for the support of the local schools and other local governmental functions, and it is my honest opinion that we will go a long ways towards erecting the lack of finances for school purposes if we eliminate the State advalorem tax.

298

RECORDS OF CONSTITUTIONAL COMMISSION

CHAIRMAN ARNALL. For the information of the Chair, early in our deliberations in this work that we have undertaken there was some discussion about changing the ad valorem system whereby the State levy to the counties and the cities, the ad valorem tax levy, with the provision that they should remit to the State a small percentage of what they collected. I think Jimmy Carmichael is Chairman of the Committee on County and County matters and had that for consideration at that time. Involved here is about five million dollars, isn't there, Mr. Thrasher?
MR. THRASHER. Three and a half million is the five mill levy.
CHAIRMAN ARNALL. How much does the State collect, ad valorem?
MR. HEAD. About five million. You have got to consider utility tax.
MR. THRASHER. Does that abolish utility tax?
CHAIRMAN ARNALL. The Chair is rather of the opinion if we are going to take off ad valorem taxes we ought to take off farms or businesses owned by small people. This is something we can get into tomorrow. I hate to think of enacting a provision in the State whereby we exempt utilities. I am for the little fellow. It is all right for the farmer to get an exemption, but when we go to allowing great utility companies and great business houses ad valorem tax exemptions from the State, that is different.
MR. GOWEN. And the enormous number of foreign corporations.
CHAIRMAN ARNALL. And absentee owners. In other words I think we ought to help our people; I don't think we ought to let the big corporations go scott free. We can talk about that tomorrow. I hope the Commission will consider that.
MR. CULPEPPER. Haven't we relieved the farmers largely by that homestead exemption?
CHAIRMAN ARNALL. To some extent.
MR. THRASHER. I would like to remind you that on the income of last year you were within four hundred thousand dollars, by your additional grant to education, which includes the collections from this tax. If you propose the removal of this tax you likewise have to propose to reduce allotments to common school education. You can't reduce taxes and spend it at the same time.
CHAIRMAN ARNALL. Let me tell the Commission this about taxes.

RECORDS OF CONSTITUTIONAL COMMISSION

299

We are trying our best to retire the State debt, and we are trying to expand service to the limit of our ability. The first bill that will be introduced in the Legislature, I hope, will be a bill appropriating some four million dollars that we have been able to accrue or accumulate to teachers' salaries. Now I would hate for us to do something that would throw the State finances out of kilter to where we couldn't do better by our teachers, and we have somewhat of an agreement with the school people of Georgia. The Legislature wants it done. I am sure that as we go along accumulating funds that we ought to make available to the schools by an act of the Legislature all the surplus money we can accumulate. I would hate for us to start tampering with our tax system whereby we are not going to be able to do more for education. I hope before the Commission adjourns we will nail at the masthead of the Constitution that the first duty of the State is to educate its citizens. I would like for that to be stamped indelibly in the Constitution because I believe in it, and I believe the ills in Georgia, including our poverty, are due largely to the lack of education of our people. Instead of talking about taking taxes off, I think we ought to try to do what we can, in justice to our people; yet at the same time provide increased funds for education. Not increased taxes, but making it our tax structure to the limit. I pledged we wouldn't have new taxes. If
the Legislature in 1945 passes a tax bill, r am going to veto it as fast
as it comes to my desk. W2- will be able, under our tax structure, with good luck, to payoff our debts and increase State service, assuming the Legislature will give us those tools and the provision of law necessary.
Now while I, as much as anyone, want to see a revision in the tax system of Georgia, yet it looks to me like at this particular time, when we don't know about the Federal system, it is a poor time to talk about changing tax structure. We must not take action in the Legislature or here that will curtail what we are doing for the schools. I know every member of the Commission feels exactly as I do. I thought I was for schools when I ran for Governor, but since my boy started in the first grade this year and comes home from school and reads from his little primer, I am stronger for schools than I ever was. We have got to do more for the children. So tomorrow when we discuss this proposal let's discuss it in the light of trying to work out something, if we adopt it, whereby we don't bring about a deficinency in our income where the schools will suffer.

300

RECORDS OF CONSTITUTIONAL COMMISSION

MR. ATKINSON. Why not vote on that first proposal and then we can think over the other?
CHAIRMAN ARNALL. That is on the ad valorem tax?
MR. ATKINSON. Yes, sir.
CHAIRMAN ARNALL. The only thought of the Chairman was that some members have not read Mr. Bloch's brief and argument. What is the pleasure of the Commission? Shall we consider it or delay it until tomorrow?
MR. CULPEPPER. I move it be delayed.
MR. ARNOLD. I second the motion.
CHAIRMAN ARNALL. So many as favor the motion make it known by saying "aye"; opposed "no." The Chair is in doubt. So many as favor the motion rise and stand until counted; reverse your position, those opposed. Nine to six to delay. That matter will go over until tomorrow morning.
Now another thing before we adjourn. We are going to deal with the courts tomorrow, and so that no one will be surprised when we get Lo the courts, if the Chair may tomorrow be indulged as you have indulged the Chair today, the Chair is going to advocate that we augment and increase the compensation of the judges of this State to some reasonable figure, including Superior Court Judges, whereby the State can pay expenses of Superior Court Judges or increase their salary, and likewise some increase in the salary of our Appellate Court and Supreme Court. I hope you will be thinking about that. You know the strength of this government, all government, is in the judiciary. They correct our errors, and unless we can attract and retain in our judiciary outstanding lawyers who are adequately compensated, we are going to weaken our judiciary. I feel very keenly about that, and tomorrow if you will indulge me I will have a proposal.
Is there objection to starting the deliberations of this Commission at 10.30 tomorrow morning? That will give the members of the ;{udiciary Committee time to meet. If DOt, we will meet at 10:30 tomorrow and members of the Special Judiciary Committee will meet in the Governor's Office at 9:30 tomorrow moming.
(Whereupon the meeting adjourned at 4:45 until 10:30 A. Moo Tuesday, November 14, 1944.)

RECORDS OF CONSTITUTIONAL COMMISSION

301

CHAIRMAN ARNALL. The Commission will come to order. The Chair will request Attorney General Head to lead us in prayer.
MR. HEAD. Let us all repe3t the Lord's Prayer together. (Commission repeats the Lord's Prayer)
CHAIRMAN. ARNALL. The Assistant Secretary will call the roll. MR. McCUTCHEN. (Calls the roll)
[All members were present except Judge Candler, Mr. Carmichael, Mr. Durden, Mr. Gross, Mr. Holt and Mr. Pope.]
CHAIRMAN ARNALL. Gentlemen, the first order of business today, without objection, will be the consideration of the report of the committee appointed to perfect the provisions in reference to the Supreme Court and Court of Appeals. That committee is comprised of the Chairman, Mr. Justice Grice, Judge MacIntyre, Speaker Harris and President Gross.
MR. LOVEJOY. Mr. Chairman, if it is proper to come at this time, I wish to make, and do make a motion to reconsider our action in approving what we call the home rule section of the Constitution yesterday. I don't know whether or not an explanation is in order, but if you permit me, I will state this. In the first place, it is of tremendous importance, I think, and we agree it can be a very dangerous thing. From my own judgment, the language we have used is too indefinite to my mind to specify exactly what rights we are giving, and I think, if and when any such provisio is adopted, it certainly ought to be clear and specific. I am afraid of it as it is now. I don't know what it does. My suggestion was that it be left with, or referred to the final editing committee or whatever that committee should be named. Unless we give that committee the right to make changes in the substance of it when they go throughwhat I am talking about, I think it should go out of this Commission only after specific changes. I am fraid of it as it stands. I voted for it yesterday, but I make that motion to reconsider and bring it back.
CHAIRMAN ARNALL. Mr. Lovejoy moves reconsideration of the proposal of home rule.
MR. HAND. I second the motion.
CHAIRMAN ARNALL. There is a second. Any discussion of it? Is there objection to reconsideration?
MRS. HAAS. I object.
CHAIRMAN AR...~ALL. There is objection. So many as favor re-

302

RECORDS OF CONSTITUTIONAL COMMISSION

consideration of the home rule provision make it know by saying "aye"; opposed "no."
MRS. HAAS. Would it be in order to move the appointment of a committee to submit to us a more specific proposal, if that is the object, that this is in too general terms? We have very able legal ability here, and some States do use a more specific form, and I think some of the lawyers could draft such a proposal if the Committee really wants home rule. I don't think the proper home rule provision is really dangerous.
CHAIRMAN ARNALL. Mrs. Haas moves that the matter be referred to a committee to redraft and submit to the full Commission. Is there a second to that motion?
MR. CULPEPPER. I want to offer a substitute motion, that the matter be referred to the Policy Committee.
JUDGE SMITH. I second that motion.
CHAIRMAN ARNALL. The Chair desires to make one statement before he puts the motion of the distinguished gentleman from Fayette. Sometime sooner or later we have got to determine these issues. We can't leave them kicking around from now until next August. Under the resolution of the General Assembly directing this Commission to proceed in doing the job that we have set out to do, as I understand it, copies of it must be in the hands of the General Assembly thirty days before their convening, that would be flbout December 8th. The Chair is perfectly willing to give such direction to this and other muters as the Commission might desire, but the Chair is pleading with the Commission that sooner or later, let's have some finality to this work and not just keep continuing and going back. Let's tackle the job and act and get it out of the way. However, the Chair will put the motion. What I have said is not in opposition.
MR. CULPEPPER. I make the substitute motion this matter be referred to the Policy Committee with power to act for the full Commission, if that settles it.
JUDGE SMITH. I second the motion.
CHAIRMAN ARNALL. For the benefit of the members who came in late, Mr. Lovejoy moved to reconsider the action of the Commission in adopting the home rule provision. Before the vote was announced on that motion, Mrs. Haas moved to refer the matter to a

RECORDS OF CONSTITUTIONAL COMMISSION

303

committee to report back to the full Commission, and Mr. Culpepper offered a substitute motion that the matter be referred to the Policy Committee with full power to act. Is there a second to Mr. Culpepper's motion?
JUDGE SMITH. I second the motion.
MR. HAND. Mr. Chairman, we have seen the home rule come up for fifteen or twenty years in the Legislature. Personally, I have never seen one that was any good. I want to make a motion that it be left out of the Constitution. See if that is the sense of the body.
MR. HARRIS. Mr. Chairman, I second that motion.
CHAIRMAN ARNALL. The Chair is in doubt about the parliamentary situation and if no one raises the point-
JUDGE MacINTYRE. There has to be a motion.
CHAIRMAN ARNALL. The vote was never announced on Mr. Lovejoy's motion. Mr. Speaker, I need help.
MR. LOVEJOY. See if these motions are. in order.
MR. HARRIS. I think the motion is a substitute for the original and the last motioll should be put first.
MRS. HAAS. It seems the first thing is to find out whether or not the Commission wants to develop some sort of home rule. I will withdraw my motion to have that motion acted on. That will give the sense of the Commission. If Mr. Culpepper will withdraw his motion, we can put Mr. Lovejoy's motion, whether we reconsider our action in adopting it, or take Mr. Culpepper's motion or some other motion.
CHAIRMAN ARNALL. The Chair is going to put Mr. Lovejoy's motion which first brought the objection to the proposal and that the Commission reconsider its action of yesterday in adopting the home rule amendment. Is there any discussion of that motion? Is there objection to its adoption?
MRS. HAAS. I object.
CHAIRMAN ARNALL. So many as favor adoption of the amendment make it known by saying "aye"; opposed "no." The ayes have it and now the Commission has reconsidered its action in adopting the home rule provision. Now the Chair will entertain Mr. Culpepper's motion to the effect that the matter be referred to the Policy Commission.

304

RECORDS OF CONSTITUTIONAL COMMISSION

MRS. HAAS. :Mr. Chairman, I might not understand it, but I made a motion. :Mr. Lovejoy expressed his opinion why the home rule provision was not good was that it was drawn wrongly. It was drawn by lawyers, not by a group of women, in case you might be misled. I think there are methods of drawing a home rule amendment, and if we have one drawn and returned to us, we could have a vote on it.
CHAIR:MAN ARNALL. For the information of the charming lady, unless we get into some snarl that the Chair doesn't anticipate, we will finish our session by noon today. Without objection the Chair will put :Mr. Culpepper's motion that the matter be referred to the Policy Committee with authority to act for the full Commission.
:MR. HAND. I move the home rule be left out of the Constitution. Of course if that motion should fail then Mr. Culpepper's could be acted on.
CHAIR:MAN ARNALL. Without objection the Chair will put the motion of :Mr. Hand, provided there is a second. That is, that the home rule provision be omitted from the Constitution.
MR. GOWEN. I second it.
CHAIRMAN ARNALL. There is a second. Any discussion? There are two propositions that can develop on this motion. If the motion of Mr. Hand prevails, then no home rule provision will be submitted to the Legislature in the new Constitution. If, on the other hand, his motion does not prevail then the motion of Mr. Culpepper would be in order, that it be referred to the Policy Committee with full authority to act. Is there any discussion on Mr. Hand's mo~ion that it be eliminated?
MR. LOVEJOY. Let me see what we want to do. Would it be in order to refer this recommendation to the Legislature, that they give careful consideration to the question of inclusion of some provision of home rule, and we take no action for or against any particular provision?
CHAIRMAN ARNALL. The Chair is of the opinion if Mr. Hand's motion prevails that eliminates any discussion. If it is lost there are two possible alternatives, either Mr. Culpepper's, that refers it to the Policy Committee with authority to act, or your suggestion that the Commission go on record as favoring home rule in principle, with the Legislature to give careful consideration to it. I believe in order to get the sense of the Commission we have got to put

RECORDS or CONSTITUTIONAL COMMISSION

301

Mr. Hand's motion. If it prevails, that is the end. Mr. Hand's motion is that the home rule provision be eliminated from the proposal and recommended to the General Assembly for consideration.
MR. ATKINSON. There was some provision written in this Constitution that we are preparing which provided against the passing of local acts which changed the form of government or which decreased the term of a man's office without having a referendum with reference back to the people. I think, Mr. Harris, that was his thought, and some of us thought that would have a great deal to do with cutting down all these local bills, because most of them come from wanting to change the officers of, by the Legislature. Now will this cut that out too?
CHAIRMAN ARNALL. No. The Chair is of the opinion that provision would go forward irrespective of whatever else is done. That is in the Constitution, and that was offered and adopted by the Commission in the hope that it would eliminate much local legislation.
MR. ATKINSON. Just what does this Paragraph refer to?
CHAIRMAN ARNALL. The home rule provision provides that any municipality or county can amend, repeal or modify, or enact any measure relating to the municipality or county that is not prohibited or in conflict with the general law or the Constitution.
MRS. HAAS. Several States are operating it successfully.
CHAIRMAN ARNALL. The lady is eminently correct. The question is on Mr. Hand's motion; so many as favor the motion, make it known by saying "aye"; opposed "no." The Chair is in doubt. So many as favor Mr. Hand's motion rise and stand until counted. The effect is to eliminate any reference to home rule in the Constitution. Now those opposed. The motion is lost. Now the question is on the motion of Mr. Culpepper, that this matter be referred to the Policy Committee with full authority to act for the whole Com mission. So many as favor that, make it known by saying "aye."
MR. FOLEY. That means they will prepare a proper home rule provision or not, as they see fit?
CHAIRMAN ARNALL. The policy Committee is comprised of the Chairman of the fuli Commission and the Chairman of each of the seven sub-committees.

306

RECORDS OF CONSTITUTIONAL COMMISSION

MR. THRASHER. Since Mrs. Haas is so vitally interested in this provision, is it in order that I make a motion that she be included?
MRS. HAAS. May I ask a question first? As I understand it, the Committee in direct fashion has gone on record as favoring some home rule provision?
CHAIRMAN ARNALL. No. The parliamentary situation, as I understand what the Commision has done, is absolutely nothing at the moment. We have neither advocated or condemned the home rule or taken action.
JUDGE MacINTYRE. In view of what Mr. Thrasher says, I want to make an amendment to Mr. Thrasher's motion, in view of the fact that there is no lady on that Policy Committee, I move that Mrs. Haas also be added to the Policy Committee.
CHAIRMAN ARNALL. The Chair is of the opinion that before we ,go to the trouble or the pleasure, as the case may be, of putting Mrs. Haas on the Policy Committee, the first thing to determine is whether or not any matter is going to be referred to the Policy Committee in reference to home rule. Therefore, Mr. Culpepper's motion will now be put before the Commission, that is, whether or not the matter of home rule will be referred to the Policy Committee with full authority to act. Any discussion? So many as favor that motion make it known by saying "aye."
MR. HARRIS. I don't know, I have been watching these suggestions and bills for twenty-five years now. All the things I have ever heard suggested was first the old Burgin Bill that made a little legislature out of every city, county and board of county commissioners; then the second is the uniform system of county and municipal government probably, as some states have two or three different systems which each municipality or county can vote under; the other general idea is the idea embodied in the proposal offered yesterday. Now nobody has ever been able to get any of the municipalities or counties or anybody interested in uniformity. They don't seem to want it. Now the idea of curing the evils of local legislation in the Legislature-everybody has agreed, I think, that the Burgin idea is not sound because instead of curing the evils of one legislature you create eight hundred more, and you create worse conditions. One of the worst features of all is defining the exact boundaries, and another thing about the initiative idea embodied in the proposal yesterday, the initiative idea can't be sub-

RECORDS OF CONSTITUTIONAL COMMISSION

307

mitted in a primary, and you know we have had a custom since Reconstruction days that we settle our problems in primaries. That would go to a general election. Those are the three general basic ideas under which every State I know of operates on, and it has been proposed over a period of twenty-five years. Unless somebody has something new, something they think would work, I don't know where we are getting, or if we are getting anywhere by going ahead. I don't think, on second thought, that this initiative idea, with the peculiar situation we have in our cities in Georgia, where this destroys the proposition that we have followed all these years of fighting all our battles out in the primary of Georgia, and that destroys the initiative idea, destroys that old traditional custom. I don't think any of us would want to do that when it is carefully considered. I don't see, unless somebody has got some ideas, some new proposal-these people who have been advocating it all these years haven't been able to submit anything all these years-and I don't believe any of us are going to be able to originate any new ideas. Everybody would like to have home rule, if they ask us if we are for home rule.
CHAIRMAN ARNALL. What do you mean by home rule?
MR. HARRIS. I don't know, except I believe in the people handling their affairs.
CHAIRMAN ARNALL. I am for home rule, whatever it is, because I believe in letting the people have all the rights they possibly can have, but my thinking is a little hazy about it in this country and this State where we have representative government. Now what can be gained? Let me make it plain I am for home rule, but what can be gained by setting up a type of government other than representative government? What is it we are striving for? Giving the people rights, yes, but when they have representatives and senators who come here to look after their business under a representative system of government, we give them their rights through their representatives. Now it is conceivable that in some cases the representatives are so callous to the demands of the people that they ignore the demands, but under representative government the people are only delayed for a little while in their desire to have something done the way they want it, because they have a way of looking after public officials. Now the reason I am saying this so frankly is because I favor home rule, and I am advocating it, and I hope the Commission will go on record for some kind of home rule. I, like you, Mr. Harris, wonder what we are striving for. Mrs. Haas

308

RECORDS OF CONSTITUTIONAL COMMISSION

has been very interested and I want her to tell the Commission what it is.
MRS. HAAS. I think, since we are getting down to the basic principles of democracy and talking about principles, that "passing the buck" is an old custom in politics, and it seems to me that the peo\ pIe, since we are talking about the people and interested in the people, the people find it difficult sometimes to understand that we have so many sets of officials running local government. It is very difficult for the ijeople to understand why their cities, counties or county commissioners can't run their local affairs, but there is a little super-government set up on top of that.
CHAIRMAN ARNALL. That supergovernment is elected by the people.
MRS. HAAS. It shows no lack of confidence in the super-government. The super-government should be set up to manage State affairs, and I can remember once in Atlanta we even had an election in which the government voted for a certain thing and it took the super-government several sessions to get it enacted. There are other issues left up to the people. You get a clear cut vote. Instead there is a lot of political wire pulling, and one person in a political delegation holds power. Also a delegation agrees on a local measure. It is not considered. I think what we should do, if we believe in the system, is try to put the power in the people's hands.
CHAIRMAN ARNALL. You have not answered to my own satisfaction the argument which properly could be advanced by those who oppose this measure, and I am not in that class. I am trying to get my thinking straight. What you are saying is really an indictment of representative government.
MRS. HAAS. No, sir. It is a confusion of representative government, because when local changes are made you have so many groups involved in the changes. You have your local officials elected, and you have a legislative delegation. I think anything that confuses responsibility is against home rule:.
CHAIRMAN ARNALL. I want to ask this question, instead of confusing responsibility, this local bill, and h e I pin g home rule, wouldn't we further confuse it? For instance, wouldn't we have petitions being circulated every day by somebody who is mad about something or dissatisfied about something? And you can get people to sign any petition. Why we even got an Independent on a

RECORDS OF CONSTITUTIONAL COMMISSION

301

ticket here, and he had to get some percentage of the voters to sign a petition to have his name placed on the ballot. If you were Mayor of Atlanta, for instance, administering the affairs of this city, and every time you looked out you have a different group circulating a petition to change this and change that, wouldn't you destroy the stability of your government?
MRS. HAAS. I don't believe that would happen.
CHAIRMAN ARNALL. I am wondering.
MRS. HAAS. I think that is one of the confusions we might discuss. I don't think that would happen from what I notice. They maybe should circulate a few more petitions and be more aware. I can't think of the mayor and council as running them. I think of the county commissioners running the county.
CHAIRMAN ARNALL. They do run it.
MRS. HAAS. They don't run it because there is another group must pass certain changes.
CHAIRMAN ARNALL. They run it under law.
MRS. HAAS. But it can be changed.
CHAIRMAN ARNALL. What you are saying is that they should not be bound by law?
MRS. HAAS. I do not. I beg pardon, I say there are certain general problems that can be solved by that local community that hurts no other community.
CHAIRMAN ARNALL. I am still hazy. As Governor and Chief Executive of the State I am charged with the responsibility of running the State, yet I have to do, under the law, some things I don't like, and sometimes the Legislature does things I don't like. I am bound by the law. I am wondering if every public official and the people aren't bound, and if we ever destroy it-
MRS. HAAS. We grant in the charters of the cities certain powers, and granting a few more powers and granting to the counties--I am in no position to fight this out with a group of lawyers, as I seem to be involved in doing. I honestly don't believe that the right kind of home measure can't be drawn, and I don't believe the purpose of this sort of thing is a disrespect of law.
CHAIRMAN ARNALL. Yesterday, for instance, when I offered

310

RECORDS OF CONSTITUTIONAL COMMISSION

this home rule bill I was asked by the members of the Commission if that meant you could extend the city limits of Atlanta.
MRS. HAAS. Does anybody actually think you could extend the limits and incorporate?
CHAIRMAN ARNALL. The Legislature does.
MRS. HAAS. Well, this couldn't be done; this takes a vote of the people.
MR. LOVEJOY. How about the people being incorporated in the county?
MRS. HASS. Of course they can vote on it.
CHAIRMAN ARNALL. I don't know how far we are going or what we are doing. I admit this, and I am as honest as I can be to the Commission-what I am trying to do is what is best for Georgia. I admit home rule is a catchy phrase, and I am for it because it is a good phrase and I am for the rights of the people just like I am against sin, but when you get down to defining what you mean by sin and virtue and by right or wrong-
MRS. HAAS. I am afraid we are not for home rule honestly.
CHAIRMAN ARNALL. I honestly am so completely confused about what we are talking about that I don't know how to put it in law or what to do. I offered an amendment and studied it last night, and I can't tell if that amendment is adopted what the rights are under that amendment. I can't tell because I don't know. Of course we can have a lot of court decisions defining the rights; but I want the people to have broad authority in a democracy, and I get back to the question I asked Mrs. Haas, are we not committed in this country to a system of representative government? If we are, that is one thing. If we are going to do away with representative government or put another alternative up where another man can participate directly in the policy of government, that is another thing.
In [Greece in the old days of Athens they had the purest democracy that has ever been known. Every man in the city of Athens served as president of the Athenian republic, every man. One would serve one day and one another. The Senate of Athens comprised everybody that wanted to attend, and they let everybody vote. That was not representative government, that was democratic government in its fullest. In this country when we organized the government, we set up a. system of representative gov-

. RECORDS OF CONSTITUTIONAL COMMISSION

311

ernment. Knowing that the people, each man, couldn't take time to spend all his time dealing with government, we delegated the authority to our representatives to represent the people. That has been the history of government. Now it seems to me that we are about to offer an alternative for the representative form of government which is in the full sense pure democracy. If that is what we want, that is good and well, but I in my own thinking am badly confused about it; and while I believe in home rule, I don't know enough about it now to draw a home rule bill that would work in Georgia if my life depended on it. Maybe we can do that through the Policy Committee.
MR. GOWEN. Before the discusion is through, I would like to hear from Senator Atkinson, because I believe Chatham County has the most perfect home rule.
MR. ATKINSON. Just leave us alone.
MR. CULPEPPER. We are all in doubt. Nobody has got any objection to the local communities managing their own affairs. As you state, you are in doubt yourself about what ought to be done; but so far as I am concerned, if they can prepare some kind of home rule that is workable, I am for it, like you all. That is the very reason why I made the motion I did to refer this to the Policy Committee, composed of outstanding lawyers and citizens of Georgia, and let them work it out if it is humanly possible, a workable plan to submit to the Legislature. That is why I made the motion. We don't know what to do, and you don't know what to do.
JUDGE GRICE. Nobody on the Policy Committee knows either.
MR. CULPEPPER. Let them work out a plan that will be satisfactory to the Legislature. I know what we have got here is not satisfactory to this Commission, and maybe you can work out some kind of a plan that is workable and is not confusing and making confusion worse. I would like to see it done, and I believe the Policy Committee would come nearer doing it than we can.
MR. MAJORS. General Head, isn't it a fact that all cities and counties have law-making powers conferred by their charters?
GENERAL HEAD. Yes.

MR. MAJORS. And make any laws that don't conflict with State laws; and also isn't it a fact that county commissioners can pass ordinances which have the effect of laws?

312

RECORDS OF CONSTITUTIONAL COMMISSION

GENERAL HEAD. The board of county commissioners usually are limited to the powers conferred by the act. The act is limited in scope, but is generally broad enough to cover all the affairs of the county.
MR. MAJORS. In effect, isn't that a duplication of the powers al~ ready conferred?
JUDGE SMITH. Otherwise the city is limited to its charter.
CHAIRMAN ARNALL. Mr. Majors, here is what we did yesterday, assuming some such provision is adopted. We give to the county commissioners or to the city council of a community the right to legislate as fully and completely as does the General Assembly in reference to local affairs, provided the people vote to approve what they do. That is the effect of it. If the people want this done, by a combination of the governing authorities and a vote of the people, they can legislate in a municipality or county under this proposal as completely as can the General Assembly.
JUDGE SMITH. I would like to inquire if the Chairman or any member of the Policy Committee or any member of the entire Commission knows of any workable plan that has been worked out by any State anywhere?
CHAIRMAN ARNALL. There are about eighteen States that have home rule.
MR. GOWAN. Are any of those Southern States?
JUDGE SMITH. Those people who worked that out, do you have any copies of that.
MRS. HAAS. I have one of each of the eighteen States.
JUDGE SMITH. It seems to me like that ought to be helpful in formulating something here.
MR. HEAD. Under this proposal that we are considering, we would have home rule for one hundred and fifty-nine counties and approximately twelve or fifteen hundred incorporated cities and towns. We would have the ideas of lawyers representing 159 counties, the ideas of lawyers representing these 1200 or 1500 incorporated towns and cities, as to what was the proper matter to be submitted to the people to vote on. For that reason you would have matters that were absolutely in violation of general principles of law; you would have matters submitted to the people in

RECORDS OF CONSTITUTIONAL COMMISSION

313

violation of the Constitution. The only way on earth that this measure could be made to work would be to create a special body or some agency of the State government and require, when a town or county wanted to vote on some measure, that they present the measure to this body and let them put it in legal form, and it would have to follow some degree of uniformity. If it did not we just couldn't keep up with all the legislation and proposals that were being submitted to the people of the State, and I am against creating any more boards or bureaus or agencies of State government. I am against taking off taxes or putting on taxes. I think we are getting along fine. I don't think we need that sort of change, and I am apprehensive unless you created some agency you couldn't have uniformity .
CHAIRMAN ARNALL. The Chair will say this: Mr. Head brings new light on this subject and is fundamentally right. Let's remember this, that one of the troubles in legislating in Georgia has been so many times the Legislature passed unconstitutional laws relating to local government, and then the local government operated under those unconstitutional laws because no one ever took them to court; and therefore we have tried to remedy that in this Constitution by putting in several safeguards about local legislation. Now Mr. Head raises the point, while the city of Atlanta has competent legal talent, and the City of LaGrange and other cities have competent legal talent, I could name some small incorporated towns that don't have a lawyer or any legal talent in their town; and if we adopt this amendment, there will be no way for us to stop them, because it would be under the home rule provision; so this is a legal point that is very important. I don't want this Commission to do something-and if I can prevent it I am going to prevent it doing something-that would make us out a bunch of nuts and crackpots and fools when our work is offered to others, by doing something unsound and impractical. I am for change, and I am for progress, but I want it well thought out. This is a knotty legal problem involved here, so we get back to Mr. Culpepper's motion that it be referred to the Policy Committee with full authority to act.
Mit LOVEJOY. May I at this time-It may help to straighten it outI would like to ask Mrs. Haas this question. Are you in favor of the people of the city of Atlanta being given authority to extend their limits out into the county further without the permission or an expression of those people?

314

RECORDS OF CONSTITUTIONAL COMMISSION

MRS. HAAS. Certainly not. That couldn't be the only issue in home rule.
MR. LOVEJOY. I want to explain this. That is exactly what the amendment we approved yesterday afternoon does. Under that we give the people within a municipality the same powers of legislature to enact laws, or the county, in this case your county wouldn't extend the limits.
JUDGE SMITH. Don't you think the county has the right to vote in increasing the city limits?
MH.. LOVEJOY. It would be a serious legal question.
JUDGE SMITH. That is the question of the whole thing.
MR. LOVEJOY. Be a question whether under that the county could have a vote as to whether they go into the City of Atlanta. It gives the power to the City of Atlanta, the people in the City of Atlanta, to incorporate within the City of Atlanta territory not in the City of Atlanta, without asking permission of the people outside, because that is exactly what the legislature can do now.
CHAIRMAN ARNALL. Since it doesn't affect the entire people in Fulton County, what right would he have to vote on who lives in Fairburn? It would have to be the people in Atlanta.
MR. LOVEJOY. I think the people in Atlanta would have to vote. You doubt that the Governor and I are sincere in our position, at least you say you doubt it. There is one application which shows there is something in this thing, even if you don't want it, and I am trying to illustrate that now. The only practical thing I know is, Mrs. Haas, if somebody sits down and writes you you can do this, and this, and this, and we can look at those particular things and see whether or not they are safe and wise.
MRS. HAAS. I thought there was a provision of the Constitution under this section of county government which said that on any addition of that sort the people of both groups had to vote.
CHAIRMAN ARNALL. That is what I wanted to ask you. You mean, let's say you have home rule, you want to extend the city limits of Atlanta, that is the proposition before the people-either have to be generated by the people in Atlanta on petition, then they couldn't give the people outside of the city to vote on city affairs, and the county wouldn't institute the move because it wouldn't affect the county.

RECORDS OF CONSTITUTIONAL COMMISSION

311

MRS. HAAS. I don't doubt the sincerity of the Go~ernor or Mr. Lovejoy on this. For many years requests have been made for help on the home rule proposition. I made the motion that I think there is enough legal talent in this group if the group wants home rule that they could work it out. I don't think there is any point in continuing this discussion and trying to trip me. What I want to explain is that I know if the lawyers in this room honestly want to work it out, I think a different type of provision could be arrived at. If the lawyers in this group give it honest consideration and find that no rule could be worked out in Georgia, I would be thoroughly convinced it couldn't be done. Most of the arguments have been by people who don't want home rule. I believe some method could be worked out by those who honestly want it. I can't defend individual legal problems. You know I can't. I am in no position to.
CHAIRMAN ARNALL. I want to ask this question, and I do it really in a desire to find out the need for this. Do you know of any proposition in Fulton County or Atlanta that the people want that has been denied to them under the present system of government?
MRS. HAAS. Well, I think sometimes they have been delayed, and in some way or another it seems to me in making minute decisions that have come to the Legislature to make, they do delay and confuse the people as to whose responsibility it is to run the government.
MR. HARHIS. Has ahy city or county in Georgia asked this Commission to do anything about it?
MHS. HAAS. Didn't the Municipal Association ask it?
CHAIRMAN ARNALL. Have we had any communication from them? The Chair has received no communication from anyone in Georgia advocating or wanting so-called home rule provision ex-
cept the League of Women Voters, and the Chair reads in the Dewit-
papers that they advocate it, but we have received no communication from any governing authority or any organization other than the League.
MR. HARRIS. MI'. Chairman, when I started off-I did not mind being interrupted-but what I started to say was this: The only three ideas I have heard of in twenty-five years were the three I tried to outline. I don't know of any other, and I don't know that any member of the Policy Committee knows of any other. I know

316

RECORDS OF CONSTITUTIONAL COMMISSION

that when they ask if you are in favor of home rule, you have got to say "yes," but I don't know that anybody has ever proposed better rule than we have got now except one, and nobody is interested in that, and I disagree with the distinguished lady member that some of us have not been honestly interested in the subject. We have been, and a long time ago even. The only way that I have been able to figure out in my mind that you can get what the League of Women Voters apparently want is by having a uniform system of county and municipal government, and giving them broad powers to handle their affairs. I have made that same statement to the county commissioners and municipalities, and I give you my word, not a one wanted it, and I don't know anybody else that does, and I believe it is the only way you can ever get it, if you want to give them authority to handle their own affairs, and I don't. The point I am making is this: Being a member of the Policy Committee and referring this to it has some implication that the Commission wants us to devise, or it might have that implication, or might leave the impression, it wants us to devise some system of home rule. Personally, I don't know of any machine that would work or this Commission would want, or the Legislature, municipalities or counties would want, and that is the reason I don't see why we should refer it, unless somehody has some ideas or something more than I have, or more than I know about. I don't believe anybody on the Policy Commission has any other ideas. I don't think either of the three general ideas would be suitable, or that this Committee will want to submit to the Legislature, or would want to submit to the people. If anybody has any ideas or anything different, I would say let's consider it before the whole Commission, if we have to have another meeting. Nobody seems to have any ideas, none of the county authorities submitted any, none of the county attorneys, and none of the city attorneys. I don't think that this proposition that they submit, that even they themselves, if they sit down and study it, will want it.
CHAIRMAN ARNALL. The question is on Mr. Culpepper's motion, that this matter be referred to the Policy Committee with authority to act. Then we will fake Mr. Lovejoy's motion, next, which is that the Commission go on record as favoring some type of home role and recommending to the Legislature that it give consideration to the enactment of some home rule.
MR. HAND. If both fail it will be left as it is?
CHAIRMAN ARNALL. That is right. The question is on Mr. Cul-

RECORDS or CONSTITUTIONAL COMMISSION

11'

pepper's motion, that the home rule matter be referred to the Policy Committee with full authority to act. Any discussion? So many as favor the motion, make it know by saying "aye"; opposed "no." The noes seem to have it. The noes have it and the motion is lost.

We now come to Mr. Lovejoy's motion, that this Commission recommend to the Legislature that it give consideration to inserting in the proposed new Constitution some workable provision affording home rule.

MR. LOVEJOY. I said affording a greater measure of home rule to the cities and counties of Georgia.

CHAIRMAN AHNALL. Is there a second to that motion?

MR. HEAD. I second it.

JUDGE GRICE. I offer this substitute. It looks to me like this Commission is not authorized to recommend to the Legislature those kind of things in the first place. In the second place, I am on the committee, and I am just thinking what in the world will I do. I wouldn't know what to do. I offer this substitute motion: "The General Assembly is empowered to enact such measures as will provide a greatel degree of home rule for counties and municipalities without conferring on such counties and municipalities the right to violate the provisions now embodied in Article I, Section IV, Paragraph I, which forbids the enactment of special law for which provision has been made by general law."

CHAIRMAN ARNALL. Is there a second to Judge Grice's motion?

MR. CULPEPPER. I second it.

CHAIRMAN ARNALL. There is a second.

MR. HARRIS. Haven't they got that power now?

CHAIRMAN ARNALL. You offered that as a substitute for Mr.

Lovejoy's motion?

.

JUDGE GRICE. Yes, sir. Just express ourselves this way is as far as I can go.

MR. ATKINSON. May I congratulate the distinguished chairman of the Judiciary Committee on his solution of this troublesome question.

CHAIRMAN ARNALL. The question is on the adoption of the mo-

318

RECORDS OF CONSTITUTIONAL COMMISSION

tion of Mr. Justice Grice, that this Commission insert in the pra. posed new Constitution a provision empowering the General Assembly of this State to give a greater degree of home rule to the municipalities and counties of the State, so long as it is not violative of the general laws-that is the effect of it. So many as favor-
JUDGE SMITH. That is to be made a part of the proposed Constitution?
CHAIRMAN ARNALL. Yes.
JUDGE SMITH. The recommendations we are to make is to submit some specific proposition.
CHAIRMAN ARNALL. This amendment, if adopted, will authorize the General Assembly to give a greater degree of home rule to the counties and cities.
JUDGE SMITH. It is just a recommendation.
MR. HAND. Isn't the Constitution just a list of recommendations for the Legislature?
CHAIRMAN ARNALL. Largely a restrictive document for the Legislature and for the people. The question is on the adoption of Judge Grice's motion. So many as favor the motion make it known by saying "aye"; opposed "no." The Chair is in doubt. So many as favor adoption of the motion make it known by rising and standing until counted; reverse your position, those opposed. Five for and nine against and the motion is lost.
We now come to Mr. Lovejoy's motion.
MR. LOVEJOY. Mr. Chairman, I am going to withdraw it.
CHAIRMAN ARNALL. Is there objection to withdrawal of the motion?
MR. HEAD. I object. I want us to indicate to the General Assembly that we favor some type of .increased home rule, and leave it up to them to see if they can work it out.
MR. THRASHER. Are you going to sit here and say we are not able to do something and pass it on to somebody else?
CHAIRMAN ARNALL. I want to poll the Commission.
JUDGE SMITH. I want to resurrect Mr. Hand's motion to leave it out.
CHAIRMAN ARNALL. Mr. Lovejoy withdraws his motion.

RECORDS OF CONSTITUTIONAL COMMISSION

.319

MR. LOVEJOY. I do that because if we can't decide-
CHAIRMAN ARNALL. There is a motion-who made the motion to leave it out entirely? Judge Smith moves that the home rule provision be deleted entirely alld no action be taken on it. Is there a second?
MR. HAND. I second it.
CHAIRMAN ARNALL. Any discussion? So many as favor the motion make it known by saying "aye"; opposed "no." The noes seem to have it. Division. So many as favor the motion rise and stand until counted; reverse your position, those opposed. Eight for and eight against. The Chair votes to consider home rule at this time. Therefore it is back before the house.
JUDGE MacINTYRE. I believe the Chair says he is for home rule and against sin.
CHAIRMAN ARNALL. I am against sin and for home rule.
MR. GOWEN. I move we hear the report on the judiciary.
CHAIRMAN ARNALL. Before we leave the home rule matter, I would like to say for the information of the Commission that some of the other States do have it now. Is there a motion that this matter be referred to a committee with power to act?
MR. HEAD. Mr. Chairman, I make a motion renewing Mr. Lovejoy's motion made a moment ago, that we say to the General Assembly that we are interested in extending in so far as possible the principles of home rule, and we leave it to them to work out the details of any measure that they see fit to adopt.
CHAIRMAN ARNALL. Is there a second to that?
MR. FOLEY. I am opposed to that motion. We are making ourselves ridiculous. If we can't do it ourselves, don't refer it to anybody else.
CHAIRMAN ARNALL. Let the Chair say this for the edification of those in hearing of the Chair's voice. Thumbing through the manual there of home rule in other States, in each instance, so far as I noticed very hurriedly, and I checked four or five States, they have uniform provisions relating to all the cities and towns and counties in the State within limits of population. Now in Georgia we have built up a type of government to where the one thing the people don't want is uniformity, apparently, and as a matter

320

RECORDS OF CONSTITUTIONAL COMMISSION

of fact our larger counties are the large offenders against uniformity, Chatham, Fulton, Muscogee. They don't want any law applied to them, apparently, that applies to anybody else, and that makes some difficulty in Georgia to create a situation whereby you can have the cities and counties governing themselves, because it is so susceptible to confusion. I would like to get some provision of home rule before the Legislature, but I confess that I don't know how to draw a home rule bill.
MR. HEAD. For the information of the Chair, I would say a number of the members of the General Assembly have been to the Law Department and requested that we undertake to assist them with a home rule bill to submit to the next General Assembly. They now have the authority to act. There is no restriction in this Constitution that prohibits the Legislature from extending home rule, and it is not necessary that we put any provision in the Constitution. If we leave it with the General Assembly and they see fit to adopt it, they can. I think it is right we indicate to them we are interested, and further than that there is no necessity to do anything about it. They have got the authority to do it now under the Constitution as it stands, and the fact that we are interested in it and so indicate to them might aid them in their deliberations. That is the reason for my motion that we pass it to the General Assembly for final analysis. That is where it has got to come from, and I think we are wasting our time, and the time of the Commission, and of the people in arguing and continuing arguments like that.
CHAIRMAN ARNALL. Is there a second to Mr. Head's motion?
MR. MAJORS. I second it. Couldn't we put it in the form of a resolution? As I understand it, this is a separate recommendation.
MR. HEAD. A letter signed by the Chairman and the Secretary will be sufficient.
CHAIRMAN ARNALL. Is there objection to giving the matter that direction?
MR. FOLEY. I object.
CHAIRMAN ARNALL. There is objection. So many as favor the motion make it known by saying "aye"; opposed "no." The Chair is in doubt. So many as favor the motion rise and stand until counted; we are voting on Mr. Head's motion that we give

RECORDS OF C01!STITUTIONAL COMMISSION

.321

expression to the Legislature that we recommend that they give some consideration to the problem of home rule.
JUDGE SMITH. Not as a part of the Constitution but as a supplementary recommendation.
CHAIRMAN ARNALL. Reverse your position. The motion prevails. Let me state this, as the Chair understands it, we have gone on record as filing a supplemental communication to the General Assembly saying that this Commission has given mucl~ consideration and thought to the matter of home rule, and we recommend to the General Assembly that they give consideration to the matter of home rule for counties and cities. Is that the substance of what you want?
MR. LOVEJOY. Would it be helpful to state in there that the Commission being of the opinion that the Legislature now had the authority to enact legislation granting additional powers to local municipalities and counties, and it is unnecessary to incorporate any additional provision in the Constitution, and it is therefore referred to the Legislature?
CHAIRMAN ARNALL. Mr. Lovejoy suggests we put in the communication that under the Constitution the General Assembly now has the power to grant home rule; therefore it is improper to put into the Constitution this recommendation, but the Assembly can take action.
MRS. HAAS. May I explain that we realize the Legislature had home rule power all along but had not been able to pass any home rule legislation under that power, and this sort of provision would make "it self-executing?
CHAIRMAN ARNALL. Is there objection to adding a postscript of Mr. Lovejoy's suggestion?
MR. FOLEY. Mr. Lovejoy, you are positive that the Legislature now has authority to delegate itself authority to municipalities and counties? Is that perfectly clear that that is true?
MR. LOVEJOY. That is my judgment.
MR. FOLEY. It is somewhat debatable.
MR. LOVEJOY. It is true we delegate legislative authority of a kind all the time. I am simply saying that is my opinion.
JUDGE GRICE. Create a court, for instance.

322

RECORDS OF CONSTITUTIONAL COMMISSION

CHAIRMAN ARNALL. W~ now come to the recommendation of the committee on procedure and operation, and the proposition of the Appellate and Superior Courts of the State. That committee is composed of the Chairman, Mr. Justice Grice, Judge MacIntyre, Speaker Harris and President Gross. This committee recommended that the full Commission retain the seven Justices on the Supreme Court, and as the Chair understands it. we have already provided for that. Therefore there is no action to be taken on that. The committee recommends the elimination of the provision which requires the Supreme Court to grant certiorari in every case and leaves the procedure as it now is. We have already acted on that, haven't we? In other words, the Commission inserted a provision in the pr.o1>osed new Constitution requiring the Supreme Court to grant certiorari in every ease. Now this committee recommends that we leave the rule as it now is, not requiring them to grant certiorari in every case, but only in those cases that they think certiorari should probably lie in.
JUDGE SMITH. As the legal ground may be set out for.
MR. FOLEY. Just for accuracy, the Commission did not require granting them in every case.
CHAIRMAN ARNALL. They did not?
MR. HARRIS. Only when it is in conflict with the Code, or the Constitution of Georgia, or the Constitution of the United States. The Supreme Court says that will plug them down.
CHAIRMAN ARNALL. The recommendation of the Policy Committee and this subcommittee is that we leave the certiorari, the grant of it, exactly as it is now.
MR. FOLEY. I did not want us to vote on a misapprehension.
CHAIRMAN ARNALL. The Chair appreciates the fact that has been pointed out. In other words, if we adopt this proposal we leave certiorari like it is provided in the Constitution.
MR. HARRIS. Provided the Supreme Court relaxes their rules some.
CHAIRMAN ARNALL. Speaker Harris will be so recorded. The question comes that the subcommittee made some recommendation about certiorari proceeding.

RECORDS OF CONSTITUTIONAL COMMISSION

32a

MR. McCUTCHEN. I think the paragraph rewritten in your report is different from the present Constitution.
JUDGE GRICE. I don't recall that it was.
MR. HARRIS. Yes, sir, Judge. You remember we agreed on some language, but that will come out under the report of the committee. It will be left as it is except the discretion to sit in different divisions will be taken from the court.
JUDGE GRICE. Leave it like it was in the present Constitution.
CHAIRMAN ARNALL. The certiorari matter is to be left as it is now provided in the present Constitution. Is there objection? The Chair hears none and it is so ordered. That is the part about certiorari.
Now the next recommendation was that the Constitution require the Supreme Court to sit as a whole. Is there objection to that provision? That is what is being done now. Without objection it is adopted.
Now the committee recommends that the Court of Appeals be left as it is in composition and procedure, with the statement from the Speaker of the House that by statute the evil that we strike at, which is to release the Court of Appeals where it can go and sit as a whole Court, that that will be attended to by statute, and it is not necessary to go into it in the Constitution.
MR. HARRIS. I don't think there is any doubt about the Legislature passing it and doing away with those provisions.
CHAIRMAN ARNALL. Is there objection to leaving the regulation and composition of the Court of Appeals up to the Legislature?
JUDGE MacINTYRE. I think we agreed to leave it just as it was.
CHAIRMAN ARNALL. The reason is it is not provided in the Constitution. That can be regulated in the statute. Is there objection? The Chair hears none and that is adopted.
Now the Chair would like to recommend to the Commission that we give consideration to raising the salary of the members of the Supreme Court, Court of Appeals, and members of the Superior Courts of this State. The Chair would like to make this statement about that. In Georgia we have the strange phenomena of paying some local m u n i c i p a I judges more than the Judges of the Supreme Court make, the highest court in the

324

RECORDS OF CONSTITUTIONAL COMMISSION

State. The Chair is of the opinion that since the Federal Tax Statute has gone into effect the Judges' salaries are taxable at the rate of about $1,000. Unless we can retain on our courts eminent lawyers, and attract to our courts eminent lawyers, the judiciary will not be a group containing or comprised of our most outstanding attorneys. The Chair is of the opinion that when a man goes on the court by and large he goes there as a profession. If a man is fortunate enough to be elected to the Court of Appeals or the Supreme Court or the Superior Court, for that matter, he lets his law practice go, and it is his full time profession. That is unlike many of OUr State Officers, for instance like the Governor's office, where it is at most only temporary, but the judges are career men, and for those and many reasons the Chair is of the opinion that by raising the judges' salaries, without undertaking to make it applicable to all State Court or county officials, but merely to the judiciary, we will strengthen the judiciary and in the end render a service to the people. As a matter of fact, if you will take the salaries paid judges in the surrounding States and the structure of salaries for judges in the country, you will find that the average in the country is some $12,000 or $14,000 whereas the average of those around us are in the neighborhood of $10,000, and therefore the Chair would like to submit to the Commission the proposition of salary increases for our Judges of the Supreme Court, Court of Appeals and Superior Courts of the State. Is there any discussion?
JUDGE GRICE. Is that about all on the agenda?
CHAIRMAN ARNALL. No, the tax on realty comes up, and the committee on final revision and distribution, and one or two other matters.
Is anyone prepared to make a motion or effectuate this in any way?
MR. GOWEN. I would like to move we reconsider our action that we leave the matter of salaries to the Legislature and permit adoption.
MR. HEAD. I second the motion.
CHAIRMAN ARNALL. Is there objection to that?
MR. MAJORS. I object.
CHAIRMAN ARNALL. There is objection. So many as favor the

RECORDS OF CONSTITUTIONAL COMMISSION

325

motion to reconsider our action before we go into the matter of salaries?
MR. MAJORS. My objection was made because we agreed to leave it out, because if it is in the Constitution it would have to be a constitutional amendment any time to rearrange salaries. If you put it in the Constitution it will be there forever and a day, and the judges wouldn't initiate any remedy, and nobody else will take any interest; and the best thing to do is let the Legislature do it, and get it without going back to the people every time to get a constitutional amendment.
CHAIRMAN ARNALL. So many as favor the motion make it known by saying "aye"; opposed "no." The ayes seem to have it. The ayes have it.
Now the question is on what amount" shall be inserted in the Constitution about Judges' salaries.
MR. GOWEN. What amounts does the Chair have in mind?
CHAIRMAN ARNALL. We were debating for the Supreme Court and Court of Appeals either $9,600 or $10,000.
MR. GOWEN. The Subcommittee, at the instance of Jeff Pope and me, recommended to the Commission a salary of $9,600 for each of the Supreme Court Judges and the Court of Appeals, and $7,200 for the Judges of the Superior Courts. The reason for the fixing of $9,600 was that I anounced that I had intended at the proper time to make a motion, which I do make a motion to increase the Governor some, and Senator Pope felt if we increased the Governor's salary we ought to increase it to $10,000. The purpose was to make the Judges a little less than the Governor. We were convinced that was not the thing to do, and did not increase the Governor's salary; so there is no particular reason for the $9,600, except it is a little less than $10,000, but that was the reason we selected that figure rather than the $10,000, while to my mind the $10,000 might be better because I still believe the Judges of the Supreme Court of Georgia should be worth as much money as the Judges of the District Courts of the United States.
CHAIRMAN ARNALL. Do you make some specific motion about the matter?
MR. GOWEN. I make the motion that the Judges of the Su-

326

RECORDS OF CONSTITUTIONAL COMMISSION

preme Court and Court of Appeals receive a salary of $10,000 a year.
MR. FOLEY. I second the motion.
MR. MAJORS. I move that any increase that we give the Judges be in the form of money for expenses. I move that you pay the Judges of the Supreme Court $7,000 and $2,600 a year for expenses.
CHAIRMAN ARNALL. You mean living expenses? How much for living expenses?
MR. MAJORS. $2,600 a year for living expenses.
CHAIRMAN ARNALL. Is there a second to Mr. Major's motion? Do you desire us to discuss it?
MR. MAJORS. Yes, you can discuss it.
CHAIRMAN ARNALL. Is there a second to Mr. Major's motion that the salaries be left at the present figure for the Judges of the Supreme Court and the Court of Appeals of $7,000 and that $2,600 per annum be paid them as living expenses? Is there a second to that motion?
MR. THRASHER. Isn't that establishing a precedent? We have around 8,000 people working for Georgia. It is establishing a precedent there that will be far reaching. Let's fix the salaries. They should be fixed. They don't furnish the Judges homes or any other State employee other than the Governor. Let's fix the salaries at a definite figure. Can't it be done? Can't it be done by striking the last sentence on the new proposal and saying that the salaries at the time of the passage of this Constitution shall be so much for the Judges of the Supreme Courts and Court of Appeals and Supreme Court.
CHAIRMAN ARNALL. As I understand it the gentleman is merely speaking in opposition to the expense item. Is there a second to Mr. Major's motion? The Chair hears none. The question is on the adoption ,)f Mr. Gowen's motion that the Judges of the Supreme Court and the Court of Appeals be compensated from the State Treasury in the amount of $10,000 per annum. So many as favor the motion make it known by saying "aye"; those opposed "no." The ayes seem to have it. The ayes have it.
MR. GOWEN. That brings up the question of the Judges of the Superior Courts. The recommendation of the Sub-committee

RECORDS OF CONSTITUTIONAL COMMISSION

327

was $7,200 per year. The Sub-committee gave considerable consideration to the matter of perhaps raising the salary to some amount less than this and providing for the judges to receive their travel expenses when they were out of the county of their residence. Finally, I believe, they reached the conclusion that that would be bad, involving a lot of expense accounts and checking, and that it might be better to continue the present practice. The Judges are used to paying hotel bills when they are away from. home, and it was recommended to increase their salary to some amount. $7,200 was an increase of $2,200 in their salary.
CHAIRMAN ARNALL. Mr. Gowen, the Chair seeks your indulgence to see if this would be acceptable to you as a substitute for your motion: That the Judges of the Superior Court shall have out of the Treasury $6,000 per annum, with the right of the General Assembly to authorize any county to supplement the salary of the Superior Court Judge in any county in which he serves out of county funds; provided, however, where such salary is at the time of adoption of this Constitution being supplemented out of such funds, such law shall remain in force until altered by the General Assembly.
MR. GOWEN. I have no objection to that except I do think the Commission might g~ve consideration to the amount.
CHAIRMAN ARNALL. Of course what this does is fix it. They are now receiving $5,000. This makes it $6,000, with the provision any county can supplement it, but where it is now being supplemented, they remain supplemented.
MR. GOWEN. I have no objection.
JUDGE SMITH. It appears to me there would be no necessity of inserting that provision that the county supplement it. They do that.
MR. HARRIS. Because we supplement our Judge's salary, when we did it we had to have a Constitutional Amendment before we could ;do it, and we said so much will be added to the amount paid by the State. That forces us to have another because we want to increase our Judge in accordance with the increase here. That would force us to submit another separate constitutional amendment to the people, and this only applies to the counties where it is now supplemented.

.328

RECORDS OF CONSTITUTIONAL COMMISSION

CHAIRMAN ARNALL. That takes care of every situation in the State.
MR. THRASHER. Don't you think that should be raised in the same proportion as the Supreme Court?
CHAIRMAN ARNALL. My idea is that if we put it in at $6,000, if the Legislature wants to do anything about expenses-you see a Judge of the Superior Court has to travel.
MR. THRASHER. All they would have to do to give expenses would be a simple resolution of the Legislature.
MR. GOWEN. The language of the Chair is acceptaple.
MR. CULPEPPER. I second the motion.
MR. LOVEJOY. That will take the place of the provision in our section?
CHAIRMAN ARNALL. Yes. The Clerk will read the motion.
MR. McCUTCHEN. (Reads) "Judges of the Superior Courts each shall have out of the Treasury of the State $6,000 per annum with the right of the General Assembly to authorize any county to supplement the salary in which said county lies out of the county funds; provided, however, if such salary is at the time of the adoption of this Constitution being supplemented out of the county funds under existing laws, it shall remain in force until altered by the General Assembly."
CHAIRMAN ARNALL. Is there objection to the adoption of that provision?
MR. LOVEJOY. That is self-operative when it becomes effective?
CHAIRMAN ARNALL. When the Constitution is adopted. Without objection it is ordered adopted.
MR. THRASHER..We want to be consistent in this, don't we?
CHAIRMAN ARNALL. Yes. sir; about what?
MR. THRASHER. About salaries. It is highly improper. It creates the wrong impression of the State to let the Governor's salary stay at $7,500. The Governor's salary should be raised in proportion. He is the Chief Executive of the State.
CHAIRMAN ARNALL. The Chair is of the opinion the Gover-

RECORDS OF CONSTITUTIONAL COMMISSION

S29

nor is well paid.
MR. THRASHER. I think the Chair is out of order in making a statement on this particular thing.
MR. HARRIS. The Governor is Chairman of this Commission. My suggestion is that we let that lay until it gets to the Legislature, and he can tell us what to do.
CHAIRMAN ARNALL. I think the judges are career people. I don't think the Governor is because we have not gotten around to talking about three telms. We have talked about two. Certainly that is not a career job. When the judges get on the bench they leave everything else, and they set out to spend a career in judicial work. Now that is not even true of most State officials, because I know very few State officials who are not ambitious to go to the Senate, or the governorship, or something else. That is the distinction I was using.
MR. THRASHER. A man in the Governor's chair, unless he has made sufficient during the term of Governor to live on for about four years will have a hard time to make a living after he leaves the Governor's chair.
CHAIRMAN ARNALL. Say that again.
MR. THRASHER. I say the experience has been when a man serves four years as Governor, particularly if he is a lawyer, because nobody will give him any business until about four years after he is out.
CHAIRMAN ARNALL. I am certainly sorry to hear you say that, Mr. Thrasher.
MR. GOWEN. That almost makes it obligatory.
CHAIRMAN ARNALL. Quite frankly, I think in view of the salary and living expenses the Governor gets, that he can adequately provide for himself, particularly if he doesn't have to spend too much sending wedding presents and flowers.
MR. GOWEN. I am going on your statement you aren't a candidate for Governor and this might affect the next Governor.
CHAIRMAN ARNALL. I have no objection to the Commission doing .what it wants to, but I have in my own thinking been able to place the judicial officers of the State in a different category.

330

RECORDS OF CONSTITUTIONAL COMMISSION

MR. THRASHER. You have one official right now that is a subofficial of the State who is making more money now than the Governor.
MR. LOVEJOY. Why not cut him down?
MR. THRASHER. He is under one of these constitutional boards you have created.
CHAIRMAN ARNALL. What is the pleasure of the Commission?
MR. THRASHER. I would like to make a motion to fix the salary of the Governor at $12,000.
MR. ARNOLD. I second the motion.
CHAIRMAN ARNALL. It is moved and seconded that the Governor's salary be fixed at $12,000 a year. Is there any discussion? Is there objection?
MR. LOVEJOY. Yes.
CHAIRMAN ARNALL. There is objection. So many as favor the motion make it known by saying "aye"; opposed "no." The noes seem to have it. Division is called for. So many as favor the motion make it known by rising and standing until counted. Reverse your position, those opposed.
MR. ATKINSON. I don't want to vote against it, but in view of all you have said, I think it would be a mistake for us to go on-
MR. THRASHER. Then vote against it.
CHAIRMAN ARNALL. Seven for and four against. A quorum did not vote.
MR. GOWEN. Don't you think this, Mr. Thrasher insists on the motion, it should have a provision it would not become effective until the term of the present Governor expires? However, I am not against him.
CHAIRMAN ARNALL. It shall not apply to the incumbent Governor.
MR. GOWEN. Not that I wouldn't like to see him get the money, but that would do away with the idea he is trying to raise his own salary.
CHAIRMAN ARNALL. Is there objection to accepting that by the Commission?

RECORDS OF CONSTITUTIONAL COMMISSION

331

MR. THRASHER. I will withdraw the motion.
CHAIRMAN ARNALL. Is there a motion before the house? All are dead.
MR. LOVEJOY. Withdrawn.
CHAIRMAN ARNALL. Is there objection? Now the Chair would like to move that there be inserted-Paragraph 2-3004 of the present Constitution relates to the Supreme Court of Georgia.
MR. McCUTGHEN. Page 34 of the white book.
CHAIRMAN ARNALL. Now the Chair moves to insert in the next to the last sentence, before the words, "in case of any vacancy," the following language: "provided further that an additional or seventh Justice shall be immediately appointed by the Governor, his tenure under such appointment to expire on December 31, 1946, and his successor for the ensuing regular term of six years to be elected at the time and in the manner aforesaid at such general election to be held."
MR. HAND. I second the motion.
CHAIRMAN ARNALL. Is there objection to the adoption of that provision? Without objection it is ordered adopted. Now, gentlemen, we come to the tax on realty. (Whereupon Chairman Arnall leaves the room and Mr. Gowen presides)
MR. ARNOLD. Before we get into that, I would like to have the privilege of referring the Commission to page 19 of the Committee Report, under Paragraph XVII, Corporate Powers, How Granted. Down about the middle of the paragraph, is the language: "All corporate powers and privileges to banking, insurance, railroad, canal, navigation, express, and telegraph companies shall be issued and granted by the Secretary of State in such manner as shall be prescribed by law." I would like to ask unanimous consent, after the word "banking," to add the word "trust," that that be inserted so the same law will apply to trust companies. Trust companies are under the supervision of the Banking Department, so they should be chartered in the same manner as is banking.
ACTING CHAIRMAN GOWEN. You have heard the request.
MR. HARRIS. I understand this is being done now, but there is some doubt about the legality.

332

RECORDS OF CONSTITUTIONAL COMMISSION

ACTING CHAIRMAN GO\VEN. Is there objection to the request that trust companies be included? The Chair hears none, and it is so ordered.
I believe the next business before the Commission now is the consideration of the State ad valorem tax and the suggestion made by the Georgia Association of Real Estate Boards. Is there any member of the Commission who desires to address himself upon the first proposition suggested in the brief, which is that real property should be relieved of the ad valorem tax in so far as that tax is levied for purposes of State revenue? Unless there is some member of the Commission that does, the Chair will take it that the suggestion is without favor.
MR. LOVEJOY. Mr. Chairman, may I ask this question, or this thought? Would-we are to give the Legislature authority to have all ad valorem taxes collected by the counties or cities, paying to the State a percentage? I ask that. If we should want that, I think we have to put some authority in the Constitution.
ACTING CHAIRMAN GOWEN. The suggestion of the Gentleman is that whether the Commission desires to give any thought to the question of having all ad valorem taxes collected by the municipalities or counties, by one collection agency, and then distributed maybe to the State and counties and municipalities. Is that the idea?
MR. LOVEJOY. One idea, but if they don't want to do it, there is nothing to be done.
MR. THRASHER. Is the question on there about abolished ad lJalorem tax?
ACTING CHAIRMAN GOWEN. It was simply brought to the attention of the Commission. Nobody made a motion, as I understand it. The promise of the Chair was that it would be brought to the attention of the Commission, and it has been brought to their attention.
MR. THRASHER. Is it possible to move that that be received by the Commission?
ACTING CHAIRMAN GOWEN. Certainly there would be. Does the gentleman make such a motion?
MR. THRASHER. In other words, on the lax question, about

RECORDS OF CONSTITUTIONAL COMMISSION

33,3

abolishment, I move the report be received and filed with the: Secretary.

ACTING CHAIRMAN GOWEN. You have heard the motion, is there a second?

MR. MAJORS. I second it.

MR. THRASHER. That is in reference to abolishing ad valorem tax.

ACTING CHAIRMAN GOWEN. All in favor of the motion make it known by saying "aye."

MR. ATKINSON. I move as a substitute we vote the sense of this Committee that we are against that.

ACTING CHAIRMAN GOWEN. You have heard the motion of the Senator from Chatham in the nature of a substitute.. Is there a second?

MR. HARRIS. I second it.

ACTING CHAIRMAN GOWEN. Any discussion? The question is on the substitute.

MR. CULPEPPER. What substitute?

~,

ACTING CHAIRMAN GOWEN. Being opposed to abolishing ad valorem tax for State revenue. Those who favor the motion make it known by saying "aye"; opposed "no." The ayes have it and: the substitute is carried.

The second suggestion: There should be a limitation on the power of the political subdivision of the State to levy ad valorem taxes, and the suggestion is made that there be an over-all limitation of thirty-five mills. The matter is now being brought to the attention of the Commission. Does any member of the Commission care to address himself on this subject?

MR. FOLEY. I move that it take the same course as the last sug~ gestion.

MR. HARRIS. I second the motion.

ACTING CHAIRMAN GOWEN. The motion has been made that the sense of the Commission is that it does not consider favorably the suggestion.

MR. FOLEY. And that also includes the third suggestion.

334

RECORDS OF CONSTITUTIONAL COMMISSION

ACTING CHAIRMAN GOWEN. For the benefit of the Commission, the third suggestion is: There should be established in each county of the State a Board of Tax Adjustment and Appeals. The motion is now before the' Commission that it express itself as being unfavorable to both the second and third proposal.
MR. FOLEY. As a matter of fact, Mr. Chairman, it is a legislative matter.
ACTING CHAIRMAN GOWEN. I think it could be done. Is there a second to the motion?
MR. HEAD. I second the motion.
ACTING CHAIRMAN GOWEN. Any discussion? All in favor of the motion make it known by saying "aye"; opposed "no." The ayes have it.
Do we have any further business?
MR. GOWEN. Mr. Chairman, that concludes the suggestions of the Real Estate Board. They expressed that they were opposed to abolishing ad valorem tax for State revenue, and decid~d they did not give favorable consideration to either the second or third.
CHAIRMAN ARNALL. Thank you, Charlie.
MR. LOVEJOY. I don't understand we are expressing any opinion as to whether the Legislature will take any action.
MR. GOWEN. I gather we did as to the first one, but expressed ourselves as being opposed to abolishing ad valorem on real estate.
CHAIRMA-N ARNALL. Ladies and gentlemen, I think it is very important that we submit this document to the people in proper legal form. I think it is proper at this time to determine upon a Committee on Procedure, likewise a Committee on Final Revision of the document. Perhaps one committee can do both jobs. There is nothing further that I know of to come before the Commission. Does any member of the Commission know of anything to come before the Commission?
MR. ATKINSON. I want to be sure about one thing, in going over these laws by the Revision Committee or Perfecting Committee, will there be included somewhere in the Constitution that local laws and constitutional amendments passed prior to the adoption of this Constitution will be preserved?

RECORDS OF CONSTITUTIONAL COMMISSION

335

CHAIRMAN ARNALL. Yes. Is there any further business to come before the Commission? If not, the Chair wants to recognize here-
MR. LOVEJOY. Just a minute. I notice in reading through, turn to page 9 in the white book, Paragraph III, "Who Entitled to Register and Vote." There is a provision and qualification, "shall have paid all poll taxes that he may have had an opportunity of paying agreeably to law." Do we want to leave that as a positive requirement, or permissive?
CHAIRMAN ARNALL. What is the pleasure of the Commission'
MR. MAJORS. My understanding was poll tax was permissive.
CHAIRMAN ARNALL. The poll tax under the present Constitution is levied by law, not by the Constitution.
MR. MAJORS. Shouldn't we make that permissive also?
CHAIRMAN ARNALL. In other words, if the Legislature ever did away with the poll tax, they could then vote, because it wouldn't be effective as long as we have a poll tax. In order to vote you have to pay it under the Constitution.
If there is no further business coming before the Commission the Chair would like to acknowledge the presence here of Mr. Ivan Allen, Mr. Gosnell, Mr. Gormley, Mr. Huiet, Mrs. Blay.. lock and some of the Representatives, Representative C ice r 0 Kendrick, Representative Fortson, and other distinguished Georgians.
At this time too the Chair would like to convey, in behalf of the entire Commission, to a member of this Commission, Mr. Hatton Lovejoy, our sincere sympathy upon the beravement he suffered between this meeting and the last meeting of the Commission in the passing of his wife.
The question now comes as to the appointment of a Committee on Final Revision and Procedure. Shall that be referred to the Policy Committee?
MR. CULPEPPER. I move it go to the Policy Committee.
MR. FOLEY. I second the motion.
CHAIRMAN ARNALL. Without objection the Policy Committee -that is a committee composed of the Chairman and the Chairmen of the Sub-committees-and that committee will be charged with the final revision and procedure.
Now unless something develops during our work in the final

336

RECORDS OF CONSTITUTIONAL COMMISSION

revision and in determining upon the procedure that we don't now -contemplate, it will not be necessary to hold another meeting of fhe full Commission. If, on the other hand, some matter develops that requires the action of Ihe full Commission, the full Commission will be called again.
I want to say as Chairman of the Commission that I think under the reasonable obstacles that have been attended upon our work, the Commission, you gentlemen and Mrs. Haas, have done a very fine job. In conclusion I want to read into the record the mandate to the Commission from the Legislature of Georgia. I want to do that because at times I have noticed there has been apprehension in the minds of some of our people. We were directed as a Commission to revise the present Constitution, which is in effect a new Constitution, to take out ambiguities, to make more certain provisions, and not to go out and bring in a new structure of organic or new law. Now the document we have completed won't meet the approval of everyone. There are some people who will view our work with doubt because there are not enough new proposals in it; on the other hand, some will view what we have done with doubt because we have retained too many old propositions, or perhaps we have taken out some particular paragraph that someone wanted in there; but by and large government is a system of compromise, and we must eternally strive to attain perfection, and if we have made any contribution to the welfare of the State by these amendments that we propose to the basic law of the State, I will be personally very gratified. It is never possible in a democracy to please everyone by what is done. We aim to do the job to the best of our ability, intelligently, and to the end it will meet the approval of the majority of the people i~ the State. So there will be no confusion about what we have undertaken to do, I read the resolution approved March 17, 1943: [See Vol. I, pp. 1-3.J
Now in the opinion of the Chair we will have complied with that mandate of the General Assembly when we provide the members of the next General Assembly each with a completed transcript of the proceedings of this body, because by reading the transcript it is easy to see why this was done, and likewise the completed work will be printed under the direction of the Committee on Final Revision and Procedure, and the printed report will be furnished to the members of the General Assembly and press and public as expeditiously as possible. The Commission will have the report just as soon as possible.

RECORDS OF CONSTITUTIONAL COMMISSION

337

It is my belief that thus far we have a Constitution which in the most part will be ratified. by the Assembly and in turn approved by the people. Had we put into this document too many radical departures from custom or procedure it would have, in my judgment, met defeat. I think we are going to end up with a Constitution we can all defend and justify and advocate, and I am hoping before another year rolls around that Georgia may have the benefit of the labors you gentlemen accorded to the people and the State.
It has been a real pleasure to be associated with you and unless some further need for a call of the Commission develops, the work of the Commission has been completed and a motion is in order to adjourn.
JUDGE SMITH. I want to suggest at this time that we give the Chairman of this Commission and the good Governor of our great State a rising vote of thanks for his very excellent and able leadership in engineering, and setting in motion, and putting through the movement to revise the Constitution of this State.
CHAIRMAN ARNALL. Thank you, Judge Smith. (Whereupon the members of the Commission rise and ap-
plaud).
CHAIRMAN ARNALL. Mr. Lovejoy, did you have something to say?
MR LOVEJOY. I just wanted to make a similar motion to that.
CHAIRMAN ARNALL. It will probably be necessary to call this group together shortly before the General Assembly convenes.
There is nothing further I can say other than to express my very grateful thanks to the members of the Commission for the fine manner in which you have worked at this job, and to thank you all for the fine frieI1d~hip that you have for me, which I assure you in turn is fully reciprocated.
(Whereupon the meetin~ was adjournedat 12:30 p.m.)

10:00 A.M. DECEMBER 8, 1944.

CHAIRMAN ARNALL. Mr. President Gross, will you lead Us in prayer?

338

RECORDS OF CONSTITUTIONAL COMMISSION

MR. GROSS. (Offers a prayer).
CHAIRMAN ARNALL. The Assistant Secretary will call the roll. (Call of the roll).
CHAIRMAN ARNALL. The Chair has a report from Fred Hand that he probably would not be able to get here because of pressing matters in his home town. Does anyone know whether Fred is going to be here?
MR. GOWEN. I understand he is in town. Is Roy McCracken going to be here? Mr. Speaker, do you know whether Roy is coming?
MR. HARRIS. He told me he would be here.
CHAIRMAN ARNALL. A quorum being present, the business of the Commission will proceed.
Lady and gentlemen of the Commission, the Chair has deemed it expedient to reconvene the Commission for the reason that after the last session of the Commission the Chair became disturbed because of public insistence that we again submit to the Commission certain propositions. The Chair looked through the press clippings at that time and saw that some thirty-five papers said that they wished that we could again convene with a full attendance and submit some matters of controversy. The Chair received a number of letters, for and against certain proposals, expressing the desire that the Commission might again be called together to consider those proposals. The Chair has convened this Commission meeting, and the Chair expresses appreciation to the members for coming to consider these particular matters, and likewise other matters that probably should come before the Commission. Now I think everyone has got a copy of this last draft of the Constitution.
MR. McCUTCHEN. Yes, sir, except those that were absent from the last meeting.
MR. FOLEY. Someone inadvertently picked up my b 0 u n d volume.
THE CHAIRMAN. Has anyone got Judge FOley's bound black Constitution?
MR. McCUTCHEN. I saw a gentleman reading it while ago.
CHAIRMAN ARNALL. Someone took Judge Foley's Constitution.

RECORDS OF CONSTITUTIONAL COMMISSION

339

He would like to get it, the black book.

Roy McCracken is now present.

On Page 9 of the white Constitution, the revised Constitution,

at the top of the page, it is provided, "after the year 1908, elec-

tions by the people shall be by ballot," and so forth. Without ob-

jection, the Chair would like to strike the words, "after the year

1908," so that the paragraph will read: "Elections by the people

shall be by ballot, and only those persons shall be allowed to vote

who have been first registered in accoI1dance with the require-

ments of law." That is purely a question of editing. Is there any

objection to doing that? The Chair hears none and it is so ordered.

The Chair would like to direct attention to page 12, Section II

of Article III, "The Senate shall consist of fifty-two members and

there shall be fifty-two Senatorial Districts with one Senator

from each District. The various Senatorial Districts shall be com-

prised of the counties as provided for in the Constitution which

is superseded by this Coustitution, and the General Assembly

shall have authority to rearrange and change these Districts."

The Chair is of the opinion the language, "for in the Constitution

which is superseded by this Constitution," should be stricken and

the word "now" inserted before "provided," so that the last sen-

tence will read as follows: "The various Senatorial Districts

shall be comprised of the counties as now provided, and the Gen-

eral Assembly shall have authority to rearrange and change these

Districts." Is there any discussion or objection? It is purely an

editing proposition. Without objection that language will be

recorded.

'

The Chair directs attention of the Commission to page 13,

"Meeting of the General Assembly," about the middle of that para-

graph, "If it shall adjourn the first regular session before the ex-

piration of seventy (70) days without fixing a date for recon-

vening, the General Assembly shall reconvene in regular session

on the second Monday in January of the next year." The Chair

makes the observation that as written that sentence, in the Chair's

opinion, will force the General Assembly into a seventy day ses-

sion, even though the General Assembly desires to adjourn prior

to the expiration of the seventy days. For instance, if the General

Assembly stays in session for fifty days, then, as the Chair reads

that sentence, the General Assembly would be compelled to re-

convene in the following January for twenty days. The Chair

makes the point that perhaps the General Assembly should have

the right to waive any further extension of the session. As writ-

340

RECORDS OF CONSTITUTIONAL COMMISSION

ten, it is my opinion that the General Assembly could not waive any part of the session, and I submit that perhaps it should be provided, "if it shall adjourn the first regular session before the expiralion of seventy days without fixing a date for reconvening, the General Assembly shall reconvene in regular session on the second Monday in January the next year, unless it shall have adjourned the entire session." Does the Commission follow that? Like we have got it, we bind the Assembly where it can't adjourn its &'eSsion, as the Chair sees it. If there is an absence of objection the Chair moves we insert at the end of that sentence this language, "unless it" (meaning the General Assembly) "shall have adjourned the entire session," and close the quotes. Is there objection? There is none and that is authorized.
On page 17 of the white book, Paragraph V, "Journals, where kept: The original journal shall be preserved after publication, in the office of the Secretary of State, but there shall be no other record thereof." The Chair seeks enlightenment. What do we mean by saying "but there shall be no other record thereof"? Does that add anything to the paragraph? Is there any need of it? Without objection then, we will strike the last language, "but there shall be no other record thereof."
MR. HARRIS. I think the object was in the event of court proceedings that would be the official record and the thing that you would be governed by, so that it would not be possible to get up outside evidence as to what transpired, but you would be confined to the journal. If you strike that out I think you could go outside the journal and contest the accuracy of the journal in court any time you want to. That is my view.
CHAIRMAN ARNALL. We don't want to open it up where you can take other evidence, other than the official journal on file.
MR. HARRIS. There is that danger. It might do it.
CHAIRMAN ARNALL. In view of that observation then, the Chair does not insist on the suggestion, unless there is some further discussion.
MR. DURDEN. That is in the old Constitution.
CHAIRMAN ARNALL. Yes, it was. The Chair directs the attention -of the Commission to Paragraph VIII, on page 17, "No law or ordinance shall pass which refers to more than one subject matter, or contains matter different from what is expressed in

RECORDS OF CONSTITUTIONAL COMMISSION

341

the title thereof." The words, "or ordinance," that is carried over apparently from the old Constitution, where we did have an ordinance adopted subsequent to the preparation of the Constitution, but the Chair is of the opinion that the ordinance provision there is of no force or effect and merely a surplusage. Is there any member of the Commission that has any suggestion to make about that? Without objection, we will strike the words, "or ordinance," because we don't have ordinance in the Constitution.
MR. HARRIS. That is just a copy of the old language..
CHAIRMAN ARNALL. Yes, but in the old Constitution we did have some ordinances. Is there objection? Without objection that is stricken. The same is true of Paragraph XIII on page 18. The word "ordinance" appears. Is there objection to striking that? Without objection, that is so ordered.
The Chair directs the attention of the Commission to Paragraph XV. "Notice of intention to ask local legislation necessary." [ direct your attention, if you please, to the last sentence in that paragraph: "No office shall be abolished nor the term of office of any official shall be either shortened or lengthened during his term of office by local or special bill unless the question shall first be submitted to a referendum by the people of the jurisdiction affected." The Chair is of the opinion it was the intention of the Commission to refer to elected officials rather than-
MR. HARRIS. I think it went further than elected. I think it meant elected by the people, because they might be elected-it might cover the county and city employees, where they would be elected by the county commission or city council, and I think it ought to be "elected by the people."
CHAIRMAN ARNALL. Then, without objection, we will rewrite that sentence to read as follows: "No office elective by the people."
MR. HARRIS. I think it would get it if you put it after "official."
CHAIRMAN ARNALL. You mean no elective office shall be abolished?
CHAIRMAN ARNALL. If you don't do that, if the city created a sanitary inspector they could not abolish it: "No office elective by the people shall be abolished, nor the term of office of any official elected by the people shall be either shortened or lengthened during his term of office by local or special bill unless the question

342

RECORDS OF CONSTITUTIONAL COMMISSION

shall first be submitted to a referendum by the people of the jurisdiction affected." Is there objection?
MR. LOVEJOY. Would it be better to have the election before the bill was introduced or after it was introduced. It reads as if you would have to have an election before you introduce a bijl. Would it not be simple to have a bill to require a referendum directed in the bill?
MR. GOWEN. If you knock out the word "first" that will cure it.
CHAIRMAN ARNALL. If Fe strike the word "first" I believe that will answer the objection. Is there objection to striking the word "first," as suggested by Mr. Gowen? Without objection, the word "first" in the next to the last line of Paragraph XV is stricken. It is purely a matter of editing.
The Chair calls attention of the Commission to page 23, Article IV, relating to public utilities, eminent domain, police power and contracts. Paragraph I provides, among other things, "The power and authority of regulating railroad freight and pasenger tarriffs and of charges of public utilities for their services," and so forth, shall be vested in the public or conferred upon the General Assem bly. The Chair makes the point, and I think when we first took up this paragraph we discussed it-I think this was Mr. Lovejoy's committee, was it not-whether or not we should leave in the words "railroad freight and passenger tariffs." After reading that paragraph the Chair is of the opinion that the language "charges of public utilities" would cover railroad rates and tariffs, and I just wonder, as a matter of editing, whether we desire to leave the language in or strike it out and make it all comprehensive by referring to it as the charges of public utilities. Is there any thought about that?
MR. LOVEJOY. I think the words "charges of public utilities" includes railroad freight and passenger tariffs. Whether it was left in just to have it beyond any question, I don't know. In fact, didn't you write that? Didu't you re-edit that and dictate it yourself?
CHAIRMAN ARNALL. I think so. I think we discussed it.
MR. LOVEJOY. I know we did.
CHAIRMAN ARNALL. I don't think it is material; it is just a question of wording it. Is there anyone that makes any motion? If not, we will pass over.

RECORDS OF CONSTITUTIONAL COMMISSION

343

MR. LOVEJOY. You could and have other charges of public utilities.
ClIAIRMAN ARNALL. We discussed that at some length, but the Chair wanted to bring that matter again to the attention of the Commission.
The Chair calls attention to Paragraph V on page 23. That is the paragraph right in front of the one we have been discussing. "Reports by Insurance Companies. The General Assembly shall compel all insurance companies in this State, or doing business therein, under proper penalties, to make semi-annual reports to the Governor and print the same at their own expense, for the information and protection of the people." As a matter of fact those reports come into the Governor's office and no one ever sees them, no one reads them. We just acknowledge the receipt of the reports and send them over to the Comptroller General's Office. Under the laws of the State the Comptroller General is the Insurance Commissioner, and the Chair is of the opinion those .reports should go to the man who regulates the insurance companies, 'not to the Governor, and without objection the Chair suggests the word "Governor" be stricken and the words "Comptroller General" be substituted. Is there any objection'{ Without objection-
MR. CARMICHAEL. You better leave it in. You might not always have a Comptroller General. The Governor could see that they get to the right official.
CHAIRMAN ARNALL. We have in the Constitution a Comptroller General. The Chair is of the opinion the reports should go to the man that handles them.
MR. CARMICHAEL. The Constitution does not make the Comptroller General the Insurance Commissioner.
CHAIRMAN ARNALL. That is right.
MR. CARMICHAEL. I think we should let the reports come to the head of the State and let him distribute them to the proper official.
CHAIRMAN ARNALL. However, the Constitution does provide that all like insurance companies licensed shall deposit with the Comptroller General a fund. Is there objection to changing that to make the reports to the Comptroller General? Without objection that change is authorized and directed.

344

RECORDS OF CONSTITUTIONAL COMMISSION

MR. HARRIS. On page 53 on the question of exemptions there is some confusion that Mr. Zack Arnold, an official of the Municipal Association, would like to take up with the Commission, and if there is no objection I would like to ask that he be heard on the question of whether or not the homestead exemption applies to taxes levied by municipalities for school purposes. They would like to have clarification on that.
CHAIRMAN ARNALL. If there is no objection we will hear from them. Mr. Arnold.
MR. ZACK ARNOLD. There are a good many cities and towns in the State, gentlemen, who operate independent school districts. Under the old Constitution and the proposed new Constitution as con"" tained on page 53, we note that you do not follow the enabling act passed in 1937 and 1938 extra session, when you in Section 14 provide that "nothing herein contained shall be construed so as to prevent any municipality from levying and collecting taxes on exempt property for the operation of independent school systems." Now here is the situation, gentlemen: The law, the statutory law, authorized munjcipalities to tax for the maintenance of independent school districts, whereas the Constitution, in our opinion, absolutely prevents it, and it is causing considerable trouble over the State. I know of one municipality, Mr. Bob Arnold here representing the City of Columbus, on the Board of Education, and it is costing Columbus a large sum of money; and our Association went on record two or three days ago at our annual meeting to the effect we wanted to request the Commission to include in the Constitution that exception; and I would like, Mr. Chairman, if you would, to hear from Mr. Bob Arnold.
CHAIRMAN ARNALL. Mr. Arnold.
MR. HARRIS. May I ask Mr. Zack Arnold this? Is not Columbus the only city in the State where any question has been raised about it?
MR. ZACK ARNOLD. The City Attorney of Columbus, upon request of the Board, ruled they could not levy it, that was against the Constitution. The other municipalities, practically all of them, are levying it now. What we are disturbed about is that somebody will take a notion they don't want to pay that tax; and it will absolutely destroy some of the independent school districts unless this provision is there that they are levying it now under, the statutory law.

RECORDS OF CONSTITUTIONAL COMMISSION

345

MR. ATKINSON. Are not all the independent school districts ab~lished under the new Constitution?
MR. ARNOLD. No. Every town I know of that maintains an independent school district with the exception of Columbus is levying this tax, and it is in direct conflict with the Constitution.
CHAIRMAN ARNALL. There are about thirty-eight independent school districts in the city. [?]
MR. ATKINSON. And those levy city tax?
MR. ARNOLD. They are ~very one levying it under the enabling act except Columbus, and we are afraid somebody will attack it and knock them out. "Nothing herein contained shall be construed so as to prevent any municipality from levying and collecting taxes on the exempt property for the operation of independent school systems." Now on page 54 we simply suggested that whereas you have got one exception in there, "that it shall not apply to pay interest on and retire bonded indebtedness," that you simply add, "and shall not prevent municipalities maintaining independent school districts from levying taxes."
MR. BOB ARNOLD. Mr. Chairman and Gentlemen of the Commission: In order to make it perfectly clear, if I can, the Constitutional provision as now inserted, and it is also in your revised copy, reads as follows, in part: "The homestead of each resident of Georgia actually occupied by the owner as a residence and homestead, and only so long as actually occupied by the owner primarily as such, but not to exceed $2,000.00 of its value, is hereby exempted from all ad valorem taxation for State, County and School purposes, with the exception of taxation to pay interest on and retire bonded indebtedness." The Legislature or the General Assambly came along after that, in its enabling net, when that Constitutional provision was passed or adopted, and here is what the Legislature wrote: "Nothing herein contained shall be construed so as to prevent any municipality from levying and collecting taxes on exempt property for the operation of .independent school systems." They are referring there to the homestead exemption. The Legislature says that you can exempt it, I mean it is not exempt for the operation':in other words, the taxation is not exempt for operation of independent school systems, whereas the Constitution says there is no exemption except to pay bonded indebtedness. Therefore you have a legislative act which is palpably mainly in the teeth of the Constitution.

346

RECORDS OF CONSTITUTIONAL COMMISSION

Now these thirty-eight independent school systems in Georgia, every one of them, I am told, I am not saying it as a fact, I am quoting, I am told is following the legislative act. They are levying the taxon the homestead property on the homestead exemption. The only one that is not doing it, as I am told, is the city of Columbus; and our City Attorney, a very fine and very able lawyer, passing on all tax matters for the City of Columbus, when he saw this he ruled that that enabling act of the Legislature was plainly unconstitutional and he could not square it with his ruling to permit the City of Columbus to levy the tax on this exempt homestead property for school purposes. Now I checked up with the City Attorney and he was supposed to be here today but could not come. The City Manager was supposed to be here and he could not come. I am here representing those gentlemen and in my official capacity as the President of the Board of Education of the City of Columbus.
Now it has cost us, for our failure to make that levy and because we felt that it could not be done, something over $50,000.00 a year for our schools. Now what we are asking you to do is to put into the Constitution practically what is now being followed throughout the entire State. Apparently these other municipalities, without going back to the Constitution, simply followed the legislative act, a natural error; but if it should become known, or if it should become known to some heavy taxpayer probably in these municipalities, they could easily contest it and overthrow that tax, and every independent school district in the State would suffer.
Now in order to clarify it our idea is to effect-if you will tum
to page 54 in this Revised Constitution edition, in the third line, strike the words, "with the exception of," those four words, and from there on to the end of the sentence let it read this way: "except taxation to pay interest on and retire bonded indebtedness and to operate independent school systems." That would accomplish the purpose that we desire. That is all I have to say and I thank you very much.
MR. FOLEY. This language you suggest makes it mandatory to levy that tax, or permissive?
MR. ARNOLD. It is permissive only. It says it. It would not make it mandatory. It would make it permissive on the cities. They are not required to levy any tax. The City of Columbus is not.
MR. HARRIS. Read that language again.
MR. ARNOLD. The one I suggest is this: "except taxation to pay

RECORDS OF CONSTITUTIONAL COMMISSION

347

interest on and retire bonded indebtedness and to operate independent school systems."
MR. GOWEN. If you change it and make it independent school districts?
MR. HARRIS. I suggest you add to your language two words, that would be, "by municipality."
MR. GOWEN. In Glynn County the City of Brunswick does not levy tax for school purposes. It does not desire to do it, and we are getting along all right, and we don't want to increase the property tax a third, I would say. It does not apply to independent school systems. If they did it, it would present this difficulty in Glynn County-all the money is put in one pot. The fellow that lives outside of the city limits, the fellow would be contributing nothing to the city school.
MR. ARNOLD. It makes no difference to us in Columbus. Of course this is a state-wide proposition. It does not matter how it is accomplished so long as it is accomplished. I am not authorized to speak for the Municipal League or Municipal Association, but it seems, Mr. Zack Arnold, that would accomplish the purpose as suggested.
MR. HARRIS. "To operate independent school systems," or you might say, "the operation of independent school systems by municipalitie.s." Is that what you want to add?
MR. ARNOLD. Yes.
CHAIRMAN AHNALL. Thank you, Mr. Arnold.
Gentlemen of the Commission, this question, while it may be a new question to some members of the Commission, is not new at all. It has been percolating around ever since we passed the homestead exemption law. As I recall, when I was Attorney General I wrote hundreds of letters to city attorneys and school officials about the city taxes. Here is the question. Here is the status. The Constitution of the State grants a homestead exemption to the people who live in the city from paying school taxes on the property. Now Mr. Arnold wants that exemption changed whereby the peo pIe will pay school taxes on their ad valorem property in the city. The Act of the General Assembly authorizes that to be done. The Constitution does not authorize the levy of ad valorem taxes for school purposes in cities. Most all of the cities are acting under the

348

RECORDS OF CONSTITUTIONAL COMMISSION

legislative act. They are doing it with the full knowledge that it is in conflict with the Constitution, but they take the position they have to have money for the schools, and they are doing it anyway, hoping no one will contest it. So that brings the issue whether we are going to Iluthorize the cities to levy under the Constitution a tax for schools or whether the homestead exemption that is now on the statute, or rather in the Constitution, will remain. That is the issue.
MR. GOWEN. I would like to ask the Chair a question, because you think it is perhaps a little mIsleading, the statements it is only permissive. Isn't It the Chair's opinion if a school tax is levied it must be levied on all the property in the confines of the taxing unit?
CHAIRMAN ARNALL. Yes. That brings the issue whether we will take away from the homestead exemption some of the provisions guaranteed in the Constitution whereby cities can levy school . taxes ad valorem. That is the issue as I understand it. That is the issue.
MR. DURDEN. Mr. Chairman, my schools happen to be affected by this provision. I am familiar with the constitutional amendment and the legislative act, and why the city has continued to levy taxes until the present. People have paid it primarily because there has been no agitation to the contrary. Since this has been agitated the City of Albany and all other independent school systems are afraid that some large property owner will take the position that it is unconstitutional. If that is done you are going to cripple quite a few independent school systems, and sin c e the Legislature has expressed itself as being in favor of the proposition it should not apply to independent school systems, I am firmly convinced that it would be to the best interests of the schools and the people of Georgia if we inserted in this Constitution the same provision that you have got in your legislative act. People are paying it. They are willing to pay it, and the schools are functioning now under the limitation granted them by the Constitution, and everybody is collecting it with the exception of Columbus, I believe. Their school tax in the future, they are not going to be able to do that unless we preserve that right in this Constitution.
CHAIRMAN ARNALL. Do you move it be amended in conformity with Mr. Arnold's suggestion?
MR. DURDEN. Governor, I would like to use the phraseology used by Zack Arnold to the effect this exemption shall not apply to independent municipal school systems.

RECORDS OF CONSTITUTIONAL COMMISSION

349

CHAIRMAN ARNALL. Where is that in the Constitution again?
MR. ZACK ARNOLD. My suggestion was on page 54, at the top of the page, to say, "with the exception of taxation to pay interest on and retire bonded indebtedness and taxation levied by municipalities to maintain independent school districts-to operate and maintain independent school districts."
CHAIRMAN ARNALL. Mr. Durden moves to amend paragraph IV of Article VIII, Section I, by inserting the following language at the end of the language "and retire bonded indebtedness," appearing at the top of page 54, the following language: "and taxation by municipalities to maintain and operate independent school systems."
MR. GOWEN. Put the words "to operate their independent school systems."
CHAIRMAN ARNALL. "And taxation by municipalities to maintain and operate their independent school systems." Is there any discussion of that? Is there any objection? Without objection-
MR. LOVEJOY. There is inconsistency. 'Vhy don't we strike out the exemption for all school purposes? Why pick out this class of independent city school districts. If there is any merit in one place, the same merit in all of it. I am stating this because I am opposed to all of it. I don't think there should be any exception. I raise the point purely for consistency. Now I want to ask you-
CHAIRMAN ARNALL. Why should you let the city tax the people for schools and not let the county tax the people?
MR. LOVEJOY. And I move that beginning at the top of page 54 and put, "but not to exceed $2,000.00 of its value, is hereby exempted from all ad valorem taxation for State, County and School purposes" be amended so as to read, "for State and County but not for school purposes."
CHAIRMAN ARNALL. If you eliminate all schools don't you say the same thing?
MR. LOVEJOY. I don't know. State and County purposes might include the schools. Put the words, "for State, County and School purposes." We insert, "for State and County but not for school purposes."
CHAIRMAN ARNALL. If that is adopted that eliminates the pro-

l

350

RECORDS OF CONSTITUTIONAL COMMISSION

vision offered by Mr. Durden because this would be inclusive of your proposition. Is there any discussion?
JUDGE CANDLER. Haven't we already authorized the county to levy fifteen mills for school purposes?
CHAIRMAN ARNALL. Not on homestead exemptions.
MR. LOVEJOY. You authorized them to levy taxation but it would only be on such property as they can legally levy it upon.
JUDGE CANDLER. Would we not be going too far to take the e:'(emption off and then authorize them to levy fifteen mills?
CHAIRMAN ARNALL. As the Chair understands it, we authorize the counties now to levy fifteen mills for school purposes under this proposed Constitution, but that levy would be only on store buildings and garages and real estate that was not occupied as a homestead.
JUDGE CANDLER. But now to disallow the homestead and then authorize them to levy fifteen mills, would not that be a rather heavy school tax?
CHAIRMAN ARNALL. That would mean he can levy fifteen mills on homes, that is right. But the point Mr. Lovejoy makes is if Mr. Durden's goes in the Constitution, and the City of Columbus, with no limit, they can levy any amount they want to for school pur poses, whereas in Muscogee County they could not levy any amount of taxes on homesteads for schools.
MR. DURDEN. In Albany we are limited to ten mills.
JUDGE CANDLER. Under Mr. Lovejoy's, it raises it all.
MR. LOVEJOY. The situation on the authorization of taxes up to fifteen mills in the Counties is simply a different limitation. You levy taxes for schools now on county property outside of independent school districts. This provision of fifteen mills simply puts a maximum in there. There is no maximum in there, in the Constitution, as to what you can levy or the Legislature can authorize to be levied on county property for county school purposes. They can levy any amount now. We put in a fifteen mills limitation, We have not given anything before that. The Legislature could authorize the levy of any amount for school purposes. We put a limitation of fifteen mills. That is one thing.
JUDGE CANDLER. I agree on that.

RECORDS OF CONSTITUTIONAL COMMISSION

35~

MR. LOVEJOY. Now the question is whether in the counties--ask the city if we are going to remove the exemption for the purpose of paying taxes. Isn't it proper the people in the counties as well as in the city pay tax for school purposes?
JUDGE CANDLER. In principle, I think you are right.
MR. DURDEN. In answer to Mr. Lovejoy, in principle he may be, but the effect of his amendment would be to increase taxes.
CHAIRMAN ARNALL. The effect of your amendment would be to increase it.
MR. DURDEN. No.
CHAIRMAN ARNALL. It will increase it in Columbus.
MR. DURDEN. That is the only people affected. Otherwise the same levy has been levied as under my amendment.
CHAIRMAN ARNALL. In actuality it will not increase the taxes on anybody but Columbus.
MR. BOB ARNOLD. I was wrong. It would increase the amount of taxes.
CHAIRMAN ARNALL. If you are not now levying ad valorem taxes for school purposes in the City and we authorize you to do it we increase the taxes on the people in Columbus.
MR. ARNOLD. That is right.
CHAIRMAN ARNALL. The question is Mr. Lovejoy's motion, and if that prevails that would include your motion. If the motion does not prevail we will take up your motion.
MR. GROSS. Let me make this statement. If Mr. Lovejoy's proposition prevails, and I am heartily in favor of it, I am going to move we place the limitation of county taxation for education as ten mills, rather than fifteen.
CHAIRMAN ARNALL. The question is on Mr. Lovejoy;s motion. Turn to page 54, top of the page, picking up the sentence, to read as follows: "but not to exceed $2,000.00 of its value, is hereby exempted from all ad valorem taxation for State and County, but not for school, purposes," and the question is on Mr. Lovejoy's motion. Is there objection?
MR. GOWEN. I object.

352

RECORDS OF CONSTITUTIONAL COMMISSION

CHAIRMAN ARNALL. Those in favor say "aye"; opposed "no." The ayes seem to have it, and the ayes have it and it is so ordered. Now, Mr. Gross. That eliminates yours, Mr. Durden. Mr. Gross.
MR. GROSS. At the proper place I move that the limitation for taxes for school purposes outside municipalities be ten mills instead of fifteen mills. I think you will find that wording to be: "There shall be levied a tax of not less than five mills, or more than ten mills for school purposes."
CHAIRMAN ARNALL. Mr. Gross moves in the appropriate place, in dealing with limitation of county taxes, that it be provided that ad valorem taxation for school purposes levied by counties shall not exceed ten mills.
MR. THRASHER. That is on page 75. Can't we get it as we go?
CHAIRMAN ARNALL. Certainly can. That is not the section dealing with the county rates?
MR. THRASHER. It is, "The fiscal authorities of several counties shall levy a tax"-
CHAIRMAN ARNALL. Mr. Gross moves to amend Paragraph I on Page 75 of the white Revised Constitution, Section XII, to read as follows: "The fiscal authority of the several counties shall levy a tax for the support and maintenance of education not less than five mills nor greater than ten mills (as recommended by the County Board of Education) upon the dollar of all taxable property in the County located outside independent school systems." Is there any discussion?
JUDGE MacINTYRE. Let's don't hamstring our schools; let's give them a chance. The people can correct it if they go too high, but let's look after the schools if we don't look after anything else.
MR. GROSS. With reference to looking after the schools, we can levy a county-wide tax of five mills now, and that is all we can levy, a local school district tax up to five mills, but not exceeding five mills. Now we do away with the local school district and we are authorizing the levy, under my amendment, of a tax of ten mills
on lin of the property outside of the local school district. Now you
find this situation where you have an industrial plant in one of these school districts. The tax rate usually is pretty low, sometimes one mill and sometimes two mills. It produces a lot of money. Now then this ten mills will give you an added income taxable return

RECORDS OF CONSTITUTIONAL COMMISSION

353

on all this property outside of the school district which will produce much more revenue than is now produced by a local school district levy and a county-wide levy. Now in addition to that, we are taking from the exemption on the homestead; and I say when you do that you have more than double the revenue, I believe, for school purposes outside of the school district. I would like for just one minute-I see Frank Hatchett back there; he is a man always interested in helping education.
CHAIRMAN ARNALL. Let the Chair, before you say anything, let the Chair recognize in the hall a number of distinguished Georgians. I wish we had time to introduce all of them. We are particularly glad to have you here. Among that number is Frank Hatchett. He is Chairman of the Education Committee of the House. All right, we will be glad to hear from you.
MR. FRANK HATCHETT. Mr. Chairman, I would be opposed to Mr. Gross' motion there, of changing from what you have or the way yoU have it now, I understand, abolishing all school districts and trying to make the county the unit. I happen to come from a county in which practically my whole county is in the local district system, and therefore we are now getting out of the county practically ten mills; yet that is not a sufficient amount to run our schools as they should be run. If you are going to do away with the school district I think it ought to be five to fifteen mills, and frankly I was in favor of Mr. Lovejoy's motion while ago. It meant that the schools, the homestead exemption would be an exemption there, even in the county. As you have made it in the local school districts, independent school districts, we are having a hard time in our counties to run our schools efficiently for the lack of money. Now if you cut it down from fifteen to ten mills and also take out the homestead exemption, we in the counties, the smaller counties, are left in a mighty bad fix to get any money.
MR. ZACK ARNOLD. Under Mr. Lovejoy's amendment you could levy the tax.
CHAIRMAN ARNALL. For the information of those present, we have now exempted, rather we have now provided that the counties and the cities can levy school taxes on homesteads.
MR. HATCHETT. I understand it did not carry. That is fine, that part.
CHAIRMAN ARNALL. Now the question-

354

RECORDS OF CONSTITUTIONAL COMMISSION

MR. HATCHETT. I don't think you should cut it down from fifteen.
CHAIRMAN ARNALL. The question is, in view of the fact we have subjected homestead property to school taxes, the question is whether we shall have an overall levy of ten mills or fifteen mills.
MR. CARMICHAEL. Frankly, you now levy ten mills.
MR. HATCHETT. Practically that.
MR. CARMICHAEL. How much do you collect?
MR. HATCHETT. We are not paying them very much more than that. The State pays them because practically all we get to pay is transportation. We do need it, and need it bad, and I hope that you will let it stay fifteen. We don't have to put it there, and I don't know but what it might be best to leave it absolutely to the people of the county and let them say what they want, and leave it to their good judgment; but if you are going to put a limit on it at all, don't cut it from fifteen. We don't have to put it fifteen if we don't need it, and I think if you have the school authorities not to get any more money from the people than they really need, and if they should undertake to do it, I think those officers would soon be removed from office. I don't think we ought to limit it.
MR. CARMICHAEL. I second the motion.
CHAIRMAN ARNALL. The gentleman has made such a splendid talk that Mr. Gross withdraws his motion. Without objection, the Chair directs the attention of the Commission to page 61, bottom paragraph, page 1, Section VI, relating to contracts for use of public facilities. If you will remember, at the last meeting the Chair requested that we amend that paragraph so as to enable any city, town, or municipality, or county of this State to contract with each other for any period not exceeding fifty years. The purpose of that was simply to try to bring about the establishment of increased health facilities, particularly here in the metropolitan area of Atlanta. At that time the Chair pointed out that the only provision that was sought to be changed was to extend the right of contract from thirty to fifty years. The Chair, upon inquiry, finds that some other changes are desired. It is the information of the Chair that here in Atlanta we have some very large foundations that are interested in working out arrangements between the City and County for expanded hospital services. To do that, as I understand from the foundations, there are some other changes that are desired in this

RECORDS OF CONSTITUTIONAL COMMISSION

355

particular paragraph. I am sure that all of the Commission is anxious to assist in the establishment of increased health facilities, but in order to keep the question clear from doubt, the Chair is going to ask the Secretary, without objection, the Assistant Secretary to read paragraph I as proposed.
MR. LOVEJOY. The whole paragraph?
MR. McCUTCHEN. (Reads) "Paragraph I. Contracts for Use of Public Facilities.
(a) Any city, town, municipality or county of this State or any combination of same may contract with each other for any period not exceeding fifty years, and said political subdivisions or combination of same may create any public agency, corporation or authority and enter into contracts with such bodies for any period not in excess of fifty years, relative to activities, facilities, services and commodities, and all rights and properties incident thereto and used in the furtherance thereof, which such political subdivisions are now or hereafter by law authorized to perform and engage in; any such contracts so entered into not to create thereby a debt of the contracting political subdivision, if the amount of any annual obligation arising by virtue of such contract or contracts does not exceed the sum that could be produced by the levy of a maximum tax rate as authorized by the Legislature for that particular purpose, as determined by the latest taxable digest available at the time of making the contract, and to the extent that any annual obligation created by such contract exceeds the maximum sum that could be produced by the levy of a maximum tax rate as aforesaid. Such excess shall constitute a debt within the meaning of the Constitution and may only be authorized pursuant to the law and procedure relative to the creation of debts.
"In connection with any contracts authorized by the preceding paragraph, there may be conveyed by any political subdivision to a duly organized public agency, corporation or authority, existing facilities, including rights and properties incident thereto; provided any such properties, tangible or intangible, so conveyed, shall not be mortgaged or pledged to secure obligations of any such public agency, corporation or authority, and provided further, such facilities are to be maintained and operated by said political subdivisions.
"In furtherance of the objects and purposes as herein above granted, any such public agency, corporation or authority may for a tenn not exceeding the c~piration date of any contract between

356

RECORDS OF CONSTITUTIONAL COMMISSION

any political subdivision and public agency, corporation or authority, contract with any eleemosynary institution, association, school, college or university for the operation and maintenance of such undertaking, facility or project, under such terms and conditions as may be authorized by the Legislature.
"Nothing contained herein shall restrict any public agency, corporation or authority from pledging the revenues produced by the operation and maintenance of such facilities, undertakings or projects."
MR. ATKINSON. Is that a part of the proposed Constitution or the old Constitution?
CHAIRMAN ARNALL. That is offered as a new paragraph I, Section VI.
MR. ATKINSON. That is not the home rule provision?
CHAIRMAN ARNALL. No, this is not the emasculated home rule.
MR. ATKINSON. Who drew that?
CHAIRMAN ARNALL. The attorneys for two foundations that are anxious to establish hospital facilities for the City of Atlanta. I see the Mayor of Atlanta here, maybe Bill knows something about this.
MR. W. B. HARTSFIELD. Merely that it extends the contract period from thirty to fifty years.
CHAIRMAN ARNALL. That was my understanding, but there are a lot of restrictions and rights contained in it, in addition to that.
MR. ATKINSON. Mr. Chairman-
MR. HARTSFIELD. Is that different from the special amendment voted on by the people?
CHAIRMAN ARNALL. Yes.
MR. HARTSFIELD. Well, we would like to look at it and sort of think about it.
CHAIRMAN ARNALL. We have already-for your information, and you know the purpose behind it; as I understand it, it is to enable Atlanta to contract about a health center-but we have already granted at the last meeting the right to enter into these contracts for fifty year periods. That has already been adopted.

RECORDS OF CONSTITUTIONAL COMMISSION

357

MR. FOLEY. I move that be referred to an appropriate committee. I don't know what it means.
CHAIRMAN ARNALL. Is there any objection? Without objection, that is so ordered.
MR. HEAD. You have already passed something. I thought I would call attention to it. I want to move you, sir, to remove from this new Constitution about eight thousand additional members of the judiciary that we have created by the language we have used. That is on page 34, Section I, Paragraph I, Article VI: "The judicial powers of this State shall be vested in a Supreme Court, a Court of Appeals, Superior Courts, Courts of Ordinary, Justices of the Peace, Commissioned Notaries Public, and such other Courts as have been or may be established by law." Now the words "Commissioned Notaries Public"; they are commissioned by the Superior Courts of this State, and there are more than five thousand of them commissioned by the State Librarian. You would be increasing the judiciary by about eight thousand members. The way that should read should be, "Notaries Public who are ex officio Justices of the Peace." I move that.
MR. HARRIS. I second that.
CHAIRMAN ARNALL. You have heard the motion of the Attorney General, seconded by Mr. Harris, Speaker of the House, that Paragraph I, of Section I, Article VI, on page 34, be amended to read as follows: "The judicial powers of this State shall be vested in a Supreme Court, a Court of Appeals, Superior Courts, Courts of Ordinary, Justices of the Peace, and Notaries Public who are ex officio Justices of the Peace." Strike out the "Commissioned Notaries Public" and insert in lieu thereof, "Justices of the Peace who are Notaries Public, or ex officio Justices of the Peace-Notaries Public who are ex officio Justices of the Peace." Is there any objection to that? Without objection it is so ordered.
MR. ATKINSON. Mr. Chairman, in our county we operate the county school system over the entire county and it is one of those independent school districts that covers the county that was created before the former Constitution; and they have been excluded under the provisions of the charter of our Board of Education, have been excluded in the former Constitution and from this one, but our Board of Education finds that we like some parts of this Constitution, and this part of it which deals with education in particular, and that part that permits the levy.

358

RECORDS OF CONSTITUTIONAL COMMISSION

CHAIRMAN ARNALL. What page?
MR. ATKINSON. Pages 74 and 75. We like that Section XII where it provides the limits to go from five to fifteen mills. Our limit was voted for the county, ten mills. We can, though, by amendment of the county tax and a vote of the people, go up to twelve mills, but we don't want to be the only cOlmty in the whole State of Georgia that has a different limItation ar4J, limiting to twelve mills when the rest are fifteen mills; so I waltt to ask permission, right at the end of Section VII, which excludes the different boards-no, that is not Section VIII, Section X. I want to right at the end of that, except the provisions of Section VII, which has a fifteen limitation: "Paragraph I of this Article shall apply to Chatham County when approved by a majority vote in an election held in that county for that purpose." Now all we have done down there is held after election; so I want to fix it so our county can come under the provisions of this Act with regard to your tax limitation, when they vote to do it.
CHAIRMAN ARNALL. Senator Atkinson moves-
MR. HARRIS. May I ask a question before you put the motion? Would there be any objection to amending Section XII so as to provide that the public school system referred to in Section X shall be subject to Section XII? There would be no objection from my county. Would there be any from Glynn or Bibb?
MR. GOWEN. Dave don't want it. He wants to vote it if they change their minds later on.
MR. HARRIS. That leaves it up to the board of education. That gives them some home rule.
MR. ATKINSON. The board of education would rather have it referred to the people because of all our tax-
CHAIRMAN ARNALL. In other words, you want true home rule?
MR. ATKINSON. I want all the people to vote on it.
CHAIRMAN ARNALL. Now where do you offer?
MR. HARRIS. I move this, that we add at the end of Section XIIstrike the period and insert a comma-"and the provisions of this section shall apply to the public school systems referred to in Section X."
CHAIRMAN ARNALL. Is there objection to that, Dave?

RECORDS OF CONSTITUTIONAL COMMISSION

359

MR. ATKINSON. I don't think so, because we are all in the same boat.
CHAIRMAN ARNALL. Is there objection to the amendment offered by Mr. Harris?
MR. HOLT. What is the effect of the motion?
MR. HARRIS. That means the county boards of education in the four counties of Richmond, Chatham, Bibb and Glynn can levy up to fifteen mills for school purposes.
JUDGE CANDLER. Is that the provision already?
MR. HARRIS. No, because they are governed by special bills.
CHAIRMAN ARNALL. They have special systems and we are giving them the same rights we give other systems. Is there objection?
MR. DURDEN. Frankly, I never have liked that exemption in there at all.
CHAIRMAN ARNALL. You mean about those four schools?
MR. DURDEN., That is right. I don't think it is right for them to come in and say if you will give us something we like we will take that, but we will not abide by the rules affecting the other schools. I think you ought to get on a level with all of us, all be fed out of the same dish.
MR. HARRIS. We are trying to get you all on our level.
MR. ATKINSON. If you will take the first part of your bill and straighten it out like I think it ought to be~Now you have it fixed that there shall be six members of the Board of Education-If, you will leave it up to the county to decide how many members they will have and how they shall be selected, some selected by a vote and some by the grand jury, and some by the recommendation of the county commissioners, if you leave that to the counties then you will have a real home rule. Let them decide how many they will have and how they will elect them. If you do that you come exactly under what we are, and I think that ought to be done; but I am not running your bill. What we want to do is to get something along with the rest of the State of Georgia on fifteen mills limitation.
CHAIRMAN ARNALL. You have heard Mr. Harris' motion. Is there objection?
MR. DURDEN. I object.

360

RECORDS OF CONSTITUTIONAL COMMISSION

CHAIRMAN ARNALL. There is objection. So many as favor Mr. Harris' motion that enables the constitutional school system of four counties to have a right to levy fifteen mills tax for school purposes, so many as favor that let it be known by saying "aye"; opposed, "no." The ayes seem to have it. The ayes have it and it is so ordered.
MR. LOVEJOY. It seems to me we should have some official recognition of this first step taken by the independent State of Chatham for readmission into the Commonwealth of Georgia?
,CHAIRMAN ARNALL. So many as favor readmission of Chatham let it be known by saying "aye." Dave, your state is readmitted and we are glad to have these other friends from your bailiwick with us.
MR. ATKINSON. Captain Spencer says if you will come down there he will take you for a ride in a big boat.
MR. FOLEY. They are readmitted on trial. Mr. Carmichael moves we admit Chatham on probation, on trial.
MR. ATKINSON. In Chatham County we have been-you know we were a city, the City of Savannah, one hundred years before this Atlanta was chartered. We are the mother Of Georgia. What good you have in Georgia, we are the ones that did it.
CHAIRMAN ARNALL. Georgia is proud of its first capital city, Savannah. Are there other details to come up? The Chair, at this time would like to know if there are any other matters any of the other members desire to bring up before we start discussing the home rule, the prison board and-
MR. GOWEN. Governor, ~ have written to each member of the Commission before I knew we were going to be called back, with reference to a provision that some people down on the Coast think should be in the Constitution. I think I made myself clear in the letters that I wrote, but the situation has been on the Coast that under an Act of 1902 the Legislature undertook to extend the ownership of property owners abutting on the tidal land in high water marks to low water marks. The purpose was to give somebody title to the oyster beds. At that time the oyster beds had been depleted, and the idea was if the private property owner owned the oyster beds they could afford to replant them and patrol them and undertake to re..tore the oyster industry to the State of Georgia. So far as I know this Act has not been attacked, and people have

RECORDS OF CONSTITUTIONAL COMMISSION

361

hesitated to plant oyster beds because they think the Act of 1902 infringes on the Constitutional provision preventing the granting of the property of the State; and the suggestion was made that as soon as the war is over there are a number of people who are willing to make large investments in trying to replant oysters in the State of Georgia. I had occasion to look at some statistics, and Georgia, prior to 1890, was one of the largest oyster producing States in the Union; and at the present time it is the smallest State. I talked with Dr. Creaser, who is Supervisor of Coastal Fisheries. The State takes the position they can't plant oyster beds because the title belongs to somebody else; and under another Constitutional provision the State can't improve the property, and nobody has done anything about planting oysters. In addition to bringing new industries, the planting of oysters increases fish, because the oyster is where the small fish hide from the large fish, and where you have plenty of oyster beds you have good fishing, and the suggestion has been made that at the end of ArtIcle XII of the Constitution a provision substantially such as this, be made: "The Act of the General Assembly approved December 16, 1902, which extends the title of ownership of land abutting on tidal water to low water mark, is hereby ratified and confirmed." I believe if that was done it would do away with the possibility of the law being unconstitutional, and would permit people to 3pend thousands of dollars necessary to plant them and spend the additional amount necessary to patrol the beds until such time as the oysters got to sufficient size to harvest. At the present time the fear they have is that if the oyster beds are planted some fellow will go in and harvest them, and the Court would declare he was properly doing so because they were on public domain and he was as much entitled to them as the other man. I do want to say this; I want to be fair with the members of the Commission. At least two of the sea-food people on the coast of Georgia regularly maintain my law firm to represent them, and I don't want the Commission to think I am undertaking to earn a fee or represent these people. A great many others that I don't repre~ sent, and the ones that I do, came to me about it, other than that; but there are two firms that pay us a regular retainer, and I want to make that clear to the Commission.
MR. CULPEPPER. Do your people down there want this?
MR. GOWEN. Yes, sir, the oyster people want it, and there is no objection from the Supervisor of Coastal Fisheries.
MR. ATKINSON. Isn't that what everybody considers the law?

362

RECORDS OF CONSTITUTIONAL COMMISSION

MR. GOWEN. It has been the law for forty-two years, and people have sold property on the basis that it was the law, and nobody questioned it.
MR. CULPEPPER. I move its adoption.
MR. POPE. I second the motion.
JUDGE MacINTYRE. What do the others say?
MR. GOWEN. There is a difference of opinion. In Virginia the Chesapeake Bay Section, all the oysters are owned by the State and leased to the people, and in South Carolina they are individually owned and in North Carolina they are individually owned. It differs with the States. It might be open to argument. If this Act of 1902 had never been passed it might be better to let the State own them all, but I don't believe the State itself would want to undertake to pay back the few people that have planted them.
MR. FOLEY. Does this affect catfish in the Chattahoochee?
JUDGE SMITH. Mr. Gowen, I want to make this suggestion, it might be a substitute motion: Might we not, rather than incorporate in this Constitution the wording as suggested by Mr. Gowen, confirm an act of the Legislature. It appears to me it would be better merely to incorporate the language of the Act to be confirmed rather than confirm it by reference to the act?
MR. GOWEN. I have no objection to doing that.
JUDGE SMITH. It would save them in time to come to the constitutionality of the act. I make the substitute motion that the wording of the act be incorporated in the Constitution rather than confirming the Act by reference.
MR. GOWEN. The Act is about a page. It is really too long and it gets into too much detail. The Act does contain a provision that I think is very important that it is not necessary to have in the Constitution, and that reserves the right of notification and the right to use the area when it has water in it. No question of being able to go up and down stream.
JUDGE SMITH. Does not the act contain all the pertinent matter you want confirmed by the Constitution?
MR. GOWEN. Yes, sir.
CHAIRMAN ARNALL. Judge Smith offers a substitute motion that

RECORDS OF CONSTITUTIONAL COMMISSION

363

the Act of December 16, 1902, in its entirety, be inserted in the Constitution.
MR. GOWEN. I think that is too long. Let me ask unanimous consent to give me until the noon hour to draw something else and submit it.
MR. CULPEPPER. Don't what you have cover it?
MR. GOWEN. It covers it.
MR. CULPEPPER. I move the adoption of the amendment offered by the gentleman from Glynn.
MRS. HAAS. I don't understand why the act has never been questioned since 1902.
MR. GOWEN. I believe most of the lawyers here would agree with you if the constitutionality had ever been questioned it would have been declared unconstitutional. It has not been questioned because nobody has done anything about it, but the way it would run and be questioned-by plants and oyster beds, and you come and harvest my oysters and I have you arrested for trespassing on my property and taking my property, and you try to prosecute him in court; then you raise the point that you have not taken my oysters because they did not belong to me, even though I planted them, and even though for forty-two years I thought they belonged to me; and if the courts hold you have the right to get them, then everybody else has equal right.
MR. FOLEY. I second Mr. Culpepper's motion.
CHAIRMAN ARNALL. The first motion will be Judge Smith's motion that the entire Act of December 16, 1902, be incorporated in the Constitution. So many as favor Judge Smith's motion make it known by saying "aye"; opposed "no." The noes seem to have it.
Now the question is on Mr. Culpepper's motion, seconded by Mr. Foley, that this language be inserted in the Constitution: ''The Act of the General Assembly approved December 16, 1902, which extends the title of ownership of land abutting on tidal waters to low water marks is hereby ratified and confirmed." Any discussion? Is there objection? The Chair hears none and it is so ordered.
The Chair desires to bring to the attention of the Commission a communication from the Presbyterian Ministers Association of Atlanta whereby they desire to prohibit any official who issues a license for matrimony from performing the ceremony. That is,

364

RECORDS OF CONSTITUTIONAL COMMISSION

they would like for the Ordinary to be precluded from performing a marriage ceremony. Is there a motion?
MR. FOLEY. I move we receive it.
CHAIRMAN ARNALL. It is moved it be received. Without objection it is so ordered.
MR. DURDEN. May I direct the Commission's attention to Section 7, on page 63 of the Revised Constitution, which has to do with limitation of the county and municipal tax.
CHAIRMAN ARNALL. Turn to page 63, if you will, Paragraph I. Mr. Durden.
MR. DURDEN. Do you have some suggestion?
CHAIRMAN ARNALL. No.
MR. DURDEN. The Clerk will read the proposed amendment.
The effect is to change the word "seven" to "ten" and to eliminate, about midways of the section, "that those voting at said election shall be a majority of the registered voters, and provided further," eliminate those words. Those are the only changes. After the Secretary reads it I would like to make a statement.
CHAIRMAN ARNALL. Is this the typed copy or printed? There has been a change, a new paragraph was adopted.
MR. DURDEN. Let the Clerk read that and let's see what it is.
CHAIRMAN ARNALL. The Clerk will read Paragraph I, of Section VII, as adopted at the last Commission meeting.
MR. McCUTCHEN. (Reads the new paragraph)
MR. DURDEN. This I have would not affect that.
MR. LOVEJOY. Didn't we make some change, not as written here, as to the number of votes which had to be cast?
MR. DURDEN. That is in another section.
MR. LOVEJOY. This is in reference to bonds. It was brought up and there was a change from the way it was in the Constitution.
MR. DURDEN. Change in the old Constitution, fifty per cent had to constitute a majority of those voting in favor of it. I think that is the only change we made.

RECORDS OF CONSTITUTIONAL COMMISSION

365

MR. LOVEJOY. I wanted to be sure we printed it as it was changed.
JUDGE MacINTYRE. Is it with reference to bond issues?
MR. CARMICHAEL. Yes, sir.
MR. HARRIS. This is the way it is adopted. The old law was twothirds of the voting in favor must be a majority of the registered voters. This says only a majority shall participate, and you get two-thirds of those that participate.
MR. LOVEJOY. If it carries the change all right.
MR. DURDEN. The effect of this amendment would be to change the words "seven" to "ten," and simply provide that two-thirds of those voting at any election for that purpose be held as required by law, and eliminating the provision "those voting at said
:eo.
election shall be a majority of the registered voters."
MR. HARRIS. Your proposition is to make the bonded debt limit ten per cent and strike paragraph three out of it?
MR. DURDEN. That would be the effect of striking paragraph three. That provided for au additional 3% to be repaid in five years.
MR. HARRIS. Would there be any objection to changing your amendment so that you have the same vote as we have already prescribed in Paragraph I to authorize bond issues?
MR. DURDEN. Frankly, I don't see any reason why you should put in there it must be a majority vote of the people. There is no other election you have that required. ,
CHAIRMAN ARNALL. You mean a majority of the registered voters?
MR. DURDEN. That is right. If 500 ""fote and the majority votes for it you carry it.
CHAIRMAN ARNALL. The Chair is in doubt as to what the gentleman is contending for. Is he contending the bonds should be authorized not to exceed 10% of the ad valorem property where we now have 7%?
MR. DURDEN. That is right. And on page 64 you authorize an additional levy of 3% under certain conditions. If this is adopted I suggest we eliminate Paragraph III from the Constitution.

366

RECORDS OF CONSTITUTIONAL COMMISSION

CHAIRMAN ARNALL. Why can't the gentleman get the relief his people may desire under the way we have it now, the 7% and an additional 3%?
MR. DURDEN. For this reason, it is impractical. You go ahead and levy a 7% bonded indebtedness, then vou come back and let's take ten mills valuation of the property,' would give you one million levy under a 10% clause. Under a 7% clause you would have seven hundred thousand. Then you say on the next page that you can levy an additional 3%.
MR. HARRIS. You mean issue bonds, not levy?
MR. DURDEN. Issue bonds to the amount of $300,000 addition and must be paid back over a five year period. That means you would have a staggering debt of five years the people could not pay. At the same time, on that basis, you would have to retire $300,000 indebtedness at a ratio of $60,000 a year. That would be in addition to the regular bond issue of $700,000, whereas if you authorize to levy a 10% levy it can be prorated over a number of years and the cities and counties will get the benefit of an additional 3% levy.
CHAIRMAN ARNALL. In other words, the gentleman's amendment to Paragraph I, if adopted, would strike Paragraph III?
MR. DURDEN. That is right. That would be the effect. Let me make this observation. Going back 'to the Constitution of 1877, if we had been sitting in that Convention we probably would have voted to make the limitation as it is because we were all familiar with the bond issue over that period of time. In 1944 there has been a changed condition, and I say to you it is sound economy to let any city or county levy 10% of its assessed valuation. We know the assessment runs about 50%. That means a total assessment of about five years for bond purposes, and another reason that should be inserted in there is this, I think anybody who has ever served in the Legislature knows that if any city or any county comes before the Legislature and asks for a constitutional amendment of $500,000 additional, the Legislature votes as a matter of course they can do it, and that submits it right back to the people to vote on it, and just encumbers the long ballot we have. If you give them a $10,000,000 overall levy you will eliminate at least 50% of the constitutional amendments that the people' vote on, and as a matter of course they always ratify it; and I hope this Commission will authorize just a 10% levy and elim-

RECORDS OF CONSTITUTIONAL COMMISSION

367

inGte Section III. Now whether or not you are going to levy it in there about fifty per cent of a majority of the registered voteI'8, it is immaterial to me, but I do think the cities and counties should have the right to levy ten per cent of their assessed valuation for bonds.
CHAIRMAN ARNALL. The Assistant Secretary will read the amendment.
MR. DURDEN. As suggested, I move to strike the word "seven" and if that is adopted I move to eliminate Paragraph III in its entirety.
JUDGE MacINTYRE. Let me see if I understand. You mean they could pass a bond issue by fifty votes?
MR. DURDEN. Just as we have it written. All I move is they strike the language "seven per cent" and substitute in lieu thereof the language "ten per cent" so that we authorize-
JUDGE MacINTYRE. Didn't the motion eliminate it?
MR. DURDEN. No. If that is passed I move to eliminate Paragraph III. That authorizes an additional levy of three per cent.
JUDGE MaciNTYRE. That doesn't affect the number of votes required?
MR. DURDEN. No, sir.
CHAIRMAN ARNALL. You heard the motion. Is there objection?
MR. LOVEJOY. Yes, sir, there is no absolute answer as to what limit there should be on a bonded indebtedness. The maximum under which we have operated through these years is a bond issue authorized in the amount of seven per cent of the assessed value of the property. There have been many occasions when localities have come up and said there was an emergency and asked for authority for additional bonds and amended the Constitution, probably hundreds of them. The committee tried to work out something to meet that situation and to prevent this continual amending of the Constitution, and at the same time make a provision under which the municipality and counties could meet the emergencies that came up, and simply to repeat what was done, the committee carried forward the seven per cent limitation, which covered ordinary purposes, and then added a new section which provided if an emergency arose the people could vote bonds in an

368

RECORDS OF CONSTITUTIONAL COMMISSION

amount equal to three per cent of the taxable property, in addi~ tion to seven per cent. Those bonds were limited. They were for emergencies. It is provided it be paid off in five years. And if the people have an emergency I think they can meet it and vote it and issue bonds equal to three per cent more than the taxable value of the property. The provision was put in there because they won't issue those bonds easily. If they want to issue this extra. three per cent they must pay them off in five years, so they won't be issued casually, as I think many of them are issued in a socalled emergency. Personally my judgment is this, judging by experience, by the experience of the State and counties and cities through this last-since 1877, that seven per oent limit has been a safeguard which has been a Godsend to many a municipality and county. Even with that seven per cent limit, gentlemen, you will find many of the cities and counties with debts on them which they struggle year after year to pay. If you increase that to ten you simply add nearly fifty per cent to your limit which you could issue under ordinary purposes in bonds and you will find you will ~oad up the counties and cities to the full ten per cent. That is what all of us do, get all you can issue, and those things are burdens on the people, and the children of the people, running through thirty years ordinarily, and the funds are tied up through all this time until you can payoff them and issue some more. The ordinary situation of the cities in Georgia now is they can issue no more bonds because they have issued up to the limit until they payoff some of them. Now we have made a provision for an emergency and only an emergency. It seems to me should they add this to the tax burden of the people, it is a safeguard and has proven of tremendous value. The result is seen in the marketing of our bonds in the United States. There are no States, counties or cities the bonds of which rank higher, and there are few that rank as high in the public markets as the bonds of the State of Georgia and its subdivisions. You will find that seven per cent has amounted to a lot of money, it has in my section and my county and my city. That seven per cent is a lot of money to put on the people. I think it has been a wise limitation. I don't think we should increase it. I have not heard before this, not one suggestion has come to our Committee from any municipality or county, from the County Commissioners Association, from the May 0 r s' Organization or the Municipal League of the State. No such request came to our Committee or has even been :mggested before that that limit of seven per cent be increased. Personally, I think that the seven per cent

RECORDS OF CONSTITUTIONAL COMMISSION

369

limit ought to be kept as it is, and if there is an emergency that they vote it, and I say this provision for the extra three per cent of bonds is the child of our committee. You may find something better than that, but we tried to meet the situation of an emergency that arose, and I think it is better that three per cent be issued in case of an emergency, and not under ordinary authority. You are simply going to tie up the people with nearly fifty per cent more bonds. You will have the municipality loaded down with fifty per cent more bonds which they will struggle under year after year, and they will be struggling until they pay those off. I think the past has proven, and in my judgment seven per cent is as much money in bonds as a municipality can safely issue. To my judgment I would leave the seven per cent like it is, and they can make a provision for an emergency issue of bonds with that provision in there. I make this further statement, many of these amendments to the Constitution for local bond issue have been to refund bonds which they have, where they have misappropriated the sinking fund, where they have not the money to retire the bonds in accordance with its terms. Under the provisions we have made in the Constitution, if the Constitution is complied with we won't have that kind of an amendment because somebody will go to jail if they misappropriate the funds, and I hope the Legislature will have the nerve, if this Constitution is adopted as aforementioned, to authorize in some locality to issue additional bonds, they will have the nerve to say no, that is a matter of fiscal policy of the State of Georgia. We have provided an emergency and we will not submit any amendments for a locality for some particular reason if they want to exceed the limit fixed by the Constitution. I think seven per cent has proven wise. As far as my judgment is concerned, I say keep the seven per cent provision, and for unusual emergency, as we have it, unless somebody can submit a better plan, and then don't amend the Constitution. I say that is not Solomon's reason. I recognize there is no mathematical reason, but I say the history of bonds in the State of Georgia has demonstrated this seven per cent limit has allowed the cities to load themselves up with bonds to a greater extent than it is wise to do.
CHAIRMAN ARNALL. The Chair wants to state he understands the proposition before the Commission is under our Revised Constitution. As presently adopted we provide that we can levy bonds up to seven per cent of the ad valorem tax value, repayable over a period of thirty years; and in addition to that we provide that we can levy bonds up to three per cent of the taxable value, repay-

370

RECORDS OF CONSTITUTIONAL COMMISSION

able over a period of five years. Mr. Lovejoy's position is that under that system there would be some restriction on the bonds because they would have to be repaid in five years under the emergency provision. Mr. Durden makes a suggestion that we do away with the three per cent bonds that have to be paid in five yea~ and authorize the issuance of bonds to the amount of ten per cent of the ad valorem value and authorize thirty years in which to repay those bonds. That would tend to liberalize the bond issue to some extent, whereas the present writing tends to some extent to restrict it. Now that is the way the Chair understands the issue.
MR. HARRIS. Since we have at issue here today a philosophy of government that if we are going to adopt in Georgia, some advocating municipality and county be permitted to run their affairs by election as they see fit, if we are going to adopt that philosophy of government, why does it not necessarily follow we ought to strike out all limitation and let the people of each municipality and county issue as many bonds as they want?
CHAIRMAN ARNALL. Without objection, the Chair will rule the distinguished Speaker out of order at that stage.
MR. HEAD. Pardon the observation, but this section of the Constitution seems to me to be the "guts" of the situation on the question of home rule. Since 1877 there have been 323 proposals to the people of Georgia to amend this Constitution. Of that the people have voted 301. This section of the Constitution has been amended 136 times. Now every time I find somebody that wants to talk about home rule they say, ''Why should I be called on to vote where I don't live, be authorized to increase the bonded indebtedness? Why not let the people determine that?" Now we have amended this section of the Constitution 136 times. We amended it 68 times following the 1941 session of the General Assembly. Now it is true, as Mr. Lovejoy said, most of those amendments at that time were for the purpose of allowing them to refund and get a better situation on the payment of interest. I want to call your attention, we are talking about this situation with reference to home rule. I want to call your attention to one situation that existed in one of those elections. Through a little miscalculation and a little mismanagement, one of the counties very close to Atlanta had a proposal to refund a $80,000 indebtedness that had been run up. They got in a political fight at home and they refused to do it. They were paying seven per cent interest on that debt, but the people of Georgia thought it was a good thing for

RECORDS OF CONSTITUTIONAL COMMISSION

371

them to be able to refund it and they voted to let them do it, and they refunded that $80,000 indebtedness at two and three-quarters per cent. Now there are both sides of your home rule picture. But I say to you that if we are going to have home rule, if we are go-ing to let people pass on questions of finance and questions of public improvement, here is the place to do it; and if you are going to let them have public improvements you ought to let them have ten per cent of the assessed taxable value of the property to do it with. I think the -gentleman's motion is right and proper and the intent and purpose in my remarks is to sec ond his motion, that is that it be increased to ten per cent.
CHAIRMAN ARNALL. Gentlemen of the Commission, the question is on the adoption of Mr. Durden's amendment.
lVIR. LOVEJOY. May I say this in reply to one statement of the General, that we have added a provision in this Constitution which permits the refunding of bonds in order to secure a lower rate of interest and it does not require any amendment, local or general, to the Constitution.
CHAIRMAN ARNALL. The question is on Mr. Durden's proposal that the language "seven per cent" be stricken in Paragraph 1 of Section VII relating to the dehts of counties and cities, and there be substituted in lieu thereof the language "ten per cent." If that motion prevails then, as I understand it, Mr. Durden moves to strike Paragraph III, that provides the additional three per cent limit. Is there objection?
JUDGE MacINTYRE. Let me make an observation. I am sort of like my friend Lovejoy. This seven per cent and this restriction on bond issue, it says if you are going to have home rule let's have a full dose, but there is no rule under the sun that does not require some exception. I never heard of such a rule; if there was no exception it would not be a rule, and this is one of the exceptions to the general home rule. I think it is necessary for the benefit of the communities involved; seven per cent, as I understand Mr. Lovejoy; they say the people, if you want to, if we had seven per cent for some emergency purpose, we allow you to do it provided you pay back for that emergency in five years. You must be careful about this thing. We are not going to let you have it every time you think you have an emergency coming up and spread it out over thirty years. If you really have an emergency we provided that you can issue bonds up to three

372

RECORDS OF CONSTITUTIONAL COMMISSION

per cent to meet that emergency and it ought to be. I have never served in the Legislature. I don't know how it works much, but it looks like it would be a good thing where the Legislature could say the Constitution has made a provision for that, you go back home and make the three percent and meet the emergency, and if it is an emergency it must be paid back in five years.
CHAIRMAN ARNALL. The question is on the adoption.
JUDGE CANDLER. May I ask a question? What has been the maximum amount that those amendments provided for?
MR. HEAD. Usually around ten or twelve per cent. None of them have ever exceeded twelve per cent.
CHAIRMAN ARNALL. The question is on Mr. Durden's motion. Is there objection?
MR. LOVEJOY. I object.
CHAIRMAN ARNALL. There is objection. So many as favor its adoption make it known by saying "aye"; opposed "no." The Chair is in doubt. So many as favor it rise and stand until counted; reverse your position, those opposed rise. Eight for and ten against and the motion is lost.
Without objection the Commission will suspend for five minutes and without objection we will set the hour of 1:00 o'clock for lunch. Is there objection?
(Whereupon a five minutes recess was called)

AFTER RECESS
CHAIRMAN ARNALL. The me~ting will come to order. Are there other extraneous matters (0 come to the attention at this stage? If not, we will proceed into a discussion and consideration of the socalled home rule, a Constitutional Board of Corrections, and a Merit System for State Employees, and the Chair would also like to submit to the Commission a proposal for creating a Veterans Department administered by veterans in the Constitution. If there is no objection we will now proceed to a discussion of those matters, and since there seems to be quite a bit of interest among those who have thus far spoken about the other things on the matter of home rule, without objection we will now proceed to a consideration of a proposal for home rule.

RECORDS OF CONSTITUTIONAL COMMISSION

373

MR. GROSS. Mr. Chairman, I have submitted to the Assistant Secretary a proposal that I would like to offer to the Commission and ask that he read it at this time.
CHAIRMAN ARNALL. Mr. Assistant Secretary, will you read it.
JUDGE CANDLER. Before we take that up, I would like to make a motion that we reconsider the motion as made by Mr. Durden. I want to make this statement: I expect I come in contact with more rural people than any other member of the Commission, and the rural people of Georgia are sick and tired of the necessity of amending the Constitution every time the people want to issue bonds in excess of seven per cent. As stated by our Attorney General, the Constitution has been amended, I believe he stated some 136 times on that section alone, and I think the time has come that we ought to write into the Constitution those things that the people want so that it will not be necessary to come to the Legislature and ultimately on the vote of the people to let the people do what they want to do, and I ask that we reconsider the motion and discuss it further because I think it will eliminate at least one-third of the amendments that are necessary to the Constitution and let the people of the State do what they want to do. I have an abiding faith in the judgment of the people, both in the cities and in counties, and I think we ought to give them more consideration and vote his motion.
JUDGE MacINTYRE. Under the Legislative rule, can a man that votes against a motion move to reconsider it?
CHAIRMAN ARNALL. This Commission is a sovereign body, Judge Candler moves we reconsider our action in defeating the amendment offered by Mr. Durden, which would have the effect of raising the bond limitation from seven per cent to ten per cent and doing away with the special bond issue.
JUDGE CANDLER. It will eliminate 'at least one-third of the number of amendments that we have had throughout the past one hundred years.
MR. DURDEN. I second the motion.
CHAIRMAN ARNALL. Is there any further discussion on the adoption of Judge Candler's motion in reconsidering our action in defeating the motion? Those in favor say "aye"; opposed "no." The Chair is in doubt. Those in favor rise and stand until counted. Nine for and eleven against and the motion is lost.

374

RECORDS OF CONSTITUTIONAL COMMISSION

We now come to the discussion of the home rule. Mr. Gross has offered a proposal which the Clerk will read.
MR. McCUTCHEN. (Reads) "Paragraph I. In addition to the grant of legislative authority contained in this Constitution, the people of any county or municipality in this State are empowered to enact any local law operative within the area of the county or municipality and not inconsistent with general law or otherwisE with this Constitution.
"Paragraph II. The methods of exercising the power herein granted are: (1) The proposed local legislation may be submitted to a vote of the people of the county or municipality when the majority of the governing authority of the county or municipality by resolution votes to submit such proposal at the next regular county or municipal election. Such proposal must be approved by a majority of the governing authority at least sixty days before the next regular county or municipal general election and the proposed local legislation shall be advertised in full once a week in the official gazette for four weeks next preceding such regular election. If in event the regular county or municipal election, as the case may be, shall not be held within one year, the governing authority of the county or municipality by resolution may submit such proposal at a special election which shall be fixed and held at a date not earlier than sixty days from the date of the ordering of the special election. A brief and accurate summary of the proposed legislation shall be placed on the official ballot and the voters voting in the election shall vote 'yes' or 'no' to said proposed local legislation. If a majority of the voters voting in the election vote 'yes,' the results of the election shall be proclaimed by the governing authority and the said local legislation shall become law upon the filing of a certified copy of the same with the Secretary of State.
"(2) When a petition proposing local legislation is submitted to the governing authority of the county or municipality signed by at least one-fifth of the registered voters of the county or municipality, it shall be the duty of the governing authority to submit such proposed local legislation at the next general or special election to be held in the said county or municipality and said submission shall be in the same manner as provided in sub-paragraph (1) of this section.
~'(3) The term 'regular election' as used in this section shall mean the election at which officers of the county or municipality

RECORDS OF CONSTITUTIONAL COMMISSION

375

are elected, but in the event any county or municipality does not hold a regular election for officers within one year from the date the governing authority by resolution votes to submit proposed local legislation or from the date of the filing of the petition proposing local legislation signed by at least one-fifth of the registered voters, it shall be the duty of such county or municipal governing authority to submit the proposed local legislation by ratification or rejection to the people at a special election which shall be held at a date not earlier than sixty days nor later than six months from the date the said petition proposing
local legislation is filed with the governing authority. "(4) This article shall not authorize the people of counties or
municipalities to change county or municipal boundaries or to abolish county or municipal governments.
"(5) This article specifically provides and authorizes the enact-
ment of zoning laws under the provisions hereof. "(6) No local act of the General Assembly shall take effect
until approved by a majority of the registered voters voting thereon in the county or municipality to be affected.
"(7) It shall be the duty of the Secretary of State to publish in a bound volume in the months of January and July of each year all local legislation enacted under the terms of this article
"Section 2. "Paragraph I. This article shall apply only to those counties and municipalities in which the people by a majority vote of those voting in the election vote to adopt the provisions of this article. The article shall become operative in such counties and municipalities as desire in the following manner: "(1) The governing authority may vote to submit the question of the adoption of this article to the people of its county or municipality at a regular general election; or the governing authority may provide for a special election upon the proposition after having advertised the special election and its purpose for four weeks next preceding the election in the official gazette. "(2) One-fifth of the registered voters may petition the governing authority to submit the proposition of the adoption of this article to the people, in which event it shall be the duty of the governing authority to submit the same at the next regular election after the signing of the petition, provided, the next regular election is not more than one year's distance. If more than one year intervenes between the date of the signing of the peti.., tion and the next regular election, it shall be the duty of the

376

RECORDS OF CONSTITUTIONAL COMMISSION

governing authority to order a special election within six months

from the date of the filing of the petition. The said special elec-

tion and the purpose therefor shall be advertised in the official

gazette for at least four weeks prior to the date of the holding of

the election.

"(3) When the question is submitted to the people of the coun-

ty or municipality, the following proposition shall be printed on

the ballot: 'shall Article

of the Constitution of Georgia

providing Home Rule be adopted."

"Paragraph II. When the people of a county or municipality

fail to adopt the provisiond of this article at an election, no other

elections on the proposition may be authorized for a period of

four years.

"Paragraph III. The people of any county or municipality hav-

ing adopted this article may rescind the operation of the article

in the county or municipality in the same procedure by which it

was adopted, provided, however, that after this article has been

adopted by the people of a county or municipality no election

for its rejection can be held within a period of four years."

CHAIRMAN ARNALL. All right, Mr. Gross.

MR. GROSS. I am sorry I did not have copies of this.

MR. LOVEJOY. I have drafted a provision which I would be glad for the members of the Commission to consider while we are talking about it. It happens that I have enough copies made. Frank, will you distribute some over there among the members, and if it is possible we could have copies of Mr. Gross', it would be a very great help.

MR. POPE. I have a substitute I would like to offer for the one just read.

CHAIRMAN ARNALL. You have Mr. Lovejoy's proposal, and also a substitute by Mr. Pope. Are there any other proposals for home rule? If there are, we might, in order to conserve time in a general discussion of them, introduce them now. If not, introduce them at a later time.

MR. GOWEN. Is this Mr. Carmichael's Sub-committee? Was that report submitted?

MR. CARMICHAEL. It looks like it smacks of it.

MR. GOWEN. I would like to consider that.

RECORDS OF CONSTITUTIONAL COMMISSION

377

MR. HARRIS. I have a proposal that I want to offer that is substantially the same that I will offer when they get through with these.
CHAIRMAN ARNALL. Read Mr. Lovejoy's proposal. Do you want to offer yours now, Roy?
MR. HARRIS. Let the home rulers, so-called, get through reading theirs and I will read mine.
CHAIRMAN ARNALL. Read Mr. Lovejoy's proposal.
MR. McCUTCHEN. (Reads) "The General Assembly shall enact general laws providing for charters for municipal corporations and setting forth the terms of such charters. The Cities of the State may be classified for this purpose. A charter authorized under general laws may be adopted by a municipality upon vote of the electors of such municipality. The charters of municipalities may be amended by the vote of the electors of the municipality. A new charter may be proposed for a municipality and adopted when ratified by the vote of the electors of such municipality. Such charter may be thereafter amended in like manner.
In addition to the foregoing, the General Assembly may amend the charter of a municipality, now of force or hereafter adopted; but no provision in any such amendment which conflicts with a provision in such charter previously adopted by popular vote, shall be valid until such new provision is ratified by vote of the electors of such municipality.
The General Assembly shall provide by general laws, the qualification of voters, necessary advertisement, the manner of holding and determining the election and all other provisions governing each election provided for in this Article. No provision in any charter or in any amendment thereto shall be valid which is inconsistent with or contrary to the Constitution of this State or the general laws thereof now or hereafter of force. The Legislature shall by general or special act, fix the maximum rate of taxation for each municipality. No municipality shall incur any debt except as authorized by this Constitution and subject to the limitations and conditions therein fixed."
CHAIRMAN ARNALL. Now what others have you?
MR. McCUTCHEN. Mo Pope's. (Reads) "The people of any county or municipality may initiate local laws or may require a referendum therein affecting only the territory included in the

378

RECORDS OF CONSTITUTIONAL COMMISSION

county or municipality by petition of one-third of the registered voters of the county or municipality. Upon the filing of such proposed local legislation together with a petition signed by a third of the registered voters of the county or municipality requesting it, it shall be the duty of the governing authority to place the same on the ballot at the next regular county or municipal general election. If a majority of the voters voting therein favor the local legislation it shall become law upon certification of a copy thereof to the Secretary of State whose duty it shall be to publish such local acts."'
MR. GROSS. Mr. Chainnan, the first paragraph of the amendment as submitted by me--I will read it because it is brief: "In addition to the grant of legislative authority contained in this Constitution, the people of any county or municipality in this State are empowered to enact any local law operative within the area of the county or municipality and not inconsistent with general law or otherwise with this Constitution." Now that limits the power of home rule in the cities and counties to those matters that are not dealt with by general law. It is true the General Assembly most likely will, under this proposal, enact a municipal code to cover those things of general nature, and leave those things only that deal with the locality and are purely of local nature to the locality.
Now Paragraph II sets out the method of exercising this power and it is in two forms. The first form is that if a majority of the governing authorities, that is the council or commissioners, board of education, or whatever the governing authority of the county, if that majority wants to submit to the people a proposal affecting the area, they can by proper resolution adopted by a majority, and after advertising it in the paper for four consecutive weeks, call election or submit it to an election, to the next general election if it is held within one year. If there is not a general election within that year then they have a right to call a special election of not less than sixty days from the date of the advertisement. The proposed legislation will be submitted briefly on the ballot. If a majority of the people vote for it, it becomes law when it is filed with the Secretary of State; if a majority of the people vote against it, it is defeated. Now if the governing body refuses, or does not submit a proposition, and if one-fifth, or twenty per cent, of the registered voters desire a change to be made affecting the locality or area affected, they can by peti-

RECORDS OF CONSTITUTIONAL COMMISSION

379

tion to the commissioners or the governing authorities, ask that an election be held and the proposition be submitted. When that petition of twenty per cent is submitted it becomes mandatory on the governing authorities to submit that in an election in the same manner as provided for the governing authorities to change an election, that is to the next general election if there is one within twelve months; if not, to a special election not less than sixty days. Those are the two methods of proposing legislation.
Now Paragraph IV. "This article shall not authorize the people of counties or municipalities to change county or municipal boundaries or to abolish county or municipal governments." In other words, it would not permit the county of Fulton to abolish the City of Atlanta; it would not permit the City of Atlanta to abolish the county government of Fulton. Those things are restricted. They can't deal with those things out of the area.
Now Paragraph V specifically refers to zoning laws, which is already in the Constitution. As I understand it they already have the right to enact zoning laws or zone them themselves. Heretofore we have had a number of amendments authorizing counties or municipalities to have what is referred to as zoning laws.
Now Paragraph VI, "No local act of the General Assembly shall take effect until approved by a majority of the .registered voters voting thereon in the county or municipality to be affected."
That simply means this, not only would the local governing authorities have the right to call an election to pass a bill; not only would the one-fifth of the qualified voters have a right to petition and call an election for a bill, but the representative from your county would have il right to submit to the General Assembly a bill. However, that bill, before it becomes law, must be submitted back to the people for ratification and it could not become law unless there was a referendum about it.
JUDGE CANDLER. Is not that a publication of power?
MR. GROSS. No. It is a different method.
JUDGE CANDLER. If the people did do it by election what is the necessity of giving the members of the Legislature authority to do the same thing?
MR. GROSS. It is a different method to do it. You could do it by legislative act. It is a different method of initiating it. You get a vote in any instance.

380

RECORDS OF CONSTITUTIONAL COMMISSION

MR. GROSS. Now Paragraph VII provides that the Secretary of State shall twice a year publish these acts in a bound volume. There has been a bit of discussion as to how you can tell what the law is. I challenge a Jawyer to tell me what the law of the locality is now. You know, Mr. Lovejoy, if you wanted to find the law of my town or county it would be difficult to do under the present system. I don't think it would be any more confusing or not as much confusion if there is a central place for them to be recorded, and twice a year they are recorded.
Now Section II. "This article shall apply only to those counties and municipalities in which the people by a majority vote of those voting in the election vote to adopt the provisions of this article. The article shall become operative in such counties and municipalities as desire in the following manner:-and then we provide the same thing: "The governing authority may vote to submit the question of the adoption of this article to the people of its county or municipality at a regular general election; or the governing authority may provide for a special election upon the proposition after having advertised the special election and its purpose for four weeks next preceding the election in the official gazette." The governing authorities can, by a majority, submit the proposition as to whether a county or municipality wants this or not after it is passed in the Constitution. Now if the governing authorities refuse or don't want to do it, one-fifth of the people can petition the governing authorities and it becomes mandatory upon them to submit to the people whether or not they will come under the provisions of the home rule as enacted in this amendment. Now after it is once submitted, if it is adopted it cannot be voted on to be rescinded for a period of four years. If it is rejected it cannot be voted on to be adopted for an additional four years. But first and last, the people, before they get home rule, first have to have an election on this bill after the Constitution is passed. Now that generally-
JUDGE SMITH. Do you have an election to determine whether they want home rule?
MR. GROSS. Yes, sir. The ihing is this, if this Commission adopts this this morning, then it goes to the General Assembly to be voted on by two-thirds of each branch, then it is submitted to the people as a whole in an election to adopt this Constitution. Then if the Constitution is finally adopted, then before it would become operative in any city or county in the State of Georgia you

RECORDS OF CONSTITUTIONAL COMMISSION

381

to the farsighted voters, as to what they want and what they do not want, ,and I say if we are going to have a democracy-
MR. HARRIS. You yelled for a question.
MR. GROSS. Yes, sir.
MR. HARRIS. On the amount of bonds issued also.
MR. GROSS. I am going to answer that. I am glad you asked that, as to the amount of bonds, as to whether the amount of bonds should be left up to the people as to what amount they should vote where they vote one hundred per cent of the valuation or seven per cent or ten per cent, I say this, I think the debt limitation is a very wise limitation. I think it ought to be hard to change, very hard to change. Sometimes we in a moment of excitement, in order to get some improvements or some industry in our location, we here in years of prosperity might listen to the demands of people and vote an obligation that would be hard to discharge; it would be on our children, on our posterity; it does not affect us now. If it affects those to follow, and I think those things should be safeguarded, put a strong provision in the Constitution. Now the local legislation that we are enacting here, Mr. Speaker, the home rule provision, can be changed at any time. It does not create a debt to be paid by your children and your children's children, because that is guarded in the Constitution.
JUDGE GRICE. Isn't there another very great difference also? When you issue bonds you affect not only the people who live there, but you affect non-resident property owners a lot of times.
MR. GROSS. That is true, affect everybody that owns property within the jurisdiction.
CHAIRMAN ARNALL. It affects the integrity of the State, of all the people.
MR. GROSS. That is right. I don't think the debt limitation enters in the argument. If you take the limitation off of course it is going to be defeated. People don't want that off, but they do want home rule, I will tell you that now, and I think they ought to have it. I don't believe the Members of the General Assembly want the right or want the responsibility to come up here and enact those laws. There is not a member of the General Assembly elected but what pressure is brought on him to introduce a bill affecting

382

RECORDS OF CONSTITUTIONAL COMMISSION

would have to submit it to the people in the area affected. If your town wants the home rule they would have to vote on it. If they don't they would go on just like they are, and then after that is done before any local law, under the provisions of this amendment, could be adopted, it must be submitted to the people. Now, gentlemen, I know there is going to be some opposition to this, and I know they are going to say it is taking the power away from the General Assembly. I never have liked the way local bills are handled in the Legislature. I have seen the Commission form of government of a city established this year, and next yea:r I have seen it abolished, and never been submitted to the people for an expression from them. I have seen county commissioners created this year and because the representative might not like the man that was elected he would put it back in the hands of the Ordinary without ever submitting it to the people. I have always taken this position with reference to legislation, that you never will go wrong so long as you let the people pass on the issue. You are never going to destroy a democracy as long as you retain the ballot, and I for one have confidence in the people and in their integrity. I believe the people of the State of Georgia, and I am convinced of it, are demanding that we have some form of progressive liberal home rule. I have become convinced of that. I think it is our duty as a Commission, and it is going to be the duty of the General Assembly, to submit this proposition to the people as a whole. I don't think you have any apologies to make when you submit it to them. If you vote it down, all right, but I think public sentiment is at such a stake and I think the demands of the public are so great that it becomes our responsibility this morning to give them the opportunity of saying whether or not they want home rule, and I don't think you could submit it in a more democratic way than we have prepared in the amendment; first, by a submission to the State as a whole, and before it becomes effective that each locality shall vote whether or not they will accept it, and I say with the debt limitation and the bond-limitation like it is, with the General Assembly writing a municipal code, as they will, dealingwith those general things that are not necessarily of local nature, then the only thing you will have left in home rule will be those things that have always encumbered the records and always proved detrimental to the members of the General Assembly when they come up and introduce and pass those local bills. I can't see anything wrong with leaving it to the people at home,

RECORDS OF CONSTITUTIONAL COMMISSION

383

the locality, and I have seen mighty good members of the General Assembly defeated because they passed some local law without asking the people. I think they ought to get rid of that responsibility and let the people pass on it.
MR. HEAD. I would like to ask the gentleman, under this proposed item you are submitting, do these towns and municipalities and counties have any extra territory authority outside of that territory, like water supply and sewage disposal, electric lines, and other matters that might properly come under the jurisdiction of a municipality?
MR. GROSS. I am glad you asked that question. I think for you to make home rule you are going to have a municipal code. This provides home rule be operated in the area or county or municipality. That is things of a purely local nature. We know a municipality has to operate and maintain or acquire a water system, and sometimes they have to go miles without the jurisdiction to get a site and build a dam and pipe the water in. That is true with electricity and other things. I think that should be provided by general law by the municipal code. I think you will have that when we pass the code, then it becomes incumbent upon the General Assembly to write a municipal code to deal with those things that are general and not local; but to say we can't write an intelligent municipal code or for us to tell [say?] we can't define home rule, or can't write a home rule bill, I am not going to go that far. I think these 22 or 23 men and one woman can write a home rule bill and a code. I believe the people want it, and I see nothing wrong in submitting it back to the people. I will answer the question. That is the proposition. It is not complicated, and if anybody don't understand the provisions of the bill I will try to explain it.
MR. GOWEN. I think the gentleman inadvertently made one misstatement. I would like to take this opportunity to make this suggestion to him. He said that representatives change city management form of government and back to mayor without the people having an opportunity. There is now a general law, that makes many years, you can't change a form of government in a municipality without a referendum, and if anything of that kind was done it is unconstitutional and illegal. The people of Georgia have more home rule than they realize they have, and that is the reason I want to correct it because that has been the law for a great many years.

384

RECORDS OF CONSTITUTIONAL COMMISSION

CHAIRMAN ARNALL. I think you are eminently correct about the city government. However, let me relate an incident that happened in the last session of the General Assembly. Up in one county of the State the man was elected on the proposition he was going to leave intact the board of county commissioners. That is why he was elected. The senator wanted to do away with the Board of Commissioners, so he got up a bill to do away with the Board of Commissioners and abolish it and create a new board, name the people he wanted on there. When the bill came up for passage in the House the representative in question was paged, and it was stated to him that the Attorney General was very anxious to see him in a very quick hurry, so this good, honest representative hastened to the Attorney General's Office, and the Attorney General told him, I assume, there was some error, he had not sent for him; and he came back to the legislative session, and he proceeded to sit all day listening to what was being done, participating in it, and the next morning bright and early, 10 and behold, the bill was put on my desk. I have a policy of signing local bills. I signed the bill. In the next few minutes the men named in that bill were in my office and they were inducted into office, sworn in. It was not until the next week that this representative found that his county government had been abolished and changed.
MR. HARRIS. Can I ask a question? Did that member of the House get re-elected?
CHAIRMAN ARNALL. No, he did not. But irrespective of whether he had been elected or not, we all admit while we laugh and joke about those things, we all admit that is not right.
MR. GROSS. The gentleman is correct, but not only that, this Commission has gone a long way to give home rule. We have done some things. We have gone a long way. Now Mr. Lovejoy's submission here I think is splendid. That is what I want the General Assembly to do, but I think it takes this and what I have presented to make home rule. I don't know that it is necessary to put it in the Constitution, that the General Assembly shall enact general laws providing for charters of municipalities. I think they are going to do that. "VVhen we enact home rule we will have a municipal code and these things are necessary where they are. It shall be put in the Constitution they shall do it or not, I don't know.

RECORDS OF CONSTITUTIONAL COMMISSION

385

MR. GOWEN. Doesn't the gentleman think that the provision he has in there which frequently causes as much as a year's delay in passing, that is a little too stringent? We will say there is an act necessary. Or just as an example, we had an opportunity in Brunswick a number of years ago to secure an attractive industry. They wanted one thing and that was have the city limits slightly changed so it would be outside of the city limits, and everybody agreed. They did not want to pay municipal tax. So they were willing to do it to get them there. There was not anybody opposed to it, but yet under this provision, that act that nobody was opposed to might have been the loss of the new industry, because if they had to wait until the next general election it would have been a little over nine months. I just pick that as an example. I know of others. Any other local law, whether it might be no opposition at all. The city council could not call a special election if it was a general election to be held within a year, and it might be non-controversial and the Legislature could pass it. The county general election is in November and the Legislature me e t s in January, February and March, so anything the Legislature submitted could not be voted upon if it was a county matter until the next general election, next November.
CHAIRMAN ARNALL. It would be a special election.
MR. GOWEN. He says you cannot have a special election if there is a general election within a year.
MR. GROSS. In answer to the question of Mr. Gowen, it might be wise to have these elections more often, but I don't think so. I think any matter can be handled within a period of one year, and while we do have instances where it should be done quicker, it might be better to wait two years. I think within one year is time enough. I am through, Mr. Chairman.
CHAIRMAN ARNALL. Mayor Hartsfield, I understand you have an engagement and wanted to make a statement to the Commission. Is there objection? If not, we will hear from you at this time.
MAYOR HARTSFIELD. I have an important engagement about the hospital authority in fifteen or twenty minutes, and I was wondering while this discussion was going on, I wanted to say something about the situation in Atlanta.
CHAIRMAN ARNALL. Is there objection to hearing from the esteemed Mayor? Come down in front. We like to look at you as well as hear you.

386

RECORDS OF CONSTITUTIONAL COMMISSION

MR. HARTSFIELD. Gentlemen, I am here in somewhat of a dual capacity, as a Member of the Legislative Committee of the Georgia Municipal Association and also of course as Mayor of Atlanta. We are all in favor of home rule. I hope that nobody will misconstrue our interest in what form of home rule there is to be. I hope nobody will misconstrue our attitude. We are for home rule and want everybody to know it, but at the same time we have the interest, what kind of home rule it is going to be. The City of Atlanta, speaking now for the City, is a great big municipal corporation and the capital of the State, that does business in different localities. It has a large number of facilities that operate outside of its limits, and our interest is merely to see that those things are protected. Now I want to start off by saying that I have read this and listened to this proposed amendment, and frankly, as I now see it, it sounds all right. We would like to have a little opportunity for our city attorney to study it and advise with us. I hope that you won't take any action on it this afternoon. Not that I urge any delay to hurt it, because I frankly state to you that as it was read to me I don't see anything wrong with it, and I hope that we shall not find anything wrong with it, but in legislating on the question we ask you, of course, whatever you do, to bear in mind your capital city. I have served in the Legislature, and I have been Mayor and a city official of my city, had quite some experience, I think of around twenty years, In this business of municipal government, and I have found oft times in the Legislature that some of my friends would legislate innocently on this subject of municipal government, having in mind a condition in their city, and yet the proposed legislation would have been favorable to Atlanta and they did not intend to do it. And so let me explain to you briefly about Atlanta. We operate now a water system that runs from Conley, in Clayton County, twenty miles to Marietta, in Cobb County. We want to be sure that our powers of operation over that gigantic water system are not interfered with. We operate a prison farm miles out in DeKalb County, away from the borders of the city, and frankly, several years ago through certain changes in Atlanta politics there was an effort made out in DeKalb to abolish our prison farm and force us, at an expenditure of hundreds of thousands of dollars, to bring it back in. We don't want anybody to do that to us if we can avoid it. We operate a venereal disease hospital on the same site, away from the city and in another county. Our water works facilities, a great many of them, are, as you know,

RECORDS OF CONSTITUTIONAL COMMISSION

387

outside of the city and in Fulton, Clayton and Cobb Counties. Our municipal sewage disposal plants,of course, are outside. We operate a great airport that is growing so large that today the Atlanta Municipal Airport is in Fulton County. It is also in the town of Hapeville on one side, and it is in the town of College Park on the other side, and it is in Clayton County on the South Side, all three of which are going to have certain powers of legislation, and naturally Atlanta is interested in what could happen. We don't anticipate that anybody wants to do anything to that great facility, but you must at least excuse us for a natural concern. Indeed, when we went to condemn certain property to enlarge our airport a year ago a point was made in the courts that the City of Atlanta was trying to exercise the power of condemnation in College Park. We got by, but at least you will see from that the tremendously complicated condition under which we sometimes must operate by reason of being a big city. Of course, as you know, Atlanta is also in two counties, in DeKalb and Fulton. So we would just like for you to have those things in mind when you recommend whatever you are going to recommend.
Now as to referring things to the people, that is nothing new to the City of Atlanta. We have in our charter already initiative for referendum and recall. I can be recalled any time twentyfive per cent of the people present a petition and call an election, and any member of our government. Likewise we can pass ordinances and the people can demand by twenty-five per cent they be submitted to them, or the people can get up an ordinance of their Own and send it over to us with twenty per cent and we have to call an election. That provision is not new to us and we have no fear of it. It is already the law as to local ordinances in Atlanta, but we have a strict charter. We do not have to begin with the wide charter powers of a city. There are a lot of foolish provisions in the Atlanta eharter. For instance, we have a large area of land out on Lakewood on Prior Street immediately adjacent to the Southeastern Fair Ground, at one time a part of tbe old water works system some fifty years ago. Although it is fine industrial property, we can't put it on the market and sell it because there is a provision in the charter that we shall never be allowed to sell it. We have charter restrictions that we can't sell our parks. Well, they don't seem to trust us. We have many other small provisions in our charter and we would not like to get in a position where in order to make a minor inconsequential amendment we had to go out and call an election and incur an expendi

388

RECORDS OF CONSTITUTIONAL COMMISSION

ture of $10,000 or $12,000, which it would cost to hold an election. Now I would like to make a constructive suggestion about that.
I think that a broad general code can be adopted, freeing these cities of all those minor restrictions, turning them loose. The local government, the people, can throw out the local government if they don't like them, and pass it here, because if you don't do it you will start Atlanta off under home rule already hobbled by a lot of foolish restrictions that we will have to call a series of elections maybe, to get rid of them. Now somebody said something about it is all right to throw elections at people all the time and that that is democracy and they love it. My experience, gentlemen, is just the opposIte. The people resent too many elections. I have never seen a Constitutional election in this State that there was not resentment against the long ballot and a whole lot of things. They say, "I am being asked to vote on a lot of things I don't know anything about." If I construe the feeling of the responsiblity of people (of course I don't refer to professional politicians and ward heelers and people who live off of elections and sell buttons and cards and make money. They want an election every week), but the responsible people don't want elections every day. They have demonstrated that in Atlanta by making the terms for officers four years with public approval. It used to be two years. And by setting off elections, I think the League of Women Voters advocated Atlanta elections be set off so they would not fall the same ycur as county elections, and people be running to the polls every few months, voting first on city and then county and the State officials. They don't want to be called out to the polls every time they turn around, about some minor matter, and they don't like long ballots submitted to them, such as shall paragraph so and so of so and so, subsection so and so, be repealed; and I hope we can get away from that, and you can get away from it, and the Legislature can get away from it by adopting, as has been sugg~sted, a broad code for the city. Turn them loose in the first place. In the first place one of the things that has meant so many local bills-I have been through all that. Probably the representative from Fulton County in the Legislature has fifty times the experience of local bills of anybody else. He is just a young Legislature in his own right. I think I handled in one session between thirty and forty local bills. There are ten municipalities in Fulton County, and they all have local bills, besides a large number for your county and for the City of Atlanta, so we have had some experience on this question of local legisla-

RECORDS OF CONSTITUTIONAL COMMISSION

389

tion, and a great many of them are occasioned by somebody putting a foolish restriction on the city in the first place that ought never to have been there. If you will analyze them, a great many of them are opening up some restriction already there so as to allow them to operate, and generally for a good purpose. The same is true of a lot of the Constitutional amendments, as has been brought out here. Some city wants to refund its bonds and you always tell them to do it. If they are going to do it from every section, and you are going to grant it, why not let them all do it in the first place. We had similar legislation about zoning. Everybody wanted zoning had to come up here and ask you especially. Why not just let everybody zone to begin with? Nothing wrong with it. So, gentlemen, there is occasion for a lot of local legislation that has been restrictive legislation in the first place. You know we Southern People and Southern Cities and Southern States, some of us still have the old Civil War Complex. In the days of Reconstruction when a lot of things were done to us, and we decided nobody would ever do those things again, and we adopted a lot of restrictive things that our more progressive Northern cities don't have. A lot of times I am confronted with a statement by my own taxpayers, why is it Buffalo, Cleveland and so and so can do something? Why don't you do it? And we find that our State Conslitution and our legislative acts prohibit us. A majority of progressive Northern cities have a great deal more power than Southern cities. If you want to trust the people there is a good place.
MR. HARRIS. Isn't it true most of them operate under a uniform code or a uniform system of municipal government?
MIt HARTSFIELD. A great many States have uniform codes. The State of Virginia has some very progressive laws with reference to the powers of cities and counties, and I may state in the case of the State of Virginia, it has provided when a city reaches a certain population the county form of government in that county automatically disappears, and from then on they operate as one government. There are many States that have codes, and if that code is adopted I hope it is permissive and not restrictive or adds any further shackles to us. But, as I said before, gentlemen, if you will analyze a lot of local bills they arise out of restrictive legislation put on the books in the first place that somebody is trying to get out from under, and you will cure a lot of the demands for home rule, in the first place, by giving

390

RECORDS OF CONSTITUTIONAL COMMISSION

cities and counties broad general powers in the first place, and then leave the balance of it up to their local government. This thing, Governor, subject to the minute inspection of our city attorney, speaking for myself alone, it sounds all right. Somebody mentioned Buckhead. I think when we get home rule we can fix our own tax rate. A lot of them will be coming down and want to join in and have a say-so.
CHAIRMAN ARNALL. Thank you, Bill. The hour of 1 :00 o'clock having arrived, without objection we will suspend. Now this question. Is it agreeable to the Commission to have a short lunch period and come back and get on this, or do you want an hour? Would thirty minutes lunch period be sufficient? Without objection, we will suspend until 1 :30?
JUDGE CANDLER. Would it be possible for the Secretary to make us some copies of that?
CHAIRMAN ARNALL. The Secretary is doing that. (Whereupon a thirty mhmtes recess was called at 1:00 o'clock).

AFTER RECESS
CHAIRMAN ARNALL. The Commission will come to order. If the Chair may be indulged, from talking with Representatives of some of the counties and municipal associations, is led to believe that generally speaking they favor Mr. Gross' proposal, and also would like to see incorporated Mr. Lovejoy's proposal of a mandatory municipal code, that is, for the Legislature to pass it. The Chair is of the opinion that any defects in these proposals, after they are published, assuming they are adopted by this Committee, and widely publicized, the Chair is of the opinion any defect in them, or inconsistency can be ironed out before the General Assembly can perfect it, so that is merely an observation. Is there any further discussion on the proposals now pending before the Committee? If there is, the reason we are inviting discussion now is that those printed copies will soon be available, in just a few minutes time, and if anyone has any particular point to bring up at this stage, we can do that.
MR. LOVEJOY. Mr. Chairman, just getting thoughts before the members of the Commission, I have read more than once all the constitutional provisions in these eighteen States which they said had home rule. I will tell you it is like the fifty-seven varieties of

RECORDS OF CONSTITUTIONAL COMMISSION

391

Heinz. They each got up their own; there is no such thing as home rule. You can designate by words, out of all of them though. I had this thought about it, which I have incorporated here. Much of it is what Frank's, that if we have, and we should have, by code or by classified charts, we should have standard uniform charters for our municipalities, classified according to their population or otherwise. If we have that, then there won't be so many amendments to come. There will come first, which are provided for, amendments which can be voted on. Now, incorporated in this proposal I had the state ment that the Legislature could still adopt amendment to charters, except if they attempted to change any provision which had been voted on and adopted by the people, that must be referred back to the people. There is one detail which I think is important about your future amendment of charters. Frankly, I don't believe the people are going to waste very much time on many amendments to charters. As a matter of experience, and you gentlemen can take your experience, nine-tenths of amendments to charters are of such matters people don't care about voting on them. I don't think they will want to be bothered with election on a large majority of the things to amend charters. If we require them to vote on every amendment to charters, in those cases they will be voting on some thing they are not interested in, and don't care to have an election on. At any rate, I put in the proposal that I submitted the provision that the Legislature could still amend charters, with the pro vision if they attempt to amend a provision previously adopted by the people, it must be submil.ted back to the people. As a practical question, I think that is valuable, because I don't believe the pea. pIe are going to want to be bothered with election on many amendments which are made to charters.
Now, just a difference of procedure, in many, between Mr. Gross and my submission was, Frank proposed to have, or has in his statement all the details of election. I provided in mine, the Legislature shall fix all details of election. There may be some value in what, in the way I have stated it, for two reasons. First, it keeps a great many details out of the Constitution which may well be handled by the Legislature, and in addition, you can't change the Constitution very well, and you find things Frank's has might need to be changed, and if it is left to the Legislature, they can change it. My thought was if we had a system, and I first provide, which Frank does not, the Legislature shall write or adopt these classified provisions for corporations. That is done by general laws. If that is done, then while there can be amendment, and while there

392

RECORDS OF CONSTITUTIONAL COMMISSION

can be changes, those changes won't be on such important matters, and there won't be so many of them, provided there is written a fairly intelligent and comprehensive code for these different classes of charters. I think Frank has it in, and I think it is important, that none of the amendments or charters can have any provision in conflict either with the Constitution, or with general laws of the State, either present or enacted hereafter. I think you will find that in the future, as questions may come up, and the answer to them should be general laws, instead of amendment of charters. I think if we have a system of general laws, general charters, and classified for us, I think then the details about which amendments will be asked will not be very serious.
Now, there are not great differences between Mr. Gross' proposal and mine. The two most important, I think, is, first in mine, it stated the Legislature must enact these general laws governing municipalities, with a right to classify them; and I think, of course, they will. The answer to Mr. Hartsfield is that naturally there would be a class of cities having population of over two hundred fifty thousand, and Mr. Hartsfield and City Attorneys and Representatives can sit down and write what they need for Atlanta; and we are in this situation, which has arisen more than once. We have Atlanta trying to fix laws that don't fit other counties, and cities, and you have the tail wagging the dog; and we have what they want by getting a classified charter, and if they don't get what they want, it will be their fault. With these classified charters for the LegiSlature to enact, I don't think there will be many occasions for amendments, and on those they can vote under the language Mr. Gross set out, or we can let the Legislature provide the details for holding the election, when you get to it. I think the State of Georgia would be better off if we had all uniform charters by classes. We will probably never get that. There are very few new charters will be asked for. Probably all we will have will be amendments, but we would be better off if we had uniform charters of cities and anybody that read the law would find it applied to the whole State of Georgia, without five hundred different charter provisions for our towns, but that is a matter of thought for your consideration.
MR. CULPEPPER. I notice you make no reference to counties.
MR. LOVEJOY. I don't think there is any place I know of for this in counties. I think the counties ought to be governed by general law. I think the cities ought to be governed by general law to

RECORDS OF CONSTITUTIONAL COMMISSION

393

all the general functions, but I don't know of any real place of the thought we have applying to counties. They operate under general law, and I think they should operate under general law, and I have not heard anybody yet complain, unless it is Fulton County.
CHAIRMAN ARNALL. Thank you, Mr. Lovejoy. Now, Mr. Gross.
MR. GROSS. I am going to ask that the proposal I have offered be changed in two particulars. First, that there be incorporated a paragraph substantially as follows: "The General Assembly shall enact general laws providing for charters for municipal corporations, and setting forth the terms of such charters. The cities of the State may be classified for this purpose." That carries the general provision and provides for a municipal code,which I think is very necessary under a real home rule bill. Now, the other change that I think it would be good in the proposal, I overlooked, that Paragraph VI be stricken in its entirety, and that is, "No local act of the General Assembly shall take effect until approved by a majority of the registered voters coting thereon in the county or municipality to be affected." I don't think it would be necessary to submit an act to the General Assembly to the people for ratification, which takes care of the objection Mr. Lovejoy had on the charter amendments. The people would not be interested, probably, in voting. Of course, if there was such a proposal made by the members of the General Assembly, and it was inconsistent with their wishes, they could still call an election under any provision to do away with it. I believe that paragraph ought to be stricken, and I would like those two propositions, first, provided the General Assembly shall enact municipal code, and the necessity of voting on local bills, be eliminated.
CHAIRMAN ARNALL. If the Chair may be indulged, taking up the last statement first, the Chair understands that the gentleman would like to do away with the provision contained in his original presentation requiring all local acts before they become effective, to be voted on by the people of the area affected. We already have in the Constitution any local act abolishing any elective office or changing the duties of the elective office have to be referred to the people, the idea being that some minor change in county or city govermaent probably would not be necessary to be referred to the people; and then if those changes were made, and they were not consonant with the wishes of the people, then

394

RECORDS OF CONSTITUTIONAL COMMISSION

under this bill they could hold an election and do away with those things.
The other point the gentleman makes, as I understand it, would be to incorporate the first two sentences of Mr.' Lovejoy's proposal in your proposal, to the effect that the General Assembly shall enact general laws provided for charters for municipalities, and setting forth the terms of such charters. The cities of the State may be classified for this purpose.
The Chair would like to suggest that similar language be incorporated relating to language in this form, something to this effect. "The General Assembly shall enact general laws regulating county government and setting forth, regulating county governments, the counties of the State may be classified for this purposeJ' Now, the point I make is, if you provide for the enact-
I
ment by the General Assembly of a municipal code then if we are going to make this operative as to the counties, the home rule provision of your proposal, haven't we got to likewise provide for some general regulations of counties?
MR. GROSS. We have it now.
CHAIRMAN ARNALL. Both the gentlemen are eminently correct. The Chair is in error because in the Constitution we do provide, and in the statutes we provide for that.
JUDGE CANDLER. Would not that be a way for the people to overrule?
CHAIRMAN ARNALL. Hm'\'?
MR. CANDLER. If the Legislature is going to do it, according to the classification, and they have to abide by it, where do you leave home rule to the people?
CHAIRMAN ARNALL. The Chair will undertake to express his opinion of it in this way. Now, we have, by statute, provisions that a county can be administered, either by an order or by a board of county commissioners, that if they have the commission form of government, they have to have five, three or some such number of commissioners. Now, it is left up to the General Assembly now to say whether they shall have a board of commissioners, and if so, how many shall be on the board, or whether they shall be administered by an Ordinary. Now, keeping the law as it is now, under the home rule provision, the people, by a vote of the people in the area in the county affected, could de-

RECORDS OF CONSTITUTIONAL COMMISSION

395

cide whether they wanted the Ordinary .form of government, or the commission form of government.
JUDGE CANDLER. You give the Legislature the authority to say now Union County, Towns County, Rabun County fall in a certain classification, and they will be under the form of Government?
MR. LOVEJOY. No, classification of counties.
CHAIRMAN ARNALL. I withdraw that, it is covered under the other. All we do is take the present law relating to counties; for instance, we have a provision in the Constitution that you can have in your county either the office of Tax Collector or Tax Receiver. That is, you can have both officers, or you can have a Tax Commissioner. Now, the way, if you have a Tax Collector and Tax Receiver, the way you get rid of those and have a Tax Commissioner now is by an act of the Legislature. Then, under the home rule provision, if the people wanted to change and go from a county Tax Collector and Receiver and consolidate those offices in a Tax Commissioner, then your people could do it under the home rule.
MR. HARRIS. Mr. Chairman, while the discussion is going, can I offer my bit?
CHAIRMAN ARNALL. Yes, I will be delighted.
MR. HARRIS. I ask that the Clerk read it.
CHAIRMAN ARNALL. Now, before we receive Mr. Harris' proposal, the parliamentary situation is this, that Mr. Gross introduced a proposed home rule provision; Senator Pope introduced a provision. Now, before any of those have been voted on, President Gross moves to strike Section 6 from his proposal, relating to local acts of the Legislature being voted on by the people, and likewise moves to put into his proposal the first two sentences of Mr. L 0 v e joy's proposition, relating to municipal corporations. Now, then, leaving the situation there, we hear from Mr. Harris.
MR. HARRIS. Mr. Chairman, the Clerk will read it.
MR. McCUTCHEN. (Reads) "The General Assembly shall provide for uniform systems of municipal and county government and provide for optional systems and the method of determining under which optional system a county or municipality shall operate."

396

RECORDS OF CONSTITUTIONAL COMMISSION

CHAIRMAN ARNALL. Mr. Harris.
MR. HARRIS. Mr. Chairman, I don't want to be personal, but I think I am due it to myself, in view of some of the charges that have been made around the Capitol in the last day or two about myself, and in view of some of the charges that have been made in the press, that I make this personal statement that I wish to make. One is, one of the papers stated that I had belatedly become converted to home rule. I want to call their attention to this fact, that in 1936 I offered in the House, as a substitute for the Burgen Bill, the same proposition that I now offer here. I think the gentleman from Cobb, Mr. Carmichael, will bear me out, when he was talking home rule sometime ago, that I sold him on the same plan, and his Committee, which sub-eommittee of this Commission, of which he was Chairman, recommended subsequently the thing I offered in the House in 1933. I think since they have charged, insinuations have been against my good faith, that I am entitled to the privilege of making that statement, and I want to S8.y this to some members of the Commission who have urged me, as a matter of political expediency to change my position, and vote for something that will put in this system of allowing laws to be enacted by somebody initiating a petition and holding elections, that I think I am due it to say to you that I appreciate. their urging, but I can't and am not willing to sacrifice my convictions for political expediency. Whatever may be the cost, I am willing to accept it. If I should have to sacrifice what little ambition I might have, and I have not much, why that is O.K.,but I do have this. To some of you who have urged me to change, and who have agreed with me, that this is not practical, I have to agree with you that I don't think that since we are on this thing, that we are called upon to sacrifice our convic~ tions to appease any part of the press or all of it, because I feel if I was actuated by that kind of motive, I would be derelict in my duty to myself and my conscience; and consequently I want to offer this amendment, and to say that I have not been any be~ lated convert to this system of home rule. I don't think anybody is against the principle of home rule, and as the Chairman stated at the last meeting, it was like asking a man if he was against sin, and he is obliged to say yes, but when you begin to argue whether playing penny ante poker, or taking an occasional drink is sin, you get in an argument. I want to call your attention to the fact that the thing that has produced the difficulty,

RECORDS OF CONSTITUTIONAL COMMISSION

397

and the confusion in which we are in, is the fact that the framers of the Constitution of 1877 made three exceptions to the provision that all laws should be uniform in their application and force and effect. As you know, those three exceptions were the granting of municipal charters-and I would like to disagree to say this, if there is anything in the Constitution about municipal charters, I can't find it, and consequently the Legislature having all power not taken away from it by this Constitution or delegated to the Federal Government, has the authority to grant municipal charters.
The second was in the case of county government. The Constitution provided, conferred the responsibility and the power and authority over counties in the ordinary, and provided a uniform system of the operation and management of counties, and left only one thing to be determined, that-and that is without regard to uniformity-that by special bill you can transfer in any county the duties of the Ordinary over to fiscal affairs of the county to a Board of Commissioners.
The third was the City Courts, and the City Courts do have this much uniformity, that the Constitution provided that they must be similar to the ones that were then in existence and I think they named three or four towns, I think probably Augusta,. Macon and Savannah. Now, we do have uniformity, a uniform system of operation of City Courts, and of counties. In the case of counties the only thing that is left to be handled by the Leg- islature is the number of county commissioners, is their salary and when they shall meet, and whether they shall be elected from the county at large, or from road districts. I don't think there is any difficulty. If you want to eliminate in the case of county government the confusion that has been attendant by the lack of uniformity, to pass an act through the Legislature or anywhere you want to, putting in a uniform system of .county governments, because now the duties, the rights, the responsibility and the powers of the county commissioners or ordinaries, whichever it may be, are uniform throughout this state, and you have uniformity there. Now, then, since the Constitution of 1877-as you know, we have amended the Constitution to where the Legislature by local bill can fix the salaries of treasurers, can combine the office of Tax Collector and Receiver, and can fix the salaries of the Tax Commissioner, and that, in some instances, counties have been conferred, the Legislature has been conferred the right by the Constitution to, by local

398

RECORDS OF CONSTITUTIONAL COMMISSION

law, confer upon cities and counties, special cities and counties zoning laws. We have already cured in this Constitution the question as regards to zoning laws, because we have provided in here, now, that by general law the Legislature shall have the right and power to confer upon municipalities and counties the rights to enact zoning laws. That has been cured. The evil that has been brought about has been their lack of uniformity, and every State that I know anything about, that has anything like a sensible or sane home rule, has uniform, and somebody mentioned that this morning, somebody mentioned Virginia this morning. I have been told that Virginia has one of the best systems in this country, and they do not have this thing of holding an election every time you want to make a little change. They have a ~ystem that is based, as I understand it, on population, and when you get within a population, a city does within a system, and the whole system of operation is laid down by general law; and you get away, now, here you want to get away from the lack of uniformity that we have. You want to get away from local bills, and it looks to me, instead of curing the confusion that we are making worse confusion, and the medicine that you offer is worse than the disease itself, and I think we ought to, and it seems to me, and the Governor of this State has the power and has the authority to appoint a commission to go to Virginia, or go wherever we need to go, and to work out and present to the next session of the Legislature a uniform system, and can make it an operational plan, make it fit in on a basis of, on a basis of population, or provide the means by which each municipality and county can elect under which one of those systems it wishes to operate. I say that is home rule. I say that that is reasonable. It is logical, and it is not only reasonable and logical, but orderly, and it is sensible, and J say to you, when you put it in the hands of a crackpot in these cities, and you have got plenty of them, and the bigger the place the more crackpots they have got, because they have more people, and the percentage, the law of average has them. You will have on the city streets of every city in this State somebody with a petition every day in the year from now on if you write into the Constitution this provision that we have, and even the author, my distinguished friend, the President of the Senate, admits it won't work; and he said even if you adopt it, I will have to ask you to have a code to go with it; and that is why I am asking, I say why all this confusion? Let's write the code. My distinguish-

RECORDS OF CONSTITUTIONAL COMMISSION

399

ed friend says we need a code, and we have got to have one, so why not let's write a code. Why all this-I will tell you one thing that could happen on this thing that you have got with this petition. Of course, this didn't happen in Georgia, but it happened in a state that I know about, that only a few weeks ago the bunch of people from another state went in and joined up with local people. They forced an election on that town; they' spent $150,000; and they changed the law. They spent $150,000 in that campaign, and I have only the word of the man who spent the money as to the statement. Now, then, you are making that thing possible in Atlanta. You are making it possible in every other town, and I say it is dangerous; and it is not only dangerous, but not orderly, and it is not IJ'roper. You know good and well if somebody wanted to come in here for their own special benefit, or for the benefit of some corporation, to come into the City of Atlanta, and organize a campaign and spend $150,000, 'lome of you on this commission have had enough experience in the cost of conducting elections in this State to know that it would be impossible for ordinary business or an ordinary community to ever combat it. Now, if you want to surrender this State to that kind of a situation, I tell you you can do it, but you are going to ruin it. You are going to have it to where you will never get a new enterprise or business in Georgia. Continual agitation by crackpots. You will keep out of your cities every business that J know about. I have a client, he is not the biggest one, but it ii a pretty good size, that anticipates as soon as they can get material and machinery, to locate in Augusta. I tell you, frankly, if you pass this bill, and it becomes effective, or if it has the possibility of being voted in my county, I am going to advise them and see to it that they build it on the other side of the river, and put it in the State of South Carolina where you do know that you have orderly processes of Government, and where you can depend on some stability.
Now, you want to subject your community to that? I don't and J am not going to do it. I am going to fight it here. I am going to fight it in the House, fight it everywhere I can, as long as I have got a breath of life in my body. Another thing, those elections will not be primaries. They will be general elections, and at a general election anybody can vote, and we have bad a gentleman's agreement in this State since the days of Reconstruction, since the bloody days of the 90's, when they fought it out with the gun, and had killings at the polls every day, every time

400

RECORDS OF CONSTITUTIONAL COMMISSION

they had an election, that we will fight out our issues in a white Democratic primary of this State, and when we get to the general election, white people of this State will submit and present a solid front. I propose to see that that system is continued; and I believe the people of Georgia want to see it continued; and whenever you let it be known that every crackpot can get up one of these petitions and have an election any time he wants it, you are going to see the Negroes vote, and you will see them register. The poll tax does not keep them from doing it; mind you there are twenty-five thousand of them in my city, out of a city of less than seventy-five thousand population; and when you take some of these influences that are in this section now, that have gone out and registered with enormous pots of money, people in order to influence elections, whenever you do this, you will see them in the South, you will see them in Augusta, and Atlanta, and when they come down here with enormous amounts of money they have got, and when they add the crackpots to that class of people, you will see what will happen to everyone of your cities, and every one of your communities. They won't be interested in the rural counties. They know that they have not any influence here now, but if they can add that vote to the crackpot vote, now, then they are a factor in Georgia, and they will be a factor in Georgia, and they will handle your cities of this State, just exactly like they handled five or six or eight of the biggest cities in this country in the last election. Now, we agreed with them last time, but we might not agree with them next time. Now, you can submit and turn over your State to those kinds of influences if you want to, and you can destroy your white primary system, if you want to, but I will tell you, when you do it you are going to have the damnedest fight that anybody in Georgia ever had.
CHAIRMAN ARNALL. Will you yield to a question?
MR. HARRIS. Yes, sir.
CHAIRMAN ARNALL. Under that proposal of President Gross, no effort is made to change the election laws.
MR. HARRIS. No, sir.
CHAIRMAN ARNALL. How does that relate to the white primary?
MR. HARRIS. I am fixing to tell you, these laws will be made

RECORDS OF CONSTITUTIONAL COMMISSION

401

not in a primary, but they will be made in the general election, and it is in the general election where they will vote, and it is in the general election where they will take charge.
CHAIRMAN ARNALL. This law of President Gross', this provision, which I favor -
MR. HARRIS. I agree with you it does not repeal any laws.
CHAIRMAN ARNALL. Affects in no way the election laws of the State. Are you arguing you ought to abolish election by the people?
MR. HARRIS. No. I say, let's keep the plan we followed, and our daddies and granddaddies followed, and some of them got shot and killed to keep it, and I say, let's keep that system, and this, in effect, will destroy the usefulness and the effect of every bit of it. We had at one time in my town, in an election to fill a vacancy, where it was called in the general election, and we came in an ace of having trouble. We came in an ace of having bloodshed, and if you ever get in back there, you will see their names put on the rolls, and you will see influences come in this State that will put their names on the rolls; and you will see them organize, and you will see them organize out from-with people from outside of the State of Georgia; and you will see it possible for corporations and big business people to come in to this State and originate a petition and spend enormous sums of money to put over things which may be good and they may not be good, but I tell you that is not the way that we ought to settle our affair in Georgia, and even the authors of these two amendments, both of them are good friends of mine, and fine gentlemen, admit that they won't work, that if you pass them, you have to have a code; and I say to you, you have got to have a code if you ever have any order and any system in Georgia; and I say instead of trying to force this thing down the people's minds, and to create the impression-those of us who are not willing to let the people vote on them, everyone of them is against home rule-we ought to be devoting our time and attention as members of the Legislature, and as members and as citizens of this State, in trying to figure up and design the code that the President of the Senate, Mr. Lovejoy, and all of us know we have got to have if we have any home rule, and if we have any order and system, and decency in the operation of government of this state.

402

RECORDS OF CONSTITUTIONAL COMMISSION

MR. HEAD. Will you yield to a question?
MR. HARRIS. Yes, sir.
MR. HEAD. Under this proposal, as made, the same interests that you were talking about, if they wanted to move in the City of Atlanta and put in legalized horce racing or some other form of legalized gambling, would it be possible under this proposal? MR. HARRIS. If the Constitution does not prohibit it, it can be done.
CHAIRMAN ARNALL. If the general law prohibits gambling, it could not be done.
MR. HARRIS. They classify it sometime like we did that act where we construed the homestead exemption. They construe it by the Act of the Legislature not to be gambling, and they have done it in some States where they have a general law against gambling. I don't know, when you start passing on constitutional and legal questions, I bave one answer. I have my own opinion,. and the Supreme Court has the last guess at it. Now, I think this, there is a philosophy of government involved in addition to all these dangers, and that is the question of whether we are going to legislate on every subject by a vote of the people, or whether we are going to follow the system that we have always had in this country, of tia ving a representative form of government.
Now, if you are going to let the people of the counties in a general election pass all the laws for the county, the people in the cities pass all the laws for the city, why isn't the next step to let them pass all the laws of the State, and then we will have so many elections that people will give up in hopeless confusion. They won't know what they are voting on. They won't have an opportunity to. They won't have an opportunity to become acquainted and familiar with the facts, and you will have such a disgust with your state of government that nobody will turn out and vote except a few wardheelers and people who expect to profit as a result of the election. I tell you, you are going to destroy your State. You are going to destroy the business in it, and after all, you admit that it is a useless procedure, because you say it won't work; the President of the Senate says it won't work, that you have still got to have a code passed under general law by the legislature of the State, that, the case-I challenge you, let's do it now, and do it at this next session, and

RECORDS OF CONSTITUTIONAL COMMISSION

403

I challenge the Governor to appoint a commission of good lawyers, and let's pay them out of the State Treasury, and let them go to Virginia and other States, study the other law and work up a uniform system, and let's put it in effect at the next session of the Legislature. \Vhy create something here just to have an issue? The Legislature has got the authority without even amending the Constitution. They can do it now. They can do it at the next session. We can enact a code and you can't vote on this thing before July, and the Legislature would not meet again until 1947 to pass the Code. If you want home rule and an orderly system of government, and you admit that you can't get it under this system here of circulating petitions and holding elections every day in the year, and every week and month, you admit it can't be done; so if you can't why put off the thing two years; let's solve it now, and solve it like it ought to be. I want to remind you of another thing, too. You are not willing-I raised the point, and I did it jokingly, and facetiously, but because I wanted to get to it when I got up here, and I asked you if you were going to have 'sho' enough home rule, and let people decide everything, why not trust them with the amount or debt they can incur, and let them issue bonds for any amount they are willing to vote. Now you say you are not willing to do that; but I tell you what you could do; you are doing. You are giving them a power to levy taxes without any limit. All the limit that exists is the provision in the Constitution that it can't be confiscatory, and I don't know what we might get to holding. We never have in the State, like the Supreme Court of the Unit- . ed States last done; they are getting so liberal they say the English language does not mean what it says. I hope we never get that way in this State, but we might. You are giving them authority to levy, they may, can't incur the debts, but they can levy all the tax they want to, and there is no limit on it, and I say, when you opened it up to the illfluences that I have told you about here, and that kind of election, where they can levy any amount of taxes they want to, go into any kind of communistic enterprise they want to, do anything that the city or county wants to on earth, and there is no limitation on the city; and I want to remind you, there is not in the Constitution of Georgia a single limitation on the authority that the Legislature can confer on municipalities, except that you can't be in derogation of a general statute. There are a lot of things in this State there is no statute on. That particular subject-and while you could not go

4CK

RECORDS OF CONSTITUTIONAL COMMISSION

into debt over seven per cent, yet they can levy just as much taxes as they want to, and go into any kind of a crackpot enterprise that you can imagine; and I say we ought not to do it, and it is dangerous.
Now, Bill Hartsfield made-Bill and I served in the Legislature, and he is a good friend of mine-he made a funny speech, said he was for home rule, and this sounds like it was all right, but he made a speech against it, and the whole idea of this amendment by the President of the Senate is to let people enact laws at elections to be held in the county, or the municipality. That is all there is to it. Bill made his whole speech against those elections, and I think he was right; but let me call your attention to one thing. Fulton County and the City of Atlanta long since quit enacting local legislation. If you will go back and study their records, they llave very few local bills. They pass general bills with local application on a population basis, and they apply it to counties and cities having a population of two hundred thousand or more, and every one of you members of the Legislature know that at the last session we passed at least a dozen of them, and they regulate Fulton County and the City of Atlanta on the same basis. You pass this monstrosity and what will happen. You will see that all local legislation from now on will be on a basis of general bills with local application. That is what you are going to get into. The point I am making is instead of having an orderly process, you are making, you are magnifying the confusion, you are multiplying it a thousand fold; you are giving the legislature authority to pass laws, and you are giving the people authority, and you have got elections going the year round, except one good thing about it. I believe in these cities and counties under Mr. Gross' proposition, there would be one year out of four they would have a vacation, because if the petition was presented within a year before the general election, that you could not submit it unfiI the general election. There is one good thing he has about it. He has one year's vacation out of four from election, and the rest of them, you will have them all the time; and I tell you, you put this in this Constitution, and if it ever goes into effect in this State, you are going to destroy everything, sir, that you have done to build up good will over this State, and to encourage business and enterprise, and manufacturing to come into this State, because there is not a lawyer on this commission, there is not a lawyer in Georgia who would know the import and the meaning

RECORDS OF CONSTITUTIONAL COMMISSION

401

of this amendment that would ever advise his client to put a factory or a plant or business in any of these cities from that day on-might be a good thing, because they might go out on the creeks and rivers and build them out in the country; but anyhow, it is subjecting business, and it is subjecting business people, and the people of this State to the most dangerous thing that has ever been produced here, and I know that those who have, those of you who have presented it, I know the spot that you are on. I know the newspapers, since our deliberate judgment was acted upon before, have put us all on the spot; but I say to you that if every newspaper in Georgia, if every man, woman and child in Georgia except one of us, were to be unanimous in demanding this thing be done, it would not make it be right, and we could not square our consciences by doing it. The only way we can do it is to do something that is ordinary, something that is constructive, and let's not be stampeded by a one of these catchy expressions, "are you for home rule or not." Everybody says they are for home rule, but I tell you, how are you going to get it, and the machinery for bringing it about is something we better be careful about; and if we adopt this machinery, we are going to ruin this State. We are going to ruin the cities, we are going to ruin the communities, and, sir, you are going to destroy the fine job that you have done in building up good will over this country for the State of Georgia, and for encouragement of people all over the State to come in here. I say to you, on one trip that I made this fall, I talked to people who told me that if we continued for a few years in Georgia with some stability to our State Government, that we would see their businesses come into this State; and I tell you that if you want to create stability..that is not the way to do it; and you will never attract business here, and you will never attract people here, you will never build up this State; and instead we will set it back in its progress more than fifty years, I think.
MR. CARMICHAEL. Mr. Chairman, Lady and Gentlemen of the Commission, I hesitate to take your time, after this matter has been discussed so much, and I am fraid I am not going to be able to stay through the deliberations of this committee to cast my vote, because I have duties that I must go back to, but I feel that I would be derelict unless I did appear before this commission and, as a member of the Committee express my feeling on this subject.

406

RECORDS OF CONSTITUTIONAL COMMISSION

At the outset, I think all of us are confused as to what the issue before the Commission is. I have had great difficulty in the past, as well as today, in understanding exactly what we are trying to accomplish when you talk about home rule. I think that in order to clarify our minds, and be sure of our action, that we ought first of all to examine the reasons which have brought about the cry over this State, on the part of our people and others, for home rule. I think that if all of us could be honest with ourselves, we will admit that there is one paramount reason why there is a demand for home rule, and that reason is that in the past our legislature, of which I served as a member for four years, permitted to grow up in this State a practice of legislative courtesy, a practice under which any member of that body could come in and introduce a local bill, which could completely change the form of government in his county, or his city, when you could oust elected officials, and that bill would be passed as 3. matter of legislative courtesy, regardless of the feeling of the demands of the people who were affected by that legislation. That is a vicious practice, which has grown up in this state, and in my humble opinion is the cause of the cry for home rule. And I think if you talk to the people of this State, the men and women whom you meet on the street, you will find that when they talk about home rule, they mean two things. They mean, first of all, that they shall have a voice in selecting the form of government under which their city or their county shall operate, that that form of government shall not be rammed down their throats by some member of the legislature without any right of appeal on the part of those people; and I think the second thing they would tell you they mean is once they have chosen that form of government, they do not want that form of government changed without their having a right to vote on it, and approve it; and to my mind, that is what home rule means. It may mean something else, and apparently does mean a great many things different from that to others of this Commission; but I think if you will examine the question honestly, we will find that that is what the people of this State, whom we represent here, understand home rule to be, and I think we will also find their reason for it. The price of protection in the Constitution is to abolish once and for all the vicious practice of legislative courtesy, under which government comes through no will of the people who are governed; and that being true, and if it is true, and I hope you agree with

RECORDS OF CONSTITUTIONAL COMMISSION

407

me, I think that it sheds the light upon this issue which might cause us to use somewhat of a different approach in solving the problem and in meeting the demands of the people of our
State. I have never agreed one hundred per cent with my good friend, Roy Harris, and if I ever do, I think I will have my
head examined; I will think there is something wrong with him. I have been fighting with him for many years, and I have enjoyed it, but Roy and I have on many occasions agreed. I think it is through the spirit of debate, as we have enjoyed it in the past years, he being entitled to his opinion, and me to mine. It is through this spirit we have democratic government, and we should throw the issues out and discuss them; but I agree with Roy Harris when he says that he believes we ought to revive, in providing for home rule, operating a plan of county and municipal government. I think that we must do that if we are to avoid complete chaos and confusion in the State. I think that the Legislature ought to provide several different plans, all of the best plans they can find, of county and municipal government, and enact them into general law; and then I think that the people of the county or the municipality affected should have the right by their vote to say which form of government they are going to live under; and when they have made that choice, I think that the Legislature should be prevented from changing that form of government by local legislation without first giving those same people the right to vote on that legislation which will change their form of government. If we do those two things, I sincerely believe that we will have provided home rule, in the true sense, which the people of this State want. I don't think the people of this State are so much concerned with having the right to enact a new law every time they turn around, or to change the form of government every time they turn around. I am convinced that they want stability, that they might know that, first, they choose their form of government, and that, secondly, it can't be changed without their consent. Now, if those propositions are true, which I firmly believe them to be, I do not believe that any of the proposals which have been submitted here today will solve the problem which confronts this Commission. I would like to call the Commission's attention to the thereof, Paragraph VI. That Sub-Committee considered the report of Sub-Committee No.7, of this Commission, on Page 8 question of home rule, long and deliberately; it brought forth what it thought to be a sound proposal to this Commission. Un-

408

RECORDS OF CONSTITUTIONAL COMMISSION

fortunately, I could not he present when that report was considered. The report, for reasons sufficient to this Commission, was rejected; but I would like to read it, with a few corrections or changes I think would be proper for the Commission, and ask you, in all fairness, if this does not provide the kind of home rule the people of this State want and expect. Recognizing that what Frank Gross has said, that we must have a code or a set of general laws covering the municipal and county government to be true, and I agree with him. I think that the language which I shall read to you covers what all of us are trying to accomplish, and meets the objections which have been raised by Mr. Harris, Mr. Pope and Judge Lovejoy, and the others here, and it reads as follows: "The organization, powers, and duties of county and municipal government shall be defined by general law." That is the code which Frank is talking about; it is that general law which Bill Hartsfield was talking about, that lays down the general principles under which county and municipal government shall operate. And then it goes on. "Optional plans of general laws covering the municipal and county government, effective in any county or municipality when submitted to the qualified voters thereof, Dnd approved by a majority of those voting it." The Legislature in its wisdom, and with ample time to study the multitude of details which are of necessity going in county and municipal government, can enact these various optional plans of government and then it will go into effect in counties and cities, not when some rabble rousing politician in the legislature wants to kick somebody out of office by a bill passed by legislative courtesy, but when it is approved by that county or municipality. And then to eliminate the evil which, in my opinion, it has brought up the question of home rule, "No special or local law affecting county or municipal government shall be enacted in any case for which provision has been made by existing general law," and then, further, "No special law affecting county or municipal government, where it is not done by general law, shall become effective unless submitted to the qualified voters of the county or municipality and approved by a majority of those voting." And that provision would eliminate once and for all, the vicious practice of legislative courtesy., It would provide that" the government which the people have selected under the optional plans could not be changed without their consent, and an election duly held for the purpose. "The result of the election, upon ratification by the voters herein

RECORDS OF CONSTITUTIONAL COMMISSION

401

prescribed, shall be certified to the Secretary of the State by the governing authority of the county or municipal authority, and shall be published in the next volume of Georgia laws to be issued subsequent to such election." Now, this is something new thrown into it, but I think we are trying to draw a Constitution for the future. We ought to anticipate this condition might arise, that some day some county and some city may decide to consolidate their government :lnd eliminate the cost of two governments. I think it is somewhat a fond dream in Georgia to hope that will ever happen.
MR. HARRIS. That was adopted by the Commission.
MR. CARMICHAEL. That was? I am glad of that. Then the next one.
MR. HARRIS. Will the gentleman yield just a moment? Paragraphs VI and VIII of Section I of your Committee's report, on pages 7 and 9, were stricken, and all of Section III, dealing with municipalities.
MR. CARMICHAEL. That is right.
MR. HARRIS. Not only Section III, but Section IV.
MR. CARMICHAEL. Correct, and what I proposed in following my reading, I have merely taken Paragraph VI, where it is provided for county government, and Section III, dealing with municipal-I have inserted "municipal" after the "county," and then Paragraph VI, which was rejected. When a county or municipality adopts one of the alternative plans of government provided by the General Assembly, or when a county and municipality adopt one of the optional systems of consolidating county and municipal government provided by the General Assembly, such county shall certify the plan chosen by the Secretary of State for publication in the volume of Georgia Law, and I would like to propose and submit along with these others for action by this Committee, as a substitute to the original, Paragraphs VI and VIII, which I read, which will read as follows, if I may repeat: "The organization, powers and duties of county and municipal government shall be defined by general law. Optional plans of county and municipal government shall be .provided to be effective in any county or municipality when submitted to the qualified voters thereof, and approved by a majority of those voting. No special or local law affecting coun-

410

RECORDS OF CONSTITUTIONAL COMMISSION

ty or municipal government shall be enacted in any case for which provision has been made by existing general law. No special law affecting county or municipal government shall become effective unless submitted to the qualified voters of the county and municipality, and approved by a majority of those voting. The result of the election, upon ratification of the voters herein prescribed shall be certified to the Secretary of State by the governing authority of the county or municipality affected and shall be published, subject to when a county or municipality adopts one of the alternative plans of government adopted by the General Assembly, or a county or municipality adopts one of the consolidated forms of government, such county shall certify the plan chosen to the Secretary of the State for publication in the volume of Georgia law." And I would like to say in all sincerity that I think it is the duty of this Commission to enact a home rule provision to meet the demands of the people of this State. I think this Commission will be derelict in its duty unless it does. I believe that what I have said with reference to what they want is right. I may be wrong. You are entitled to your opinion. If what I have suggested is not the proper way of doing it, then this Commission ought to provide the proper way. We should do something, hut I think that we ought to be awfully careful in doing it, that we don't create a situation which is worse than what we already have. I appreciate very much your time, and I am sorry to have taken so long.
CHAIRMAN ARNALL. Does the gentleman yield for a question?
l\fR. CARMICHAEL. Gladly.
CHAIRMAN ARNALL. If I understand all that has been said thus far concerning the different proposals, in my thinking it boils down to the question-which comes first, the horse or the cart? Now, under Frank Gross' proposal, he provides just as you provide there, that the people can vote on these provisions. You say, and Mr. Harris says, that the General Assembly shall provide a code or general law governing these municipalities and counties.
MR. CARMICHAEL. Which Mr. Gross also admits is needed.
CHAIRMAN ARNALL. If you pass your proposal, or Mr. Harris', or Mr. Lovejoy's, this Commission will not have done a single thing that is not now authorized by law. Isn't that true?

RECORDS OF CONSTITUTIONAL COMMISSION

411

MR. CARMICHAEL. This Commission, if they pass mine will make it mandatory, one thing, and will prevent the vicious practice of legislative courtesy, which is the one thing that people of this state are upset about.
CHAIRMAN ARNALL. If you pass Mr. Gross' and then adopted the cede would not that be the same as yours?
MR. CARMICHAEL. Would be, except it would not prevent it to be-that wanted to change the law, pass or circulating the petition and changing the law every time you turned around, and I don't think Mr. Gross' proposal prohibits special legislation.
CHAIRMAN ARNALL. And when would you have an election?
MR. CARMICHAEL. The Legislature would handle it.
CHAIRMAN ARNALL. The Chair takes the position we ought to pass a local home rule bill that will make it incumbent on the General Assembly, if the General Assembly wants to keep down confusion, of enacting general laws governing these things.
MR. CARMICHAEL. It is true whatever we do, whatever we pass, we have got to depend on the Legislature to pass the general laws to put it into effect. It is impossible in this Commission to write a home rule bill which will provide all of the safeguards that you have got to have in a home rule bill, and the Constitution is not for that purpose. A Constitution is supposed, in broad terms, to provide authority and to provide the checks which are necessary, and within those two limitations your Legislature must of necessity act. We can't avoid the conclusion that ,,'hatever we adopt the General Assembly still has a job to do. All we can do here is make it mandatory for the Legislature to act, to provide the scope of the authority of the Legislature, and to say thou shalt not continue the vicious practice which has brought the thing about.
CHAIRMAN ARNALL. Assuming this Commission recommended, and the General Assembly adopted, and the people ratified the proposal that the gentleman makes making it mandatory on the General Assembly to enact general laws and codes governing municipal and county operation, what would be the result if the General Assembly was derelict in its duty and failed to enact such code?
MR. CARMICHAEL. The General Assembly could answer that.

412

RECORDS OF CONSTITUTIONAL COMMISSION

MR. HEAD. What would be the result of Mr. Gross' plan if the General Assembly fails to act?
CHAIRMAN ARNALL. How do you mean?
MR. HEAD. If they failed to enact the code that he is talking about, the General Assembly refuses to act and this Constitutional Amendment stands as he has written it, what have you got?
MR. CARMICHAEL. You would have confusion. We have got to trust the Legislature.
CHAIRMAN ARNALL. Therefore it would be a greater incentive to the General Assembly to hinder that confusion by enacting the code.
MR. CARMICHAEL Would not that be true under this proposal?
CHAIRMAN ARNALL. No. If the General Assembly did not enact the laws, yours would not be operative.
MR. CARMICHAEL. You would be operative. and we would be in a hell of a mess if they failed to act; and if they did not act, we would at least go along like we have been going.
MR. CARMICHAEL. That is why I say it gets a question of which comes first, the cart or the horse. In my opinion if Mr. Gross' proposal was adopted the Legislature would be quick by general enactment to keep down confusion, whereas if the other was enacted it would be no incentive on the Legislature to adopt any laws. The only thing, the incentive that makes us discuss it today, there is a demand from the people of the State that something be done.
JUDGE MacINTYRE. If Mr. Gross' proposal is passed, how are you going to change it unless you follow his proposal? The Constitution says you can't. The Legislature has to act if you want to change any present law.
CHAIRMAN ARNALL. You mean they will have to approve his provision?
JUDGE MacINTYRE. I say if it is passed and you put it in the Constitution, and the next session of the Legislature says we will ignore it, and they not go to your county and mine and change it, because the Constitution says you can't do it.

RECORDS OF CONSTITUTIONAL COMMISSION

413

MR. CARMICHAEL. Under Mr. Gross' amendment, if it is adopted as a part of the Constitution it becomes the law. There are one of three methods under Mr. Gross' bill by which it can operate. The Legislature can act and send it back to be voted on by the people; the county governing authority or the city governing authority can act and send it back to the people; or the thing which I don't like, everybody can start circulating a bunch of petitions and five hundred different forms of government to vote on.
JUDGE MacINTYRE. They can't change the law of a single county unless they follow one of three provisions in Mr. Gross' that he made.
CHAIRMAN ARNALL. Provided they adopt that provision in the county or city.
MR. CARMICHAEL. That is right.
JUDGE MacINTYRE. The government can't change them and that would force the Legislature to act if they wanted to change any local law.
MR. MAJORS. Mr. Carmichael, you made the statement several times the people have demanded this thing. I would like to know where that demand originated. I don't hear anything about it in my section, and I read about it in the Atlanta papers. I don't see anything about it.
MR. CARMICHAEL. It is a question of agreeing what the man means, I might say, which is being agitated. I don't care what language you use. There is a movement that requires over a period of years. I have never attended a session of the Legislature that every person with whom I came in contact I did not hear the practice of legislative courtesy roundly condemned, and I think that we owe it to the people, even if there is no demand, even if we have not had a single request, I think we owe it to abolish that practice and put the control of county matters, county government, where people can select that form of government and where it can't be changed without their consent.
MR. GROSS. Now, as I understand, the main objection the gentleman has to my proposal is the right of the people to call an election and change the law. That is the main objection, Judge?
MR. CARMICHAEL. That is one of my principal objections. I

414

RECORDS OF CONSTITUTIONAL COMMISSION

mean it is the procedure of the thing, plus the fact that you admit that your system is no good unless you can get the general code, and so I say that before we go into the question of local government or home rule that we ought to provide that general code that there be a series of alternate plans of government.
MR. GROSS. We have to start some way.
MR. CARMICHAEL. Let's have something to close in instead of
"T letting everybody-
MR. GROSS. e must start somewhere, a home rule on [or?] municipal code, and don't you agree if you put the provision in there that I have said, and say in the provision, like Mr. Hatton Lovejoy and I stated, that it shall be the duty of the General Assembly to provide the code, with this right of localities to enact their own laws - isn't the gentleman of the opinion the next session of the General Assembly will write a municipal code? They will have to write it.
MR. CARMICHAEL. The gentleman sincerely hopes so.
MR. GROSS. I don't think there is any way around it.
MR. HARRIS. I think the President of the Senate has the chance of the proverbial snowball to adopt his plan anyhow.
MR. CARMICHAEL. That is a matter of opinion.
MRS. HAAS. You say one thing you objected to in Mr. Harris' proposal, you feared the people might continually circulate petitions. That is the one I want to speak of, and Mr. Harris seems to feel the large sums of money can buy the people. I don't believe large sums of money can buy them; and if you had the initiative and referendum in there for all the years I think there are two petitions. One was to recall the mayor and I don't recall how it is sent up. The Legislature, it seems to me, has had seventy-seven years to enact something to straighten this thing out. They have not done it. That is why there is some demand and some feeling on the part of the people that I talk to that it must be straightened out, and this is a method of trying to force them to straighten it out.
MR. CARMICHAEL. It is a matter of opinion what we mean by home rule. I bet you any amount of money that you can take every person in this room and ask them to write down what they mean by home rule and there will not be any two definitions

RECORDS OF CONSTITUTIONAL COMMISSION

415

alike. The things I don't like about Mr. Gross' proposal are: One, you are constantly subject to petitions for every fonn of gov. ernment and every kind of law that you can think of; and you talk about long ballots and where people don't know what they are voting on; you haven't seen anything yet until you see that; and the second thing I don't like is that it can go in effect before you have a general policy which they have a right to choose and pick from. I would put that first, and then have the home rule go into effect, rather than putting it into effect and hoping the other will be provided. That is the only difference between Mr. Gross and I. Fundamentally, we are driving at the same thing.
MRS. HAAS. Has not the Legislature always had the power to do what you say?
MR. CARMICHAEL. The General Assembly has always had the right to write a general code for municipalities.
MR. HARRIS. Thay have the power now to put in effect Mr. Gross' plan, without the Constitutional Amendment.
MR. CARMICHAEL. Correct, and if I may say this, we talk about home rule. I don't know any more home rule than to take municipal charters in the State. Every one, every city in the State, has a different set of powers and authority and different set of this, that, and the other; and while I am firmly convinc ed the people ought to have a right to choose and weigh, we still have to have, in my humble opinion, some degree of uniformity, and some degree of uniformity in the method by which those things shall be accomplished.
CHAIRMAN ARNALL. The gentleman has had legislative experience and had the experience of a practicing attorney and looking into local laws and local acts. Does the gentleman share the opinion of the Chair that the one thing the people of Georgia don't want, above everything else, is unifonnity?
MR. CARMICHAEL. I think that is true of the American people. They don't like it.
CHAIRMAN ARNALL. What I say is Major Hartsfield COIlles in and says he is for this if it does not relate to Atlanta, and someone else is for it if it does not relate to somewhere else. And the point the Chair makes, are we not deceiving ourself when

416

RECORDS OF CONSTITUTIONAL COMMISSION

we talk about we are going to get a home rule bill passed on uniformity. I would not suggest alternate plans of city and county government. There are some cities that want a mayor and council; there are others that want a city manager; there are other cities that want something else. I think we ought to provide the plan by general law and define the power and authority, and let them pick the form. Here is Mr. Gowen, the eminent representative of Glynn, that wants a school system not like anybody else's, and the Speaker wants a different school system in his county, wants one not like anybody else.
MR. GO'VEN. We know we four are alike.
MR. CARMICHAEL. I think one thing that causes confusion, when you are talking about home rule, are you talking about the form of government or the powers of local government?
CHAIRMAN ARNALL. The gentleman has made his statement and taken the position that when we talk generally about home rule we talk about merely adopting the type of government that we have. The Chair is of the opinion that home rule goes further than that. I just say this for information. I believe that by that the people mean, or it is meant that the people should have a right to determine local issues. The Chair goes further than the gentleman from Cobb; we determine State issues. Every time we amend the Constitution your people vote on it and mine do.
JUDGE CANDLER. We are here to represent the people of Georgia, and the people of Georgia, in my humble opinion, are sick and tired of what has been going on in Georgia for the last several years. I went to school with Roy Harris over there, and I loved him then, and my admiration for him has grown stronger, and since, I don't know what has happened to Roy to get him afraid of the people. I am not fraid of the people in settling any issue that concerns them; but I am afraid of the people when they undertake to settle the issues for my community when they don't know a thing in the world about them. The last session of the General Assembly passed a new charter for my town. It consists of 65 pages. It even undertakes to regulate the speed of trains through my town, and as a matter of fact the nearest railroad point to my town is 21 miles. And the gentleman from
Cobb there has it right. We elect members of the Legislature, we
don't elect them on any issue, and he comes down here and gets up some wild notion about how to regulate his county or how

RECORDS OF CONSTITUTIONAL COMMISSION

417

to run his town or community, and he introduces a bill, and under legislative courtesy everybody votes for it; and in many, many instances the people affected by it are bitterly opposed to it. I picked up the Acts of 1943 last Sunday and just turned through it casually. There are seventeen hundred and some pages in that volume of acts, and some twelve hundred pages of it is purely local matters; and if the locality to be affected was given the right to settle those issues it would cut down the necessity of the Legislature staying in session seventy days, unless the Legislature just wanted to stay here for some other reason. I am heartily in favor of Frank Gross' proposal. I was somewhat amused when the paper quoted a very good friend to every member of this Commission when he said that he had proposed to the two Altanta papers if they would hire some good lawyer to draft a proper resolution he thought he could get the members of this Commission to approve it; and the confusion here today indicates to me that he is probably right. I want us to settle this issue. I want us to give the peepIe of Georgia home rule because they want it and because I think it is right. Then if the Legislature wants to emasculate it, or if the people don't want to approve it, let them do that, but I am in favor of this Commission, while we are in session, if we have to stay here until the day after Christmas, to work out some plan, and I think Frank Gross' proposition is all right, and submit it to the General Assembly; and if the General Assembly is made up of men like Roy Harris or the majority of them that want to kill it, let them kill it and let them take the responsibility for it. As a member of this Commission I want us to adopt a feasible home rule plan and give the localities of our State and our counties the right to say what laws shall govern them locally and take it away from people who are not interested in those matters.
CHAIRMAN ARNALL. Is there any further discussion?
MR. HOLT. Mr. Chairman, I want to indorse everything Judge Candler has had to say. I want to tell you very frankly that I feel that in all of the sessions of this Commission that I have attended there has been a waste of my time. I had thought when I came here that we had a semblance of democracy in the State of Georgia. I am now convinced that the Legislature runs it entirely and probably not more than ten per cent of the Legislature does that. Every single constructive suggestion that has been made to this Commission has been vetoed under the pro-

418

RECORDS OF CONSTITUTIONAL COMMISSION

position that the Legislature won't stand for it. Now so far as I am concerned, I have lived about as well as most people under the direction of a Legislature of the State of Georgia, but so far as I am concerned, if they are going to run it, I think we should adjourn and go home and get to work; and if we are not going to do that, let's consider those things we think are of interest and value to the people and 11ut be so concerned of what the Legislature is going to do with it. After all it is their responsibility.
,CHAIRMAN ARNALL. Thank you, Mr. Holt.
MR. GOWEN. I have been giving considerable attention to the discussion on Frank Gross' proposition and also to Mayor Hartsfield's statement, and I wonder if the reason he accepted this so quickly is because of the fact it does not apply to Atlanta. As I recall the decision of the Supreme Court, they have held that the classification of a law to apply only in cities of over 150,000 population was a legitimate classification, even though there was only one city in that group, and it becomes a general law. Under that decision of the Supreme Court, and if it is still the law, the Fulton County delegation would merely have to pass a law. Instead of saying Fulton County, they would simply say this would apply only in cities having a population of over 150,000 and it could not be affected by Frank Gross' bill at all; and since Atlanta seems to be for home rule, or some people here, I think we ought to include them in whatever we do. I don't think we ought to leave them out because it would be a great joke on certain people in Atlanta if they adopted a Constitutional Amendment and found themselves sitting outside.
CHAIRMAN ARNALL. This proposal, if adopted as written, would apply to the City of Atlanta now. Isn't that true?
MR. GOWEN. It would not apply to any law that was passed for the purpose of cities of over 150,000, and there are a lot of them on the statute book now. I don't know how many.
CHAIRMAN ARNALL. Would it apply to any general law, and if that is a general law it would not apply; but after it once went into effect, the only way they could exempt Atlanta or Fulton County from the operation of the proposal would be to enact another general law to say it did not apply to the cities and coun~ ties above a certain population.
MR. GOWEN. If they wanted to amend the charter of the city,

RECORDS OF CONSTITUTIONAL COMMISSION

419

instead of saying they would grant to say it, they should say the following provisions should apply to all charters in cities of this State having a population of over 150,000 and it would be a general law and the home rule to the people in Atlanta could not do a thing about it.
MR. HARRIS. Haven't we already set up a system by those general bills and this would not change any of them?
MR. GOWEN. Fulton County and the City of Atlanta have been having special laws passed under the guise of general laws, and they are the only ones I know of that are uniformly constitutional.
JUDGE MacINTYRE. Mr. Carmichael says, and as I say I never served in the Legislature and I don't know, but he says that citizens who never served, I think he has really hit the nail on the head when he says what people are against is what the Legislature likes. The United States Senate has built up what they call United States courtesy. If in a home county a man runs without any issues and goes up there and says, this thing is run which my local representative has here and we want to hear it. I have known instances in which they said we won't hear you, that is a local matter, what your local representative says about it, and we are going to vote for it. Like Senator Harris turning down Mr. Tillison, I believe it was. I don't think there was any attack on his ability but he was personally obnoxious, and they said, "Good morning Mr. Tillison." There was not any question of whether he could have a hearing before the committee or anything else. Now if you have a code classification like these gentlemen said, that would be one of the classifications you would most likely have, counties and cities over a certain population could have a cer tain form of government; cities and counties of another population, as Mr. Harris said, should have another form of city government. If Atlanta has 185,000 and you were a member of the Legislature, could the local representatives come in and under legislative courtesy, if that was a general law, would the Legislature hear from the citizens, or would they just say out of local representative in the legislative courtesy we will pass the act?
MR. GOWEN. They will pass the act. They have a special day in the Legislature where they pass these population bills under the guise of being general laws. It is usually on Friday when

420

RECORDS OF CONSTITUTIONAL COMMISSION

everybody is home and they are passed, and ninety per cent of them are unconstitutional, but the ones affecting Atlanta and Fulton County are constitutional, but they get it passed just the same.
MR. CARMICHAEL. I agree with what you have said one hundred per cent, and don't you think this will solve the very thing you are talking about? The sentence in this provision "no special law, etc", should not that be amended to read, "no special law or general law having local application affecting county or municipal government shall become effective"?
MR. GOWEN. I think that is true. I would like to get myself straight on the home rule proposition. I want to ask if you are undertaking to try to run the affairs of Glynn County or the City of Brunswick? I have a colleague in the House, but if I was the only one and the Speaker came from the Okefeenokee Swamp, I would not want the responsibility of running it, and I don't think the majority of the Legislature wants the responsibility of running it; but we don't want to turn it over where you can get a bunch of citizens that would be in the petition circulating business. You know they would be in every place, and they would come and say, "You better come and see me quick because I have almost got twenty per cent, and if you don't care to come and see me you will have an election, and you know what it will cost." And they will go to business enterprises and say we will circulate a petition against you and would be opening you to the greatest amount of graft. If you get twenty per cent and if you turn it over to the group Speaker Harris is talking about and let them register one hundred twenty per cent of the registered voters and get out and circulate around a petition and bring it to them and say, '~How much is it going to cost you not to have this election?" It is a vicious practice. Now the people should not have the form of government forced on them they don't want. It should not be possible for representatives up here to legislate his county commissioner out, or legislate the city charter out, or to do anything of that kind; but on the other hand it should not be proper for the people to generally circulate a lot of petitions and hold the threat of it over business or office holders of the community. It is not democratic. Now we think a lot of the people. We in this discussion are for them, the people, one hundred per cent. Their decisions are going to be right. But a lit-
tle later On we are going to take a part of our State government

RECORDS OF CONSTITUTIONAL COMMISSION

431

away from the people so that they can't mess with it. We are going to fix it because the people aren't able to run their prison system. We are going to fix it so that it must be set up so the people can't change it without amending their Constitution now no matter how they are. Say the people of this State might be with the prison system. They could not elect a Legislature that could come up here and do anything about it. All it could do would be to submit another Constitutional Amendment, and you could have the rottenest prison system in Georgia on the face of the earth and it would take nearly two years to do anything about it because you don't trust the people about that; but when it comes to running industry away from their homes, when it comes to -getting the crackpots out, when it comes to getting a small minority who can get a petition signed, and goodness knows anybody that has ever tried it knows that is the easiest thing to get. You put a petition down on the street corner and everybody will sign it that comes along. The only difficulty is to keep from getting people that are not registered voters from signing it. But I do think if we pass Frank Gross' proposition we ought to put the City of Atlanta in it. I don't think we ought to leave them out.
The second proposition, I don't think if we pass this proposition we ought to leave the petition in for initiating local laws and legislation. It would be bad enough if you want to leave it in there. I think the part of his proposal that might be left certainly the least obnoxious, is let the local government substitute; then if the local government don't give the people what they want they can elect a new one. If the county commissioners of Glynn County don't give the people what they want they can get a new county commission. If the city commission of the City of Brunswick don't give them what they want they can get a new commission. The responsibility is theirs. It is dangerous, and something the State of Georgia will live to regret if they make it possible for a person who controls twenty per cent of the registered voters to hold a threat of any unwise legislation. You take a time when there is a depression on in the State of Georgia and the people are worried, when a man like Huey Long comes along and says, "I will make every man a king", and gets a following; goodness knows where it would have gone if providence didn't stop it.
JUDGE MacINTYRE. Would it make it better to put in thirty per cent?

422

RECORDS OF CONSTITUTIONAL COMMISSION

MR. GOWEN. I don't think so. If you make it fifty per cent you would not help. The City of Atlanta can't get a bond issue out because they can't get the people out. Put in a form of Government and say people come to Georgia, this is the form of government Georgia has. We know the worst that can happen is for our cities to boom and grow in a larger classification. If it does we know what that is. If you left it up to people to change from one form of government to another they know what form of government they will change to. They know they will not get crackpot legislation because it will not just affect one place; it will affect one hundred or two hundred communities in the State of Georgia. With all due respect, the general laws the Legislature of Georgia passes by and far are good sensible laws. You read the general laws and you don't find many of them foolish and crackpot laws. You find many bad for special interests. Whether you like the Legislature or not, most of the people in it are conscientious and try to do a good job. They are there for the purpose of giving a good job. The matter of legislative courtesy is bad. It ought to be stopped once and for all because it does have a lot of legislation like Judge Tom Candler said about dealing with railroads when there is none there. Let's do away with legislative courtesy but let's have stable laws. We have a county government. We have an established county government. Authority is not established and it probably should be, but we have a stabilized county government. You don't hear any row about it. We ought to have a stabilized municipal government. It ought to be there before the people. They ought to make their choice and then they ought to have the right that somebody can't take it away from them without their consent, and if you give them that, I think you have given them every bit of home rule they want and every bit of home rule they are entitled to.
MR. CARMICHAEL. I presume we will amend something. I would like to propose an amendment to the original proposal by me by inserting in the fourth sentence, after the words "no speciallaw" the words "general law with local application", and then I would like to say that I am sincerely in favor of some form of home rule. As I stated, I believe my proposal is best, but if the Commission does not see fit to accept it I am then willing to accept Mr. Gross' proposal if you eliminate that business of petitionand leave it where you can initiate initial local legislation by commission legislation and submit it back to the local peo-

RECORDS OF CONSTITUTIONAL COMMISSION

423

pIe, or let the local government officials, which are the county commission and city council, initiate and submit it to the vote of the people. I am willing to take it either way. I do think we ought to eliminate that provision with reference to circulation of petitions, and I move when that proposal is submitted to vote it be amended by striking that provision from it.
MR. HARRIS. I would like to ask unanimous consent to withdraw my substitute, and I would like to second Mr. Carmichael's motion as amended. Now we have got a chance to get rid of the most vicious piece of legislative machinery that has ever been in Georgia, and that is legislating on population basis, except it may destroy your classification right on. It might, and of cours~ we can give some thought to it and work it out.
MR. CARMICHAEL. It won't destroy the classification because the classification I propose is not on population basis, but optional plan, which any city can adopt.
MR. HARRIS. All right, the chances of it. I think the Supreme Court made a mistake of holding any of them constitutional, and if we don't do something to get rid of them, we will be here in this State where we are going to be in the most confusion you ever saw-every session, local legislation, zone passing is out of vogue. It is now general bills with local application, because with general bills with local application you can confer upon local authorities so much more power than you can with a local bill. I think we ought to adopt an amendment to his original motion, and I would like to ask unanimous consent to withdraw mine and second his.
CHAIRMAN ARNALL. Is there objection to the withdrawing of the Harris proposal? Without objection it is so ordered. Is there objection to proceeding with consideration of this proposal? If not, we will proceed.
MR. GROSS. Due to the fact that certain attacks have been made on my proposal, I would like to ask permission to again address myself to two particular points and answer some criticism.
CHAIRMAN ARNALL. Is there objection? If not, proceed.
MR. GROSS. Mr. Chairman and Members of the Commission: First I want to refer to what Roy Harris said in his own statement. Roy was concerned about what the newspapers had said about members of the Commission.

424

RECORDS OF CONSTITUTIONAL COMMISSION

MR. LOVEJOY. I move we take a five minute recess. CHAIRMAN ARNALL. Without objection, it is ordered.

AFTER RECESS
CHAIRMAN ARNALL. I think we are about ready to resume. The Chair desires to thank the members of the Committee and visitors for your patience and the very thoughtful consideration that is being accorded these proposals. We will now be delighted to hear from President Frank Gross.
MR. GROSS. Mr. Chairman and Gentlemen: Previously, as J started to say and Roy Harris left-
CHAIRMAN ARNALL. Do you want to address your remarks to the Speaker?
MR. GROSS. Not necessarily. He was concerned about what the newspapers had to say about the members of the Commission. There is no use for a man having such thin skin. I just wanted to say to him that once upon a time they accused me of robbing a bank. It is not what you are accused of, it is whether you are guilty. That does not make any difference. It is whether they can prove it. Now in all sincerity, I think Roy Harris is sincere about his position. I think he has got off on the wrong foot a little bit and I want to address myself to two particular ones. I think Jimmy Carmichael's provision with reference to general bills having local application should be incorporated in my proposal. I move in the first paragraph after the words "local laws", the following language be inserted "or general bills with local application."
CHAIRMAN ARNALL. Mr. President, as I understand it, you are trying to outlaw general bills with local application in relation to municipalities?
MR. GROSS. That is right.
CHAIRMAN ARNALL. I don't believe that does it. Read it.
MR. GROSS. (Reads) "Paragraph I. In addition to the grant of legislative authority contained in this Constitution, the people of any county or municipality in this State are empowered to enact any local law operative within the area of the county or municipality

RECORDS OF CONSTITUTIONAL COMMISSION

425

and not inconsistent with general law or otherwise with the Constitution."
CHAIRMAN ARNALL. I wonder if you are going to catch Ful~ ton County if you don't say in the proposal that the Legislature is not authorized to enact any general bill with local applica~ tion relating to municipal or county government.
MR. CARMICHAEL. That is submitted to the people if they want it.
CHAIRMAN ARNALL. We will put that in?
MR. GROSS. I think you are right. Mr. Speaker, I was talking about you. I just told them you started off and you were all riled up about what the newspapers had to say. I think they did it in all good grace. I don't think they were taking out after you or anybody else. I told them you should not have such thin skin. Once upon a time I was accused of robbing a bank. You have not been accused of anything. You ought not to have such thin skin. I think you are sincere in your proposal, but I think you are warped a little, but if you will sit there and listen, I think I can get you straightened out. Speaker Harris talked sbout somebody coming in a locality with $150,000 and getting a petition of twenty per cent to call for an election or a bill. If we were writing the original laws of the State of Georgia and how local bills should be enacted we would be given quite a bit of concern over one plan, the right to enact the law. Where do you think that right could come to one man? From the county that comes to the General Assembly, or whether he rather go back to the county and there try to get the petition. I tell you those people that want to change the law rather it be like it is.
MR. GOWEN. I was just wondering if the gentleman meant it was easier to buy one member of the Legislature than to get twenty per cent to sign the petition.
CHAIRMAN ARNALL. I am sure the gentleman meant the men of the Legislature are men of integrity and beyond the reproach of anybody.
MR. HARRIS. You should hear now as to whether they are going to adopt Jimmy's proposition now or yours.
MR. GROSS. Well, I imagine the issue is what proposition they are going to adopt, but gentlemen, I am not afraid of the people.

426

RECORDS OF CONSTITUTIONAL COMMISSION

You think about people coming to my town and getting a petition of twenty per cent, and if they had some personal ulterior motive, don't you know it would be detected? Don't you know they could not buy the people of Stephens County in an election? It could not be done. I think probably Speaker Harris had ridden a horse down the road on a moonlight night and he was feeling good, and he was looking on the side of the road, and he saw a paper, and it jumped up. That is like this, he wants to shy from it; but if you leave it to the people you are not going to be hurt. The people won't be hurt. Here is one thing we are overlooking and nothing has been said about it to amount to anything; no county, no city will have this form of government until they themselves vote it in. First they have to vote on it themselves to see whether they want it. If they don't want it it is not going to be crammed down their throat: and I think this is the only democratic way to solve it. Speaker Harris said, "I admit it won't work." I don't admit it, it will work. Certainly it will work, but I think we ought to have a general code for municipalities dealing with those things that cover the State all over, and we are not going to write one until you make the Legislature do it. If you adopt my proposal Roy Harris will write a municipal code we will be proud of. He can do it, but unless you make him do it he won't. Let's put it to the General Assembly, and you can write a code that will protect us generally, and the local matters would be handled by the people.
MR. CARMICHAEL. Do I understand the gentleman to say the provisions in his proposed bill that carries the circulating of pe': titions are so dangerous it will force the Legislature to act?
MR. GROSS. No, I don't say that. If they don't act they can deal with a great many things they probably should not deal with. I will admit that, and there ought to be a general code to do it. But listen, there is an evil which you have explained here, legislative courtesy, and that is the only way to get rid of it. Now to get rid of it we have to have home rule, and when we put it in there, then the General Assembly is going to protect those general propositions by a municipal code; and the two can work together and one is not worth a cent without the other, and I think we need them.
MR. CARMICHAEL. I would like to say to the gentleman I am not afraid of what a majority of people will do. I am afraid of

RECORDS OF CONSTITUTIONAL COMMISSION

42'1

what twenty per cent will do. I am not afraid that the people would not vote right. I am willing to trust the people, but I do hate to subject the majority of the people to a mass of issues constantly that twenty per cent of the people want.
MR. GROSS. If anything is needed in Georgia it is that Georgia be aroused publicly. I say that because every issue you present to the people in Georgia, only a small per cent of those qualified to vote take the time out to go and cast their ballot. If you put the responsibility back to the people, and call on them to vote, and exercise their right to vote to choose their officials and choose the form of government they have, they are going to vote. You are going to see people participating in government, and when you have that you have good government. If it does nothing else but arouse the public to go out and take an interest in the election, I think we have done something worthwhile; and ultimately it will have to be passed on by the people. Although twenty per cent raises an election, if you want to raise it to thirty per cent, all right. If you want to take it out all right. I am not for taking it out, but it will be better than what I have got. I never have yet got a bill through the General Assembly like I want it, and I have to compromise, and I will compromise on this if necessary; but I rather leave it in there. It would be better to let the people call it. They have one election a year. In municipalities you have a general election every year, I reckon. They do in mi~e, and I reckon they do in all the rest.
MR. CARMICHAEL. If that is taken out of the provision and the Legislature did not act, the people could still go to the local politician and have anything submitted.
MR. GROSS. If that was taken out they would not.
MR. CARMICHAEL. The local official could do it.
MR. GROSS. Yes, sir, but if they did not do it they would have to wait and beat them at the polls. I think it would be confusing but it will be better than what we have got, and I think we are looking at something that is not there, to say twenty per cent of the people are going to burden 'the municipality with numerous elections, or some crackpot will buy over twenty per cent and make them call an election.
MR. MAJORS. Suppose you amend it to one-third? That will make it more expensive than $150,000.

428

RECORDS OF CONSTITUTIONAL COMMISSION

MR. GROSS. Do you mean to say if I increase it to one-third it will make it cost $150,000? That suits me.
MR. LOVEJOY. Mr. Gross, you strike your provision which prohibited any action by the Legislature, as I understand it, any subsequent special act. Didn't you strike that provision?
MR. GROSS. It has not been acted on. I offered it as an amendment.
CHAIRMAN ARNALL. That is an amendment pending before the Committee.
MR. LOVEJOY. State the effect of that.
MR. GROSS. The amendment as now written, Mr. Lovejoy, says no local act of the General Assembly shall take effect until approved by a majority of the registered voters.
MR. LOVEJOY. I move to substitute for that paragraph this paragraph, in addition to the foregoing, and I ask if you will accept it. I don't know whether you can. "In addition to the foregoing the General Assembly may amend the charter of a municipality now of force or hereafter adopted, but no provision in any such amendment which will conflict with any provision previously adopted by popular vote shall be valid until such new provision is ratified by the voters of such municipality." The provision, then the Legislature can't act. If they have not voted thought of that is simply this, if the people have voted upon a on it the Legislature can act. I think nine times out of ten that is the way they will do it. I offer that as a substitute of Paragraph VI of Mr. Gross' proposal.
CHAIRMAN ARNALL. Thank you.
MR. LOVEJOY. Any objection to inserting in yours this provision~ ''The Legislature shall, by general or special act, fix the maximum rate of taxation for each municipality"?
MR. GROSS. I have this to say with reference to that. I think it ought to be in there but I think it ought to be-you say that is mandatory on the Legislature to fix a maximum rate?
MR. LOVEJOY. Right?
MR. GROSS. I think it ought to be done. I think if we adopted :your first two sentences and the General Assembly wrote a code

RECORDS OF CONSTITUTIONAL COMMISSION

429

that would be in there, but there is no objection on my part for it going in.
CHAIRMAN ARNALL. Will the gentleman, Mr. Lovejoy, hold them until we come to Mr. Gross' proposal and submit them '1 The Chair would like to have the indulgence of the Commission, as you have indulged me on many occasions. I think the discussion that has been had thus far on this matter has been most edifying and enlightening, and I think the people of Georgia, had they been here, would have been pleased to see democracy at work. However we now have pending four proposals, all of which strive for some type of home rule. There are four I believe. We had five and Mr. Harris withdrew his.
MR. LOVEJOY. May I ask unanimous consent to withdraw mine?
CHAIRMAN ARNALL. To withdraw your proposal?
MR. LOVEJOY. Withdraw mine.
MR. POPE. I would like to do the same thing.
CHAIRMAN ARNALL. Is there objection to Senator Pope withdrawing his proposal and Mr. Lovejoy withdrawing his, the first part of Mr. Lovejoy's being incorporated in Mr. Gross' amendment. Is there objection? Without objection it is so ordered. Then that leaves before the Commission two for consideration, two proposals. There has been an amendment offered, and there will be amendments offered to these two proposals. The first is the original by President Gross, and the other proposal is a substitute offered by the most eminent gentleman, the former Legislator and business tycoon from Cobb County, Jimmy Carmichael. If there is no objection we will then proceed to a consideration of the Carmichael substitute. The Clerk will read the substitute.
JUDGE MacINTYRE. I want to determine which one to vote for. Did Mr. Harris have his bill amended so as to apply to local laws as well as general laws with local application? I meant Mr. Gross. If he don't amend it he just has a detour in the road.
CHAIRMAN ARNALL. That has not yet been amended. However, an amendment has been offered carrying out the idea of it. Judge MacIntyre has asked when we reach that we can consider that amendment, but the amendment is on the Speaker's desk. It has not yet been adopted.

430

RECORDS OF CONSTITUTIONAL COMMISSION

JUDGE MacINTYRE. But will it be parliamentary procedure to ask that be done?
CHAIRMAN ARNALL. Is there objection to circumventing the ordinary parliamentary procedure by perfecting the bill before the substitute is considered? Is there objection to perfecting both proposals so we will have both proposals complete before the committee reaches the conclusion? If not, we will proceed to perfect the substitute first, and in perfecting the substitute that does not bind us to vote for the substitute. You are free to vote finally on either one when they are both perfected. Is there objection? Without objection it is so ordered. The Assistant Secretary will read the proposal of Mr. Carmichael and the amend,ments to it so that may be perfected as the substitute. We will perfect them both.
MR. McCUTCHEN. (Reads) "The organization, powers, and duties of county government shall be defined by general law. Optional plans of county government may be provided to be effective in any county when submitted to the qualified voters thereof, and approved by a majority of those voting. No special or local law affecting county government shall be enacted in any case for which provision has been made by existing general law. No special law affecting county government shall become effective unless submitted to the qualified voters of the county and approved by a majority of those voting. The result of the election, upon ratification by the voters as herein prescribed, shall be certified to the Secretary of State by the governing authority of the county affected and shall be published in the next volume of Georgia laws to be issued subsequent to such election. "When a county or municipality adopts one of the alternative plans of government provided by the General Assembly or when a county and municipal government adopts one of the optional systems of consolidated county or municipal government provided by the General Assembly, such county or municipality shall certify the plan voted to the Secretary of State for publication in the volume of Georgia laws."
CHAIRMAN ARNALL. Are there amendments?
MR. CARMICHAEL. Mr. Chairman, I would like also to insert, "no special or local law affecting county government shall be enacted in any case for which provision has been made by existing general law", I would like that to read "No special or local

RECORDS OF CONSTITUTIONAL COMMISSION

431

law or general law having local application affecting county or municipal government shall be enacted in any case for which provision has been made by existing general law."
MR. HARRIS. I second that.
CHAIRMAN ARNALL. It is moved and seconded that the proposal be amended prohibiting and outlawing general laws with special application to municipal and county government. That is the effect of it. It has been moved and seconded, is there objection to the adoption of that amendment? Without objection it is so ordered. Are there other amendments?
MR. LOVEJOY. May I ask if Paragraph VIII is not in fact a duplication of the last sentence in Paragraph VI?
MR. CARMICHAEL. It is except for the fact of the possibility of the consolidated county and municipal government.
CHAIRMAN ARNALL. That Paragraph VI was previously adopted, as the Chair understands, by the Commission, the one authorizing it.
MR. CARMICHAEL. I think what he is asking me is-
MR. LOVEJOY. Paragraph VIII and the last sentence of Paragraph VI both refer to certifying the results to the Secretary of State and the publication.
MR. HARRIS. Paragraph VIII was stricken when the Committee dealt with it.
MR. LOVEJOY. It is offered now.
MR. HARRIS. No, sir. Paragraph VI is rewritten to apply to both county and municipal government.
CHAIRMAN ARNALL. Are there any other amendments? There being no other amendments, the Carmichael substitute is perfected. Now the Gross original proposal, are there amendments?
MR. GOWEN. I would like to offer some amendments to it.
CHAIRMAN ARNALL. The Clerk will read it first, the first amendment.
MR. McCUTCHEN. Mr. Gowen moves to amend the Gross proposal by striking Sub-Paragraph of Paragraph 2 of Section II.

432

RECORDS OF CONSTITUTIONAL COMMISSION

MR. GOWEN. That is the section dealing with petitions.
MR. CARMICHAEL. You move to strike that?
MR. GOWEN. Yes, sir.
CHAIRMAN ARNALL. The question is on striking Sub-Paragraph 2 of Paragraph II of Section II, which authorizes the onefifth of the registered voters of the county or municipality to circulate a petition making it mandatory on the governing authority to call a special election or put the issue on the regular election ballot. In other words, that is a provision authorizing initiative on the part of the people, and Mr. Gowen moved that it be stricken.
MR. MAJORS. I object. It is a part of the fundamental law of Georgia that people can petition for elections, petition for prohibition or recall or any other thing, and we won't be able to do that.
MR. CARMICHAEL. Do you mind citing that?
CHAIRMAN ARNALL. He is referring to the prOVISIon for the right of redress. While the gentleman is eminently correct in saying the Constitution does give them the right of petition and redress, and yet it is not specifically provided for, and this provision would make specific provision for it. The question is on eliminating the initiative provision of the Gross bill. Is there any discussion? If not -
MR. CARMICHAEL. If the amendment is adopted and this is eliminated it will not change the fundamental law of the State to which Mr. Majors refers?
CHAIRMAN ARNALL. Correct. Is there objection? There is objection. So many as favor the amendment of the gentleman from Glynn, Mr. Gowen, to elimina.te the initiative feature in Paragraph II, sub-section 2 will make it known by saying "aye"; opposed "no." The Chair is in doubt. So many as favor the adoption of the amendment make it known by rising and standing until counted. Reverse your position, those opposed. Thirteen for and seven against. The amendment is adopted. The Clerk will read the second amendment.
MR. McCUTCHEN. Mr. Gowen of Glynn moves to amend the Gross proposal by adding a new paragraph to Section I as follows: "Paragraph VIII. For the purpose of this section no act of

RECORDS OF CONSTITUTIONAL COMMISSION

433

lhe General Assembly shall be deemed a general law if it applies only to counties or municipalities."
MR. GROSS. I ask unanimous consent that amendment be adopted.
CHAIRMAN ARNALL. The Chair makes the point that may apply to two counties or two municipalities.
MR. GOWEN. The reason I thought about that, the reason I didn't do it, if you adopt optional plans you might well have, but I don't think it will interfere with its optional plans because more than one county can adopt the plan of the larger county.
CHAIRMAN ARNALL. Won't you hit the same thing more nearly accurately by saying the General Assembly shall not adopt any general bills with local application relating to municipal or county-
MR. GOWEN. What is a general bill with local application? The Supreme Court held a bill that applies to a county is a general bill. I think general bills with local application is legislative courtesy.
MR. CARMICHAEL. Isnt it true the reason the Supreme Court held the general bills with local application, it was possible or probable in some day all cities could come into it and fall within the population figures? That is the basis of their sustaining it. They would still be permitted under the amendment offered by the gentleman from Glynn, isn't that true?
JUDGE CANDLER. Has the Supreme Court held them constitutional?
MR. CARMICHAEL. Yes, sir.
CHAIRMAN ARNALL. You are in this danger if you bottle it up too much, you won't be able to enact classification laws.
JUDGE CANDLER. I suggest the Gross bill here provides the Legislature is without authority to enact any local legislation. The chief complaint about this matter is the fact we are encumbered with elections, and if a member of the Legislature can be passing something that has to be voted on, and if the municipal or county governing authority could call an election, or the people call an election, it is probable we will be having elections all the time, and if we are going to delegate this authority to the

434

RECORDS OF CONSTITUTIONAL COMMISSION

people, then why not keep it and give it to the Legislators?
CHAIRMAN ARNALL. The second amendment-Judge, the Chair will get to your proposal in just a minute-Read that amendment again.
MR. McCUTCHEN. By adding a new paragraph to Section I as follows: "For the purpose of this section, no act of the General Assembly shall be deemed a general law if it applies only to one county or municipality."
CHAIRMAN ARNALL. Now Judge Candler offers a substitute or an amendment to that amendment to the effect that the General Assembly shall not have the right to enact local legislation.
MR. CARMICHAEL. An inquiry.
CHAIRMAN ARNALL. Or general legislation relating to local units of government.
MR. CARMICHAEL. That then eliminates the first method of initiating legislation under the Gross bill by the Legislature.
MR. GOWEN. It would also make it impossible to have any classification because it takes the subject of local legislation en tirelyout.
MR. CARMICHAEL. I would like to submit a substitute for the proposed amendment to the effect that no special or local laws or general laws having local application shall become effective until and unless the same shall have been ratified by a majority of those voting at an election held for that purpose.
CHAIRMAN ARNALL. Held where, in the locality affected?
MR. CARMICHAEL. Wait a minute.
MR. GROSS. [You are putting back in Mr. Gross' Paragraph VI.] Read Paragraph VI and see if that is what you want.
MR. CARMICHAEL. I think you want number 6 because that is one of the methods of initiating local legislation, but what you are doing is carrying it back to the people and saying it won't affect them until they vote on it.
CHAIRMAN ARNALL. Do you like 6 or don't you?
MR. MARMICHAEL.Six is not sufficient. It is not broad enough. It would be sufficient if you said "no local act or no local law

RECORDS OF CONSTITUTIONAL COMMISSION

435

or general law having local application shall take effect until voted on by the majority of the voters in the county affected."

CHAIRMAN ARNALL. The Chair is of the opinion that does not reach what you are striving for.

MR. GOWEN. The only thing I am striving for is for you to put Fulton County on the act.

MR. CARMICHAEL. I think they went on it too.

MR. ATKINSON. I move we put these words in, "This Constitution and all parts shall apply to Fulton County."

MR. CARMICHAEL. I ask unanimous consent he can't do that, unanimous consent to withdraw the gentleman's amendment and mine as a substitute. Paragraph VI of the act be amended to read "No local or special law or general law having local application shall take effect until approved by a majority of the registered voters voting thereon in the county or municipality affected." I think that will put Fulton County back in the Union.

CHAIRMAN ARNALL. Is that your proposal, Judge Candler, in effect?

JUDGE CANDLER. No. My proposal was to prohibit the Legis-

lature from enacting any local laws or any general law having

local application. Let the people themselves settle that.

I

CHAIRMAN ARNALL. The Chair will put Judge Candler's motion first, which is to the effect that the General Asembly shall not be authorized to enact any local law or special law with local application or general law. The General Assembly shall not have the authority to enact any local law or general law with local application.
MR. MAJORS. What would the effect of that paragraph be on counties and municipalities that did not adopt this thing?

CHAIRMAN ARNALL. They would not be affected unless they adopt this whole article. Is there objection?

MR. GROSS. I object to that. Judge, I can visualize the situation coming up where you would want to amend the charter if the General Assembly would be in session before long, and it would be necessary that it be amended before the next general election of the municipality. In that event the Representative could introduce a bill, but it would have to be voted on. That is still home

.mJ

RECORDS OF CONSTITUTIONAL COMMISSION

rule as long as you submit it back to the people. I think it is the thing to do. Now that is another method.
MR. HARRIS. Under Paragraph I you won't have to wait until the general election.
JUDGE CANDLER. The people of Georgia are anxious to cut down the time necessary for the session of the Legislature, and at least two-thirds of the time of the General Assembly is taken up by local bills.
MR. HARRIS. Five minutes a day.
MR. GROSS. I will tell you what I have done. I have passed local bills here at the rate of thirty-
JUDGE CANDLER. The provision-
MR. GROSS. The objection I think is the lack of consideration, because I have passed thirty bills here in less than thirty minutes, so I say it ought to go back to the people and let them vote on it.
CHAIRMAN ARNALL. The issue on this amendment is this, whether you will take away from the General Assembly the right to enact local legislation or general laws with local appli~ cation, or whether you will require the General Assembly, when they do enact local laws, to submit them to the people. Now Judge Candler moves to take that right of enacting local legislation away from the General Assembly. Is there a second to that motion? There is a second. The question is-Is there objection to its adoption? There is objection. So many as favor its adoption-
MR. HOLT. May I ask a question before you put the vote on that? As I understand this matter, we are voting on the proposition that the General Assembly can initiate local legislation which cannot become effective until voted on by the people?
CHAIRMAN ARNALL. That is Mr. Carmichael's and Mr. Gowen's proposal, but Judge Candler seeks to take away from the General Assembly the right of local legislation.
MR. HOLT. Why should the General Assembly initiate legisla~ tion that could be initiated in the county if it cannot become effective until they pass on it?
CHAIRMAN ARNALL. As I understand it, it is purely a system of initiating the legislation for a vote of the people.

RECORDS OF CONSTITUTIONAL COMMISSION

437

MR. CARMICHAEL. It is one thing more than that. That is one thing, but the main thing, it also prohibits the general laws which the Legislature has the right to pass with local application; it prohibits their becoming effective until they are approved by the people.
MR. HOLT. The proposal of Judge Candler is the Legislature shall not have that right?
MR. CARMICHAEL. If you put in the Constitution. the Legislature can't pass a general bill you might abolish it.
I
MR. HOLT. That might be a good thing. The point I am making, you are making it possible for the Legislature to initiate legislation which must be passed on by a county whether the county wants it?
MR. CARMICHAEL. The right of the Legislature to initiate general legislation is inherent.
JUDGE CANDLER. I am talking about the bill that says in those counties of Georgia having a population of not less than 4850 and not more than 4852. Everybody in the State knows that is a local bill.
CHAIRMAN ARNALL. Now let the Chair understand you accurately on your proposition. Do you move to take away from the General Assembly the right to enact any local legislation?
JUDGE CANDLER. That is right.
CHAIRMAN ARNALL. Or do you take away the right to enact general bills with local application, or move to take away both rights?
JUDGE CANDLER. I move to take away the authority of the Legislature to pass a local act or to pass a general act which has a local application, which has only a second application.
CHAIRMAN ARNALL. Mr. Holt seconds this. Is there any objection? So many as favor its adoption make it known by saying "aye"; opposed "no." The noes seem to have it, and the noes have it and it is lost.
Now we come to an amendment that was an amendment to an amendment. Now we come to your amendment. What is your amendment, Mr. Carmichael?
MR. GOWEN. I think the language is good. I have no-

438

RECORDS OF CONSTITUTIONAL COMMISSION

MR. CARMICHAEL. My proposal is that Sub-Paragraph 6 of Paragraph II of Section I be amended to read: "No local law, special law, or general law having local application shall take effect until approved by a majority of the registered voters vot~ ing thereon in the county or municipality affected."
CHAIRMAN ARNALL. Is there a second?
JUDGE MaciNTYRE. I second it.
CHAIRMAN ARNALL. You heard the reading. Is there objection to its adoption? There is objection. So many as favor adoption make it known by saying "aye"; opposed "no." The Chair is in doubt. So many as favor its adoption make it known by rising and standing until counted; reverse your position, those opposed rise. Twelve for and four against and the amendment carried.
The Chair desires to point out that that particular paragraph would be applicable only in counties that adopted this provision. Are there other amendments?
JUDGE MaciNTYRE. Just for this reason. Of course I unde~ stand the procedure in the Legislature. They frequently detour around a local bill by saying it is a general bill with local application, and if you don't stop up that gap, you are not doing anything.
MR. CARMICHAEL. Has not this stopped it?
JUDGE MaciNTYRE. If that stopped that gate.
CHAIRMAN ARNALL. We are of the opinion it does.
MR. CARMICHAEL. Mr. Chairman, it seems these amendments have met my objection to the main bill, and I think it is right, and I therefore ask u~animous consent to withdraw my proposal.
MR. HARRIS. I think the gentleman forgot or overlooked one thing. The proposition submitted by Mr. Carmichael does away with local bills. Under Mr. Gross' plan you have local bills ini~ tiated in two ways; one by the Legislature and one by the governing authority of the county and be submitted to the people. Now under Mr. Carmichael's proposal that he has adopted he provides that the powers and duties of county and municipal governments shall be defined by general law.

RECORDS OF CONSTITUTIONAL COMMISSION

439

MR. CARMICHAEL. The gentleman is correct. I withdraw my request.
CHAIRMAN ARNALL The Chair seeks enlightenment. You with draw your request?
MR. CARMICHAEL. I requested unanimous consent to withdraw my substitute, but in view of the amendments to Mr. Gross' bill, what he points out is true.
CHAIRMAN ARNALL. I don't understand what he points out, why that affects you. Assuming you want to withdraw your pro~ posal, why does that change you wanting to withdraw it?
MR. CARMICHAEL. For the reason we still have not provided in the Gross bill a requirement for optional plans of govern~ ment.
CHAIRMAN ARNALL. Correct. If the county did not adopt it you would not have any other law.
MR. HARRIS. That is you have this situation. Under Mr. Car michael's proposal the Legislature must enact laws, the Legislature may submit optional plans, so that does away with local bills. Now Mr. Gross' proposal has got a referendum attached to it. In other words, it does not become effective in any county un less it is adopted in that county, so the county might adopt it and they might not. We don't know, but if they did adopt it then the Legislature could initiate the legislation and submit the referendum and the local county authorities could do it. So under Mr. Gross' proposal we continue the things that we are trying to get rid of, and that is local and special laws for each community. Now Mr. Carmichael provides for uniformity, and I think we ought to take up uniformity, and let me give you one illustration that I know all you lawyers are familiar with, and I am quite sure the members of the Legislature are. In 1937 Mr. Marion Smith approached me and asked me if I would introduce a bill to amend the private corporation law of Georgia, and I told him to give a corporation some authority they did not have. I told him I was tired of helping amend the corporation law, that what all the Georgia corporations wanted was the Delaware system, so they would not have to go up to Delaware to get a charter; and I suggested that he get a group of associates who were ac customed to handling that type of corporation law and draft us a new corporation law in Georgia conferring upon all the pri.

440

RECORDS OF CONSTITUTIONAL COMMISSION

vate corporations, without the necessity of going back and amending their charters, the authority that was necessary and that they wanted and needed, and we would enact that. We did do it. Now I am not enough of a corporation lawyer to know whether it is good or bad, but we undertook to put in effect what they wanted, and to give them the powers they wanted, and the authority to run their business as they wanted to. Now it seems to. me - and it has never been amended since then, never been an amendment offered to it. Now the point I am making, why can't we do the same thing in the Legislature for municipal corporations that we did for private corporations and give them the authority to handle their own business, and give them home rule without the system of having a harum-scarum plan in every community with a different type of government, a different form of government, and every municipality with a different form. Now if you want to cure the evil that you are striking at, and after all what we are doing, talking about home rule is a misnomer; what we are trying to do and what everybody is seeking to do is get rid of special and local bills and special and local laws. Now if you want to get rid of them Mr. Carmichael has offered the plan. Not only a plan that is offered here today but a plan that his sub-committee of this Commission carefully worked out, carefully studied out and recommended to this Commission several months ago; and I think that we ought to adopt his proposal because it gives us the thing we want, and the thing we need, and the thing we ought to have in this State, and that is instead of making a special law for everybody that we have a general uniform law applicable to municipal and county government, and then we would know where we stand. We will have some idea of what the law is all over the State, and you won't have this hodgepodge system of utmost confusion. Here we have got election and the Legislature both, just confusing it and making it worse every day. I think we ought to adopt Mr. Carmichael's plan, and I hope the President of the Senate will withdraw his and ask unanimous consent. It will make unanimous a plan carefully worked out by a committee of this Commission appointed in the beginning, and after careful study, and gives us something I think we will be proud of, and give us some order and regulation and some stability to local government in this State that will be an attraction to business and business people to come into our State and develop our State and feel some stability about it, and some reason and assurance they won't be upset all the time by some

RECORDS OF CONSTITUTIONAL COMMISSION

441

local bill initiated even by the Legislature or the local authorities.
CHAIRMAN ARNALL. Thank you, Mr. Harris.
MR. GROSS. One other amendment.
CHAIRMAN ARNALL. There is one other amendment. Now have we voted on your amendment? Now there is another amendment before the committee. Read the amendment.
MR. GROSS. The amendment is this, the first two sentences of the Lovejoy proposal.
MR. McCUTCHEN. Mr. Gross moves to amend Paragraph I of Section I by adding at the end of said paragraph the following: "The General Assembly shall enact laws, provide for charters for municipal corporations, and set forth the terms of said charters. The cities of the State may be classified for this purpose."
CHAIRMAN ARNALL. I made that point some while ago and we decided we have a uniform system of county government where they can take their choice, commission plan, ordinary plan, abolish tax collectors and receivers and so forth, you understand.
MR. HARRIS. Not some form of county commISSIon government because we have that now; and under this bill every county in the State could have a different form of government, I mean the organization.
MR. CARMICHAEL. I don't think we have any uniformity as to powers that can be delegated under each of the plans at the present time. I think the plan itself ought to be uniform. I think it is uniform as to ordinary or commissioner, but the powers that delegate those are not uniform.
CHAIRMAN ARNALL. The Assistant Secretary will read the amendment.
MR. McCUTCHEN. Mr. Gross moves to amend Paragraph 1 of Section I by adding at the end of said paragraph the following: "The General Assembly shall enact laws, provide for charters for municipal corporations, and set forth the terms of said charters. The cities of the State may be classified for this purpose."
MR. HARRIS. That gives you two provisions of the same amendment in conflict.

442

RECORDS OF CONSTITUTIONAL COMMISSION

MR. GROSS. Explain that statement.
MR. HARRIS. You say the Legislature can set it up, and at the same time you say they can do it this way.
MR. GROSS. I don't understand what you are talking about.
MR. HARRIS. And another thing, that provision would only apply to the counties that adopted it under this referendum, and you would have one county adopting, and the Legislature would have to set up a uniform plan for the counties adopting, and the counties that did not adopt it, it would not apply at all.
CHAIRMAN ARNALL. The Chair is of the opinion that particular proposal should be inserted in the Constitution under an article other than this article.
MR. HARRIS. Put it in this article. It won't have any effect.
MR. GROSS. I withdraw the amendment. Now the Gross proposal has been perfected, I understand.
MR. McCUTCHEN. And the Carmichael plan.
CHAIRMAN ARNALL. Before we consider those two proposals, is there objection to the adoption of the Lovejoy proposal which was just offered as an amendment, to be inserted in the Constitution under the Legislative Article?
MR. HARRIS. Let's vote on them in their order, and if Mr. Carmichael's plan is adopted, and if we adopt that, we don't have to adopt the Lovejoy proposal.
CHAIRMAN ARNALL. The Chair is of the opinion that assuming we adopt Mr. Carmichael's proposal-
MR. HARRIS. The Lovejoy proposal is incorporated in it.
CHAIRMAN ARNALL. Assuming we adopt that, then that takes care of the Lovejoy proposal; but after we adopt the Carmichael proposal, assuming we do, then the Gross proposal could be adopted. MR. HARRIS. It would be out of order.
CHAIRMAN ARNALL. Why?
MR. HARRIS. Because the Carmichael is offered as a substitute, and when the substitute is adopted it takes the place of the original and the original is out of order.

RECORDS OF CONSTITUTIONAL COMMISSION

443

CHAIRMAN ARNALL. The Chair is of the opinion the Carmichael proposal is not in conflict with the Gross.
MR. HARRIS. That does not make any difference, under the rules of procedure when you adopt the substitute it takes the place of the original.
CHAIRMAN ARNALL. The Chair seeks the indulgence of the Commission. The Commission is a sovereign body and makes rules, and the Chair is of the opinion if the Carmichael proposal is adopted, the Gross proposal then could be submitted for consideration of the Commission without being restricted by technicalities.
MR. GROSS. I make this point, if the Carmichael proposal was adopted and my proposal adopted also we would have a hell of a lot of confusion.
MR. CARMICHAEL. I agree.
MR. GROSS. Let's kill one of them.
CHAIRMAN ARNALL. The Chair is unable to understand why the Gross proposal is in conflict with the Carmichael proposal. The Carmichael proposal provides for optional system. You mean the people can vote whether we want it?
MR. CARMICHAEL. They choose which of the optional systems they want. "The optional plan of county and municipality shall be provided to be effective in any county when submitted to the qualified voters thereof and approved by a majority of those voting." They have to adopt one.
CHAIRMAN ARNALL. So we get back to where if we adopt the Carmichael proposal we recommend to the Legislature that it do something about home rule?
MR. GROSS. That is it.
CHAIRMAN ARNALL. I want to relinquish the Chair and talk.
MR. CARMICHAEL. Do you yield for a question.
MR. HARRIS. Whatever we do will be a recommendation to the Legislature. That is as far as we can do it.
CHAIRMAN ARNALL. The Chair is of the opinion if that is all we do we don't submit a workable or concrete plan, all we do is recommend to the General Assembly that it undertake to write

444

RECORDS OF CONSTITUTIONAL COMMISSION

a modern Constitution for the State. All we are doing is recommendatory in nature, but it has the effect of submitting to the General Assembly a concrete policy or plan of procedure for their consideration.
MR. HARRIS. We recommend to them.
CHAIRJ.~AN ARNALL. That is right.
MR. CARMICHAEL. I would like to ask unanimous consent to cast my vote and retire.
CHAIRMAN ARNALL. Is there objection to allowing Mr. Carmichael to vote? The Chair hears none.
MR. CARMICHAEL. I would like to cast my vote for the substi~ tute, and if it fails I would like to cast my vote for the Gross bill.
CHAIRMAN ARNALL. Thank you, you will be so recorded.
The Chair desires to speak, not as Chairman but as a member of this Commission, and to say just as strongly as it is possible for me to say that if we finish up this home rule discussion having done nothing except to recommend to the General Assembly that it make some provision for home rule, then I don't think we have done anything; and as far as I am concerned I want to give the General Assembly something to sink its teeth in and the peo~ pIe something to see that we are doing something in the Constitution about giving them a right to control their local affairs. I have no fight with the Carmichael proposal. I don't think it goes far enough. I think it is wholly inadequate. I think the Gross bill in its original form would have been much better, but we have taken out some of the provisions in that; but I do desire to express to the members of this Commission that let's submit to the General Assembly some type of home rule provision; and unless I listen very carefully and change my mind, I don't be~ lieve we have done a thing in the Carmichael amendment, and we have not given the General Assembly any power that it does not have now. I think all we have said is we want the General Assembly to draw up laws relating to county and city governments. Now if that is all we want to do then that is all right, but as far as I am concerned, I say that the people of any county or any city ought to have the right to enact local legislation governing the affairs of that city or county, irrespective of what the Legislature says about it. Now if we don't want to give them that right, that is one thing; if we do, that is another; but as far as I

RECORDS OF CONSTITUTIONAL COMMISSION

. 445

am concerned, I think we have successfully so far today bam~ strung the proposition of letting the people decide the local affairs; and therefore I say that the Gross amendment should be adopted, and if we can't get the Gross amendment, as far as I am concerned I am taking what I can get; but I am going to be disappointed, and I think the people are going to be disappointed. I think they expect us to give them a local home rule bill whereby they can vote on local affairs, and if we don't do that we have not given it to them. If we recommend in the General Assembly that it pass general laws relating to the government of cities and counties, why we have got those now, except in the case of municipalities where each one operates under his own law, and we are not giving the people the right to do anything under the Carmichael bill except to vote on whether they approve what the governing authorities have done. I think the idea of the initiative, we have killed that. I don't think we have enough crackpots in Georgia to wreak all the havoc that has been pointed out. I believe instinctively the people will do what is right. I think we are making progress, but I certainly would hate for some situation to develop whereby when you get through we are back where we started before, that we merely recommended to the Legislature to give consideration to home rule. Therefore as a member of this Commission I want to state that I favor the Gross proposal, and I don't see anything wrong in letting the people of Coweta County, or Berrien County, or Macon, Georgia, or Thomasville, Georgia, vote whether they want to come under the Gross proposal, and if they don't want it they don't have to come under it. If they do want it they ought to have a right to have it. If they come under the Gross proposal and then decide they don't like it, they have the right to get rid of it after a period of time. We are not forcing home rule on them. We are saying to them, if you want it you can have it, and I don't see any possible objection to that proposal. It merely lets the people say whether they want to come under it.
MR. LOVEJOY. Would there be anything helpful in submitting more than one proposal to the General Assembly, and they to the people? Here are eighteen States that have different provisions, and I would like this, I might like this or that. I ask would there be any impropriety, and it might be helpful in submitting more than one form of home rule.
CHAIRMAN ARNALL. That can't be done unless we submit the

446

RECORDS OF CONSTITUTIONAL COMMISSION

Constitution in segments, rather than as a total document.
MR. LOVEJOY. They would vote separately on that.
MRS. HAAS. I can't see what we are afraid of in the Gross proposal. We are not forcing it on anybody. We are timidly letting a county vote to come under it. It does not seem to me radical. It seems to be a good step to say to the people, here it is. If you want it vote to come under it.
CHAIRMAN ARNALL. I can't see where the Carmichael proposal and the Gross proposal are in conflict one with the other. I think the Carmichael proposal relates to all the operations within the State, and then the Gross proposal relates only to those counties or cities that want it. Then we give the people two types and they can select which type they want. I don't understand wherein the Gross proposal is in conflict with the Carmichael proposal. I think it is a supplement to it.
MR. HARRIS. In other words, it is possible that the Gross, if we should recommend and they should adopt the Gross proposal, two or three counties in the State might adopt this and the rest of the counties under the present system under which it operates by courtesy.
CHAIRMAN ARNALL. Correct. But if you have the Carmichael provision they can't do that.
MR. HARRIS. And my folks in my county would not adopt it in a hundred years.
CHAIRMAN ARNALL. If you have the Carmichael proposal it does away with the legislative courtesy, as I understand.
MR. THRASHER. The trouble with the Carmichael proposal it would be an amendment to the Gross and get both in at the same time.
CHAIRMAN ARNALL. The Chair would like to see the Carmichael proposal adopted and then would like to see the Gross proposal adopted as an alternative system under which counties and cities can operate.
MR. THRASHER. One bill include all. Why not carry this as an amendment to the Gross proposal and put it all in?
CHAIRMAN ARNALL. The Chair is of the opinion the Gross proposal is an amendment to the Carmichael. The Carmichael

RECORDS OF CONSTITUTIONAL COMMISSION

447

proposal deals with the whole State, whereas the Gross proposal deals only with the cities and counties that want to come under. The Clerk will read the Carmichael proposal.
JUDGE MacINTYRE. I think if Mr. Carmichael was here he would object.
MR. GROSS. I think the Carmichael provision can be enacted in the municipal code, but for us to say to the General Assembly here is home rule, and put both in there, how do you expect them to unravel those things? You can't do it.
MR. HARRIS. Will the gentleman yield?
MR. GROSS. Yes.
MR. HARRIS. Would not the Legislature wind up in about the same fix we are in?
MR. GROSS. Yes, and I don't want the Legislature confused, and I think it is our responsibility to give them a clear-cut home rule, and when it is given to the General Assembly, I think they ought to adopt it or defeat it and let it fall in their lap.
MR. HARRIS. Dues the gentleman think that his bill would ever be adopted in Richmond or Chatham County?
MR GROSS. I don't know whether it would or not, but if Richmond County don't want it they would not take it.
MR. HARRIS. If they don't want home rule they ought not to be made to have it.
MR. GROSS. That is right. I don't see how anybody can object to people voting on it and see whether they want it.
MR. ATKINSON. Why not put that section about eliminating legislative courtesy in Frank's bill?
MR. HARRIS. Then, Mr. Chairman, legislative courtesy would be in effect as applying to me. If my county did not adopt it, if Dave's county did not adopt it, legislative courtesy would not apply to him.
CHAIRMAN ARNALL. That is right. That is why the Chair thinks this Carmichael proposal should be adopted, and then the Gross proposal should likewise be adopted.
MR HARRIS. And we would have one hell of a mess with both of them.

448

RECORDS OF CONSTITUTIONAL COMMISSION

MR. ATKINSON. At the end of Mr. Gross' bill, after you get through that optional part, say put in a section from the Carmichael bill on legislative courtesy. Now this is a constitutional amendment. This is writing the Constitution. You are limited to one subject or limited to anything you may put in it; and you can write that in as a part of your Constitution, notwithstanding another part of the same section made it optional as to what counties it should be adopted in, if you want to get the Carmichael hooked up.
MR. HARRIS. May I ask a question? The Chair says he would like to see the Carmichael proposal adopted, so it looks like we are all unanimous on that, and we are all split to pieces on the other. Since we are unanimous on the Carmichael, would it not be a good idea to unanimously adopt the Carmichael proposal and forget about the other one?
MR. GROSS. What have you got? You have a suggestion to the General Assembly for you to work out home rule. We can't do it.
MR. HARRIS. It says "must." And another thing, it looks like Jimmie is giving you more home rule than you want.
CHAIRMAN ARNALL. The Chair will read the Carmichael proposal and the Chair hopes the Members of the Commission will pay attention to what the proposal actually is.
JUDGE SMITH. Will you explain what you mean by favoring the adoption of both proposals and bringing about conflicts and making both parts of the fundamental laws of the State?
CHAIRMAN ARNALL. The Chair is of the opinion the Carmichael proposal deals generally with the subject of home rule by saying to the Legislature, the Legislature shall work out a system of government for counties and cities, submitting different classifications of government, and that the people in the area affected can avail themselves of the type of government they WAnt by an election. That is the Carmichael proposal. Now the Chair is of the opinion that in addition to that, the Gross proposal would give the people the right to enact any law not in conflict with the general law or the Constitution by allowing the governing authorities of the city or county to enact a law and submit to the people, and if the people vote it then it becomes the law. The whole difference is this, the Carmichael does not vest in the people any legislative authority. The Gross proposal does

RECORDS OF CONSTITUTIONAL COMMISSION

449

vest in the people legislative authority. Now that is the difference.
JUDGE CANDLER. Necessarily then would not the Gross act be in conflict with the general act which the Carmichael act would create?
MR. HARRIS. To get out, I suggest that we take a vote and vote on it. Under the rules of all procedure the last substitute is voted on first. Let's vote on it and take a stand, and then we will vote on the other, whether we adopt both of them, if you want to.
MRS. HAAS. May I ask a question? Isn't it true the Legislature has all along had the power to do what we are telling them to do under the Carmichael proposal?
CHAIRMAN ARNALL. Had it since 1877.
MR. GOWEN. Is it not also true this Legislature has had the same authority to do what the Gross amendment suggests during this time?
CHAIRMAN ARNALL. The Chair makes' this point, and he desires to make it as carefully as he can. The heart of the Gross proposal is to vest in the people---
JUDGE CANDLER. It appears to me that the Carmichael proposal adopted, and the first paragraph of the Gross proposal i~ that the counties may accept this, or may adopt it, provided it is not inconsistent with the general laws or otherwise with this Constitution. It appears to me if you adopt the Carmichael, then the Gross act would be inconsistent with it and would be unconstitutional for that reason.
CHAIRMAN ARNALL. The Judge may be right. I think we have gotten in this position, we have got two proposals before us, with merit in both perhaps, and since neither is printed as perfected I don't know whether the Members of the Commission would like - the Chair is not quite sure of the effect of either - therefore the Chair wonders if it would be wise to appoint a committee consisting of such eminent gentlemen, for example, as Judge Candler, Speaker Harris and President Gross, or some other Members of the Commission, to take these two proposals and undertake to work out some proposal to bring to the committee tomorrow.
MR. HARRIS. Mr. Chairman, how in the world are you going

450

RECORDS OF CONSTITUTIONAL COMMISSION

to take two inconsistent things and shape them together and make them consistent? It can't be done.
CHAIRMAN ARNALL. The Chair is of the opinion-
MR. HARRIS. You can apply-the Legislature under the Carmichael proposal can pass uniform laws for certain counties, as in certain counties this would apply, and it would be confusion of the worst kind.
MR. McCRACKEN. Under this Gross bill, as I understand it, the governing authorities of the county would have to inaugurate any move that there was to submit any law to the people affected.
CHAIRMAN ARNALL. Yes, or the General Assembly.
MR. HARRIS. Not on adoption of the act about the system.
CHAIRMAN ARNALL. No. We are talking about after it gets in operation. If it was not ratified it would never be eff~ctive in that county.
MR. McCRACKEN. How does that give the people the right to legislate. You have the representative on one hand to recommend that certain laws shall be passed, and on the other hand you have the county commissioneJ;" or the ordinary. As I understand it, that has been inaugurated by some county officers in each instance, and people are going to have to submit some matters submitted to them by the county officers or the Legislature and not something they themselves initiate.
CHAIRMAN ARNALL. That is right. We killed the initiating part.
MR. McCRACKEN. The difference is in the way it is inaugurated. There could not be any difference if it is inaugurated by the county commissioner, or the ordinary, or by the representative on the other hand; so in so far as the people are concerned as to who shall inaugurate legislation, one gives them as much authority as the other. The people have to vote on both but they don't have the right to inaugurate it.
CHAIRMAN ARNALL. The Assistant Secretary will read the Carmichael proposal.
MR. McCUTCHEN. (Reads) "Section I, Paragraph I. The organization, powers and duties of county and municipal government

RECORDS OF CONSTITUTIONAL COMMISSION

451

shall be defined by general law. Optional plans of county and municipal governments shall be provided to be effective in any county or municipality when submitted to the qualified voters thereof, and approved by majority of those voting. No special or local law or general law having local application affecting county or municipal governments shall be enacted in any case for which provision has been made by existing general laws. No special law or general law with local application affecting county or municipal governments shall become effective unless submitted to the qualified voters of the county or municipality and approved by majority of those voting. The result of the election, upon ratification by the voters as herein prescribed, shall be certified to the Secretary of State by the governing authority of the county or municipality affected and shall be published in the next volume of Georgia laws to be issued subsequent to such election.
"Paragraph II. When a county or municipality adopts one of the alternative plans of government provided by the General Assembly, or when a county and municipal government adopt one of the optional systems of consolidating county and municipal government provided by the General Assembly, such county or municipality shall certify the plan chosen to the Secretary of State for publication in the volumes of Georgia laws."
MR. ATKINSON. Mr. Chairman, if you number Carmichael Section I of this Article, and number this Section II, and have your optional provisions to apply to Section II instead of the whole Article, then you have that thing fixed because there is not anything in conflict with these two.
CHAIRMAN ARNALL. That is what I think. I think one is supplemental to the other.
JUDGE GRICE. It is offered as a substitute.
MR. ATKINSON. A substitute is an amendment, and it can be offered as an amendment too.
CHAIRMAN ARNALL. "The organization, powers and duties of county and municipal government shall be defined by general law. Optional plans of county and municipal government shall be provided to be effective in any county or municipality when submitted to the qualified voters thereof and approved by a majority of those voting. No special or local law or general law having local application affecting county or municipal govern-

452

RECORDS OF CONSTITUTIONAL COMMISSION

ment shall be enacted in any case for which provision has been made by existing law. No special law or general law with local application affecting county or municipal government shall become effective until submitted to the qualified voters of the county or municipality and approved by a majority of those voting. The result of the election, upon ratification by the voters as herein prescribed, shall be certified to the Secretary of State by the governing authority of the county affected and shall be published in the next volume of Georgia laws to be issued subsequent to such election." Now the Chair does not understand that proposal would ever give the governing authority of the county or city the right to initiate a proposal and submit it to the General Assembly. I mean to the people.
MR. McCRACKEN. No. What I have reference to is this. This says "No special law or general law with local application affecting county or municipal government shall become effective until submitted to the qualified voters of the county or municipality and approved by a majority of those voting." All right, your representative introduces a bill with local application. That could be submitted to the people, and if accepted by them, you have that on one hand; and on the other hand you have the county commissioner, so the people have just as much voice in the inauguration of it, it looks to me like.
CHAIRMAN ARNALL. Here is all we have done. I think all this does, it merely says no local law shall be passed by the General Assembly unless the people vote on it.
MR. GROSS. Does not the amendment in there take care of that?
MR. HARRIS. No, sir. It goes on and says the object of putting that in there is this: He says there shall be uniform laws, and that they may provide optional plans, that there can be no local bill at all on a subject that is covered by one of these general plans. The idea of putting this other thing in there, the committee idea in writing it that way, was if the Legislature in enacting a general law governing cities or counties can't anticipate every possible subject that might arise, and it is put in there for the simple reason if the General Assembly should overlook something and somebody discover it and come with a local bill it could not pass without being submitted to a referendum.
CHAIRMAN ARNALL. Suppose Coweta County people want to abolish the board of county commissioners and have an ordi-

RECORDS OF CONSTITUTIONAL COMMISSION

453

nary fiscal officer to administer county government. Under this proposal could our people do that unless the Legislature or unless the representative authorized it to be done?
MR. HARRIS. Under the present law. Now this provides that we won't have a continual change; that there will be submitted to the people of Coweta County two, three or four plans, and they will adopt one under which they prefer or they select to operate.
MR. GOWEN. And they can change.
MR. HARRIS. Yes. Then they can change into another plan any time they want, but it must be one of these uniform plans.
CHAIRMAN ARNALL. Now this question. Assuming you have got three or four different plans that are uniform and the people of Coweta County want to do away with the five man board of commissioners and go to a single county commissioner or ordinary-
MR. HARRIS. In the second the county commissioners are authorized by a uniform plan that they can adopt.
CHAIRMAN ARNALL. Assuming it is, how do we go about it.
MR. HARRIS. We don't legislate in the Constitution. We grant the authority to the Legislature, and they set up the machinery by which they will go from one plan to another, and it has to go by an election.
CHAIRMAN ARNALL. In other words, the General Assembly could say that the alternative plan 1, 2, 3 or 4 could be adopted in Coweta County when the county commissioner certifies to the people or when a local bill was passed?
MR. HARRIS. No, sir, it is when the general law would provide how the method of adopting one and also the method of going from one to another, the general act of the Legislature which would be uniform.
CHAIRMAN ARNALL. I understand. But for instance, just as~ suming we have a general act of the Legislature, it could p~ vide that the way you pick your type of government would be by the governing authorities submitting it to the people.
MR. HARRIS. The best way to get that is for the Chairman to draw us a bill, or have the Legal Department get some lawyer to prepare the bill, and we will pass it.

454

RECORDS OF CONSTITUTIONAL COMMISSION

CHAIRMAN ARNALL. In other words, here the county commissioners in my county, and suppose the people don't like them, after you have three or four different plans of government, and want to go to a"'single commission, how will we make them let us vote on it?
MR. HARRIS. You can't. They won't have anything to do with it. You can provide the plan and method, the general plan.
CHAIRMAN ARNALL. But somebody has to initiate.
MR. HARRIS. The Legislature provides the machinery.
MR. GOWEN. The Legislature can provide for the people to do it by petition.
MR. HOLT. I must confess I am entirely confused about all this but I would like to ask this question: Under the Carmichael proposal there are to be provided by the Legislature several alternate plans of municipal and county government. Is there anything in that proposal which requires a county or municipality to accept one of these plans? If there is not, then is it possible for a county or municipality to adopt some other plan other than that offered by the Legislature?
CHAIRMAN ARNALL. The Chair is of the opinion if they provide the optional plans the counties or cities would have to adopt one of those plans.
MR. HOLT. I must confess I am entirely confused about all this, like any of the plans offered?
CHAIRMAN ARNALL. Then they would be stuck.
MR. HOLT. For that reason I am inclined to agree with you. There are certain very good features in the Carmichael proposal, and several also in the Gross proposal, and in as much as we have spent as much time as we have in discussion, it seems it might be well to spend some more and try to get the good features of each and put them together, and I so move.
CHAIRMAN ARNALL. In other words, the gentleman moves, I assume, the Chair appoint a committee?
MR. HOLT. That is right.
CHAIRMAN ARNALL. To take both proposals and undertake to harmonize them, or work out from them both a good proposal,

RECORDS OF CONSTITUTIONAL COMMISSION

455

or maybe abandon one entirely, or using some of both.
MR. HOLT. The question of legislative courtesy is taken care of in the Carmichael plan; the question of something specific, give the county a specific basis on which it can govern, is contained in the Gross proposal. It seems to me it might be well to have a committee and see if they can't harmonize them and take the good points in each.
CHAIRMAN ARNALL. You heard the motion. Is there objection? Without objection-
MR. HARRIS. I object.
MR. LOVEJOY. When will you get the report?
CHAIRMAN ARNALL. In the morning. If the motion passes the Chair will appoint the committee and we would have the report in the morning. Let me say for the information of the committee, we still have several other matters to consider here, though not as lengthy as this, and it won't require much time, but they are here nevertheless. So many as favor Mr. Holt's motion make it known by saying "aye"; opposed "no."
MR. HOLT. I offer a motion we suspend the rules and vote on the Gross proposal.
CHAIRMAN ARNALL. Is there objection?
MR. HARRIS. I object.
CHAIRMAN ARNALL. There is objection.
JUDGE MacINTYRE. As I understand the Gross proposal, there are two methods to initiate or change this county or municipal government. If it is a county in which they have five county commissioners, if the county commissioners refuse to do it, then can go to the Legislature and pass a bill through the Legislature, but that bill has got to be referred back to the county and the county votes on it. It gives them two methods of initiating and they vote it out.
CHAIRMAN ARNALL. They voted out the initiative by the people.
JUDGE MacINTYRE. That leaves two methods of initiating: one the county commissioner, and a great many people want it, and they got bull headed and turned it down; then they could say to

456

RECORDS OF CONSTITUTIONAL COMMISSION

the Legislature, we want you to initiate it by passing the bill in the Legislature; but in either event it has to come back and be voted on by the people. Is that the effect of it?
CHAIRMAN ARNALL. Yes.
MR. FOLEY. I move we reconsider our action in striking Section II of Paragraph I of the Gross bill.
JUDGE CANDLER. I second the motion.
MR. FOLEY. Of Article I.
CHAIRMAN ARNALL. When you give the people the right to initiate it--the Chair hates to get up but here is what the Chair is trying to say, and there is no need of fooling ourselves. If you shadow box, that is one thing; and if you mean business, that is another. I know some counties in this State have a sole county commissioner and have one representative. Now under the Carmichael proposal you have made it possible for the county commissioner and the representative to get in cahoots with one another to stifle any changes in that county.
MR. HARRIS. I will disagree with you there because it can't be submitted by them. It has to be done by the Legislature in a bill, and it has to be provided in the uniform laws and uniform system, and I don't see any reason why we should play for time when we see it is not going to suit us. Let's vote.
MR. FOLEY. You painted a terribly gloomy picture early this afternon about all the corruption that could ensue. Do you know anything about the experience in other States where they have allowed plans to be initiated?
MR. HARRIS. I don't know any State that knows anything about this type of legislation working or being used. Now there are plenty, perhaps, where uniform system is used. Now there are one or two States that have the system, but they don't use it, and I think the Governor gave me that information.
CHAIRMAN ARNALL. It is not used to a great extent; but it acts as a club over your public officials, that is what it does.
MR. HARRIS. Most of them never voted it in.
CHAIRMAN ARNALL. In other words, the Chair wants to say this. The issue, as the Chair sees it, is whether the public officials will boss the people or the people will boss the officials. That

RECORDS OF CONSTITUTIONAL COMMISSION

457

is all; anyway you go you end up with that, whether you will make it possible to throttle the people by a public official, or cool them down, or whether you will let the people have something to say about it. That is why the Chair is so concerned about the Gross proposal.
MR. GROSS. If you will put the amendment offered by Mr. Foley and put the right in the people to call an election for these things you don't have to worry about the provisions of the Carmichael bill. The General Assembly is going to enact it. You need not worry about that, they are going to do it.
CHAIRMAN ARNALL. That is why the Chair said a good while ago it is a question of which comes first, the cart or the horse.
JUDGE SMITH. I voted against the motion to take this initiative away from the people. I think it was a serious mistake. I still think so, and I certainly hope we will restore that privilege to them.
JUDGE CANDLER. In our county if we have home rule you would have home rule vested in two men, the ordinary of my county and the member of the Legislature.
MR. DURDEN. Mr. Chairman, we get back to the proposition which we have discussed pro and con, and anything I say will probably be a repetition, that is with reference to the confusion if you permit two people, twenty per cent, or twenty-five per cent, or whatever percentage you may agree on, to petition for a referendum on any question. Now you know as well as I know there is not a city or county in the State but what there are two or more political factions. I know from actual experience what you are going to run into if you permit twenty per cent of the people to petition the right for a chance to change your system of government. You will have the faction that is in, and you are going to have the faction that is out; and the faction that is out is going to be constantly petitioning the crowd that is in for some form of legislation. Now you might apply that to the State. We know that there are two or more factions in the State of Georgia. If the people of Georgia have got a right to petition The counties and municipalities on legislation, they ought to have the right to petition the Governor on those things, and you know what a confused session we would be in today if twenty per cent of the people had the right to petition you on certain legislation. It certainly is going to tend to have confusion throughout all your

458

RECORDS OF CONSTITUTIONAL COMMISSION

cities and counties whenever you give the people the right on a twenty per cent basis to call for a vote on these sundry questions. I don't think it is going to work. I have said that before, and I don't think it is going to work now.
CHAIRMAN ARNALL. We heard the Mayor of Atlanta this morning who stated, as I recall, that they have the initiative provision in the charter of the City of Atlanta whereby one-fifth of the people can initiate any law before the city council or initiate any law; and I think he said that he had had it sixteen years and there are only two instances.
MR. FOLEY. I give you the experience in Columbus. We have had the same provision for twenty years and it has been invoked one time, and that was when our governing board did not have the guts to decide whether a school should be in one part of town or another part.
MR. ATKINSON. May I offer the following amendment to the Carmichael proposal?
MRS. HAAS. We are not forcing it on any county.
CHAIRMAN ARNALL. The question is on Mr. Foley's proposal that we reconsider our action in striking the Sub-Paragraph 2 of Paragraph II of the Gross proposal or proposed article. Is there a second to that motion?
MR. HOLT. That motion in effect is we restore in the Gross proposal the referendum?
CHAIRMAN ARNALL. Reconsider the action. The effect would be that.
MR. HARRIS. I second it.
CHAIRMAN ARNALL. All in favor rise and stand until counted. Nine to nine and the Chair votes to reconsider. The question is now on the adoption of sub-section 2 of Paragraph II of the Gross amendment, which will tend to perfect the amendment.
MR. GOWEN. That leaves it in.
CHAIRMAN ARNALL. Without objection we are perfecting the amendment.
MR. HARRIS. I object to its adoption, but when you reconsider it goes in.

RECORDS OF CONSTITUTIONAL COMMISSION

458

CHAIRMAN ARNALL. Then it is in. Now Senator Atkinson offers a new proposal as an amendment to the Carmichael proposal.
MR. ATKINSON. I offered the Gross bill, or whatever was printed, whatever you call it, the Gross proposal as an amendment to the Carmichael bill. I call it Section II, or Section blank, whatever section it will be of the Carmichael bill, and in filing our optional features, instead of saying, "this article shall go in effect," we say, "this section shall go in effect," so that it will not apply to the Carmichael proposal as printed. Fer instance, if this is adopted the Carmichael proposal will be adopted without any referendum, but to get the Gross amendment, which will be a part of the Carmichael bill, into effect it would have to be voted on. The only thing I changed was the word "article" to "section" so as to make it optional as to that part of the Carmichael bill as amended, which will be the Gross amendment.
CHAIRMAN ARNALL. Is there a second to Senator Atkinson's amendment.
MR. HOLT. I second it.
CHAIRMAN ARNALL. Is there objection to its adoption? There is objection.
MR. LOVEJOY. Before you vote it down we need two things: First, we need a uniform system of laws applying to cities and counties; then we need the right, and that is what we are talking about, of local divisions voting on supplemental questions not covered by those general laws. The Carmichael act provides for the general laws. The Gross amendment provides for laws not in conflict with the laws, which covers special cases coming up where ordinarily you want to amend the charters of your cities; and this P!ovision for referendum and for the people to vote on is occasioned by special acts regularly passed for provision or submission not covered by general law. We should have found in the State first a system of general laws for municipalities and counties; then we simply have to amend those, or we have to have legislation covering some new situation outside of the general laws. The Carmichael act covers general laws, a general plan. The Gross bill provides for the people acting and voting in localities on particular situations coming up which are not covered by the general laws and which are not in conflict with the general laws. I think we need them both. I

460

RECORDS OF CONSTITUTIONAL COMMISSION

think if you adopt the Gross amendment you have done something, but unless we have general laws we have nothing, for almost the great majority of these provisions in other States state, as does Mr. Gross', that these special laws which the people can act on must not be in conflict with the Constitution or with the general laws. It is outside of that. We need the provision for the general laws which we have not got in the Carmichael amendment. It is trying to give us general laws. Then as a supplement to that, we have a provision of Mr. Gross' act where special cases come up the people can vote on it. I think they are complimentary.
MR. HARRIS. Will the gentleman yield to offer an amendment? Mr. Chairman, I want to offer an amendment. I want to offer the Gross bill as an amendment to the Carmichael proposal with Sections I and II out of the Gross bill. That is the initiative. That gives the commissioner or the city and county authority to initiate it.
CHAIRMAN ARNALL. You mean that makes the Gross proposal mandatory?
MR. HARRIS. No, sir, I offer the same amendment Dave Atkinson did, with the exception I have taken out the right of twenty per cent to initiate legislation by petition. That is like it was before we carried the motion.
MR. HOLT. Suppose the county commissioner does not initiate it. MR. HARRIS. It is up to the county or the Legislature.
CHAIRMAN ARNALL. The Chair is willing to put these questions. The Chair is, however, of the opinion there is very much merit to Mr. Lovejoy's statement that we need some of the features of both of these. The Chair is of the opinion that Mr. Harris' proposal and Mr. Atkinson's have merit in them, but the Chair is of the opinion that perhaps if this matter were referred to a committee early in the morning when we meet we would have a more intelligent proposal.
MR. ATKINSON. l\Jay I just explain this. We have the Gross bill and the Carmichael bill. We have one as a substitute for the other; that makes a conflict; but by putting the Gross bill as an amendment to the Carmichael bill, then you keep them both, and that is what both Harris and I are doing, we are combining.

RECORDS OF CONSTITUTIONAL COMMISSION

461

MRS. HAAS. Mr. Harris wants to take out the important feature of a chance of the people to initiate if they want to. They prob.ably won't.
MR. ATKINSON. You voted down mine that had it in. Mine had it in there and they voted it down.
CHAIRMAN ARNALL. Is there objection to the appointment of a committee to bring this report in the morning, a home rule bill having the benefits of all that has been said and done?
MR. HARRIS. I object. I want to say why too. The thing that we are going to be irreconcilable on and split wide open on is that initiative of twenty per cent, or any amount. Now if we leave that out I think it would be all right. I think we ought to vote on it; then if there is a conflict between the two, I think we ought to have somebody to study it tonight and reconcile it, if there is a conflict. I am not sure but what there is; but at the same time we have got the two general ideas combined. With that one feature that I don't think we will ever get an agreement on, or ever get somewhere, and I think we can get somewhere on this, and get something that we can take and work out something that will be workable and something that will eventually be adopted by the people, and we can make some progress; but I don't think as long as we leave the other in it we will. I was at the County Commissioners' Association the other day and somebody got up and said, "Mr. Chairman, we made a motion and appointed a commission of fifteen people of this Commission a year ago to study this thing, this question of home rule, and I think we ought to hear from them." Mr. Zack Arnold, he was around here, he will bear me out, who was the secretary of that Association, and he got up and made the report. He said, "This Committee has met three or four times and no two of them can agree on what they want as home rule." Now that is the situation, and I think that reflects the fact there is a great conflict between everybody as to the machinery for bringing it about; and I think that we can take these, and we can all agree on it, and we are getting somewhere; and we can make some progress because these gentlemen who are lawyers know that what we have offered we have to have uniformity.
CHAIRMAN ARNALL. The Chair is perfectly willing, if it meets with the approval of the distinguished Speaker and Members of the Commission, to put to this Commission as the first question

462

RECORDS OF CONSTITUTIONAL COMMISSION

whether or not this Commission shall insist upon the right of initiative on the part of the people. Then if they reject that, it seems to me we naturally come to your proposal. Now on the other hand if we don't reject the initiative, then we come to the proposal of taking the Carmichael bill.
MR. HARRIS. To get it to a head, I make a motion we reject the idea of putting into this bill the initiative by petition.
MR. HOLT. Let me get that clear.
CHAIRMAN ARNALL. Here is what the Chair is undertaking to do. We have put that back in the Gross bill. We are now undertaking to get a vote on the Carmichael bill and the Gross bill on the question of whether or not in considering those together or separately we are going to insist upon the initiative feature of the people.
MR. GROSS. Mr. Chairman.
CHAIRMAN ARNALL. In other words, that is not parliamentary procedure. The parliamentary procedure would be to perfect the Gross bill and put it up and vote on it.
MR. GROSS. I want to say this, you have that initiative of the people back in the proposal I submitted. If you adopt that this afternoon, don't you worry, there will be somebody to work out the general bill proposition of Jimmy Carmichael. Whether it is done by us or the General Assembly, it has got to be done, and it will be done.
MR. HARRIS. Why adopt something that is offensive to everything?
MR. GROSS. It is not offensive.
CHAIRMAN ARNALL. The Chair, in order to end the discussion and to get around the parliamentary situation, is undertaking to find out the sense of this Commission on whether we want the initiative in there or don't want it.
MR. LOVEJOY. Regardless of parliamentary procedure, I believe it is the sense of the Commission that initiative be not included. Let's vote on it.
MR. THRASHER. Why not move for a reconsideration of Mr. Atkinson's.
CHAIRMAN ARNALL. We will get at it this way, if you will

RECORDS OF CONSTITUTIONAL COMMISSION

463

hold your motion. It has been moved by Mr. Lovejoy and seconded by someone that we eliminate from the Gross proposal, or the Carmichael proposal, or both, or either, the initiative right of the people. That is, that the people can initiate local laws by a vote or by a petition signed by one-fifth of the qualified voters. Is there objection to that proposal?

MR. GROSS. I object.
CHAIRMAN ARNALL. There is objection. So many as favor it make it known by saying "aye"; opposed "no." 8he Chair is in doubt. So many as favor it rise and stand until counted; reverse your position, those opposed.

JUDGE CANDLER. I would like my vote on that be recorded.

MR. HOLT. I certainly did not understand it.

CHAIRMAN ARNALL. Mr. Lovejoy's motion is before the Commission to get the sense of the Commission, and he moves that we strike out all of these considerations of the initiative provision by which one-fifth of the registered voters can initiate.

JUDGE CANDLER. I understood the motion was to insert it.

CHAIRMAN ARNALL. No, to eliminate it.

MR. HOLT. If we vote yes on the proposition it means the people are I deprived of the privilege of initiating legislation?

JUDGE GRICE. They have not got the right they are to be deprived of.

CHAIRMAN ARNALL. That is right. So many as favor Mr. Love.. joy's motion say "aye"; opposed "no." The Chair is in doubt. So many as favor the motion make it known by rising and standing until counted; reverse your position, those opposed. Ten to nine. The Chair votes with it for the initiative right of the people, so we are divided in the Commission on that proposition.

MR. GOWEN. I might call attention to the fact Mr. Carmichael

asked unanimous consent to vote and leave, and he previously

cast a vote oppo$ed to initiative.

'

MR. HARRIS. I ask that Mr. Carmichael's vote be counted. MR. HOLT. We object.

JUDGE CANDLER. Mr. Carmichael voted in favor of the Gross bill.

464

RECORDS OF CONSTITUTIONAL COMMISSION

CHAIRMAN ARNALL. There is objection. Judge Candler and gentlemen of the Commission, what are you about to move?
JUDGE CANDLER. I say Mr. Carmichael, when he voted, he voted for his own bill, and said if his bill was passed he voted for the Gross bill, and when he put it back into the Gross bill, Section II, he was voting for the entire bill.
MR. HARRIS. He specified also that he would not vote for the Gross bill with that in it.
CHAIRMAN ARNALL. The Chair has no opinion. If the Commission is a soothsayer and could tell what Mr. Carmichael's vote would be-the Chair seeks enlightenment of the Commission on this proposition. Is there objection to appointing a committee to bring into the Commission meeting in the morning two proposals, each of which shall include the features of the Carmichael and the Gross bill, with the difference being that in one proposal we have the right of initiative in the people be submitted, and in the other proposal that right not be submitted, and then we can take our choice of those proposals tomorrow. Is there objection? Unless we are able to break the deadlock about the initiative right, it would seem to the Chair we would be compelled to submit to the General Assembly an alternative proposal saying~
MR. HARRIS. That is what the Municipal Association did after a year.
CHAIRMAN ARNALL. Is there objection to appointing a committee? Without objection it will be ordered and the Chair appoints Judge Candler, the Speaker of the House and Judge Frank Foley as the committee to report to this Commission in the morn-
ing.
Now at this time, unless the Commission is jaded, we may consider taking up the Department of Corrections Constitutional proposal. Is there objection?
MR. MAORS. I move to reconsider our action in setting up the salary of the Governor at $7,500, and I move that it be reconsidered and make it $15,000. There is considerable complaint over the State. Now I have got a letter on that.
MR. LOVEJOY. Let's finish the general things.
CHAIRMAN ARNALL. Does the gentleman have objection to de-

RECORDS OF CONSTITUTIONAL COMMISSION

465

laying that proposal until tomorrow?
MR. MAJORS. I will insist that it be acted on.
CHAIHMAN ARNALL. The Chair wants to speak on that and the Commission is tired of hearing the Chair today. Is there objection to considering the Constitutional Department of Corrections matter? I believe we can submit this and take a vote on it and get something done today.
MR. DURDEN. I move we so consider.
CHAIRMAN ARNALL. The Chair would like to submit as a memorandum before the Commission the following paragraph to be inserted in an appropriate section of the Constitution. It is short and simple and if you will listen we will soon determine what we want to do about it.
MR. McCUTCHEN. (Reads) "Paragraph I. There shall be a Department of Corrections controlled by a State Board of Corrections comprised of seven members. The Board shall have jurisdiction and control of the State Penal System and the inmates therein. The Board shall have all the authority and duties imposed upon the present Director of Corrections and the Department of Corrections with such additional authority and duties as the General Assembly may provide. The Board shall elect a Commissioner of Corrections who shall be Executive officer of the Department. The Governor shall appoint the Board of Corrections with the advice and consent of the Senate. The first appointments shall be for terms as follows: Two for two years, two for five years and three for seven years, thereafter all terms shall be for seven years."
CHAIRMAN ARNALL. Is there any discussion?
MR. HARHIS. I didn't catch the first language.
MR. McCUTCHEN. (Re-reads the proposal).
MR. HARRIS. I am opposed to creating any constitutional board that is beyond the reach of the people or the Legislature or the Governor, and that puts them beyond it. It would take a constitutional amendment to ever subject them to the will of the people; and it might take two years to get it to a vote; and if we had had that kind of a constitutional board at the time the Legislature, at your request, did away with the one that we had, we still would have them today; and I think it is dangerous to create

466

RECORDS OF CONSTITUTIONAL COMMISSION

these boards with greater power than the Legislature or the Governor, or both of them together, and beyond the will of the people, because there is one thing you can say about the Legislature; you can curse it all you want to, but we have to run every two years, and they can beat us when they get ready, and when they get a lick at us every two years, and you don't get a lick at a board set up in the Constitution and over and above the law.
CHAIRMAN ARNALL. Does the gentleman have any amendment to offer?
MR. HARRIS. I would like to suggest-I have not got time to prepare it-I suggest we put in the Constitution, "There shall be a Board of Correction and they shall be appointed for a term as specified in there and confirmed as provided." That is the only objection I have got, conferring upon them the constitutional power and duties of the authority of the Director of Corrections and putting it beyond the control of the people or the Legislature or the Governor.
CHAIRMAN ARNALL. What would be your amendment? You stopped there.
MR. HARRIS. I would say, "There shall be a Board set up as follows: and that they shall have such power and authority as may be conferred upon them by law," and stop.
MR. THRASHER. Is there any provision in the law for removal of such officers as that?
MR. HARRIS. Only by impeachment.
MR. THRASHER. Does that apply to all of them?
CHAIRMAN ARNALL. That is right.
MR. LOVEJOY. I think if you take the language you have that says, "They shall have the power now vested in certain authorities," and where you say, "together with any which may be added," state, "until altered by law"; then they can either increase or decrease it.
MR. HARRIS. That would be all right, but freezing it the way it is worded, it freezes it. Now if you say, "They shall have such power and authority as now conferred until changed by law," that is all right.

RECORDS OF CONSTITUTIONAL COMMISSION

467

MR. LOVEJOY. As it reads you give them those powers and nobody can take them away.

CHAIRMAN ARNALL. That is right. In other words, your amendment would be to this effect: In the finishing statement, as amended, this paragraph would read as follows: "There shall be a Department of Corrections controlled by a State Board of Corrections comprised of seven members. The Board shall have jurisdiction and control of the State Penal System and the inmates therein. The Board shall have the duties and authority imposed upon the present Director of Corrections and the Department of Corrections until changed by law"?

MR. HARRIS. I ask unanimous consent we adopt the idea as expressed by Mr. Lovejoy, and .that the Chairman be authorized to redraft it and put in the proper language by morning.

CHAIRMAN ARNALL. Is there objection to referring this to the committee working on the home rule business?

MR. FOLEY. I object.

CHAIRMAN ARNALL. Is there objection to the Chair appoint-

ing a committee to give consideration to this? Without objection,

the Chair will appoint on this committee Mr. Durden, Mr. Head

and Mr. Holt. Is there objection? You, gentlemen, tonight or the

first thing in the morning work out a Constitutional board on

that.

'

And the Chair would also like to bring to the consideration of

the Commission, if you will bear with me just a minute, the mat-

ter of a Veterans Board.

MR. LOVEJOY. In the Constitution? Good.

CHAIRMAN ARNALL. The veterans, through their proper organizations, have petitioned the Commission to create a Board compvised of veterans to administer the State Department of Veterans Service.

MR. LOVEJOY. I move it be accepted.

CHAIRMAN ARNALL. The Chair has a proposal to offer.

MR. GOWEN. I move that it be read.

CHAIRMAN ARNALL. The Clerk will read it.

MR. McCUTCHEN. (Reads) "Paragraph I. There shall be a State

468

RECORDS OF CONSTITUTIONAL COMMISSION

Department of Veterans Service controlled by a State Commission of Veterans Service composed of seven members. The commission shall have such control and jurisdiction of veterans affairs as is now vested in the State Veterans Service office and such other duty and authority as may be provided by law. The Commission shall elect a Veterans Service Officer or Director who shall be Executive Officer of the State Department of Veterans Service. The Governor shall appoint the State Commission of Veterans Service by and with the advice of the Senate. Four members of the Commission shall be selected by the Governor from the Veterans Organization as recognized by the United States Veterans Administration under the statute apapproved June 29, 1936 (P. L. 844). The first appointments shall be for terms of 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, and 7 years. Thereafter all terms shall be for seven years. All members of the Commission shall be veterans of some war of the United States."
MR. HARRIS. Without going further, I make the same motion, that that be referred to a committee with instructions to rewrite it and provide that there shall be a Board and the powers and authority conferred on it by law.
CHAIRMAN ARNALL. Without objection, it will be referred to the same committee working on the Department of Corrections, because they are similar in nature.
If the Commission will indulge me, I have the Merit Board proposal. Is it the wish of the Commission it be considered, or be referred to a committee, or be considered in the morning?
MR. HARRIS. I move the proposal be referred to the committee with instructions to prepare a substitute providing for a Merit Board, as provided for there, and to provide their powers and duties shall be prescribed by law. We did that before.
MR. GOWEN. Yes, sir.
MR. HARRIS. We have acted on that.
CHAIRMAN ARNALL. The Chair wants to bring to the consideration of the Commission at the present time a proposal in detail about how the Civil Service System should work. There is no need of it going to the committee because we have acted on it, and there will be an amendment to what we have done.
MR. GOWEN. I suggest we do that in the morning.

RECORDS OF CONSTITUTIONAL COMMISSION

469

MR. GOWEN. Can you have that printed?
MR. HARRIS. Let me ask this question: Why set up a super-board you can't get to except by amendment of the Constitution? It is not responsive to the will of the people to find expression. You have got to give it some way. If you put these boards up hereI have had enough experience with these bureaucrats, and I am telling you when they are above the law and out of reach of the Legislature, and out of reach of everybody else, you have a tyranny, and that is what we would eventually have if somebody loads the board up. Probably the present Governor would give us a good board, but somebody else might not some day.
MR. GOWEN. I would like to ask a question. Where will this thing end? If we keep on they will appoint a Constitutional board to administer the Executive Department and a Constitutional board to run the Attorney General's Office.
MR. HARRIS. This one runs the Attorney General's Office right here, and the Attorney General won't have any say so.
MR. HEAD. I want a chance to offer an amendment to it then.
MRS. HAAS. Mr. Chairman, I don't think we want to go to extremes with Constitutional boards, but it certainly is true, should the Constitutional board run the prisons in the way the Legislature did, they would not have to give any money, they would not have to appropriate any money. They would easily approve or disapprove of the general policy of the boards, but they could not go behind and interfere with the details of the way that it is administered; and I think we are trying to get a new board and protect it until we establish something in Georgia.
MR. GOWEN. I would like to ask a point of information about the Legislature appropriating money. Isn't this sort of outmoded?
MRS. HAAS. I think it is because you spend too much time on home rule, you kind of abdicated the control of State government on the other hand, and I would like to see them redeem that power.
CHAIRMAN ARNALL. It is the hope of the Chair that tomorrow we can agree on a type of home rule bill that will give the people and local officials a greater degree of control over local government; and it is the hope of the Chair that we can agree on a Constitutional Board of Corrections and a Merit System for

470

RECORDS OF CONSTITUTIONAL COMMISSION

State employees. The Chair is of the opinion we ought to do it. ",Ve ought to submit to the Legislature our recommendations along those lines, if we will in the morning attentively move along. I think today everyone sounded off on that and gave their attitude about the philosophies of Government, but tomorrow if we will address ourselves to the business before the Commission, I believe we can attend to it with dispatch, and I hope when we adjourn we will have to a great degree have met the demands tha t the Chair believes the people are making to this Commis sion that we submit to the Legislature some reforms and a new proposal relating to these features in our Constitution. Is there any further business to come before the Commission?
MR. THRASHER. I move we adjourn until 10:00 o'clock in the morning.
CHAIHMAN AHNALL. The Chair asks the members of the committees that were appointed to please get together and work out these problems. If you do we can conserve time.
Without objection, we will adjourn until 10:00 o'clock tomorrow morning.
(Whereupon the Commission adjourned at 5 :20 P. M.)

SATURDAY MORNING
DECEMBER 9,1944
CHAIRMAN ARNALL. The meeting will come to order. The Chair will request Judge Tom Candler to open the meeting with prayer, please.
JUDGE CANDLER. (Offers prayer).
CHAIRMAN ARNALL. At the outset of the meeting this morning, the Chair wishes every member of the Commission to express himself or herself freely, but we are very hopeful that we can move along today rapidly, put the propositions to the Committee and vote on them, and get something done one way or the other. I know every member of the Committee is ready to give to this work as much time as is required; the Chair makes the point that if you will move along we can conserve time and probably get some re. suIts accomplished today. When we adjourned yesterday there were several committees appointed one committee to work out'the home rule provision; another committee to work out the Constitu-

RECORDS OF CONSTITUTIONAL COMMISSION

471

tional Board of Corrections and the Constitutional Veterans Bureau. I hope, and assume, those committees are ready to report, so we will hear at this time, without objection, the report of the com mittee working on the home rule feature.
MR. FOLEY. Mr. Chairman, the Secretary has not been able to prepare one of the plans worked out. Would you rather wait until he brings it in?
,
CHAIRMAN ARNALL. We have some plans, that is, on the home rule; and without objection we will proceed to the Board of Corrections and the Veterans Bureau. Without objection we will receive the report of HIe Committee working on the State Board of Corrections. The Chair will read the Committee report signed by Mr. Durden, Mr. Head and Mr. Holt. (Reads) "Paragraph I. There shall be a State Board of Corrections composed of seven members in charge of the State Penal System. The Board shall have such jurisdiction, powers, duties and control of the State Penal System and the inmates thereof as shall be provided by law. The Board shall elect a Commissioner of Corrections who shall be the executive officer of the Board. The Board of Corrections shall be appointed by the Governor with the advice and consent of the Senate. The first appointments shall be for terms as follows: Two for two years, two for five years, and three for seven years, and thereafter all terms shall be for seven years. The compensation of the Director of Corrections and members of the State Board of Corrections shall be fixed by law." You have heard the reading of the committee report. Is there any discussion?
MR. GROSS. I move its adoption.
MR. POPE. I second the motion.
CHAIRMAN ARNALL. Moved and seconded it be adopted. Any objection?
MRS. HAAS. I want to get it clear. Will I understand the Governor will still appoint the Board at staggered terms?
CHAIRMAN ARNALL. That is correct.
MRS. HAAS. The Governor will not control the Board? That is, the Board will elect the Director.
CHAIRMAN ARNALL. Yes. The Legislature will prescribe the duties of the Board or the Director, or the Commission could pre-

472

RECORDS OF CONSTITUTIONAL COMMISSION

scribe the duties of the Board and allow the Board to prescribe the duties of the Director.
MRS. HAAS. Something about salaries.
CHAIRMAN ARNALL. The compensation of the Board and the Director shall be fixed by law. Here's what this does, as the Chair understands it, makes a Constitutional Board modeled after the Game and Fish Board, and our Board of Regents, and those other Boards, to administer the prison system. It leaves to the General Assembly the right to prescribe duties and authorities under the law. The Chair is of the opinion that this is a step in the right direction. The Chair would prefer that the duties be fixed in the Constitution, but since the Committee has reported the duties he prescribed by law, the Chair is of the opinion this provides for a Constitutional Board of Corrections, and as far as the Chair is concerned, while he might prefer the other, yet if it is the sense of this Committee we adopt the Constitutional proposal, it meets with the full approval of the Chair. Is there any other discussion?
JUDGE SMITH. A suggestion. It appears to me that in that proposal that it would be wise to add this phrase or this sentence: "The Board of Corrections shall have the sole authority to administer the prison affairs of the State." If the Legislature did not prescribe any rules or if the Legislature should, by enactment, give others authority to act, they might be probably within their rights with the proposal standing as it is. I suggest that the word "sole" be added, or add the phrase or sentence, "said Board shall have the sole authority to administer the prison authority of this State."
CHAIRMAN ARNALL. Judge Smith's proposition is this: If we vest the power over the penal system in the Constitutional Board, then the Legislature still could delegate and regulate their duties and responsibilities relating to the administration of the prison system. Is there objection? If there is not objection, at the end of the paragraph the sentence will be added: "The State Board of Corrections shall have sole jurisdiction over the state penal system."
MR. THRASHER. Does that conflict with the other provisions?
CHAIRMAN ARNALL. The Chair is not of that opinion because it provides-
MR. DURDEN. That was the intention of the committee.
MR. CULPEPPER. I don't think we have any right to amend the

RECORDS OF CONSTITUTIONAL COMMISSION

473

Committee's report. We either accept it or reject it, as I understand the parliamentary procedure. It seems to me like this Board has done a fine job. I heartily approve of it and I think we ought to accept the Committee report or reject it. The motion has been made the committee report be adopted, and seconded, and that is the question now before the Commission, the only question that can come before it.
CHAIRMAN ARNALL. The Chair is of the opinion, since this is a sovereign body, if some member moves to amend the committee report and it meets with the approval of the committee we could do that.
MR. MAJORS. I am in favor of putting the words in.
CHAIRMAN ARNALL. Let the Chair take a stab at it. Suppose we read it this way: "There shall be a State Board of Corrections in charge of the Penal System of Georgia, composed of seven members. The Board shall have such jurisdiction, powers, duties and control as authorized by law."
MR. GOWEN. I think that is all right.
CHAIRMAN ARNALL. Then, without objection, the first sentence will read as follows: "There shall be a State Board of Corrections composed of seVen member in charge of the Penal System of Georgia," and then the rest of the committee report as authorized. Is there objection?
JUDGE SMITH. That still does not shoot at the trouble I anticipate. My point was to give the Board sole charge of the Prison or Penal System of the State, and the proposal as prepared does not so state. Without giving the Penal Board sole authority to administer the Prison or Penal Affairs of the State, then by legislative act an outsider might be authorized to administer the same affairs.
MR. THRASHER. Could you state, "No other agency of the State shall be designated to administer the affairs of the Prison System."?
CHAIRMAN ARNALL. That is the same as Judge Smith wanted. You want to add it at the end?
JUDGE SMITH. It does not matter where it is, just so they are given sole authority.
CHAIRMAN ARNALL. You propose this sentence be added at the end of the paragraph: "The State Board of Corrections shall have

474

RECORDS OF CONSTITUTIONAL COMMISSION

sole control of the State Penal System."?
JUDGE SMITH. That is right. That covers it.
CHAIRMAN ARNALL. All right.
MR. HEAD. You might, I think. Then if you do that, I think you probably interfere with the right of the Legislature to legislate. I call the Chairman's attention and the Commission's, that no such language as is now being proposed is in any of the Constitutional Amendments creating any Constitutional Board. That language is not in there with reference to the Board of Regents. It is not in there with reference to the Department of Game and Fish, the Public Service Commission, and all of the other Boards that have been created.
MR. HARRIS. The language does not apply even to the office of the Attorney General.
CHAIRMAN ARNALL. That is, the Legislature can prescribe your duties.
MR. HEAD. They did.
CHAIRMAN ARNALL. Thank you. We will put this motion. Judge Smith moves to amend the committee report by adding the language, "The State Board of Corrections shall have sole authority concerning the State Penal System." Is there a second to that?
MRS. HAAS. I second it.
CHAIRMAN ARNALL. There is a second. Is there objection to its adoption? There is objection. So many as favor the adoption of Judge Smith's amendment say "aye"; opposed "no." The noes seem to have and the noes have it.
MR. GOWEN. I would like to move the adoplion of your suggestion, that you insert the language that you suggested in the committee report.
CHAIRMAN ARNALL. (Reads) "Paragraph I. There shall be a State Board of Corrections composed of seven members in charge of the State Penal System. The Board shall have such jurisdiction, powers, duties and control of the State Penal system and the inmates thereof as shall be provided by law. The Board shall elect a Commissioner of Corrections who shall be the executive officer of the Board. The Board of Corrections shall be appointed by the

RECORDS OF CONSTITUTIONAL COMMISSION

475

Governor with the advice and consent of the Senate. The first appointments shall be for terms as follows: Two for two years, two for five years, and three for seven years, and thereafter all terms shall be for seven years. The compensation of the Director of Corrections and members of the State Board of Corrections shall be fixed by law." Is that it?
MR. GOWEN. Yes, sir.
CHAIRMAN ARNALL. There is a motion that the sentence as read which is as follows: "There shall be a State Board of Corrections composed of seven members in charge of the State Penal System." Here is the argument. As I understand there is no argument about whether the Legislature should have the right to control the penal system through this Board, that is by prescribing the limit; but the argument is this, unless you vest the control over the penal system subject to laws by the Legislature in the Board, then the whole penal system could be removed from the Board and they would not have anything to administer. The language is as follows: "There shall be a State Board of Corrections comprised of seven members," and all we add is, "in charge of the Penal System."
MR. HARRIS. That is all right.
CHAIRMAN ARNALL. Is there objection to the adoption of that? That would leave the Board in charge of penal affairs under the jurisdiction of law, whatever the law was relating to it. You could change the law as you saw fit. Is there objection to its adoption? Is there objection to the amendment? Without objection it is so or dered. Is there objection to the amended report of the committee? Without objection it will be adopted and it is adopted.
Now we have a report from the committee, the same committee, Representative Durden, General Head and Citizen Holt, relating to the Veterans Service Office. Please give attention to the reading of the report. Before the Chair reads it, however, the Chair wants to state this, that this veterans business is going to be just about the biggest thing in Georgia. It is growing now and the veterans want some voice in the operation of that department, just like the bank~ ers like to have a voice in the operation of the Banking Department, the Chiropractors want to have a voice in the operation of their Board, and the veterans want to have an active voice in it. At the request of the American Legion, and the Veterans of Foreign Wars, and the Spanish War Veterans, the Governor appointed a committee consisting of representatives of all veterans groups. We are try-

-

476

RECORDS OF CONSTITUTIONAL COMMISSION

ing to do two things at the moment to help the veterans in Georgia and to evidence our regard for them. The first thing is we are try. ing to expand the veterans service office so we can put a veterans service representative in every county in Georgia to help them ob tain benefits from the Federal Government to which they are en titled under the law and under the G. I. Bill of Rights. This com mittee, and the other things we hope to accomplish, I shall take up with the legislature, and recommend that we give consideration to erecting here a Veterans War Memorial Building at an appropriate place on Capitol Square. This group of veterans representatives, meeting with me, recommended, among other things, the State Vet erans Office should be administered as now administered, except there should be a board of directors, so to speak, comprised of vet erims, and that is why this matter comes before the committee. The committee report is as follows: "There shall be a State Department of Veterans Service, composed of seven members, who shall have such control, duties, powers and jurisdiction over veterans affairs as shall be provided by law. The Department of Veterans Service shall appoint a Director, who shall be the executive officer of the Department. Members of the Department of Veterans Service shall be appointed by the Governor with the advice and consent of the Senate and four members of the Department shall be selected from Veterans Organizations recognized by the U. S. Veterans Admin istration. First appointments shall be for terms of 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6 and 7 years. Thereafter all terms and appointments, except in case of vacancy, shall be for seven years. The compensation of the Director and members of the State Department of Veterans Service shall be fixed by law. All members of the Commission and the Director shall be veterans of some war of the United States." Now for the information of the committee, the reason we referred to four or ganizations recognized by the United States Veterans Administra
tion is this, there are some fourteen or fifteen veterans organiza tions now, and in the days to come there will be more veterans organizations. The United States Veterans Administration recognizes veterans organizations on a basis of how much veterans service work they do, that is towards helping veterans of other wars. Many of the veterans organizations carry on veterans service work and have their own officers paid to help look after veterans, so that is merely a designation recognizing the veterans organizations that have been most active in assisting the rehabilitation of their broth~ er veterans. That is why that come in.
MR. THRASHER. Does that preclude the new soldiers from this

RECORDS OF CONSTITUTIONAL COMMISSION

477

war from forming new organizations?
CHAIRMAN ARNALL. No, it does not, and the United States Veterans Administration recognition changes from year to year. If one becomes more active in the way of helping veterans, it gets recognition.
JUDGE GRICE. Will you give us a line on the necessity of that kind of thing in the Constitution?
CHAIRMAN ARNALL. Yes, Judge, I will be glad to. The necessity seems to be this, that the American Legion and Veterans of Foreign 'Vars, and Spanish War Veterans, and other veterans organiza tions are anxious that the administration of the department be on a non-partisan, non-political basis. With great numbers of veterans coming back they are apprehensive that if left to the Governor for appointment they will be more interested in promoting political activity than the affairs of the department.
JUDGE CANDLER. I move it be adopted.
MR. DURDEN. The original draft said all members of the commission shall be members, and we made the director.
CHAIRMAN ARNALL. Judge Candler moves it be adopted. Is there a second?
MR. DURDEN. You insert the same words in there as inserted in the other one, that they shall have control.
CHAIRMAN ARNALL. I tell you, Adie, with the veterans of this State, I don't think it would be much need because they don't want that department toyed with. Is there objection to its adoption? Without objection, it is so ordered.
We are quite glad to have with us today-and as we did not have a roll call perhaps we should do it, to show a quorum is here-we are delighted to have Dave Arnold, who was absent yesterday in Washington on official business, banking business. I think I read where the Federal Reserve is trying to put somebody out of business, and you were there opposing it?
MR. ARNOLD. That is right.
CHAIRMAN ARNALL. Call the roll to show we have a quorum here.
MR. McCUTCHEN. (Calle the roll.)

478

RECORDS OF CONSTITUTIONAL COMMISSION

CHAIRMAN ARNALL. Jimmie Carmichael called and said that he has unexpected business and cannot be here. We realize Jimmie has just taken over the Bell Bomber Plant as Director, and there is a tremendously important job there, and without objection we will give the gentleman a leave of absence.
Now is the committee on home rule ready to report, Judge Foley?
JUDGE FOLEY. Mr. Chairman and ladies and gentlemen of the Commission: As you may suspect, the Speaker of the House is of the same opinion, and Judge Candler and I are likewise of the same opinio~. We have handed the Secretary two bills, two provisions rather. One of them embraced the provisions of the Gross provision and the Carmichael provision. We have added the requirements of one-fourth of the registered voters to initiate any local laws, and everything else is in Mr. Harris' bill the same as! this one, except the right to initiate legislation by the people is stricken.
CHAIRMAN ARNALL. The Chair wants to offer an amendment to the committee report.
MR. FOLEY. We welcome it.
CHAIRMAN ARNALL. Some other amendment might want to be offered. Suppose you read both, one at the time, and let's see if there are any other amendments to be offered. Here is what I propose to do, so you may know. Judging from the discussion yesterday, some of the members of the Commission were of the opinion that if we had initiative by the people that it would then confuse, or bring confusion to the orderly process of government, in that local officials might be bombarded at times by petitions calling special election; and also, the way the Chair understood it, the percentage required for petition was so low that perhaps it was thought that twenty per cent could be secured nearly any time. Now here is the only reason the Chair is interested in having an initiative right. The only reason, the Chair confesses, is that it won't be used very much, even if we have it, as the Speaker of the House brought out yesterday in the eighteen States that use it. And the Chair did study their provisions and the effect of them, particularly the New York provision, because they have had it up for dis~ cussion a whole lot. It has been found when the initiative right is there it is very seldom, if ever, used .. But the proposition that the Chair is anxious to provide redress for is this, supposi:pg Judge Candler-I think the Carmichael provision and the Gross provision

RECORDS OF CONSTITUTIONAL COMMISSION

479

either one, or both, keep any local law from being enacted that the people don't want. I think they effectively do that, either one, because the people get to vote on it, but the thing that the Chair is apprehensive of is this: Suppose the people want some progressive law, and suppose Tom Candler's ordinary and representative say they are not going to let them have it, then how are you going to ever get before the people or give the people the right to enact or say what they want. In other words we are giving them a right to say what they don't want. Now the Chair is apprehensive unless we give them the right under some circumstances to express what they do want, that instead of promoting the future welfare of the State we are tying it down to where we won't. To that end, when the committee report is read, the Chair proposes to restrict elections and the number required for petition even to a greater extent than I understand the committee has done, by doing away entirely with a special election initiated by the people, but leaving it where the people be given some right of appeal, and that is why, at the regular election, even if they have to wait two years they still will have a right. And the other point is, the Chair does not think it is material whether we have twenty-five per cent required, or thirty per cent, or a third, or a fourth. The Chair is anxious though that the people be given some right of appeal, and that is why at the proper time I will offer an amendment. I agree thoroughly with what was said here yesterday by Mr. Lovejoy and Mr. Harris and others, that there is a danger of having too frequent elections to where things are confused, but if we give the people the right at some time to bring their issue in as an election, why the Chair is not apprehensive because all the initiative will do anyway is to hold a club over officials. You would leave in there the right to call a special election by the governing authority, but as far as the initiative of the people, it can only be at general elections. That answers the argument that you will keep things confused.
MR. GROSS. I think you are right.
CHAIRMAN ARNALL. Read both proposals and the amendment.
MR. FOLEY. It is hardly necessary to read both. The second one is identical with the first except Section II is left out.
CHAIRMAN ARNALL. Suppose you read the original Carmichael proposal first.
MR. McCUTCHEN. (Reads)

480

RECORDS OF CONSTITUTIONAL COMMISSION

"COMMITTEE PROPOSAL NO. 1
SECTION 1
"Paragraph I. The organization, powers and duties of county and municipal government shall be defined by general law. Optional plans of county and municipal governments shall be provided to be effective in any county or municipality when submitted to the qualified voters thereof, and approved by majority of those voting. No special or local law or general law having only local application affecting county or municipal governments shall be enacted in any case for which provision has been made by existing general laws. No special law or general law' with local application affecting county or municipal governments shall become effective unless submitted to the qualified voters of the county or municipality and approved by majority of those voting. The result of the election, upon ratification by the voters as herein prescribed, shall be cer4 tified to the Secretary of State by the governing authority of the county or municipality affected and shall be published as herein4 after provided.
"Paragraph II. When a county or municipality adopts one of the alternative plans of government provided by the General Assembly, or when a county and municipal government adopt one of the optional systems of consolidating county and municipal govern4 ment provided by the General Assembly, such county or municipal4 ity shall certify the plan chosen to the Secretary of State for pub4 lication as hereinafter provided.
SECTION II
"Paragraph I. In addition to the grant of legislative authority contained in this Constitution, the people of any county or municipality in this State is empowered to enact any local law operative with~ in the area of the county or municipality and not inconsistent with general law or otherwise with this Constitution.
"Paragraph II. The methods of exercising the power herein granted are:
"(1) The proposed local legislation may be submitted to a vote of the people of the county or municipality when the majority of the governing authority of the county or municipality by resolution votes to submit such proposal at the next regular county or munici

RECORDS OF CONSTITUTIONAL COMMISSION

481

pal election. Such proposal must be approved by a majority of the

governing authority at least sixty days before the next regular

county or municipal general election and the proposed local legis-

lation shall be advertised in full once each week in the official

gazette for four weeks next preceding such regular election. Or in event the regular county or municipal election, as the case may be,

shall not be held within one year, the governing authority of the election. A brief and accurate summary of the proposed legislation shall be placed on the official ballot and the voters voting in the county or municipality by resolution may submit such proposal at

a special election which shall be fixed and held at a date not ear-

lier than sixty days from the date of the ordering of the special

election shall vote "Yes" or "No" to said proposed local legislation.

If a majority of the voters voting in the election vote "Yes", the re-

sults of the election shall be proclaimed by the governing author-

ity and the said local legislation shall become law upon the filing

of a certified copy of the same with the Secretary of State.

"(2) When a petition proposing local legislation is submitted to

the governing authority of the county or municipality signed by at

least one-fourth of the registered voters of the county or munici-

pality, it shall be the duty of the governing authority to submit

such proposed local legislation at the next general or special elec-

tion to be held in the said county or municipality and said submis-

sion shall be in the same manner as provided in sub-paragraph

(1) of this section.

..

"Paragraph III. The term "regular election" as used in this section shall mean the election at which officers of the county or municipality are elected, but in the event any county or municipality does not hold a regular election for officers within one year from the date the governing authority by resolution votes to submit proposed local legislation or from the date of the filing of the petition proposing local legislation signed by at least one-fourth of the registered voters, it shall be the duty of such county or municipal governing authority to submit the proposed local legislation for ratification or rejection to the people at a special election which shall be held at a date not earlier than sixty days nor later than six months from the date the said petition proposing local legislation is filed with the governing authority.

"Paragraph IV. This provision shall not authorize the people of counties or municipalities to change county or municipal boundaries or to abolish county or municipal governments.

482

RECORDS OF CONSTITUTIONAL COMMISSION

"Paragraph V. This article specifically provides and authorizes the enactment of zoning laws under the provisions hereof.
"Paragraph VI. No local law, or special law or general law with local application, of the General Assembly shall take effect until approved by a majority of the registered voters voting thereon in the county or municipality to be affected.
"Paragraph VII. It shall be the duty of the Secretary of State to publish in a bound volume in the months of January and July of each year all local legislation enacted under the terms of this article.
"Paragraph VIII. No law shall be enacted under this section which deals with more than one subject matter.
"Paragraph IX. This section shall apply only to those counties and municipalities in which the people by a majority vote of those voting in the election vote to adopt the provisions of this section. The section shall become operative in such counties and municipalities as desire in the following manner:
"(1). The governing authority may vote to submit the question of the adoption of this section to the people of its county or municipality at a regular general election; or the governing authority may provide for a special election upon the proposition after having advertised the special election and its purpose for four weeks next preceding the election in the official gazette.
"(2) . One-fifth of the registered voters may petition the governing authority to submit the proposition of the adoption of this section to the people in which event it shall be the duty of the governing authority to submit the same at the next regular election after the signing of the petition, provided, the next regular election is not more than one year's distance. If more than one year intervenes between the date of the signing of the petition and the next regular election, it shall be the duty of the governing authority to order a special election within six months from ~he date of the filing of the petition. The said special election and the purpose therefor shall be advertised in the official gazette for at least four weeks prior to the date of the holding of the election.
"(3). When the question is submitted to the people of the county or municipality, the following proposition shall be printed on the ballot: "Shall article --, Section --, of the Constitution of Georgia providing Home Rule be adopted?"
"Paragraph X. When the people of a county or municipality fail to adopt the provisions of this section at an election, no other elec-

RECORDS OF CONSTITUTIONAL COMMISSION

483

tion on the proposition may be authorized for a period of four years.
"Paragraph XI. The people of any county or municipality having adopted this section may rescind the operation of the section in the county or municipality in the same procedure by which it was adopted, provided, however, that after this section has been adopted by the people of a county or municipality no election for its rejection can be held within a period of four years."
CHAIRMAN ARNALL. Wait a minute. Which proposal are you reading?
MR. GROSS. The consolidated, Carmichael's in with mine.
JUDGE MacINTYRE. That is what you wanted.
MR. FOLEY. That is what this committee was instructed to do.
CHAIRMAN ARNALL. I see, but now he has gotten up until this place you have the Carmichael?
MR. GROSS. No, he is reading mine.
MR. LOVEJOY. Beginning with Section II he is reading word for word the Gross proposal.
CHAIRMAN ARNALL. Go ahead.
MR. McCUTCHEN. (Continues to read Section II).
MR. HARRIS. That should be corrected there, that section, because you have two sections in it. Is that right, Mr. Foley?
MR. LOVEJOY. That should be section-
MR. HARRIS. The Carmichael proposition is in Section I of the Article; the Gross proposal is in Section II; so it should be changed to read that this section of this article shall not become effective.
MR. GROSS. Change to section where he has article.
MR. McCUTCHEN. (Continues to read, correcting the word "article" by changing it to "section").
CHAIRMAN ARNALL. Suppose we proceed with a consideration of the committee report by paragraphs. Paragraph I. -The Chair will read Paragraph I. (Reads Paragraph I) "The organization, powers and duties of county and municipal government shall be defined by general law. Optional plans of county and municipal government shall be provided to be effective in any county or

484

RECORDS OF CONSTITUTIONAL COMMISSION

municipality when submitted to the qualified voters thereof and approved by a majority of those voting. No special or local law or general law of local application affecting county or municipal government shall be enacted in any case for which provision has been made by existing general law. No special law or general law with local application affecting county or municipal government shall become effective unless submitted to the qualified voters of the .county and municipality and approved by a majority of those voting. The results of the election, upon ratification by the voters as herein provided shall be certified to the Secretary of State by the governing authority of the county or municipality affected and shall be published as hereinafter provided." Is there objection to the adoption of Paragraph I?
MR. LOVEJOY. I would like to state this as applying to one feature of this and as to one feature which comes under Section II, the Gross amendment -
CHAIRMAN ARNALL: Perhaps we should perfect this in its entirety. If we adopted this and did not adopt another section it would not work, is that the point?
MR. LOVEJOY. I better state the point I have in mind, and that is this: I wonder if as a matter of fact in practice we aren't going to find that nine-tenths of the amendments which will be wanted to charters and such matters that there is no reason to have the people vote on them. We are prohibited any amendments unless they are voted on by the people. I think we are going to cause infinite trouble by that requirement in nine-tenths of the cases where I think it is not important. At least might we not well do this, that the General Assembly may not pass a special bill changing any provision which has theretofore been adopted by the people without referring it to an election. Now in there is a margin as to which you are going to refer or not, but you may judge from your own experience. I am wondering if we are not going to cause many elections which are undesired because they are on comparatively trivial matters that you have amended now as a matter of course, and it is immaterial whether voted on by the people. If that is a fact, and that is a matter of opinion and judgment, and that is my opinion, if you think there is anything in there, would we be safe by saying that we will require a referendum on local bills for amendment only where the Legislature by that bill attempts to change a provision which has been previously voted on by the peo-

RECORDS OF CONSTITUTIONAL COMMISSION

485

pIe. Now they can't change any provision of general law that is fixed. It is some special provision. If there is anything in my point, would we be safe in one limitation that the Legislature can't amend without submitting to the people where the people have previously voted upon that proposition. I want to submit that thought.
CHAIRMAN ARNALL. The Chair is of the opinion there is much merit in what you say. If the committee will indulge the Chair a minute, the Chair would like to make one or two observations. In practically all the States that have home rule, what they mean by home rule is, let the local governing authorities enact legislation relating to that locality without having the Legislature do it. That is what most of them provide. You have read those provisions and you are familiar with them. Now the Chair is of the opinion that if we did one or two simple things that we could get a workable home rule plan and still protect the people from abuse. Now here is the way, if it is within the Chair's power, if I were writing this without consulting the committee, if it was for me to do, I think I would write a provision something like this, authorizing the General Assembly to lay down the uniform systems for counties or cities to adopt, and then allowing the people to vote on which system they want. Then, after having adopted a system, to allow the local governing authorities to enact any law relating to the operation of that government without having to come to the Legislature, with a provision that the local authorities could submit their change to the people. That is, if it were some matter of great moment there would be a public demand they would pass on it. Then if you stuck into the bill the right of initiative at a regular election with a higher percentage of voters, I think that we would have a workable system. I see, here is what you are driving at, Mr. Lovejoy, that assuming we adopt the alternate plans or uniform plans of government, and suppose the people in LaGrange do not now have a sanitary inspector and they want a sanitary inspector-
MR. LOVEJOY. It takes an amendment to the charter to do it.
CHAIRMAN ARNALL. Is there any need to submit that to the people? Suppose you have a provision you have a sanitary inspector and you have one assistant and the business gets so great, LaGrange grows so that you need another assistant, is there any need to have an election on that?
MR. HARRIS. In my town it costs $10,000 to hold an election and maybe there would not be $1,000 involved.

486

RECORDS OF CONSTITUTIONAL COMMISSION

CHAIRMAN ARNALL. So the point the Chair makes is this, that I am not afraid of public officials in the State or counties not doing what the people want done which lodge in the people some right of redress. I think perhaps that it would be well to provide that the local officials can enact these local laws under a system of uniform government and that they may refer them to a vote of the people, and then if we could put in the right of initiative there would be no abuse on the part of the public officials.
JUDGE MaciNTYRE. May I ask Mr. Gross a question? I may be in error about the bill, but my impression was that they had three ways by which this could be initiated, by the Legislator himself, or by the governing authority, or by twenty per cent of the voters. There are three ways to start it off. Assuming that the Legislator himself initiated it, as I understood his bill or provision, if the Legislator came to the Legislature and passed his local bill, if nobody raised any point about it at all, that would become the law. He could amend the charter, as I understand, without changing one or more sanitary inspectors or whatever he pleases, and if the Legislature passed it that became the local law, provided a certain number of citizens did not call for an election in a specified time. If that is not in the bill it looks like to me that would correct it, where it is some little matter. We might say where the Legislator could initiate it himself, if there was not some petition of the people or somebody calling for it within a restricted time, the legislation passed, and then that became the local law. You see what I am trying to say? If you wanted to amend the charter and nobody objected, why not the local member of the Legislature introduce it and reserve to the people of that county the right upon a petition of twenty per cent of the voters to put that issue to the people. Is that what your bill provides?
MR. GROSS. No, sir, it did in original form, but now no local bill or general bill with local application or special bill can be enacted by the General Assembly unless it is submitted to the people by referendum.
JUDGE MacINTYRE. I like it better in the bill.
MR. LOVEJOY. To get the thought before the Commission, it may take some editing after you finish, but I move we insert in what I call the Carmichael proposal the following, this sentence: "No special law or general law with local application affecting county or municipal government shall become effective unless submitted

RECORDS OF CONSTITUTIONAL COMMISSION

487

to the qualified voters of the county or municipality and approved by a majority of those voting," and insert after that this provision, "Upon the request of a majority of the governing body of the municipality or county, the General Assembly may amend the charter of a municipality or a law governing a county now of force or hereafter adopted, but no such provision in any such amendment which conflicts with a provision in such charter or law previously adopted by popular vote shall be valid unless such new provision is ratified by vote of the electors of such municipality or county."
CHAIRMAN ARNALL. Now, Mr. Lovejoy, if you will oblige the Chair by holding that, suppose we start, sentence by sentence, adopting the provisions, and then at the proper place that would come.
MR. LOVEJOY. All right.
MR. HARRIS. I think your suggestion there-we are getting somewhere now. All of this thing thrown together is going to create a world of confusion. Not as much as I thought yesterday. As Mr. Carmichael explained it with some right strong language, I don't think it is that bad, but you get down there, and I think that if you have a general statement that the Legislature shall have authority or either way you want to put it, make it mandatory to pass uniform laws setting up a code of operation of cities and counties, and give them optional plans, and require a method of selecting that, I think you have gone then a good long ways. Then if you want to give to your municipality and county authorities the right to initiate, as well as the Legislature, that is all right. Now there are two things in here that Mr. Lovejoy, for instance, is correct on. There are plenty of things you don't want an election for, the people don't want an election for, and nobody else. For instance, in my municipal charter, I remember at the last session of the Legislature, we have got a civil service system for policemen and firemen. We have a retirement system, a pension plan. In the manpower shortage we had firemen and policemen who had retired drawing half pay that were willing to come back and work when you would only have to pay them half pay and when we had a shortage. Everybody was in favor of that, yet they did not have the authority to pay them if they came back, and it took an amendment to the charter. There was no objection to it. Everybody wanted it. We brought old policemen back that were too old to do active duty, but are acting in the place of women who were at the telephone exchange. Numbers

488

RECORDS OF CONSTITUTIONAL COMMISSION

of things like that. It did not involve over half a dozen people, and yet to have an election on it would have cost the city, as I say, $10,000. If there is any controversy it would cost $5,000 or $6,000 just to have an election to do that one thing. Now nobody, I don't think, would want to do that. Now here is another thing about your initiative. In my town we have a general election every year. We have one year that half the council is elected; the next year half the council is elected. The third year the mayor is elected. They hold for three terms. If you write that in there once a year you are going to have a ballot as long as your arm, and it looks like the ballot when voting all these local Constitutional Amendments. No body will know-
CHAIRMAN ARNALL. If you write in that, the local authorities, before they make these changes, have to submit it to the people.
MR. HARRIS. Now if you eliminate the idea of having a petition circulating every day in the year on the streets, and let the local authorities initiate, they are going to initiate it if there is any demand for it. They are not going to listen to a little handful of crackpots, but the people, when you have an election coming up every year, or whether it is coming up every two or three years, the local officials are going to be responsive to the demands of their people. If they don't they are going to get beat, and there is no way that you can help it. I do what the people of Richmond County want. If I didn't I would not come back here, and every other man does, and these members of the Legislature who don't, they don't come back, and, as evidence of that fact, in the last thirty years the highest num- . ber of members of the House out of 205 that ever come back from one session to another was 80, and that is the reason that it is filled up with new members, because they do tamper with local bills. If they would let them alone more of them would come back instead of getting beat. But anyhow it is responsive to that, and the danger of having these petitions circulated on the streets every day -and anybody will sign a petition. I don't know as I ever turned one down and nobody else does. Everybody that comes along wants a recommendation, and you give them a recommendation, and every petition that comes along, nobody ever turns them down, and I think if you would do that and correct these general bills-You talk about local bills, they have never been one-tenth as vicious as these things you call general bills with local application. It is the most vicious piece of legislation that was ever designed anywhere, and it is creating more confusion and getting away from uniformity

RECORDS OF CONSTITUTIONAL COMMISSION

489

more than anything else in Georgia because it is changing the generallaw; and I think if we could have a concise statement of those things right there that you cure as far as you can go, and you will have a practical workable plan. Suppose you allow them to initiate legislation by everybody that wants to get up a petition. Once a year in my town we would have a ballot as long as your arm, voting on hundreds of laws, and nobody would know what he was voting for or voting against.
CHAIRMAN ARNALL. The experience of initiative in the States that have it and in the cities that have it is that there is very little legislation ever initiated. Now Mr. Foley spoke of Columbus, in sixteen years they have had one initiative, one question, and someone spoke of some other city. Atlanta has had it thirty years; they have had it twice.
MR. HARRIS. There is one good thing, I don't think you will find a town or county in Georgia will ever vote the Gross plan in.
CHAIRMAN ARNALL. What the Chair is anxious to do in order to conserve time, and the Chair has no desire to limit the discussion of the distinguished Speaker, but the Chair is of the opinion if we perfect the kind of plan you are talking about now, then we can consider after we perfected this plan the right of initiative, but I think the first thing to do is agree on some plan.
MR. HARRIS. Another thing about initiative, you are setting a precedent going to the principal, and carried to the conclusion leads to the home rule and pure democracy.
MR. HOLT. Presuming your statement is true about the long ballot, your people will find some objection; what difference does it make to them whether it comes from the local authorities or the Legislature, they could get one every year anyhow. And presuming they do get that long ballot and they find no difference in getting it from their own local authorities and the Legislature, would it not be?
MR. HARRIS. Except the people in my county don't get any.
MR. HOLT. I was going to come to that. They have to vote the long ballot?
MR. HARRIS. On Constitutional Amendments, and they don't like it. Yet at the same time you can't let the City of Augusta amend the Constitution of Georgia. They might abolish Macon.

490

RECORDS OF CONSTITUTIONAL COMMISSION

MR. HOLT. They get the long ballot.
MR. HARRIS. They don't like it.
MR. HOLT. And think they don't know anything about it.
MR. HARRIS They don't know what they are voting on.
MR. HEAD. The reason they get the long ballot, 136 cities and counties had to amend one section of the Constitution because they did not have enough limitation, enough freedom, to exercise the right of bonded indebtedness. Now if we go back and extend the ten per cent to the right of the people to increase their bonded indebtedness when the period of let-down comes after the war, we would have made it possible for the people to have exercised the right and a privilege that they have not had, and which they have had to amend 136 times within recent years.
CHAIRMAN ARNALL. Is it the opinion of the gentleman that we have taken care of that situation?
MR. HEAD. No, sir. It is my opinion we definitely have not.
JUDGE MacINTYRE. The Commission voted the other day, when we had Mr. Lovejoy's plan of three per cent for emergency.
CHAIRMAN ARNALL. The Chair understands. It is since we are talking on bonds. It is true, is it not, General Head, that we have made an additional provision which under the present county system-
MR. HEAD. That is true, if anybody can take advantage of it by reason of the fact it has to be repaid in a period of five years.
MR. LOVEJOY. I move it be made the continuous order of business we take up the proposed legislation sentence and act on it.
CHAIRMAN ARNALL. Is there objection? If there is no objection we will proceed. The first sentence in the paragraph would be, "The organization, powers and duties of county and municipal government shall be defined by general law." Is there objection to the adoption of that sentence? The Chair hears none, and it is adopted. The second sentence: "Optional plans of county and municipal government shall be provided, to be effective in any county and municipality when submitted to the qualified voters thereof and approved by a majority of those voting." Is there objection to the adoption of that sentence? The Chair hears none and it is adopted.

RECORDS OF CONSTITUTIONAL COMMISSION

491

The third sentence: "No special or local law or general law having local application affecting county or municipal government shall be enacted in any case for which provision has been made by existing general laws." Is there objection to the adoption of that sentence? There is no objection and it is adopted. The fourth sentence: "No special law or general law with local application affecting county or municipal governments shall become effective unless submitted to the qualified voters of the county or municipality and approved by a majority of those voting." Is there objection to the adoption of that?
MR. MAJOR. Read that again.

CHAIRMAN ARNALL. "No special law or general law with local application affecting county or municipal governments shall become effective unless submitted to the qualified voters of the county or municipality and approved by a majority of those voting."

MR. HARRIS. If you are going to eliminate, you have to make county and municipality plural, because if it is referred to more than one or affected more than one area it would be possible then, and that would not eliminate general bills with local application to the City of Atlanta at all because it applies to more than one county.
CHAIRMAN ARNALL. Was that the substance of your proposal, Mr. Lovejoy?

MR. LOVEJOY. Yes, the point that I am directing the suggestion

at, which some of you may have thought is to enable the General

Assembly or some authority to enact an amendment not covered by

general law in those cases where it is not necessary to have an

election. I offer this amendment to that sentence, adding at the end

thereof: "Provided upon the request of the governing authority

of a county or municipality the General Assembly may amend the

charter of such municipality or the law regulating such county

now of force or hereafter adopted, but no provision in any such

amendment which conflicts with a provision in such charter or law

previously adopted by popular vote shall be valid unless such new

provision is ratified by the vote of the electors of such municipal-

ity or county." Now that lets the Legislature, upon the request of

the municipal authorities, pass by local bill an amendment to a

charter on some matter not covered by general law and on some

matter not previously voted on without having an election. If some-

01

body can get a better way, you can do it.

i

492

RECORDS OF CONSTITUTIONAL COMMISSION

MR. GROSS. I want to ask this question, in the interest of wording, to make it a little more understandable, would there be any objection to this, "unless recommended by a majority of the governing body"? Then if the local bill was introduced and recommended by a majority of the governing body, it would not have to be voted on by the people.
MR. LOVEJOY. I have no objection to that, but I add a further provision which I think is wise. If the people had voted on such a provision and you can adopt that general law without having voted on it, but if it had not been voted on the Legislature could pass a local bill amending the charter on some matter not affecting the general law upon the request of the majority of the governing body.
CHAIRMAN ARNALL. Mr. Speaker, before we take up Mr. Lovejoy's proposal, the Chair was not quite clear about the objection you made to the original sentence four in this bill.
MR. HARRIS. I said it would permit general bills with local application if it applied to more than one town or county, as expressed.
CHAIRMAN ARNALL. What would the gentleman suggest?
MR. HARRIS. I would say it would have to be submitted to the municipalities or counties affected, make it plural, and put in the word "affected."
MR. GOWEN. It seems to me you need the word "only" right ahead of local application because every general law has local application. I would suggest you put "general law with only local application."
CHAIRMAN ARNALL. Is there objection to inserting before "local application"; the word "only," "no special law or general law with only local application", is there objection? Without objection that is inserted. Now then, "affecting county or municipality governments shall become effective unless submitted to the qualified voters of the counties or municipalities affected"; is there objection to the adoption of that language? That would be after the words, and the sentence then would read as follows: "No special law or general law with only local application affecting county or municipal governments shall become effective unless submitted to the qualified voters of the county or municipality affected (or counties or municipalities affected) and approved by a majority of those voting." Is there objection to the adoption of the sentence as read? Without objection it is so ordered. All right.

RECORDS OF CONSTITUTIONAL COMMISSION

493

MR. ARNOLD. It seems the word "only" should go in sentence number three up there too.
CHAIRMAN ARNALL. What do you say, Mr. Gowen? You are the Fulton County and Atlanta watcher.
MR. GOWEN. I have about decided to take care of them after I pointed out the danger to which they are faced.
CHAIRMAN ARNALL. Mr. Arnold makes the point in sentence three that probably the word "only" should likewise be inserted. What do you say? The sentence now reads as follows: "No special or local law or general law having local application affecting the county or municipal governments shall be enacted in any case for which provision has been made by existing general laws."
MR. HARRIS. I think it would be a good idea to insert it.
CHAIRMAN ARNALL. Is there any objection to inserting the word "only" in that sentence? Without objection it so ordered. Now, Mr. Lovejoy.
MR. LOVEJOY. I have submitted and explained the method I had and the purpose desired to be accomplished, and I am like the mule as to this proposal, I have neither prior ancestors or hope of posterity.
CHAIRMAN ARNALL. Read the proposal again for the record.
MR. GOWEN. I move the adoption of the proposal.
MR. HARRIS. I second it.
CHAIRMAN ARNALL. Read it.
MR. LOVEJOY. It would be safer if the stenographer read it. It is not written out in full as I dictated and stated it before.
BY REPORTER. (Reads) "Provided upon the request of the governing authority of a county or municipality the General Assembly may amend the charter of such municipality or the law regulating such county now of force or hereafter adopted, but no provision in any such amendment which conflicts with a provision in such charter or law previously adopted by popular vote shall be valid unless such new provision is ratified by the vote of the electors of such municipality or county."
CHAIRMAN ARNALL. It has been moved and seconded it be adopt-

494

RECORDS OF CONSTITUTIONAL COMMISSION

ed. Is there objection? Without objection the Lovejoy amendment is adopted.
The next sentence reads as follows: "The results of the election, upon ratification by the voters as herein provided, shall be certified to the Secretary of State by the governing authorities of the county or municipality affected and shall be published as hereinafter provided." The Chair would like to strike out the "hereinafter provided," because since we are adopting this in sentence and section we may not adopt the latter one, so the Chair proposes that the sentence read as follows: "The results of the election, upon ratification by the voters, shall be cerified to the Secretary of State by the governing authorities of the county or municipality affected and shall be published by the Secretary of State." Is there objection? Without objection that sentence is adopted.
Paragraph II: "When a county or municipality adopts one of the alternative plans-"
MR. LOVEJOY. Mr. Chairman, if you don't mind, it seems that leaves it in an uncertain way, "shall be published by the Secretary of State"-where? In the newspapers or what?
MR. FOLEY. There is a later provision.
MR. LOVEJOY. We don't tie in with that at all. This is complete.
CHAIRMAN ARNALL. Suppose we add to the end of that sentence the language, "shall be published by the Secretary of State in bound volumes."
MR. LOVEJOY. All right.
CHAIRMAN ARNALL. What we want is a record.
MR. FOLEY. There is a later section that requires him to publish it. In July and January in bound volumes.
CHAIRMAN ARNALL. The Chair understands that, but the thought is this, if they reject a subsequent section, we were trying to perfect it as we went along. That is the whole thought.
MR. GROSS. What about this, "shall be published in a bound volume in the months of January and July of each year."?
CHAIRMAN ARNALL. Is there objection to that language? If there is no objection, then, at the end of the sentence we will add, "and shall be published in the months of January and June by the Secretary of State in a bound volume." That takes care of it. Without

RECORDS OF CONSTITUTIONAL COMMISSION

495

objection that is ordered. Paragraph II: "When a county or municipality adopts one of the alternative plans of government provided by the General Assembly, or when a county or municipal government adopts"-that should say, "or when a county or municipal government adopts one of the optional systems." No, that is wrong. That is "and." The Chair will read the sentence again: "When a county or municipality adopts one of the alternative plans of government provided by the General Assembly or when a county and municipal government adopt one of the optional systems of consolidated county and municipal government provided by the General Assembly, such county or municipality shall certify the plan chosen to the Secretary of State for publication as provided in Paragraph I." Is there objection to the adoption of that paragraph?
MR. LOVEJOY. I raise the question again-to my mind when you certify under the preceding section or paragraph you certify to exactly the same thing provided to be certified in this paragraph, it looks to me.
CHAIRMAN ARNALL. The Chair thinks the gentleman is correct, because in both instances they are adopting optional plans.
MR. LOVEJOY. Right. The preceding paragraph provides for certification of all elections.
CHAIRMAN ARNALL. The Chair will undertake to read Paragraph II: "When a county or municipality adopts one of the alternative plans of government provided by the General Assembly or when a county and municipal government adopts one of the plans of consolidated county and municipal government provided by the General Assembly, such county or municipality shall certify the plan chosen to the Secretary of State." Mr. Lovejoy moves--isn't that what you are going to do under the preceding section?
MR. GOWEN. The preceding section refers to laws.
CHAIRMAN ARNALL. Assuming that it does, it is just four words extra, and if it does not it takes care of it. Is there objection to the adoption of the paragraph as read? Without objection it is so adopted.
Section II, Paragraph. Now before the Chair reads this Section II, haven't we effectively provided everything that is in Section II in what we have already adopted, except the right of initiative?
MR. GROSS. I don't think so. I think local legislation is in Section II.

496

RECORDS OF CONSTITUTIONAL COMMISSION

CHAIRMAN ARNALL. Section II, Paragraph I: "In addition to the grant of legislative authority contained in this Constitution, the people of any county or municipality in this State are empowered to enact any local law operative in the municipality or county and not inconsistent with general laws or otherwise with this Constitution."
MR. GOWEN. I offer as a substitute for that paragraph the fol lowing: "In addition to the grant of legislative authority contained in this Constitution, the governing authority of any county or municipality in this State is empowered to enact any local law operative only within the area of the county or municipality and not inconsistent with general law or with this Constitution." The effect of that, if it is adopted, would mean that the county or city authorities could, by ordinance, do anything that did not contravene the general law of the State or the Constitution of the State. If this should be adopted it would be my plan or purpose to offer another substitute that would provide for a referendum upon a petition of one-fifth of the registered voters of the county. That would permit any citizens who felt they were aggrieved by any local ordinance or law to have a referendum if they wanted it, but it would leave .the local legislative authority in your city and county and board I()f county commissioners, as the case might be, and would do away with the question of initiative entirely because the authority would be in your counties and cities, and that to my mind is home rule. You would leave it to the City of Atlanta and leave it to the City of Brunswick and Glynn County, or Fulton County, to do anything except contravene the general laws of the State or the Constitution of the State.
JUDGE MacINTYRE. Would you not want to put in there, "general law with local application"?
MR. GOWEN. I don't think. I said a little while ago I had quit worrying about Fulton County and-all the other general laws with local application are unconstitutional anyway.
JUDGE MacINTYRE. I think the general law with local applica. lion-Mr. Harris says that is the most vicious thing in the Legislature.
MR. GROSS. That has to do in the Legislature.
MR. GOWEN. That would weaken that, that would permit the Leg. islature to pass general laws with local application. This says the

RECORDS OF CONSTITUTIONAL COMMISSION

497

city, council and county commissioners can do anything but violate the laws of the State.
JUDGE MacINTYRE. This only applies to the city or county.
MR. GOWEN. To the governing authorities or the city or county.
MR. HARRIS. The Legislature can't apply a general bill with local application on the basis of population.
CHAIRMAN ARNALL. The Chair will read the paragraph again, which, in effect, in the Chair's judgment allows the governing authority of counties and cities to enact local legislation, "In addition to the grant of legislative authority contained in this Constitution, the governing authorities of any county or municipality in this State are empowered to enact any local law operative only within the area of the county or municipality and not inconsistent with general law or this Constitution."
MR. THRASHER. Isn't that what we have been trying to get at all the time?
CHAIRMAN ARNALL. This provision, and the Chair in all fairness desires to make it plain, in the Chair's judgment is what is called home rule.
MR. THRASHER. That is what we have been trying to get to.
CHAIRMAN ARNALL. In the eighteen States that have it, this provision follows pretty generally what has been done there. It answers pretty generally the criticism that has been made of our governing organization, which is to this effect, the General Assembly spends much time enacting local laws affecting Sharpsburg or Senoia, when the governing authorities ought to have the right.
MR. THRASHER. I move its adoption.
MR. GROSS. I object. First, it removes the referendum from prop06ed legislation, and it further takes the initiative from the people on local laws.
CHAIRMAN ARNALL. That is right. And what I am trying to do, if you will allow the indulgence of the Chair, is to go on and agree on this type thing, then at the proper time the Chair is going to do all within his Constitutional power to provide a right in the people to institute local laws; then, if the governing authority does something the people don't want, the people still have a right to do something about it.

498

RECORDS OF CONSTITUTIONAL COMMISSION

MR. GOWEN. To answer him-
CHAIRMAN ARNALL. Does that meet with your approval or not?
MR. GROSS. I think if we adopt that, I don't see how you have referendum or initiative.
MR. GOWEN. I will show you how you will have a referendum.
MR. GROSS. I understand they will have a petition.
MR. THRASHER. We are considering this paragraph by paragraph. We have not reached the referendum.
CHAIRMAN ARNALL. That is right. In other words, if we adopt this and don't adopt a referendum or the initiative, and I hope we will, but if we don't, in the Chair's honest judgment we will then have a large degree of what is generally called home rule.
MR. GOWEN. If this is adopted there will never be any reason to have a local bill passed in the General Assembly of Georgia. Isn't that true?
CHAIRMAN ARNALL. That is true.
MR. HARRIS. Let me say this in behalf of Mr. Gowen's proposal, if you want uniformity and home rule, adopt the Carmichael proposal with this and you have got it. Then when you envision your finished product here is what you will eventually have, a uniform code of operation or uniform system of city government and county government that will cover the broad general law governing that, and then when it comes down to fixing the salary of policemen or fixing the little things that I mentioned just now, the things that are not covered by your general law, then your cities can do it; and it will certainly require us to lay down a code of operation under which they can operate. And you say that the people won't have any say-so about it. The people have got to adopt this Constitution, and I think it is the finest thing we can do because it will result in general laws governing cities and counties and leaving to them the little details that they should not be required to come to the Legislature with, and they should not be required to go to the expense of having a campaign and election to adopt, and I think it will result in an orderly process and an orderly government because it gives them the authority to do the many things they want to do and to attend to the little details.
CHAIRMAN ARNALL. Is there objection to the adoption? Frank,.

RECORDS OF CONSTITUTIONAL COMMISSION

499

is there objection to adopting Charlie Gowen's?
MR. GROSS. Since he said I could have the right to argue for initia~ tire in the people-
CHAIRMAN ARNALL. The Chair will join you in that.
MR. GROSS. I withdraw my objection.
CHAIRMAN ARNALL. Without objection it is ordered adopted. The very eminent member of this Committee, the Honorable Hatton Lovejoy, has directed the Chairman's attention to several provisions there in other States that have home rule, and he points out in most of the instances before any local law can be enacted by the governing authorities it is submitted to a vote of the people. The Chair makes that statement because the Chair was under the impression that in most of the States it merely provided for enactment of law by local officials. The Chair makes that statement.
MR. HOLT. I asked the Attorney General a question concerning that same proposition and he states that this provision which has already been passed by this Commission in Paragraph XV on Page 18, to the effect no local or special bill shall become law unless there is attached thereto and made a part of said bill a copy of said notice certified to before a Notary Public or accompanied by an affidavit of the officers to the effect it has been published as pro~ vided by law. I asked the Attorney General if that would hold on the proposition made by Mr. Lovejoy that the majority of the local authorities could come to the General Assembly and ask for an amendment to their charter unless the same proposition had been previously voted on by the people. In my opinion it would be very simple for the local authorities to come to the General Assembly and request that a charter be amended in such a fashion that would be not to the best interests of the people, and I believe that a requirement that the full intent and purpose and effect of the intention of the local authorities to request such an amendment should also be published in the community affected, and that evidence of that publication should be brought to the General Assembly before they should have authority to so amend a charter.
MR. HEAD. Let me correct myself. I misunderstood the gentleman's question. I think that will take care of any local law.
MR. HOLT. If it does, all right.
MR. HEAD. I thought you were going to substitute that foc other language.

500

RECORDS OF CONSTITUTIONAL COMMISSION

MR. HOLT. All right, I withdraw my suggestion.
CHAIRMAN ARNALL. Paragraph II.
MR. GOWEN. I would like to move to strike Paragraph II and insert in lieu thereof the following, and the Chair will let me read it because I have practically the Gross amendment originally here again. I think it states it more clearly, and it is not in exact order, but this is the way it reads: "If a petition proposes local legislation or a petition asking for a referendum on any local law is submitted to the governing authority of the county or municipality, signed by at least one-fifth of the registered voters of the county or municipality, it shall be the duty of the governing authority to submit same proposed local legislation or referendum on such local law at the general or special election to be held in said county or municipality, and submission shall be advertised in full once each week in the official gazette for four weeks next preceding such regular election, or in the event the regular county or municipality election, as the case may be, shall not be held within one year, the governing authority of the county or municipality, by resolution, may submit such proposal at a special election, which shall be fixed and held at a date not earlier than sixty (60) days from the date ordering the special election, and a brief and accurate summary of the proposed legislation shall be placed on the official ballot and the voter voting in the election shall put 'yes' or 'no' on such proposed local legislation or referendum on a local law. If a majority of the voters voting in the election vote 'yes' the results of the election shall be proclaimed by the governing authority, and the said local legislation shall become law or shall fail." I would like to fix that a little better, put it, "the results of the election shall be proclaimed by the governing authority and said local legislation shall become law or shall not become law, upon the filing of the certified copy of the same with the Secretary of State." That is a little cumbersome but the point is if it did not become law there would be no object in certifying it, unless the original had already gone up.
MR. HARRIS. It will be all right to leave it like it is.
CHAIRMAN ARNALL. Upon the filing of the certified copy of the same with the Secretary of State. Charlie, will you at this stagethat is going to be a long proposition-will you allow the Chair to read a shorter one and see if this does not take care of what you are undertaking to do, and this is the heart of the Gross proposal. I think it is-the safeguard or the check the people will be afford-

RECORDS OF CONSTITUTIONAL COMMISSION

501

ed in matters of local legislation. "The people of any county or municipality may initiate local laws or may require a referendum thereon." The Chair will try it again. "The people of any county or municipality may initiate local laws affecting only the territory included in the county or municipality, or may require a referendum thereon by petition of one-third of the registered voters of the county or municipaJity. Upon the filing of such proposed local legisla~ tion, together with a petition signed by a third of the registered voters of the county or municipality requesting it, it shall be duty of the governing authorities to place the same on the ballot at the next regular county or municipal general election. If a majority of the voters vote there in favor of the local legislation it shall become law upon certification of a copy thereof to the Secretary of State, whose duty it shall be to publish such local action."

MR. GOWEN. I think that is good. I don't think you need to be so concerned about special elections. Frank and I were talking about it a little while ago, but the Legislature, if this authority is ceded to the local bodies, is of necessity going to have to pass general laws that preserve the substantive rights of all the citizens of counties and municipalities. I think that has been done largely for counties, but they will have to do it, but that won't make it possible for city council to do something foolish that won't wait until the next general election.

CHAIRMAN ARNALL. Mr. Lovejoy, does this meet your objection that the local authorities under the paragraph could enact local laws but the people could require a referendum on them if they filed a petition; if they did not, why there would not be any re~ ferendum, and the petition, according to the Chair's suggestion, would have to be by a third of the registered voters. That would do away with any instance where there was just agitators involved, and it would also require a pretty strong public opinion to submit it to the people.

MR. GROSS. Another thing, it would require, I believe it would

make this possible only in general elections, and could not, if as

was the objection of Speaker Harris, petition on the street all the

time. It would have to be submitted only in the regular election at

which officers were elected.

.

CHAIRMAN ARNALL. That is right. MR. GROSS. I think that is good. MR. LOVEJOY. May I ask, that means the people can require a

502

RECORDS OF CONSTITUTIONAL COMMISSION

referendum on some action taken by the municipal or county authorities?
CHAIRMAN ARNALL. Yes, sir.
MR. LOVEJOY. You don't say that-
MR. GROSS. I am going to ask unanimous consent that the Chair be allowed to insert that provision in his amendment. It is not in here now, the right of the people to have a referendum on legis~ lation.
CHAIRMAN ARNALL. You mean an absolute right?
MR. GROSS. If they petition.
CHAIRMAN ARNALL. That is what they say.
MR. GROSS. It is not in here.
CHAIRMAN ARNALL. If this is adopted it would be the one you have got there?
MR. GROSS. Yes, sir.
CHAIRMAN ARNALL. No, but I have written in the referendum.
MR. GROSS. I don't like the language. I want it stated more clearly.
MR. THRASHER. Does that replace everything in the Gross amend~ ment?
CHAIRMAN ARNALL. Yes.
MR. GOWEN. I think there are one or two things in the Gross amendment we ought to reserve, such as not changing county lines and city limits.
CHAIRMAN ARNALL. There is the heart of that. There are some details about local laws and publishing the acts and so forth. Now, Mr. Speaker, there is one other thought that occurs to me in connection with that, there will have to be a time limit on when the referendum could be filed.
MR. HARRIS. I think the addition makes it a little confusing, or it is not clear enough.
MR. GOWEN. Why not let the Chair have the right to get the language and clarify it.
CHAIRMAN ARNALL. The whole purpose of giving the people the

RECORDS OF CONSTITUTIONAL COMMISSION

503

right to have a local act referred to them and giving the people the right to initiate local acts is merely a safeguard. The Chair very frankly doubts if it would be availed of very much, if any, but it still gives the people, if their public officials don't do what they want, a chance to bring redress, and the Chair will read this again and he will read it in two sections. This is an amendment embodying Mr. Gowen's proposal, which is the heart of the Gross proposal: "The people of any county or municipality may initiate local laws affecting only the territory included in the county or municipality, or may require a referendum on local laws affecting only the territory included in the county or municipality provided by petition of one-third of the registered voters of the municipality; provided, however, in the case of a referendum, the petition must be filed with the governing authorities within sixty days, or the local law becomes operative."
MR. LOVEJOY. Sixty days of what?
CHAIRMAN ARNALL. Within sixty days of the enactment of the local law.
MR. HARRIS. I think the Chair is a little confusing by trying to combine the two. Ithink you will have to write a separate paragraph to get it straight.
MR. GROSS. I think so.
CHAIRMAN ARNALL. I think the gentleman is correct. Suppose we deal with the referendum first.
MR. HARRIS. Deal with them separately and I think you will get out of the confusion.
CHAIRMAN ARNALL. This is the first proposal: ''The people of any county or municipality may require a referendum on any local law affecting only the territory included in the county or municipality by a petition of one-third of the registered voters of the county or municipality affected. The petition for referendum must be filed within sixty days after advertisement of the local act has been had in the public gazette of the county or city or municipality affected."
MR. HARRIS. That is noUce after passage or befo:r:e?
JUDGE MacINTYRE. Suppose there is no gazette?
CHAIRMAN ARNALL. They all have them. If they have not one

504

RECORDS OF CONSTITUTIONAL COMMISSION

in the county they have adopted an official gazette.."Upon the filing of such proposed request for referendum with the petition signed by a third of the registered voters of the county or municipality requested, it shall be the duty of the governing authorities to place the same on the ballot at the next regular county or municipal general election. If a majority of the voters voting there in favor of the local legislation, it shall become law. It shall become law upon certification to the Secretary of State, whose duty it shall be to publish the same in conformity with the provisions hereinbefore made." Is there any discussion?
MR. LOVEJOY. You do not say you refer to local legislation enacted by the governing body of the county or municipality. It sounds like it applies just as much to an act of the Legislature.
MR. GROSS. It does.
CHAIRMAN ARNALL. Is it the thought of the Commission it would apply only to the governing authority? The Chair will undertake to read it, with the amendment proposed by Mr. Lovejoy. "The people of any county or municipality may require a referendum on any local legislation sought to be enacted by the governing authority of the county or city, said local legislation affecting only the territory included in the county or municipality, by petition of one-third of the registered voters of the county or municipality; upon the filing of such proposed petition for referendum signed by a third of the registered voters of the county or municipality affected, it shall be the duty of the governing authority to place the same on the ballot at the next regular county or municipal election; provided, however, that the petition for referendum must be filed with the governing authorities within sixty days after publication, if the enactment of local legislation by the governing authority has been made. If a majority of the voters voting are in favor of the local legislation it shall become law upon certification of a copy thereof to the Secretary of State, whose duty it shall be to publish the local acts in conformity with the provisions hereinbefore provided."
MR. GROSS. I move its adoption.
MR. FOLEY. I second it.
CHAIRMAN ARNALL. Is there objection? Without objection it is so ordered.
MR. LOVEJOY. May I ask this question, all this is in the division

RECORDS OF CONSTITUTIONAL COMMISSION

505

of what we are proposing, which is subject to being ratified and adopted by the people of the county? CHAIRMAN ARNALL. Yes, sir.
MR. CULPEPPER. You contain the optional provision?
CHAIRMAN ARNALL. Yes, sir, this would be merely an optional plan. MR. CULPEPPER. I thought you struck Section II and substituted that. CHAIRMAN ARNALL. That is right.
MR. CULPEPPER. In the Section II, is that provision making it optional for counties and municipalities, whether or not they desire to come under the provisions of this paragraph?
CHAIRMAN ARNALL. That is right.
MR. CULPEPPER. You have stricken that out?
CHAIRMAN ARNALL. But the optional plans to which we refer are these provided in Paragraph I, that the General Assembly will set up. MR. CULPEPPER. As I understand it, this was all stricken?
CHAIRMAN ARNALL. Yes, sir.
MR. CULPEPPER. All that down to Section II?
CHAIRMAN ARNALL. That is right.
MR. CULPEPPER. Now you strike Section II and substitute that?
CHAIRMAN ARNALL. Yes.
MR. CULPEPPER. Does that carry that optional plan with it?
MR. CULPEPPER. You want to leave it optional with counties whether they retain this or not? If you keep that in, it's all right.
CHAIRMAN ARNALL. Yes.
CHAIRMAN ARNALL. Mr. Culpepper makes the point whether or not the local authorities will be given the right to enact laws and whether or not the people will be given the right to require a referendum to them, that that should be optional in the counties or cities whether they want that plan or not.
MR. THRASHER. When you offer it to them to pass their own leg-

506

RECORDS OF CONSTITUTIONAL COMMISSION

islation don't you think they will go ahead and adopt it if they want to, if they are really interested in home rule?
CHAIRMAN ARNALL. As the Chair understands it, what we have done thus far is to give the counties and cities, every county and every city, the right to enact local legislation in conformity with general plans promulgated by the Legislature. Now Mr. Culpepper makes the point, as I understand it, that perhaps his county would not want any of this, but would be satisfied to continue to operate as they are. Therefore we want to know whether or not this is going to be made an alternative arrangement whereby they can come under it or not.
MR. LOVEJOY. Just like Mr. Gross' was.
CHAIRMAN ARNALL. Yes. But for Mr. Culpepper's information, up to this stage of the proceedings there is no alternative.
MR. CULPEPPER. I want to move to insert in there-
MR. GROSS. There is onQ later when we get to it.
MR. CULPEPPER. I thought we had stricken all that.
CHAIRMAN ARNALL. If the gentleman will wait just a minute and let's perfect what we have got, then he can offer the alterna tive right to come under or not to come under. Now the second proposal the Chair makes is this, "That the people of any county or municipality may initiate local laws affecting only the territory included in the county or municipality by petition of one-third of the registered voters of the county or muncipality. Upon the filing of such proposed local legislation, together with a petition signed by a third of the registered voters of the county or municipality requesting it, it shall be the duty of the governing authorities to place the same on the ballot at the next regular county or municipal general election. If a majority of the voters voting therein favor the local legislation it shall become the law upon certification of a copy thereof to the Secretary of State, whose duty it shall be to publish such local acts." Is there objection to the adoption of that? Without objection that is adopted.
Now before we get to Mr. Culpepper, Charlie, let's perfect the other provisions in the Gross bill that you cover.
MR. GOWEN. I think Paragraph IV of the original Gross amendment should stay in. I think Paragraph IV is all right.
MR. GROSS. I think so too.

RECORDS OF CONSTITUTIONAL COMMISSION

507

CHAIRMAN ARNALL. Mr. Gowen moves to add Paragraph IV or incorporate Paragraph IV of Section II of the Gross proposal that reads as follows:
MR. LOVEJOY. It is not Section II. It is paragraph 4 of Paragraph II of Section I.
MR. GOWEN. That is right.
CHAIRMAN ARNALL. The gentleman is correct. The language, if adopted, will read as follows: ''This provision shall not authorize the people of counties or municipalities or the governing authorities thereof to change county or municipal boundaries or to abolish county or municipal government." Is there objection to its adoption? Without objection, that is adopted.
MR. GOWEN. I think paragraph 5 should stay in.
CHAIRMAN ARNALL. Paragraph 5. The language reads as follows: "The governing authorities of the counties and municipalities of this State, in conformity with the provisions hereinbefore contained, are authorized and empowered to enact zoning laws." Is there objection to the adoption of that proposal? Without objection, it is so ordered.
MR. GOWEN. Paragraph 6 should be out. It has no application. That has been covered.
CHAIRMAN ARNALL. And 7 has been covered.
MR. GOWEN. That is right.
CHAIRMAN ARNALL. The next, paragraph 8, which the Chair thinks is important.
MR. GOWEN. Yes. I did not have it in my copy.
CHAIRMAN ARNALL. Mr. Gowen moves this paragraph be enacted, this provision be enacted or recommended by the Commission: "No law shall be enacted by the governing authorities of the municipalities or counties of this State which deals with more than one subject matter." Is there objection? The Chair hears none and that is so ordered. Now, Mr. Culpepper.
MR. LOVEJOY. Before we leave that, should we incorporate a provision first that no legislation may be enacted under this which conflicts with the Constitution or the general laws of the State?
MR. GROSS. We did that in the first paragraph.

508

RECORDS OF CONSTITUTIONAL COMMISSION

CHAIRMAN ARNALL. In the lead paragraph it is provided, "not inconsistent with general law or this Constitution."
MR. LOVEJOY. I know it is there, but I did not know whether that went there and covered this provision or not.
MR. HARRIS. There is one thing that occurred to me, in listening to it as read I could not tell. This item was if a local law was passed by the governing authorities and after that time a general law was passed by the Legislature dealing with the same subject matter, if it would supersede the local law, and just from listening at it, there was some doubt in my mind whether or not it would take away from the general law to govern it after it was once passed. It seemed to hang the validity upon the time of passage and not something happening after.
CHAIRMAN ARNALL. The Chair is of the opinion it might be well to clarify it by putting in a provision that all local laws should yield, in conflict with general laws now in effect or hereafter enacted, would be null and void. Will you state it, or does that state it substantially?
MR. HARRIS. I don't know how to state it, because in hearing it read that occurred to me, and I was not sure.
MR. FOLEY. The Policy Committee can smooth it out.
CHAIRMAN ARNALL. Is there objection to this statement being inserted: "All local laws in conflict with general law as now in force or hereafter adopted shall be null and void." Does that take care of it?
MR. HOLT. Mr. Chairman, could not that be construed-it gives the Legislature the power to declare null and void by some legislative act any local laws passed?
CHAIRMAN ARNALL. I think it does.
CHAIRMAN ARNALL. Suppose that general law applied to all the State? Suppose one city had a fire department and another city did not have, and the General Assembly were to pass a general law that every city in the State, every municipality, had to have a fire department. Then if they had a law in Newnan they could not have a fire department, they would have to get one because we would be bound by the general law. I think that ought to be done.
MR. HOLT. Does it not offer the Legislature an opportunit.y to nullify the home rule?

RECORDS OF CONSTITUTIONAL COMMISSION

509

MR. HOLT. If it does you are taking away the home rule.

CHAIRMAN ARNALL. I don't think so. Now we come to Mr. Culpepper's proposal.
MR. LOVEJOY. I think we ought to add this provision: "The Legislature shall, by general law or special act, fix the maximum rate of taxation for each municipality." We left this in this situation, until these uniform laws for municipalities are adopted, and the Legislature may not adopt any of them, this power that we have put in here, if this Constitution is adopted, will authorize the municipal authorities of a city to make any amendment they want to in the city charter. We have been talking about minor amendments. When we get this general code of law then they can only change as to things which are not in the general code of law, but until that is done absolute power is put in the municipal governing body under this provision, and it means, for instance, they could change the charter and put in a tax rate of five hundred mills. Mr. Gross, I notice in the paper, was quoted as stating that we had provided a limit of taxation on municipalities. We have not.

MR. GROSS. I said on county.
MR. LOVEJOY. The statement in the paper was to the contrary. We have no limitation except the city charter, and I think to safeguard it we better provide the Legislature shall fix a maximum rate of taxation for municipalities.
CHAIRMAN ARNALL. Is there objection to putting in at a separate place in the Constitution, not in this particular part, or you can put it here, making it mandatory on the General Assembly to provide maximum rates of taxation for municipalities?

MR. LOVEJOY. Yes. CHAIRMAN ARNALL. Is there objection to that?



MR. ATKINSON. His suggestion is the provision be made the Legislature must fix a maximum. I think that it rather ought to be optional for this reason, the control of the purse strings is the absolute control of the government, whether it be county or city, and if the Legislature, by general law, can fix the tax rate for every municipality in the State, why then you are putting the power of taxation and the limitation of the taxation in the hands of the Legislature, and the Legislature at some time or other may undertake to control the taxation of all of the cities of the State. Now that may

510

RECORDS OF CONSTITUTIONAL COMMISSION

be a good idea from the point of view of some people, but I am not sure it is a good idea from the point of view of all the people of the State. Now I have no objection to stating the Legislature may do that, but I don't see why you should require that the Legislature must do it. I think that you might have to fix a different tax rate for different cities because there are different demands on them. They have a different method of raising taxes.
CHAIRMAN ARNALL. When the General Assembly enacts a municipal code or county regulations, can't it deal with the tax rate?
MR. ATKINSON. Absolutely. It can deal wiith it now, but why should you make it mandatory on the Legislature to do it?
MR. GOWEN. Will you yield for a question? Isn't it necessary for this same reason that we now have a limit on the amount of taxation, tax rates that counties can levy, that is fixed by general law? Isn't the reason for that this, that if it was not done because the utilities make their returns to the Comptroller General, and if their valuation was fixed it would make it possible for the cities and counties to run their government at the expense of utilities by having a higher tax rate?
MR. ATKINSON. I don't know anything about taxation for public utilities. I guess they pay their just proportion, but I think it ought to be left to the Legislature, but I don't think you should tell the Legislature they must do it. When you tell them that they will undertake to fix the tax rate for every little city in the State, and the people of your city won't have a thing to do with it; you won't be able to levy any tax until you come here and make things straight with the Legislature. Now you are fixing a mighty big power, and you don't say that you can do it, but you say you must do it. Now I think the Legislature has the power now. I don't see any objection to sayin, that they may do it and add that in your Constitution, but I don't think you ought to tell the Legislature up here that you have got to fix the tax rate or limit for all these cities.
MR. HARRIS. If you put in there they must do it and they don't, you could invalidate all the tax levies.
MR. ATKINSON. I am not judging yet. I would not pass on that. I don't think it would.
JUDGE CANDLER. Mr. Chairman, if he fixes the maximum mills that a county can levy, why can't we fix the maximum mills the city can levy?

RECORDS OF CONSTITUTIONAL COMMISSION

511

MR. POPE. You can.
MR. ATKINSON. You can now.
MR. LOVEJOY. Every tax rate in Georgia is fixed by the Legislature now, by the charters.
MR. ATKINSON. Not altogether.
CHAIRMAN ARNALL. The only difference the Chair sees is this, now the Legislature fixes your tax rate of municipalities through charters. There may be some instances where that is not true, but by an average it is true. Now practically all of those have different rates. They are not uniform. Under Mr. Lovejoy's proposal we would have to have a system of uniformity somewhat, about the maximum of tax levy. Now in some cities of this State you find the people are more progressive than in others. They want to build public buildings and pave the streets and do things like that; whereas in another city they are satisfied not to do those things. If we lay down a floor and a ceiling, why there is some question about how much restriction we put on these. Authorities are not going to raise your tax rate unless the people want it done, are they?
MR. LOVEJOY. I won't use the language I started to use, but sometimes we get some of them.
MR. THRASHER. Mr. Chairman, Mr. Lovejoy seems to be in doubt about the fixing of this between the time the Constitution is adopted and the General Assembly acts on it. Can't something be put in there that the tax rate now provided by charter is to remain iIi existence until the code is adopted?
CHAIRMAN ARNALL. If we can get the city attorneys present, and the Municipal Association and the esteemed Mayor of Atlanta, at this session of the Legislature, we can turn out a good code. The Constitution in any event would not be adopted for some while. Mr. Thrasher is worried that it will be adopted but there won't be a code. Can't you put a provision in that the present tax rate as authorized by charter is covered? We are dealing with something now that is the life of government. When you go to talking about taxes that is the heart of the government, restrictive or liberal, as the case may be. The Chair does not know. He will be glad to put any question the Committee desires.
MR. DURDEN. It seems the home rule advocates are getting in-

512

RECORDS OF CONSTITUTIONAL COMMISSION

consistent when they don't want to trust the people back home on the idea of taxation. That is the backbone of their government.
CHAIRMAN ARNALL. As I understand it, every member of the Commission is an advocate of home rule, so there is no inconsistency on its part.
MR. DURDEN. Some of them seem to be stronger than others and want the people to pass on it, and I think that is a matter for the people back home to pass on and not be restricted in the Constitu~ tion.
CHAIRMAN ARNALL. Does Mr. Lovejoy make a motion?
MR. LOVEJOY. No, sir. I can take care of my town and county. 'You can go to hell if you want to.
CHAIRMAN ARNALL. Now when you come to Mr. Culpepper's proposal-
MR. CULPEPPER. I want to insert what is in the Gross provision,
and I want to insert it as Paragraph Ix of Section II. All of Section
II having been stricken. "This section shall apply only to those counties and municipalities in which the people by majority vote of those voting in an election vote to adopt the provisions of this Article." Now I am adding this provision "The General Assembly shall provide for such election." I am inserting what you had in yours.
CHAIRMAN ARNALL. You have heard the reading.
MR. ARNOLD. We could not hear it.
JUDGE CANDLER. Read it again.
MR. CULPEPPER. It was in the other, "this section applies to those counties and municipalities in which the people by a majority of those voting in an election vote to adopt the provisions of this ar~ tide," this is in the Gross proposal, but the method of election I am simplifying by saying, "the General Assembly shall provide for such election."
CHAIRMAN ARNALL. You heard the reading. Is there any dis~ cussion?
MR. ARNOLD. I would like to know if that General Assembly shall provide a general law for such election or will that be a local law?
MR. HARRIS. It would have to be a general law.

RECORDS OF CONSTITUTIONAL COMMISSION

513

MR. GROSS. General law.
CHAIRMAN ARNALL. As I understand by your language about the General Assembly providing for the election you say whether this plan is operative in any city or county will depend on whether the people want it, and the General Assembly shall provide a procedure for the people to advise whether they want it or not?
MR. CULPEPPER. Yes, sir.
MRS. HAAS. Suppose they don't provide a procedure? Suppose the General Assembly does not act?
MR. CULPEPPER. The General Assembly will provide it.
MR. GROSS. I don't think you need to worry about the General Assembly providing the means of submitting. That will be done.
CHAIRMAN ARNALL. My belief is there will be such a demand for the choice the General Assembly will do it. I am going to stay in behind the General Assembly to try and get them to do it.
MR. DURDEN. What will happen to the counties that don't adopt this plan?
CHAIRMAN ARNALL. They will operate like they do now.
MR. DURDEN. Where will you get that authority?
CHAIRMAN ARNALL. It is only if they come under this plan.
MR. LOVEJOY. To be sure now, that is an additional provision in the Article we are substituting, the provision we are substituting for Mr. Gross' plan? That does not affect what we call the Carmichael plan of the Carmichael provision?
CHAIRMAN ARNALL. That is right.
MR. LOVEJOY. I call attention to the fact you must be quite careful if referring to articles and sections.
CHAIRMAN ARNALL. The Chair is of the opinion that the Clerk of this Commission and the Chair, if you see fit, be directed to take special care in the final revision to see that we refer to the right article, section and paragraph, so there won't be any confusion.
JUDGE MacINTYRE. The Lovejoy point is that the Constitution is divided in articles, sections and paragraphs, and when speaking of and referring to a paragraph so and so of section so and so--

fi14

RECORDS OF CONSTITUTIONAL COMMISSION

CHAIRMAN ARNALL. You will have to look at the right paragraph.
MR. LOVEJOY. It des not include the Carmichael.
CHAIRMAN ARNALL. That is right. Here is what we have. We have the Carmichael plan for home rule absolute in the Constitution. That is, the General Assembly shall submit optional plans of government to the cities and counties and they can take whichever one they want, the Committee plan. In addition to that we have got many of the features of the Gross proposal in it. Now whether those features become operative will depend on whether the people in the particular counties or cities to be affected want those features. So now we have Mr. Culpepper's proposal. You have heard the reading of it.
MR. GROSS. I move it be adopted.
CHAIRMAN ARNALL. Any discussion? Without objection it is ordered adopted. Now the Chair is of the opinion that when the details of these proposals that we have adopted are worked out that we will have a system of home rule. Whether it goes as far as some would desire that it go or goes too far, that is, others might desire that it not go that far, that is open to question; but certainly we are submitting a detailed plan to the General Assembly for them to consider in giving the people the right to home rule. The effect of what we have done, it seems to the Chair, will, to a large extent, if the cities and counties adopt it, do away with much local legislation in the General Assembly.
MR. FOLEY. Is it adopted as a whole?
MR. THRASHER. I make a motion you present that to the Committee, if the whole is adopted.
, CHAIRMAN ARNALL. The question is on the adoption of the perfected home rule provision.
MR. HARRIS. I did not hear. Mr. Gross made some motion, what did you adopt there, right at the last?
CHAIRMAN ARNALL. The right to make it effective in a county or city or not.
MR. HARRIS. So, as I gather, we have the Carmichael proposal, that is in Section II. Section II we have got the revised Gross pIau with a referendum to see whether it shall become effective?

RECORDS OF CONSTITUTIONAL COMMISSION

515

CHAIRMAN ARNALL. In any county or city?
MR. HARRIS. Yes, sir. Now the Carmichael, there is no referendum to that?
CHAIRMAN ARNALL. That is right.
MR. HARRIS. Now I think with that, I think I can vote for it, because I think we have eliminated the danger or reduced it to a minimum. I am not crazy about it by any means, to be frank with you I am not yet. I may change my mind when I see it different
but I have not yet. I am not sure that I know what we have done. r
have listened very carefully and sometimes it is like acts we pass in the Legislature. When we get home they don't mean exactly what we thought we were doing up here, but the thing of it is that we are getting somewhere. We are getting more home rule than you started out to get, I think, because this uniformity is the only home rule that will ever work, and I am glad the President of the Sen- ate agrees with me, and I think we can do what some of us have been advocating for years, that is adopt a code of government and leave the details to the local officials. Now I still am not much on this initiative recall and reform of everything every time anybody wants to get up a petition, but you have got it down to where it does not go into effect in my county I don't think. As a matter of fact I am pretty sure it won't go into effect in my county, and I don't think it is going into effect in many others, but it does do two things that have been needed doing in this State for a long time, and I think will justify all of us in voting for it, and that is that it outlaws, first, general bills with local application. That, I think, is the most vicious legislative practice that has ever cropped up anywhere and more vicious than any local legislation has ever been, because it in effect says this, that the general law of this State shall not apply to a particular county and I don't think we ought to have it. Another thing it does, it gives us a chance to adopt a code and do for municipal corporations what we have done in this State for private corporations and get some degree of uniformity, and until you do get uniformity you will never eliminate local bills because the people and everybody else are going to insist on them, and you are going to have to have them, and if you want home rule you can only get it by having a uniform system and granting to the local authorities a broad enough power to do whatever the people of this State want their officials to do. We have got that in your county commission form of government, where the only thing we need to get is uniformity to provide how many com-

516

RECORDS OF CONSTITUTIONAL COMMISSION

missioners you are going to have and when they are going to meet. That is all I know that you can do, provide whether you are going to elect from road districts or county at large, because now their rights, duties and responsibilities are fixed by uniform law, and they can't be changed, except Fulton County changes them time and time again by that general bill with local application to coun,. ties of a population of 200,000 or more, and I think we have made some progress.
CHAIRMAN ARNALL. Does the gentleman move we adopt all we have done in perfecting the bill?
MR. HARRIS. I will make the motion, even though there may be something in there that I have not caught.
CHAIRMAN ARNALL. The gentleman, as Speaker of the House, can reserve any opinion.
MR. HARRIS. I do think we have something we can talk over in the House, and when Mr. Culpepper and Adie Durden and Roy McCracken and Charlie Gowen and I get on to it, we might be able to work out a good bill, so I move that it be adopted.
CHAIRMAN ARNALL. The Committee has implicit confidence in the Speaker and the members of the Commission who are mem bers of the House and the Senate to turn out a very fine home rule bill.
MR. HARRIS. When we get through with it, then the President of the Senate can take it, and he is going to have some good help, and when they get through working on it, I think eventually we will have a good home rule bill.
MR. HOLT. May I say I doubt if we can recognize it when it comes out?
MR. HARRIS. I doubt it, but I think you can count on two things being true when it goes through the House and Senate, that is, you will have a better bill than you have now, if changed, and you will have less initiative than you have got now, if changed.
MR. HOLT. We are accustomed to the lack of initiative.
MR. HARRIS. I do think we have got something, and we have some. thing that has darn little initiative in it.
MRS. HAAS. As I understand it, should a proposal of this sort go through, would it not be true it would be better the Legislature do

RECORDS OF CONSTITUTIONAL COMMISSION

517

the work on the first part? There is less need there might be under the adoption of the second part.
MR. HARRIS. The lady is correct, because if it is under the Carmichael bill we are going to make progress.
MRS. HAAS. In case you don't, the other is there.
MR. HARRIS. The more uniformity and better uniformity, the less need you have to hodge podge schemes whether voting by the people or local bill or whatever it is, and consequently the less need you will have for it. Here is one danger I think we ought to keep in mind, and I don't know how much demand there is for home rule. I have tried to ask the folks in my county what they thought about it, and I never have been able to get anybody to express themselves; and if there is anybody in my county wanted it except one man, I have never heard of it; but I want to say this, here is the danger of what we are doing and you better keep it in mind; I think we are giving them more home rule than they are going to want when they read it, and I think you will have to sell them on home rule because that was a catchy phrase and the people did not know what was meant by home rule. They still don't know and, Mr. Chairman, if the newspapers had ever printed the details of any plans that were offered here, I think they would have turned them down. I think that is the trouble you are going to get into. The Municipal Association had a committee of fifteen people working over a year and they made a report the other day no two of them could agree. The County Commissioners Association had a crowd in here yesterday and their report last night was they could not agree on anything, and I think that is the danger you are going to get, that probably some of these folks that are clamoring for home rule now are going to get more home rule than they want, and they may kick it all out. I don't know.
CHAIRMAN ARNALL. If we submit to the people the home rule provision and the people don't want it-I don't want it, but I am in favor of letting the people say, and that is what you are doing, and the Chair congratuates the Speaker because that is what we are doing.
MR. HARRIS. Here is one thing I want to call the Commission's attention to, and I think we ought to think about it, all of use, before the Legislature meets. I doubt, if we could write a good Constitution that everybody should agree on except home rule, and then they did not want home rule. The spotlight has been put on

518

RECORDS OF CONSTITUTIONAL COMMISSION

home rule-and everything you have done, if they turn down home rule, will be done away with if you submit it all in one piece; and I think that is something everybody on the Commission should give attention to.
CHAIRMAN ARNALL. Under the proposal we now have, assuming the people adopt the Constitution with the provision, it is not mandatoryon any city or county to have home rule. What objection would there be to letting the people vote on whether they want it?
MR. HARRIS. Except this, under the Carmichael amendment it says they shall be governed by general laws, and it makes it necessary.
CHAIRMAN ARNALL. In other words, you come to this point, as I see it, that the very fact that the people of the cities and counties don't want uniformity is the one thing that may offend them, the people?
MR. HARRIS. That is right.
CHAIRMAN ARNALL. And yet the gentleman argues for uniformity.
MR. HARRIS. Yes, sir, that is what I believe.
CHAIRMAN ARNALL. But the Chair states, and I believe you agree with me, that while the Speaker argues for uniformity we must confess the people generally don't like uniformity.
.MR. HARRIS. I don't know, because I.don't think they know what they want, for the simple reason' that it is a catchy phrase; and yet they don't know anything about municipal or county government. When they begin to study it then they may have a different idea than what they have now, because I was only pointing as an illustration, we see we wound up in a deadlock, ten to ten last night. The county commissioners can't agree what they want, the city officials can't agree, and when you get in the details I don't know whether it is uniformity or what, but whenever you get into the details that is when the fur begins flying and the disagreement comes. I think whatever we do we will have a hard job selling it, I don't care what it is. You don't have any trouble selling home rule because everybody is in favor of it, but when you get down to the machinery I think any machinery that is ever adopted we will have to get out and sell it.
CHAIRMAN ARNALL. The Speaker-

RECORDS OF CONSTITUTIONAL COMMISSION

519

MR. HARRIS. One other thing, I want to call attention to, I don't know whether it should be done, that is in Sub-committee Number 7, Jimmy Carmichael's Committee, made a recommendation in another section for preserving-let me read it-all local laws or Constitutional Amendments affecting the county or municipality which shall have force and effect on the effective delivery date of this Constitution shall remain in full force and effect until and unless such law or Constitutional Amendment will be repealed, amended, or superseded by the act of the General Assembly adopted in accordance with the provisions of this article. That language would not fit the main purpose of getting up what is called for but I call that to the attention of the Commission to see whether or not we should adopt something of that kind, because if the Constitution is adopted with those provisions in it, say in July, and the Legislature does not meet for eighteen months afterwards, we might have repealed every charter of every city in Georgia.
CHAIRMAN ARNALL. Will you read that and let's consider it.
MR. HARRIS. I think the last language should be changed and I propose we add another paragraph and section. I think we better put another section in it, make it section 3.
MR. ATKINSON. Put in there on division one.
MR. HARRIS. I think we better. We will make it Section III.
CHAIRMAN ARNALL. Section III.
MR. HARRIS. (Reads) "Paragraph I. All local laws or constitutional amendments affecting the form of county or municipal governments which are in force and effect an the effective date of this Constitution shall remain in full force and effect until and unless such law or Constitutional amendments be repealed, amended or superseded in one of the manners provided for in this Constitution."
CHAIRMAN ARNALL. Is there objection? Without objection it is so ordered. Now Mr. Harris moves-
MR. ATKINSON. Wait a minute. One provided for in this Constitution?
MR. HARRIS. Yes, sir.
MR. ATKINSON. Could you not say it by law?
MR. HARRIS. Suppose we do this way. You can't say by law, you can't change a Constitutional amendment by law.

520

RECORDS OF CONSTITUTIONAL COMMISSION

MR. ATKINSON. You are preserving everything in that law until changed by some law.
MR. GOWEN. Until and unless changed to agree with the law.
MR. HARRIS. All right, "unless such law or Constitutional amendments be repealed, amended or superseded."
CHAIRMAN ARNALL. Is there objection to its adoption?
MR. GROSS. I object.
CHAIRMAN ARNALL. Now, Mr. Harris moves, not on this, he is moving that we ratify and adopt the perfecting work that we have done heretofore as a whole article.
MR. GROSS. I second it.
CHAIRMAN ARNALL. Mr. Gross seconds.
MR. GROSS. It gives me a great deal of pleasure to second the motion of the Honorable Speaker of the House, although the Speaker reminded me somewhat of an explanation of a vote on the pipe line bill that happened in the House. I am glad he made the motion.
CHAIRMAN ARNALL. The Chair desires to say for these two very eminent gentlemen that he has never witnessed an illustration of two gentlemen who apparently were far apart on this original idea who are more nearly in accord in the middle of the road than these two men. I only hope they will with wisdom and prudence govern the deliberations of the General Assembly on the Constitution, so that the House on the one side and the Senate on the other can agree easily on the provisions to be included in the Constitution. Is there objection to the adoption of what has been done so far? Without objection it is so ordered.
MR. ATKINSON. May I call attention to the last words of a great man who was arguing before the Supreme Court before he dropped dead, he said: "In the conflict of great minds the sparks of truth scintillate." And I think that is what we have here, the fine result that has been brought about by the conflict of these two minds, not these two but those who have trains of thought.
CHAIRMAN ARNALL. "VeIl said, Senator Atkinson.
MR. ATKINSON. I congratulate you.
CHAIRMAN ARNALL. Thank you. Now we pass on to two other matters.

RECORDS OF CONSTITUTIONAL COMMISSION

521

MR. LOVEJOY. Who determines whether the Constitution is submitted to the people as a whole or in portions?
CHAIRMAN ARNALL. This committee can make a recommendation about that, but if we do nothing about it it will be up to the Legislature to say whether it goes as a whole' to the people or in sections.
There are two more matters coming before the committee unless there be others. One is the Merit System and the other, I understand Judge Candler-
JUDGE CANDLER. My friend Roy Harris said that he did not think the people knew what they wanted. I think he said that inadvertently. I will tell him one thing-
MR. HARRIS. The points, I mean, when it comes to the details, because it is like most of us, you ask me what kind of medicine I want when I am sick and I don't know.
JUDGE CANDLER. I will tell you one thing the people of the State do want. They do want an absence of the necessity to amend the Constitution so much. I have never believed in doing anything by indirection that ought to be done by direction. As pointed out yesterday, we have amended the Constitution in the last one hundred years 137 times to give the cities the right to raise enough money to do something with. We soon, I hope, will enter the postwar period and every county in Georgia is going to by necessity have to make large public improvements, and to do that they are going to have to have more money than seven per cent of the assessed value of this property represents, and you are going to have to perfect a hundred amendments, and I want to move we reconsider our action of yesterday and we fix the maximum rates that be levied-not levied, but fixed for bond purposes at ten per cent rather than seven per cent, and I move that we reconsider our action of yesterday.
CHAIRMAN ARNALL. Is there a second?
MR. GOWEN. I second it.
CHAIRMAN ARNALL. The question is on reconsideration. Let the Chair explain the effect of the gentleman's motion. As now pro" vided in our recommended Constitution we have the seven per cent value limit on bonds that is also provided in the present Constitution. In addition to that we have provided that the counties be authorized to issue an additional three per cent on bonds payable

522

RECORDS OF CONSTITUTIONAL COMMISSION

in five years, whereas the seven per cent bonds were payable in thirty years. Now the effect of Judge Candler's motion is to recon" sider our action in setting up the special bond issue whereby in.. stead of having a bond issue of seven per cent payable in thirty years the county can issue bonds to the extent of ten per cent pay.. able in thirty years, and the effect would be to eliminate the additional three per cent. All in favor say "aye"; opposed "no." The Chair is in doubt. So many as favor it make it known by rising and standing until counted; reverse your position, those opposed. Nine to five and the motion is-the motion carried.
MR. THRASHER. Before you get to that Merit System, when that is adopted everybody is going to light out of here. I would like to make a motion-
MR. ATKINSON. We have not voted.
MR. LOVEJOY. You have not voted.
MR. HARRIS. You have not finished it.
CHAIRMAN ARNALL. We have reconsidered our action and now we are ready to talk about it.
MR. ATKINSON. A lot of the committee are gone and they had a motion to reconsider yesterday and it was voted down.
CHAIRMAN ARNALL. This is a sovereign body. You can have as many motions as you want while the light holds out.
MR. ATKINSON. That is a serious proposition. You are involving the credit of every city in the State.
CHAIRMAN ARNALL. Counties, it does not apply to cities.
MR. LOVEJOY. Yes, sir.
MR. ATKINSON. You are involving the credit of your whole State. You will get yourself in trouble.
MR. THRASHER. I want to make a motion on this first.
CHAIRMAN ARNALL. Now Judge Candler moves we eliminate from the Constitution the emergency bond issue of three per cent payable in five years and strike the seven per cent limitation in the preceding paragraph and provide that the bonds may be issued to the amount of ten per cent of the ad valorem value on property repayable over a period of thirty years. Is there objection?

RECORDS OF CONSTITUTIONAL COMMISSION

523

MR. LOVEJOY. Of course, you know there is. Now, Mr. Chairman, we have done fairly well.
CHAIRMAN ARNALL. The Chair understood the distinguished gentleman from LaGrange to say he could look after LaGrange aU right and would leave it to the rest of us to look after ourselves. Now will you change that?
MR. LOVEJOY. I said as to the matter you had there. If the Chairman was right we would not have any law to affect ourselves at all. We would look after ourselves, and I think nobody disagrees with that. Everybody agrees we must have a Constitution or fixed principle.
CHAIRMAN ARNALL. The Chair meant no offense.
MR. LOVEJOY. I knew you did not. I would not have taken it if you had. That is the thing about a friend, a friend who can do you no wrong. They curse you and you forgive them for cursing you. They have worked reasonably well during this period under nothing but a seven per cent limitation. The very fact that you came to the Legislature, although in the course of how many-seventy years, approximately seventy years, there were this many amendments to get permission in special cases to increase, this shows what a deterrent that seven per cent was, and it has held the finances of the cities and counties in a condition which is probably not comparable to any other state in the United States. Now that is under a seven per cent limitation, with an amendment here and there. Most of those amendments, however, were because the people had misappropriated the taxes levied to pay those bonds. That is what most of these amendments were for. We have provided in the Constitution now a provision for a single fund, which, if they don't comply with, they go to the penitentiary, and if complied with, we will never have to have any more of that kind of refunded bond. In addition to having worked under the seven per cent, with that experience, recognizing the possibility of greater needs, we have provided, as I understand, first, a provision as to a sinking fund that will prevent that kind of amendment. We have a provision which is new with us, adopted a few years ago, money can be raised. Sir, if indebtedness is necessary I will call them-that can be raised against revenue bearing or revenue producing facilities, and in addition to that we have provided an emergency. You can issue bonds to the extent of three per cent of the taxable value in addition. We have gone far beyond the provisions of the old seven

524

RECORDS OF CONSTITUTIONAL COMMISSION

per cent limitation in an effort to give the people an opportunity to raise additional finances. We did well and the cities and counties did well under the seven per cent limitation. There is no question as to what we have added to that and give them an opportunity, in case of emergency, to do more, that they will be protected. There is not any sound financial basis for raising this seven per cent to ten per cent, regardless of emergency, regardless of counties. It simply means you will load the people, and you will have the counties and cities with a ten per cent levy, ten per cent of the assessed value issued in bonds, and they will be hanging over your people for the next thirty years, and some of you know that you can get up some popular movement and issue bonds and issue them to the limit.
JUDGE CANDLER. Would it not be easier on the people if those bonds were all thirty-year bonds than it was on us if part of them were thirty-five year bonds. Would it not equalize the burden?
MR. LOVEJOY. The easiest thing on the people is to remove all limit and do whatever you please and play hell. The easiest thing on the people, Judge, is to pay your debts as you go. I understand you can't always do it, but we had an illustration when they tried to issue bonds to build roads in the State, and if there had not been the fight made that was made on the pay as you go plan the State of Georgia would not be loaded down with millions of dollars in bonds; but the Legislature decided we won't do that, we are going to pay as we go and use the pay as you go plan in the ,State of Georgia, and the State of Georgia in its financial situation today, especially as to bonds, is better off than I presume forty-seven out of forty-eight States are. I know you can't always pay as you go, but it ought to be an exception when you don't pay as you go, in your private life as well as in public life. The sound thing is to pay as you go; the exception ought to be going in debt, and I say when you go in debt it is a very serious matter. We have not only done what he said while ago, we have made it easier to issue the bonds. You don't have a strike requirement under our proposal as you had under the Constitution as it stands today. We have made provision for emergencies. I will say finally, it is unfortunate for the question to come up here, as serious as it is to the State of Georgia. The empty benches here, they voted against it when you voted on it yesterday, and voted it down, and now with this little fifteen or eighteen left we undo what we have done when the Commission was present in full.

RECORDS OF CONSTITUTIONAL COMMISSION

525

JUDGE MacINTYRE. Suppose some of us retire and we won't have a quorum?
MR. LOVEJOY. We will not do it that way, we will vote, but it is unfortunate we have come down with a handful of members, when with a full Commission we voted it down.
MR. GROSS. The question is on the motion of Judge Candler.
MR. DURDEN. With reference to the addition of three per cent, to show you how impractical that would be, Mr. Lovejoy, you are talking about placing a limitation on the tax rate on the basis of your five per cent or three per cent, in addition to the seven per cent, it would take at least a twenty-five mill levy in order to retire those. That is why it is impractical. The people could not stand it. If you are going to give it to them in case of emergency, since you have to make it take two-thirds of those voting in favor of it, then you have a protection unless it is an emergency or unless it is necessary you are not going to get the people to vote for it. Then, as you say, they can do it and issue over five year periods. You might as well eliminate that because it can't be paid back, and I do say in fairness to the cities, as pointed out by Judge Candler, during postwar periods there is naturally going to be construction. We hope there must be, and in that event it won't hurt any city to issue bonds up to ten per cent of the assessed value, and I think it is only fair and right, and I hope we will adopt that provision.
JUDGE CANDLER. I would not have any members of this Commission for anything to think that I would take advantage of the absence of anybody, for every man that is not here today is absent because of some special reason, and I would not have anybody to feel like the matter was brought up yesterday, and he was absent today, and it was brought up and reconsidered when he did not have an opportunity to vote on it. I realize my good friend Adie Durden is a member of the Legislature. This matter can come up when the matter is discussed before the Legislature, and rather than to have anybody feel like I had taken advantage of their absence, I desire to withdraw my motion to reconsider.
MR. GROSS. I am sure the gentleman from LaGrange did not mean to insinuate that Judge Candler had taken advantage of the absentees.
MR. LOVEJOY. Of course I did not.
JUDGE CANDLER. I did not so understand, but I do realize there

526

RECORDS OF CONSTITUTIONAL COMMISSION

were a number here yesterday who are not here today.
MR. LOVEJOY. The fact remains they are not here. I imagine you did not think about whether there was more or less of them here today.
JUDGE CANDLER. No, sir.
MR. LOVEJOY. But the fact remains we have the smallest attendance of the Commission now that we have had to vote.
JUDGE CANDLER. I only wanted to make it unnecessary to have to amend the Constitution so many times for that specific purpose.
MR. GROSS. Mr. Chairman, Judge Candler asked permission to withdraw his motion, is there objection? The Chair hears none and it is withdrawn.
MR. THRASHER. On page 26 of the white copy, at the top of the page, which says, in reference to the Governor, "He shall have a salary of seven thousand five hundred dollars per annum," I would like to offer an amendment there, to insert "until January 1, 1947. The salary of the Governor for each year thereafter shall be twelve :thousand dollars per annum."
MR. GOWEN. I second that.
MR. HOLT. How many members constitute a majority?
MR. GROSS. A majority, there are about eighteen here.
MRS. HAAS. Didn't the Governor specifically request we not do that?
MR. THRASHER. The Governor is back here, he can speak for himself. He said as long as it did not apply to him. I would like to make this statement, you raised the Judges' salaries. You have left the Governor's salary below the Judges, and it is not fair to have the Chief Executive of the State with a salary considerably less than the Judges'. He is the Chief Executive Officer of the State.
MR. GROSS. The effect of the motion is this, beginning with the term of the next Governor the salary of the Governor of the State of Georgia will be twelve thousand dollars instead of seven thousand five hundred?
CHAIRMAN ARNALL. I was back here discussing something with the .esteemed Mayor of Atlanta. As a member of the Commission, I

RECORDS OF CONSTITUTIONAL COMMISSION

527

would like to violently oppose or protest any raise in salary to the:: Governor. Is that what you were talking about?
MR. THRASHER. That does not affect you.
CHAIRMAN ARNALL. What does it say.
MR. THRASHER. "He shall have a salary of seven thousand five' hundred dollars per annum until January 1, 1947. The salary of the Governor for each year thereafter shall be twelve thousand dollars per annum."
CHAIRMAN ARNALL. Even then I want to vote against you.
MR. THRASHER. I move that the salary be raised to $12,000 per annum after the expiration of the present term of the Governor.
MR. GROSS. I think the members of the Commission understand the motion. Those in favor say "aye"; opposed "no." The "ayes'" seem to have it. The ayes have it and the motion prevailed.
MR. THRASHER. I would like to make another motion.
MR. LOVEJOY. To be clear about it, there is still left in the provision that the General Assembly may change the salary?
MR. GROSS. Yes, sir.
MR. THRASHER. Mr. Chairman, the Governor has been saying that: he has been hearing from various people over the State. It is peculiar, but I have heard from one or two members of the General: Assembly. They have been up to Atlanta here and they have to stay' here for sixty or seventy days during the session. The local hotels. in Atlanta have made a rate which they say they are going to' charge the members of the Legislature of $4.50 per day per room.. They have to buy their meals on top of that. With the provision for the compensation of members of the General Assembly of the State of Georgia, which has been very niggardly in providing pay for this type of work. Any board in the State or any public official in the State gets $25.00 per diem, some of them $15.00 a day plus their actual expenses. On page 21, 'Section IX, I would like to make this motion, at the end of that section, that these words be added: "All members shall receive hotel and subsistence allowance not in excess of $7.00 per day while in session outside of their home county."
MR. GROSS. Mr. Thrasher moves at the end of Section IX, Para--

528

RECORDS OF CONSTITUTIONAL COMMISSION

graph I, of Article III-read that again and let the members pay attention.
MR. THRASHER. "All members shall receive a hotel and subsistence allowance not in excess of seven dollars per day while in session outside of their home county." The reason for putting that in there, the members of the Legislature from Fulton County are here at home, they don't stay at hotels, and they would not be entitled to it.
MR. GOWEN. How about the DeKalb members?
MR. THRASHER. It says outside of their home county. Except Fulton County and counties adjacent thereto. Let it stay like I had it.
MR. HARRIS. I think we had better let this alone, and another thing too, I think, Mr. Thrasher, of course he is elected by the Legislature, I think he will get re-elected.
MR. MAJORS. In deference to Mr. Thrasher, I state I offered to do that, I tried to get it done several times.
MR. GROSS. The Chair will put the motion.
MR. THRASHER. I still think the members of the General Assembly on this Commission have expressed themselves, and he that looks not after his own household is not worthy of his hire.
MR. GROSS. I will put the motion.
MR. THRASHER. There is no member of the General Assembly, particularly a poor man like some of us are, that come up and stay; I think you will agree with me, without having personally to pay money out of his own pocket.
MR. ARNOLD. Mr. Chairman and Mr. Thrasher, I am inclined to vote against your motion, but I think your motion, if made at all, should leave out the words "outside of his home county." I think that is a narrow view and I think it should be general.
MR. GROSS. The motion as put, "All members shall receive hotel and subsistence allowance not in excess of seven dollars per day while in session outside of their home county."
MR. THRASHER. I might say I have had several members of the Legislature, not complaining, but they have fussed about the arrangement here in Atlanta. Now this committee has been getting eight dollars a day to cover their expenses, and I don't think any

RECORDS OF CONSTITUTIONAL COMMISSION

529

of them have been able to come within that. They have no per diem, no salary, so that is the reason for the motion.
MR. GROSS. The question is on the motion. The Chair again would like to say that he is of the opinion anything applying to the salary or expenses of the General Assembly should not apply to those already elected.
JUDGE MacINTYRE. As Mr. Harris has said, the people have a chance at them every two years. I am in accord. I don't think the Legislature gets enough, but times change. It is higher sometimes and lower sometimes and the Legislature can change it, but you hog-tie it in the Constitution, no difference what happened.
MR. THRASHER. May I call the gentleman's attention to the provisions for the salaries of the Governor and Judges. That was ,insisted they be put in and not left out.
JUDGE MacINTYRE. I stated I did not care whether they made it less or more, and we have fixed it, and we fixed the Legislature's salary at their suggestion, and so far as my salary is concerned, they can raise it more or raise it less. If I don't want it I don't take it.
MR. ARNOLD. Mr. Chairman(Chairman Arnall resumes the Chair)
CHAIRMAN ARNALL. Now in order to move along, we want everybody to express themselves but it is growing late and there is a lot of work to be done here. The question is on the subsistence allowance of the Members of the Legislature, not to exceed seven dollars a day, is there objection?
MR. GROSS. I object.
CHAIRMAN ARNALL. There is objection. So many as favor the motion make it known by saying "aye"; opposed "no." The noes seem to have it and the motion is lost.
MR. HOLT. I have a matter I would like to bring before the Commission at the time when you are ready to discuss it. I go back to what my friends there said about changing things when we have the skeleton membership of this Commission present. At a previous meeting of the Commission we decided upon the matter of the election of a State School Superintendent and County School Superintendent. At a subsequent meeting of the Commission, when very

530

RECORDS OF CONSTITUTIONAL COMMISSION

few were present, I am reminded, the vote was extremely close, it was changed by one vote. This paragraph was adopted, Paragraph I, Section III, on page 72, Paragraph I, "State School Superintendent; election, term, etc. There shall be a State School Superintendent, who shall be the executive officer of the State Board of Education, elected by the people at the same time for the same term and in the same manner as the Governor, who shall hold office until his successor is elected and qualified. The State School Superintendent shall have such qualifications and shall be paid such compensation as may be fixed by law." What I want to do, I am not certain about the proper procedure for doing that, is to submit to this Commission the original paragraph under Section III, which reads as follows: "State School Superintendent; election, term, etc. There shall be a State School Superintendent, who shall be the executive officer of the State Board of Education, elected by the State Board of Education, for such term as it may fix, except that the term fixed shall not exceed four years. The State School Superintendent shall have such qualifications and shall be paid such compensation as may be fixed by law. No member of said Board shall be eligible for election as State School Superintendent during the time fQr which he shall have been appointed. The first appointment under this provision shall be made at the expiration of the term of the State School Superintendent in office at the time of adoption of the Constitution." We have in a preceding paragraph arranged for a State Board of Education and the method of appointment and they are appointed by the Governor. Those men come into office as appointees of the Goyernor with administrative duties and administrative authority. The State School Superintendent, as a man elected by the people, would come in and perhaps claim a mandate from the people by virtue of his election by them, and successfully thwart the efforts of the State Board of Education. I therefore move you, sir, that the Paragraph I under Section IlIon page 72 as adopted by the Commission originally, be declared to be the judgment of this Commission rather than that one which was adopted at the last meeting.
CHAIRMAN ARNALL. Without objection we will re-open it. The question, if there is no objection, it is re-opened. Mr. Holt moves the State Board of Education elect a State Superintendent of Schools. Is there objection?
MR. MAJORS. I object.
CHAIRMAN ARNALL. There is objection. All in favor say "aye";

RECORDS OF CONSTITUTIONAL COMMISSION

531

opposed "no." The Chair is in doubt. All in favor make it known by rising and standing until counted. If you vote for this motion it means the State Board of Education selects the State Superintendent of Schools.
JUDGE CANDLER. My venerable friend over there gave me a good spanking while ago and I withdraw my motion. I am going to administer the same spanking to my other friends. I don't think in the absence of as many members as are absent that we ought to bring that matter up. I withdrew my motion for the same reason.
MR. HOLT. I would like to make this explanation, the motion that I am making is the motion adopted by the full Commission. The one I am trying to get rid of is the one that was adopted by the Commission when only fifteen members were present and was lost by one vote.
CHAIRMAN ARNALL. The question is on the adoption of the motion by which, if adopted, the State Board of Education elects the State Superintendent of Schools.
MR. HOLT. The motion I make was voted on affirmatively by the full Commission and that was changed when there were only fifteen members of the Commission present, and it was only lost by one vote. I see no consistency in your position.
JUDGE MacINTYI1E. I move that we go back and reconsider and vote on that motion whether or not we can reconsider. That is the only thing I want to vote on.
CHAIRMAN ARNALL. The record shows twenty-one members.
MR. HOLT. Only twenty-one members and twenty-three on the Commission. I don't think you can call that a skeleton Commission.
CHAIRMAN ARNALL. It moves, we will move right along, and the Chair hopes everybody will stay without lunch and speed up and do the work. Now the question is on Mr. Holt's motion, whether or not the State Board of Education is empowered to elect the State School Superintendent. The State Schol Superintendent is elected now by the people. The question is on Mr. Holt's motion. So many as favor it let it be known by saying "aye"; opposed "no." The noes seem to have it.
MR. HOLT. I call for a division.
HAIRMAN ARNALL. So many as favor the motion rise and stand

532

RECORDS OF CONSTITUTIONAL COMMISSION

until counted; reverse your position, those opposed. Nine for and six against and the motion prevails.
MR. LOVEJOY. Can I say something before you announce the result?
CHAIRMAN ARNALL. Yes.
MR. LOVEJOY. I don't think we do it because I will move we reconsider. I voted for it. We should not pass anything by nine members here now and in the absence of the others in a matter as important as that.
MR. HOLT. May I call the gentleman's attention again to the fact the original proposition was passed by the full Commission and the change was made by fifteen, eight to seven.
MR. MAJORS. May I call the gentleman's attention to the fact this change was changed because the Governor stated that he had received more letters in protest against our action than any other one proposition?
MR. HOLT. On the county school superintendent proposition?
MR. MAJORS. You pass this and you will see.
MR. HOLT. May I ask the Governor to clarify that. Was it on the county school superintendent? CHAIRMAN ARNALL. I believe what was stated was that we had received a great deal of criticism-because when I say "we," I received it through the letters that came to me-because the Commission was taking away from the people the right to elect their county school superintendents; that the people generally like to have the right to elect people, and that is why home rule is popular; they like to participate, they like to have the right to participate. This much is to be said for Mr. Holt's position: We have a Constitutional Board of Regents administering the higher education and they select the Chancellor, whereas in the State Schools the State elects the Superintendent and the Board is appointed. The remarks the Governor made were directed primarily about the county school superintendent. You know the people back home, other than a few State officers, they are not as close in touch with State affairs as their local affairs, and they get more interested in local affairs. The question is on Mr. Holt's motion. It seems it has passed. Mr. Lovejoy moved to reconsider action in the Committee's adopting it.

RECORDS OF CONSTITUTIONAL COMMISSION

533

MR. LOVEJOY. I withdraw it if the majority of the full Commission took this same action and the majority of those here take the same action. I guess that is all right.
MR. HOLT. Now, Mr. Chairman, at the same time when these fifteen people were present there was a change made in the proposition of the county school superintendent. Originally they adopted a prohibition; now it requires all county school superintendents be elected by the people; and I offer this amendment to Paragraph I of Section VI: "There shall be a County School Superintendent, who shall be the executive officer of the County Board of Education. The method of the selection of said County School Superintendent shall be determined by the people of the county."
CHAIRMAN ARNALL. Is there a second to the motion?
MR. GROSS. I second that.
CHAIRMAN ARNALL. 1s there objection to reconsidering our action? Without objection it is reconsidered. The question is on the adoption of Mr. Holt's motion that the people in the county determine whether they want to elect or appoint a school superintendent.
MR. GOWEN. The Legislature can establish the machine how they can decide.
CHAIRMAN ARNALL. Is there objection to its adoption? The Chair hears none. It is so ordered. What other proposition? We have the Merit System. The Chair hopes we will adopt the Merit System; and let's make a recommendation to the Legislature about how it shall work.
MR. HARRIS. Mr. Chairman, everybody has read it. I don't think it is necessary to read it again. Now you talk about doing away with home rule; you are going to take away more home rule than you ever considered on this action. I have the note from Bill Hartsfield back here, says true home rule lies in the field of finance and fair division of revenue. Now here is one thing Bill is leading up to, and it happened elsewhere. We have a lot-you take all of our employees in the Health Department and Public Welfare Department in the counties come under the provision~ of this. Bill had the trouble here with the State Merit Board coming in and telling Fulton County what they would have to pay nurses that were paid out of funds that was in this work that came under the State Merit Council. Every county has the same kind of a situation. Now under this

534

RECORDS OF CONSTITUTIONAL COMMISSION

thing here we set up a super-government over the State that is beyond the will of the people. It is beyond the Legislature. It is beyond the Governor, and it grants in here authority to fix salaries and pass on expense accounts of employees of every department of the State Government; and you have a super-government here beyond the reach of anybody, and it is running in the bureaucracy. We are building under bureaucracy that would be worse than the Federal bureaucracy we run up against now, because the Federal bureaucracies are set up by an Act of Congress and can be done away with; but this thing sets up something that nobody will have anything to do with. You could not touch them; and it puts them above the law and above everything else, and provides here-it says it can be changed, but it takes two-thirds vote of the membership of both houses to do it. Now here is your trouble about that. We usually operate with about two-thirds of them present, and usually twelve or fifteen men in either house can kill any kind of a proposal you have got; and I think it is the most dangerous thing we can do. At the last session of this Commission we did this: We provided for a Civil Service System and a Civil Service Board, and said their duties and powers should be conferred by law, by the Legislature. I think we ought to leave it like we have got it. Whenever we enact this, this is something that is hard to change, takes a statewide campaign to change it, and you have to get a two-thirds of the votes of the members of the Legislature; and when you go to writing this kind of a thing, a government that is over the government, be a guardian of every department of State Government-they can even fix the salaries of the people in the Governor's office, and they can fix the salaries of the people who are in the Attorney General's Office, p.rescribe their duties; and I tell you the kind of lawyers they would pick for the Attorney General's Office would leave him in a bad fix.

MR. GOWEN. Will you yield to a question? If this process is continued, won't the deliberation of this body be to give local rule to the people and take State rule entirely away from the people?

MR. HARRIS. That is right, and sets up a bunch of bureaucrats. They might be fine gentlemen; they might do a good job; and they might not. If you are going to have a real Merit System, you have to give them a good bit of authority, but you better let it come from the Legislature, so when they abuse it you can do something about it; and this thing sets up a board above the reach of the people,

RECORDS OF CONSTITUTIONAL COMMISSION

535

and above the reach of the Legislature, or the Governor, or anybody.
CHAIRMAN ARNALL. Here is what the Chair wants to get across: a merit system or civil service system, either one that works free from politics, or there is none.
MR. HARRIS. I have never known one to be free. The Federal Civil Service System is shot as full of it as it 'can be, and you will never take politics out of politics. It can't be done.
CHAIRMAN ARNALL. The Chair will say this. The Chair is of the opinion the present State Merit System is free from politics, and let me give you an illustration. In a county not far from here our friend was elected to the Senate, and he wanted to get rid of the welfare worker, and preferred charges against her. They had the hearing and the Merit System Board would not remove her, because while they would like to have accommodated our friend, there was no grounds. Now then, if you leave it up to the Legislature, that friend and other friends will unseat or upset the Merit Board, even though the Merit Board has done what is right.
MR. HARRIS. I don't think so. I think the Legislature will stay with them as long as they are right. Now you may have a few disgruntled, but I think you will find the Legislature staying with them, and I don't think you will find any effort on the part of the Legislature to get them to play politics. I don't think there is any possibility of ever getting anybody to be impartial.
CHAIRMAN ARNALL. Do you have objection to that provision? If you take away that two-thirds vote and say it can be changed by the General Assembly?
MR. HARRIS. That would make it better, but why clutter the Constitution with a lot of legislative acts when it ought to be a matter of legislation? What is the use to put it in the Constitution if you will let the Legislature change it?
MR. HEAD. If this goes in the Constitution it ought to be redrafted. It is loosely and badly worded, the provision in there that should never be in the Constitution, and it would have to be redrafted. It is the most imperfect document that has been presented to the Commission. I can start in and pick out myself mistakes and errors and complaints from the first word to the last.
MRS. HAAS. I have not studied this particular document, and I

536

RECORDS OF CONSTITUTIONAL COMMISSION

don't know about its imperfections. I do know every time you talk about inaugurating the merit system people operating under the other system don't want you to inaugurate it and get a fair system set up. An increased number of employees want to come under the merit system. The merit system may not be perfect, and this bill may not be perfect, but a merit system is better than any patronage system I know.
MR. HARRIS. I don't think anybody here is opposed to a merit system. Everybody is in favor. We have gone on record. And as far as that is concerned, I am accustomed to it because every employee in my county and in my city is under a merit system, but we don't set it up in the Constitution.
MRS. HAAS. But, Mr. Harris, it seems to me we have to set up some beginning so we know where we are. Couldn't the Legislature have done something?
MR. HARRIS. The Legislature set up some merit systems.
CHAIRMAN ARNALL. We have a good merit system by statute and it applies to three departments, and there is a provision in it any other department can come under it; and there is quite a bit of agitation for some of the other departments to come under it because they want it.
MRS. HAAS. Isn't it true that was set up because you cauld not get Federal funds unless you did?
CHAIRMAN ARNALL. No. I will tell you why we set it up, to break up a system and a bunch of people frozen under the old system, and we wanted to get rid of them and consolidated the whole organization in one system. For the information of the Committee, I want everybody to know it was a good proposal, and we would do it again if it came up. We found the Health Department had its own merit system, and the Welfare Department had its system, and the Labor Department had its own merit system. We found the salaries in some of those departments were out of line with the salaries in others; therefore, we said, we will have one system applying to all of you. That was the background, and we did it, but by doing that the Legislature and the Governor took care to see to it that in that change-over we weeded out anybody we did not want. That is the truth about it, and that is what will happen every time you change your merit system unless it is protected in the Constitution. Does that answer the question?

RECORDS OF CONSTITUTIONAL COMMISSION

537

MRS. HAAS. Yes.
CHAIRMAN ARNALL. Do you agree?
MR. MAJORS. If you went to all that much trouble to weed out somebody you did not want, suppose the next Governor finds somebody up here he won't want?
CHAIRMAN ARNALL. He will weed them out if it is not in the Constitution.
MR. MAJORS. If you did not want them in there you did not have to have them. Why make them have people if they don't want them?
CHAIRMAN ARNALL. In Michigan they had a good State civil service law, statutory law as I recall it, and it provided it should apply to everybody in the State service except those appointed by the Governor; so the Legislature said everybody in the State government shall be appointed by the Governor upon the recommendation of the department heads, and that took everybody out from under it. in other words, it is the same old story; there will be a fight made to take it over, and unless you protect it in the Constitution it will be done. Now the question you raise, should it not be done-
MRS. HAAS. I thought the Committee had agreed.
MR. MAJORS. I think you find the complaint is we did not go far enough and state we should set up a retirement fund for all State employees who serve a certain number of years.
MR. HARRIS. We put that in the other day.
CHAIRMAN ARNALL. That is in.
MR. MAJORS. If that is in, I think we have a good merit system.
MRS. HAAS. You have tenure without merit.
CHAIRMAN ARNALL. Run through the whole thing, but it is a philosophy involved in this thing. We have gone along and set up a Department of Corrections; we have set up a Veterans Bureau; all these in the Constitution. We have set up a merit system in the Constitution, but in each one of those boards there are some of us who think the Legislature should be able to change them or fix their powers and duties. There are others of us who believe the boards should be beyond the reach of the Legislature. Now that is

538

RECORDS OF CONSTITUTIONAL COMMISSION

the philosophy involved, one on one side and one on the other. Now we have a merit system set up that can be developed by the Legislature into a good merit system, but there is no security or guarantee that the next Legislature, or the next Governor, or the next administration won't tear it down. Now Mrs. Haas takes the position if we freeze it in the Constitution it will be protected, and the Chair says unless we freeze it in the Constitution it won't be protected.
MR. GOWEN. We will freeze our idea in the Constitution.
MR. HEAD. I am going to have to leave. I want to ask the Commission to amend the language in Pargagraph III, the exemption from the jurisdiction of the State Personnel Board all positions in government service under the Legislative and Judicial branches. If that language is left as it is-
CHAIRMAN ARNALL. Do you address your remarks to the proposed amendment or what is already here?
MR. HEAD. This document here, this merit system that you are proposing.
CHAIRMAN ARNALL. Mr. Head, I hate to hold you, but just this one thought, in order to conserve time. We have already adopted a merit system to be set up by the Legislature, except the board, which is set up in the Constitution. Now then, the question comes whether we shall go further and write into the Constitution the details proposed in the bill; if we do, then properly you should amend it-I mean your amendment would be in order, but if it is the sense of the committee we are not going to write a proposal in detail, then the Chair is at a loss to see why we should.
MR. HARRIS. I move it to be the sense of the Commission we stand by what we did at the last meeting when we wrote in the Constitution a board and gave the Legislature authority to prescribe their powers and duties. We wrote into the Constitution there shall be a retirement system for State employees, and I move that it be the sense we stick by the action of the Commission at the last meeting.
CHAIRMAN ARNALL. You heard the motion.
MR. MAJORS. I second it.
CHAIRMAN ARNALL. Is there objection?
MRS. HAAS. I object.
CHAIRMAN ARNALL. There is objection. Before it is voted ~n, the

RECORDS OF CONSTITUTIONAL COMMISSION

539

Chair wants to express a hope we do write a detailed merit system in the Constitution. I am speaking as a member of the Commission in stating that. I think we ought to go into details, but that is just my expression as a member. So many as favor the motion of the distinguished Speaker that we stand by the action of the Committee heretofore taken in reference to a merit system which it sets up in the Constitution, but the provisions of its operation to be provided for by law, so many as favor that make it known by saying "aye"; opposed "no." The ayes seem to have. The ayes have it and the motion prevails.
MR. GROSS. Mr. Chairman, I want to make two motions hurriedly. One, on page 9 of the white Constitution, Paragraph III. I want to amend that paragraph by striking the last of the paragraph reading as follows: "To entitle a person to register and vote at any election by the people, he shall have resided in the State one year next preceding the election, and in the county in which he offers to vote six months next preceding the elections." And strike the remainder. The effect of that motion is to abolish poll tax as a prerequisite to vote in the State of Georgia, and call your attention to this fact: It is now the law no one over 60 years of age pays poll tax. You can, by Constitutional Amendment enacted at the last session of the General Assembly and voted on by the people, all citizens in this State from 18 to 21 are entitled to vote without paying poll tax. Women are not required to pay poll tax until they have first registered; and in addition we have exempted from poll tax all members of the Armed Forces; so it leaves you and me, and that is just about all; and if it is good for these different classes, and I think it is, why isn't it good for everybody, and I think we should abolish the poll tax as a prerequisite to voting. That is the purpose of the amendment, and that is all there is to it.
MR. GOWEN. How would you collect it if you did not have it?
MR. GROSS. I don't think we need it.
CHAIRMAN ARNALL. Charlie, you would do it like we now collect
it, and you can fz fa people for payment of it, and they are fz faed.
MR. GOWEN. For one dollar?
CHAIRMAN ARNALL. Two dollars and fifty cents would be fi
faed because they add a dollar and a half.
MR. GROSS. Representative Fortson is going to introduce a bill and everybody is going to vote.

540

RECORDS OF CONSTITUTIONAL COMMISSION

JUDGE MacINTYRE. Can't the Legislature exempt everybody?
MR. GROSS. Take it out of the Constitution.
CHAIRMAN ARNALL. The gentleman moves to abolish the poll tax as a prerequisite. Is there objection? There is objection. All in favor of the motion let it be known by saying "aye"; opposed "no." Division. As many as favor it rise and stand until counted; reverse your position. Seven for and nine against. The chair is prepared to vote if it had been a tie vote.
JUDGE CANDLER. I hate to admit that I am dumb, but when those proposals were submitted a few minutes ago by Mr. Holt and the Chair asked if there was any objection, I thought the Chair meant was anybody objecting to reconsidering. I do object to its adoption. I object to the adoption of the proposal. I would like to go on record.
MR. HOLT. Does the gentleman desire to undertake to reconsider our action?
JUDGE CANDLER. I thought you were asking if there was any objection to reconsidering it.
CHAIRMAN ARNALL. There is objection?
JUDGE CANDLER. There is objection.
CHAIRMAN ARNALL. Does the gentleman desire to be recorded as objecting?
JUDGE CANDLER. Yes, sir, on both.
CHAIRMAN ARNALL. He will be so recorded. The Chair, in order to submit one or the other proposition, that, as I remember in listing the qualifications of electors, we stuck in a third paragraph saying they must be of good character who could not read or write but owned property. The Chair is of the opinion the first prerequisite for voting would be to understand the issue and be able to read and write, and I hate to carry over a practice-
MR. HOLT. I would like to tell you I talked about that at length when it was tacked on.
CHAIRMAN ARNALL. You don't like to tell the world to vote in Georgia you don't have to read and write to know the issues. It is a question. If you don't want to do it, all right; but I think it ought to be stricken. Is there objection to reconsidering?

RECORDS OF CONSTITUTIONAL COMMISSION

541

MR. THRASHER. I move the Chairman be authorized to strike it.
CHAIRMAN ARNALL. So many as favor Mr. Holt's motion that Paragraph III, which enables people who can't read and write who own forty acres of land or taxable property in the value of five hundred dollars to vote, that be stricken, is there objection? The Chair hears none and it is so ordered.
MR. GROSS. I have one other matter.
MR. THRASHER. Don't you have on your desk the amendment to the Constitution proposed by Mr. Roy Harris on home rule and pure democracy?
CHAIRMAN ARNALL. That has not been filed.
MR. HARRIS. Can I call attention to one thing and then-
MR. LOVEJOY. I want to talk business.
MR. HARRIS. And that is this. The only man we have got that is unconstitutional that I have been able to think about is the State Auditor. Everything else is in the Constitution. He is the only man that is unconstitutional. I want to call attention of the Commission to that. Of course I am in favor of having him stay unconstitutional.
MR. THRASHER. I would like to be different from the rest. I prefer to be unconstitutional.
MR. LOVEJOY. Do you want a report from the committee to which was referred a substitute provision about contracts between municipalities and others? It was referred to this committee.
CHAIRMAN ARNALL. Yes.
MR. LOVEJOY. Under the provisions of the Constitution in reference to this, under taxation, there is a provision in reference to contracts between municipalities and counties. We have changed that by agreement allowing those contracts from thirty to fifty years. This provision was handed to us yesterday afternoon, or yesterday morning, and our committee asked to examine it. The one vital thing in it is a provision that these contracts between municipalities and counties or public agencies can be made now for fifty years, and that they can make a contract involving the payment of money, not in excess in one year, of the amount which could be levied for taxes in that year for that purpose, and that not be the creation of a debt under the Constitution. The purpose of it is to

542

RECORDS OF CONSTITUTIONAL COMMISSION

directly, as I understand it, in some way to enable the City of Atlanta and some charity here to organize a hospital authority of some kind; but the language is general and applies to all of the cities and counties in Georgia and would now enable them to make a contract, apparently, so far as I can tell in this short time, running for fifty years, and binding the payment of money for fifty years, and tying up the funds for fifty years on anyone item of taxation. It is so serious as affecting the general counties and cities of the State that I am unwilling to recommend it. There has not been time. I endeavored and advised with several people on it who were interested. I have not had time even to get back to my committee. and this is not a report even from the committee; but I have not been able to get the time, and at this time I am not willing to endorse it, giving permission to counties and cities to make contracts for fifty years which involve the payment of all the money which could be raised for a particular purpose, and without any authority from the people. They book every water works. electric lights. and rent buildings, and this and that. My own statement about it is we are not able, and I am not able to give any recommendation at this time that this substitute be put in, and personally I am opposed to it as far as its general application applies to the whole State. Now if they want this done for the City of Atlanta, I have no objection to stating in plain English the City of Atlanta if it wants to, or whatever else political subdivision involved can make such a contract under these terms if they want it. I state this, at this time I am not throwing off or criticizing Atlanta. The conditions in Atlanta and Fulton County are different from what they are in my home town of LaGrange. They need different things here, and if they want something that fits their condition, I have no objection to having it; and all I can say is not to have this matter conferred. It could be brought before the Legislature, and not put us in the position of not acting on it. I have no objection to writing a specific provision that will apply and give the authority to Atlanta if they want it. I say this in justice to the Commission and ourselves, this sub-committee. This was just presented to us yesterday morning and referred to us yesterday, and it is not our thought or not our fault that it came up after we had formally adjourned the situation.
CHAIRMAN ARNALL. Is there objection to receiving the report? There is none and it will be received.
MR. GROSS. I have one other proposition I want to bring before

RECORDS OF CONSTITUTIONAL COMMISSION

543

the Commission. I was not here when it was acted on before, and that is with reference to the provision of the Governor being allowed to succeed himself. I am of the opinion, since I know how the Governor feels about the proposal-as I understand, the Commission enacted it before and at one time I expressed myself as being favorable to such a proposal. I have had time to consider those things and I am one politician that sometimes changes his mind. I have no fear of the present Governor.
CHAIRMAN ARNALL. I am surprised the President referred to himself as a politician. The Chair was of the opinion he was a statesman.
MR. GROSS. The point I make, ladies and gentlemen of the Commission is this. I think one term of governorship was enacted, and you got away from the possibility of power politics and possibility of anybody building a machine, and that possibility of the Governor being hamstrung by people wanting favors from Persimmons District, and finding a great deal of difficulty in refusing those favors, that district might or might not go for him for Governor; and I know our Governor has made a good Governor, and I believe one of the reasons he has is the reason we made it possible to easily say no and exercise his good business judgment; and I think when we are dealing in personalities in the Constitution we are getting in dangerous feet; we are dealing with something that will affect posterity, and I would hate to see us do something now that some Governor in the future forty or fifty years from now might capitalize on and might prove detrimental to the State; and I move the Commission reconsider its action in allowing a Governor to succeed himself. Is there a second?
MR. DURDEN. I second it.
CHAIRMAN ARNALL. Any discussion? If not, is there objection?
MR. LOVEJOY. I object.
MRS. HAAS. Why do you think that should apply to the Governor and not to other officials? Why restrict the Governor and no other elective official in that manner?
MR. GROSS. Under our present system, and I think it is a wise one, the Governor has a great deal of influence over the funds of the State Highway Department and others. He has a great deal to do with patronage and so forth. He runs the Highway Department.

544

RECORDS OF CONSTITUTIONAL COMMISSION

CHAIRMAN ARNALL. This Governor does not run the Highway Department.
MR. GROSS. And doing a darn good job. I say there is an evil of a Governor running for a second term while he is in office. We have seen it before. I have seen Governors ruin themselves in the first two years of the term in an effort to assure their re-election the next two.
CHAIRMAN ARNALL. Will the gentleman yield to a question? If you preclude a Governor from running for a second term, and please understand I am not interested personally, how are you going to keep- and you say you are going to remove from him the temptation of building his political fences through patronage and those kind of things, and that then he therefore will be more attentive to promoting himself for a second term than he would the peopIe's business. Why don't we also provide he can't run for the United States Senate? It is just as bad to be using the people's money to be building fences for the United States Senate as it is for Governor. Why don't you outlaw a man as Governor, after he serves one term, from running for public office for a period of foul' years? In other words, to see this thing through.
MR. GROSS. I think that same evil would exist.
JUDGE MacINTYRE. One reason is, the Governor's term don't always expire at the same time as a Senator.
CHAIRMAN ARNALL. A man could build up a pretty good organization.
JUDGE MacINTYRE. Not if there is two years in there between time.
CHAIRMAN ARNALL. What is to keep a man who is Governor from going out and building roads and giving jobs and incurring the good will of the people who can get up to vote in a close election? What is to keep him from running from the Supreme Court or Court of Appeals and taking unfair advantage of someone who can't do that? I say you ought to outlaw him from all public office.
MR. THRASHER. Isn't the best way to keep a Governor on the even keel of having prospects of possibly being elected again?
CHAIRMAN ARNALL. The Chair, not having thought much about it, I don't know. However, the point I am making, I am not objecting to Frank's proposal, but I say to be consistent, if you want to

RECORDS OF CONSTITUTIONAL COMMISSION

545

remove temptation from an incumbent Governor, why don't you divorce him from politics by saying after you serve four years you can't be a candidate for any office?
MR. GOWEN. With no limit at all, and you send him to the Senate, you would be through with him then.
MR. HARRIS. Let me tell you the only argument against it, and that is the argument on home rule. The folks want it that way and I am not sure if anybody knows exactly why, but that is the way they want it, and I think it is just a custom. Personally I think you get a poor official if you can't let him get out and run, because the thing that keeps all of us going is trying to keep our skirts clean and you certainly have an incentive.
MR. LOVEJOY. Do the people want it?
MR. HARRIS. I say this thing of one term is something that builds up in the minds like home rule, and they don't know what it means.
MR. THRASHER. Mr. Chairman, the history has been the last two years of the Governor's administration if he could have reasonably expected that he would have been elected he would behave himself.
MR. GOWEN. Isn't this true, he paid off all the debts in the first two years to try to get re-elected in the second?
MR. ATKINSON. I move we adjourn.
MR. LOVEJOY. I second the motion.
CHAIRMAN ARNALL. We have not put Mr. Gross' motion?
MR. ATKINSON. The motion to adjourn takes precedence.
CHAIRMAN ARNALL. The Chair would hate to say as Chairman that an important question was submitted that could indirectly affect the Chairman in another capacity and that he put a motion to adjourn rather than let that issue be voted on. Therefore the Chair desires to put the motion. Is there objection to the adoption of Mr. Gross' motion?
MR. HOLT. I object.
CHAIRMAN ARNALL. There is objection. All in favor of it say "aye"; opposed "no." The Chair is in doubt. So many as favor it rise and stand until counted.
MR. ATKINSON. Explain it.

54:6

RECORDS OF CONSTITUTIONAL COMMISSION

CHAIRMAN ARNALL. If you vote favorable to Mr. Gross' motion you prevent a Governor from being a candidate to succeed himself; if you vote against it you enable a Governor to be a candidate to succeed himself. So many as favor it let it be known by rising and standing until counted. Reverse your position, those opposed, The vote is eight to eight.
The motion to adjourn is in order. The motion failed to pass. The motion to adjourn is in order. Before we take that motion up the Chair will, in order to keep the record straight, be happy to say this, that the Chair, because he believes in letting the people elect whom they please, as much as they please, or to reject them as many times as they please, because he believes in real democracy, votes against the motion. That has no reference to the present incumbent or his future ambition, if any.
Now is there any other business to come before the Commission?
MR. GROSS. I move we adjourn:
CHAIRMAN ARNALL. The Chair would like to say that he appreciates the forbearance of the members of the Commission. We have not agreed on everything, but I will say I believe the disagreement between us has been honorable and honest, a conscientious disagreement, and I believe that we have dealt with some matters that the people wanted dealt with, and I believe that the General Assembly can perfect our work, if it will, whereby the people may have presented to them a better document than the one we have now. I know we can't please everybody, but I do think that in this session that we have had these two days we have gone further towards doing the things the people wanted done than we have yet gone, and I think we have made it fast with the General Assembly to deal realistically with some of these issues.
The question comes before we adjourn that there should be a small committee, and the Chair says small because in his opinion it should be small, to edit what we have done, to fit it in the right place, not changing the meaning or work of the committee, but to have it in there that should not be taken out.
MR. HARRIS. Would the Chairman accent, "be small enough"?
CHAIRMAN ARNALL. The Chair would like to have as a committee, because the Chair has confidence in the Legislature, the Chair bragged at great length about the last session of the Legislature, and the Chair believes we will have another good session-the

RECORDS OF CONSTITUTIONAL COMMISSION

547

Chair would like to suggest the President of the Senate, the Speaker of the House and the Chair.
MR. LOVEJOY. I so move.
CHAIRMAN ARNALL. Be authorized to edit this work to the best of our ability. Then the Clerk will prepare it, and I will go over it, and submit to Frank and Roy, and when we get through we will try to have it accurate in so far as what we have done. Is there objection? Without objection it is so ordered.
There is a motion that we adjourn. Is there objection?
JUDGE SMITH. Before we adjourn, gentlemen, I want to make the suggestion or motion, this being the final meeting, that we give our able Chairman a rising vote of thanks and appreciation for his leadership and the very able manner in which he has presided over this meeting. Let's give him a big hand. (Applause)
CHAIRMAN ARNALL. The meeting is adjourned.

The Constitution as revised by the Committee on Final Revision and submitted to the General Assembly read as follows:
REVISED CONSTITUTIONI Preamble
To perpetuate the principals of free government, insure justice to all, preserve peace, promote. the interest and happiness of the citizen, and transmit to posterity the enjoyment of liberty, we, the people of Georgia, relying upon the protection and guidance of Almighty God, do ordain and establish this Constitution.
Article I BILL OF RIGHTS
Section I
Paragraph I. Origin and foundation of government. All government, of right, originates with the people, is founded upon their will only, and is instituted solely for the good of the whole. Public officers are the trustees and servants of the people, and at all times,
1 Note that this is not the constitution submitted to the people for ratification. A copy of the Constitution as revised by the General Assembly is given in the Georgia Laws, 1935, pp. 9-8&.

548

RECORDS OF CONSTITUTIONAL COMMISSION

amenable to them.
Paragraph II. Protection the duty of government. Protection to person and property is the paramount duty of government, and shall be impartial and complete.
Paragraph III. Life, liberty, and property. No person shall be deprived of life, liberty, or property, except by due process of law.
Paragraph IV. Right to the courts. No person shall be deprived of the right to prosecute or defend his own cause in any of the courts of this State, in person, by attorney, or both.
Paragraph V. Benefit of counsel; accusation; list of witnesses; compulsory process; trial by jury. Every person charged with an offense against the laws of this State shall have the privilege and benefit of counsel; shall be furnished, on demand, with a copy of the accusation, and a list of the witnesses on whose testimony the charge against him is founded; shall have compulsory process to obtain the testimony of his own witnesses; shall be confronted with the witnesses testifying against him; and shall have a public and speedy trial by an impartial jury.
Paragraph VI. Crimination of self not compelled. No person shall be compelled to give testimony tending in any manner to criminate himself.
Paragraph VII. Banishment and whipping as punishment for crime. Neither banishment beyond the limits of the State, nor whipping, as a punishment for crime, shall be allowed.
Paragraph VIII. Jeopardy of life or liberty more than once forbidden. No person shall be put in jeopardy of life, or liberty, more than once for the same offense, save on his, or her own motion for a new trial after conviction, or in case of mistrial.
Paragraph IX. Bail; fines; punishment; arrest, abuse of prisoners. Excessive bail shall not be required, nor ex,cessive fines imposed, nor cruel ,and unusual punishments inflicted; nor shall any person be abused in being arrested, while under arrest, or in prison.
Paragraph X. Costs. No person shall be compelled to pay costs except after conviction on final trial.
Paragraph ~I. Habeas corpus. The writ of Habeas Corpus shall not be suspended.

RECORDS OF CONSTITUTIONAL COMMISSION

549

Paragraph XII. Freedom of conscience. All men have the natural and inalienable right to worship God, each according to the dictates of his own conscience, and no human authority should, in any case, control or interfere with such right of conscience.
Paragraph XIII. Religious opinions; liberty of conscience. No inhabitant of this State shall be molested in person or property, or prohibited from holding any public office, or trust, on account of his religious opinions; but the right of liberty of conscience shall not be so construed as to excuse acts of licentiousness, or justify practices inconsistent with the peace and safety of the State.
Paragraph XIV. Appropriations to churches, sects, etc., forbidden. No money shall ever be taken from the public Treasury, directly or indirectly, in aid of any church, sect, or denomination of reliJgionists, or of any sectarian institution.
Paragraph XV. Liberty of speech or of the press guaranteed. No law shall ever be passed to curtail, or restrain the liberty of speech, or of the press; any person may speak, write and publish his sentiments, on all subjects, being responsible for the abuse of that liberty.
Paragraph XVI. Searches, seizures, and warrants. The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searchers and seizures, shall not be violated; and no warrant shall issue except upon probable cause, supported by oath, or affirmation, particularly describing the place, or places, to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized.
Paragraph XVII. Slavery and involuntary servitude. There shall be within the State of Georgia neither slavery nor involuntary servitude, save as a punishment for crime after legal conviction thereof.
Paragraph XVIII. Status of the citizen. The social status of the citizen shall never be the subject of legislation.
Paragraph XIX. Civil authority superior to military. The civil authority shall be superior to the military, and no soldier shall, in time of peace, be quartered in any house, without the consent of the owner, nor in time of war, except by the civil magistrate, in such manner as may be provided by law.
Paragraph XX. Contempts. The power of the Courts to punish for contempt shall be limited by legislative acts.
Paragraph XXI. Imprisonment for debt. There shall be no im-

550

RECORDS OF CONSTITUTIONAL COMMISSION

prisonment for debt.
Paragraph XXU. Arms, right to keep and bear. The right of the people to keep and bear arms, shall not be infringed, but the General Assembly shall have power to prescribe the manner in which arms may be borne.
Paragraph XXIII. Legislative, judicial, and executive powers, separate. The legislature, judicial, and executive powers shall forever remain separate and distinct, and no person discharging the duties of one, shall, at the s'ame time, exercise the functions of either of the others, except as herein provided.
Paragraph XXIV. Right to assemble and petition. The people have the right to assemble peaceably for their common good and to apply to those vested with the powers of government for redress of grievances by petition or remonstrance.
Paragraph XXV. Citizens, protection of. All citizens of the United States, resident in this State, are hereby declared citizens of this State, and it shall be the duty of the General Assembly to enact such laws as will protect them in the full enjoyment of the rights, privileges and immunities due to such citizenship.

Section II
Paragraph I. Libel; jury in criminal cases; new trials. In all prosecutions or indictments for libel the truth may be given in evidence; and the jury in all criminal cases, shall be the judges of the law and the facts. The power of the judges to grant new trials in case of conviction is preserved.
Paragraph II. Treason. Treason against the State of Georgia, shall consist in levying war against her; adhering to her enemies; giving them aid and comfort. No person shall be convicted of treason, except on the testimony of two witnesses to the same overt act, or confession in open court.
Paragraph III. Conviction, effect of. No conviction shall work corruption of blood, or forfeiture of estate.
Para1graph IV. Lotteries. All lotteries, and the sale of lottery tickets, are hereby prohibited; and this prohibition shall be enforced by penal laws.

RECORDS OF CONSTITUTIONAL COMMISSION

551

Paragraph V. Lobbying; penalties. Lobbying is declared to be a crime, and the General Assembly shall enforce this provision by suitable penalties.
Paragraph VI. Fraud; concealment of property. The General Assembly shall have the power to provide for the punishment of fraud; and, shall provide by law, for reaching property of the debtor concealed from the creditor.

Section III
Paragraph I. Private ways, compensation. In cases of necessity, private ways maybe granted upon just compensation being paid by the applicant. Private property shall not be taken or damaged for public purposes without just and adequate compensation.
Paragraph II. Attainder; ex post facto and retroactive laws, etc. No bill of attainder, ex post facto law, retroactive law, or law impairing the obligation of contracts, or making irrevocable grant of special privileges or immunities, shall 'be passed.
Paragraph III. Revocation of grants. No grant of special privileges or immunities shall be revoked, except in such manner as to work no injustice to the corporators or creditors of the incorporation.
Paragraph IV. Revocation of tax exemptions. All exemptions from taxation heretofore granted in corporate charters are declared to be henceforth null and void.

Section IV
Paragraph I. General laws; uniform operation; how varied. Laws of a general nature shall have uniform operation throughout the State, and no special law shall be enacted in any case for which provision has been made by an existing general law. No general law affecting private rights, shall be varied in any particular case, by special legislation, except with the free consent, in writing, of all persons to be affected thereby; and no person under legal disability to contract, is capable of such consent.
Paragraph II. What acts void. Legislative acts in violation of this Constitution, of the Constitution of the United States, art> void, and the Judiciary shall so declare them.

551

RECORDS OF CONSTITUTIONAL COMMISSION

Seetion V
Paragraph I. State rights. The people of this State ha\~ the inherent, sole and exclusive right of regulating their internal government, and the police thereof, and of altering and abolishing their Constitution whenever it may be necessary to their safety and happiness.
p.aragraph II. Enumeration of rights not denia{ of others. The enumeration of rights herein contained as a part of this Constitution shall not be construed to deny to the people any inherent rights which they may have hitherto enjoyed.

Section VI
Paragraph I. The Act of the General Assembly approved December 16, 1902, which extends the title of ownership of lands abutting on tidal water to low water mark is hereby ratified and confirmed.

Article II
Elective Franchise
Section I
Paragraph I. Elections by ballot; registration of voters. Elections by the people shall be by ballot, and only those persons shall be allowed to vote who have been first registered in accordance with the requirements of law.
Paragraph II. Who shall be an elector entitled to register and vote. Every citizen of this State who is a citizen of the United States, eighteen years old or upwards, not laboring under any of the disabilities named in this Article, and possessing the qualifications provided by it, shall be an elector and entitled to register and vote at any election by the people: Provided, that no soldier, sailor or marine in the military or naval services of the United States shall acquire the rights of an elector by reason of being stationed on duty in this State.
Paragraph III. Who entitled to register and vote. To entitle a person to register and vote at any election by the people, he shall have resided in the State one year next preceding the election, and in the county in which he offers to vote six months next preceding

RECORDS OF CONSTITUTIONAL COMMISSION

553

the elections, and shall have paid all poll taxes that he may have had an opportunity of paying agreeably to law. Such payment must have been made at least six months prior to the election at which he offers to vote, except when such elections are held within six months from the expiration of the time fixed by law for the payment of such taxes.
Paragraph IV. Qualifications of electors. Every citizen of this State shall be entitled to register as an elector, and to vote in all elections in said State, who is not disqualified under the provisions of Section II of Article II of this Constitution, and who possesses the qualifications prescribed in Paragraphs II and III of this Section or who will possess them at the date of the election occurring next after his registration, and who in addition thereto comes within either of the classes provided for in the two following subdivisions of this paragraph.
1. All persons who are of good character and understand the duties and obligations of citizenship under a republican form of government; or,
2. All persons who can correctly read in the English language any paragraph of the Constitution of the United States or of this State and correctly write the same in the English language when read to them by anyone of the registrars, and all persons who solely because of physical disability are unable to comply with the above requirements hut who can understand and give a reasonable interpretation of any paragraph of the Constitution of the United States or of this State that may be read to them by anyone of the registrars.
Paragraph V. Appeal from decision of registrars. Any person to whom the right of registration is denied by the registrars upon the ground that he lacks the qualifications set forth in the two subdivisions of Paragraph IV, shall have the right to take an appeal, and any citizen may enter an appeal from the decision of the registrars allowing any person to register under said subdivisions. All appeals must be filed in writing with the registrars within ten days from the date of the decision complained of, and shall be returned by the registrars to the office of the clerk of the superior court to be tried as other appeals.
Paragraph VI. Judgment of force pending appeal. Pending an appeal and until the final decision of the case, the judgment of the

1M

RECORDS OF CONSTITUTIONAL COMMISSION

registrars shall remain in full force.

Section n
Paragraph I. Registration of electors; who disfranchised. The General Assembly may provide, from time to time, for the registration of all electors, but the following classes of persons shall not be permitted to register, vote or hold any office, or appointment of honor, or trust in this State, to wit: 1st. Those who shall have been convicted in any court of competent jurisdiction of treason against the State, of embezzlement of public funds, malfeasance in office, bribery or larceny, or of any crime involving moral turpitude, punishable by the laws of this State with imprisonment in the penitentiary, unless such persons shall have been pardoned. 2nd. Idiots and insane persons.

Section In
Paragraph I. Privilege of electors from arrest. Electors shall, in all cases, except for treason, felony, larceny, and breach of the peace, be privileged from arrest during their attendance on elections, and in going to and returning from the same.

Section IV
Paragraph I. Holder of public funds. No person who is the holder of any public money, contrary to law, shall be eligible to any office in this State until the same is accounted for and paid into the Treasury.

Section V
Paragraph I. Sale of liquors on election days. The General Assembly shall, by law, forbid the sale, distribution, or furnishing of intoxicating drinks within two miles of election precincts, on days of election-State, county, or municipal, and prescribe punishment for any violation of the same.

Section VI
Paragraph I. Returns made to whom. Returns of election for all civil officers elected by the people, who are to be commissioned

RECORDS OF CONSTITUTIONAL COMMISSION

555

by the Governor, and also for members of the General Assembly, shall be made to the Secretary of State, unless otherwise provided by law.

Article III
Legislative Department
Section I
Paragraph I. Power vested in General Assembly. The legislative power of the State shall be vested in a General Assembly which shall consist of a Senate and House of Representatives.

Section II
Paragraph I. Number of senators and senatorial districts. The Senate shall consist of fifty-two members and there shall be fiftytwo Senatorial Districts with one Senator from each District. The various Senatorial Districts shall be comprised of the counties as now provided, and the General Assembly shall have authority to rearrange and change these Districts.

Section ill
Paragraph I. Number of representatives. The House of Representatives shall consist of representatives apportioned among the several counties of the State as follows: To the eight counties having the largest population, three representatives each; to the thirty counties having the next largest population, two representatives each; and to the reIl)aining counties, one representative each.
Paragraph II. Apportionment changed, how. The above apportionment shall be changed by the General Assembly at its first session after each census taken by the United States Government in accordance with the provisions of Paragraph I of Section ill of this article.

Section IV
Paragraph I. Term of members. The members of the General Assembly shall be elected for two years, and shall serve until the time fixed by law for the convening of the next General Assembly.

556

RECORDS OF CONSTITUTIONAL COMMISSION

Paragraph II. Election, when. The first election for members of the General Assembly, under this Constitution shall take place on the first Tuesday in November, 1946, and subsequent elections biennially, on that day, until the day of election is changed by law.
Paragraph III. Meeting of the General Assembly. The General Assembly shall meet in regular session on the second Monday in January 1947, and biennially thereafter on the same day until the date shall be changed by law. By concurrent resolution, adopted by a majority of members elected to both Houses, the General Assembly may adjourn any regular session to such later date as it may fix for reconvening in regular session, but shall remain in regular session no longer than seventy (70) days, in the aggregate, during the term for which the members were elected. If it shall adjourn the first regular session before the expiration of seventy (70) days without fixing a date for reconvening, the General Assembly shall reconvene in regular session on the second Monday in January of the next year unless it shall have adjourned the entire session. All business pending in the Senate or House at the adjournment of any regular session may be considered at any later regular session of the same General Assembly as if there had been no adjournment. Nothing herein shall be construed to effect the power of the Governor to convoke the General Assembly in extraordinary session, or the duty of the Governor to convene the General Assembly in extraordinary session upon the certificate of threefifths of the members elected to the Senate and the House of Representatives, as provided in Article 5, Section I, Paragraph 13 of this Constitution. If an impeachment trial is pending at the end of any regular or extraordinary session, the Senate may continue in session until such trial is completed. The provisions of Paragraph 3, Section 4 of Article 3 of the Constitution which this Constitution supersedes which apply to the meetings of the General Assembly shall continue in force until the second Monday in January, 19"17.
Paragraph IV. Quorum. A majority of each House shall constitute a quorum to transact business; but a smaller number may adjourn from day to day and compel the presence of its absent members, as each house may provide.
Paragraph V. Oath of members. Each Senator and Representative, before taking his seat, shall take the following oath, or affirmation, to wit: "I will support the Constitution of this State and of the United States, and on all questions and measures which may

RECORDS OF CONSTITUTIONAL COMMISSION

55'1

come before me, I will so conduct myself, as will, in my judgment" be most conducive to the interests and prosperity of this State."
Paragraph VI. Eligibility: appointments forbidden. No person holding a military commission, or other appointment, or office" having any emolument, or compensation annexed thereto, under this State, or the United States, or either of them, except Justices of the Peace and officers of the militia, nor any defaulter for public money, or for any legal taxes required of him, shall have a seat in either house; nor shall any Senator, or Representative, after his qualification as such, be elected by the General Assembly, or appointed by the Governor, either with or without the advice and consent of the Senate, to any office or appointment having any emolument annexed thereto, during the time for which he shall have been elected, unless he shall first resign his seat, provided, however, that during the term for which he was elected no Senator or Representative shall be appointed to any civil office which has been created or the emoluments thereof increased during such term.
Paragraph VII. Removal from district or county, effect of. The seat of a member of either house shall be vacated on his removal from the district or county from which he was elected.

Section V
Paragraph I. Qualifications of Senators. The Senators shall be citizens of the United States, who have attained the age of twentyfive years, and who shall have been citizens of this State for four years, and for one year residents of the district from which elected.
Paragraph II. President. The presiding officer of the Senate shall be styled the President of the Senate, and shall be elected viva voce from the Senators.
Paragraph Ill. Impeachments. The Senate shall have the sole power to try impeachments.
Paragraph IV. Trial of impeachments. When sitting for that purpose, the members shall be on oath, or affirmation, and shall be presided over by the Chief Justice or the Presiding Justice of the Supreme Court. Should the Chief Justice be disqualified, the Senate shall select a Justice of the Supreme Court to preside. No person

558

RECORDS OF CONSTITUTIONAL COMMISSION

shall be convicted without the concurrence of two-thirds of the members present.
Paragraph V. Judgments in impeachments. Judgments, in cases of impeachment, shall not extend further than removal from office, and disqualification to hold and enjoy any office of honor, trust. Qr profit, within this State; but the party convicted shall nevertheless, be liable, and subject to indictment, trial, judgment, and pun{.shment, according to law.

Section VI
Paragraph I. Qualifications of representatives. The Representatives shall be citizens of the United States who have attained the age of twenty-one years, and who shall have been citizens of this State for two years, and for one year residents of the counties from which elected.
Paragraph II. Speaker. The presiding officer of the House of Representatives shall be styled the Speaker of the House of Representatives, and shall be elected viva voce from the body.
Paragraph III. Power to impeach. The House of Representatives shall have the sole power to vote impeachment charges against all persons who shall have been or may be in office.

Section VII
'Paragraph I. Election, returns, etc.; disorderly conduct. Each ,House shall be the judge of the election, returns, and qualifications of its members and shall have power to punish them for disorder~y behavior, or misconduct, by censure, fine, imprisonment, or expulsion; but no member shall be expelled, except by a vote of twothirds of the House to which he belongs.
Paragraph II. Contempts, how punished. Each House may punish by imprisonment, not extending beyond the session, any person, not a member, who shall be guilty of a contempt, by any disorderly behavior in its presence, or who shall rescue, or attempt to rescue, any person arrested by order of either House.
Paragraph III. Privilege of members. The members of both Houses shall be free from arrest during their attendance on the General Assembly, and in going thereto, or returning therefrom,

RECORDS OF CONSTITUTIONAL COMMISSION

55g.

except for treason, felony, larceny, or breach of the peace; and no member shall be liable to answer in any other place for anything spoken in debate in either House.

Paragraph IV. Journals and acts. Each House shall keep a Journal of its proceedings, and publish it immediately after its adjournment. The General Assembly shall provide for the publication of the laws passed by each session.

Paragraph V. Where journals kept. The original journal shan be preserved after publication, in the office of the Secretary of State, but there shall be no other record therof.

Paragraph VI. Yeas and nays, when taken. The yeas and nays on any question shall at the desire of one-fifth of the members present, be entered on the Journal.

Paragraph VII. Bills to be read. Every bill, before it shall pass, shall be read three times, and on three separate days, in each House, unless in cases of actual invasion, or insurrection, but the first and second reading of each local bill, shall consist of the reading of the title only, unless said bill is ordered to be engrossed.

Paragraph VHI. One subject matter expressed. No law shall pass which refers to more than one subject matter, or contains matter different from what is expressed in the title thereof.

Paragraph IX. General appropriation bill. The General appropriation bill shall embrace nothing except appropriations fixed by previous laws, the ordinary expenses of the Executive, Legislative and Judicial Departments of the Government, payment of the public dept and interest thereon, and for support of the public institutions and educational interests of the State. All other appropriations shall be made by separate bills, each embracing but one subjeot.

Paragraph X. Bills for revenue. All bills for raising revenue, or appropriating money, shall originate in the House of Representatives, but the Senate may propose, or concur in amendments, as in other bills.

Paragraph XI. Public money, how drawn. No money shall be drawn from the Treasury except by appropriation made by law.

Paragraph XII. Bills appropriating money. No bill or resolution

appropriating money shall become a law unless, upon its passage

the yeas and nays, in each house are recorded.

...

:560

RECORDS OF CONSTITUTIONAL COMMISSION

Paragraph XIII. Acts signed; rejected bills. All acts shall be signed by the President of the Senate and the Speaker of the House of Representatives, and no bill or resolution, intended to have the effect of a law, which shall have been rejected by either house, shall be again proposed during the same session, under the same or any other title, without the consent of two-thirds of the House by which the same was rejected.
~;aragraph XIV. Majority of members to pass bill. No bill shall become a law unless it shall receive a majority of the votes of all the members elected to each House of the General Assembly, and it shall, in every instance, so appear on the Journal.
Paragraph XV. Notice of intention to ask local legislation necessary. No local or special bill shall be passed, unless notice of the intention to apply therefor shall have been published in the locality where the matter or thing to be affected, may be situated, which notice shall be given at least thirty (30) days prior to the introduction of such bill into the General Assembly, and in the manner to be prescribed by law. No local or special bill shall become law unless there is attached to and made a part of said bill a copy of said notice certified by the publisher, or accompanied by an affidavit of the author, to the effect that said notice has been published as provided by law. No office elective by the people shall be abolished nor the term of office of any official elected by the people shall he either shortened or lengthened during his term of office by local or special bill unless the question shall be submitted to a referendum by the people of the jurisdiction affected.
Paragraph XVI. Statutes and sections of code, how amended. No law, or section of the code, shall be amended or repealed by mere reference to its title, or to the number of the section of the Code, but the amending, or repealing act, shall distinctly describe the law to be amended or repealed, as well as the alteration to be made.
Paragraph XVII. Corporate powers, how granted. The General Assembly shall have no power to grant corporate powers and privileges to private companies, to make or change election precincts, nor to establish bridges or ferries, nor to change names of legitimate children; but it shall prescribe by law the manner in which such powers shall be exercised by the courts; it may confer this authority to grant corporate powers and privileges to private companies to the judges of the superior courts of this State in vacation. All corporate

RECORDS OF CONSTITUTIONAL COMMISSION

561

powers and privileges to banking, insurance, railroad, canal, navigation, express and telegraph companies shall be issued and granted by the Secretary of State in such manner as shall be prescribed by law; and if in any event the Secretary of State should be disqualified to act in any case, then in that event the legislature shall provide by general laws by what person such charters shall be granted.
Paragraph XVIII. Recognizances. The General Assembly shall have no power to relieve principals or securities upon forfeited recognizances, from the payment thereof, either before or after judgment thereon, unless the principal in the recognizance shall have been apprehended and placed in the custody of the proper officers.
Paragraph XIX. Yeas and nays to be entered, when. Whenever the Constitution requires a vote of two-thirds of either or both houses for the passage of an act or resolution, the yeas and nays on the passage thereof shall be entered on the Journal.
Paragraph XX. Powers of the General Assembly. The General Assembly shall have the power to make all laws consistent with this Constitution, and not repugnant to the Constitution of the United States, which they shall deem necessary and proper for the welfare of the State.
Paragraph XXI. Signature of Governor. No provision in this Constitution for a two-thirds vote of both houses of the General Assembly shall be construed to waive the necessity for the signature of the Governor as in any other case, except in the case of the two-thirds vote required to override the veto, to submit constitutional amendments, and in case of prolongation of a session of the General Assembly.
Paragraph XXII. Adjournments. Neither House shall adjourn for more than three days, or to any other place, without the consent of the other, and in case of disagreement between the two Houses, on a question of adjournment, the Governor may adjourn either, or both of them.
Paragraph XXIII. Zoning and planning laws. The Gen,eral Assembly of the State shall have authority to grant the governing authorities of the municipalities and counties authority to pass zoning and planning laws whereby such cities may be zoned or districted for various uses and other or different uses prohibited therein, and

562

RECORDS OF CONSTITUTIONAL COMMISSION

regulating the use for which said zones or districts may be set apart, and regulating the plans for development and improvements on real estate therein.
Paragraph XXIV. Civil service-equal preference to veterans. Neither the State of Georgia, nor any political subdivision thereof, shall inaugurate or maintain any civil service scheme of any nature whatever which fails to provide for honorably discharged veterans of any war, and the said State of Georgia, or any political subdivision shall, if a civil service scheme is originated or is already in force, provide equal preferences accorded to such veterans as now exist under Federal Civil Service Laws.

Section VIII
Paragraph I. Secretary of Senate and Clerk of House of Representatives. The officers of the two houses, other than the President and Speaker, shall be a Secretary of the Senate and Clerk of the House of Representatives, and such assistants as they may appoint.

Section IX
Paragraph I. Compensation and mileage. The per diem of members of the General Assembly shall not exceed ten dollars; and the mileage shall not exceed ten cents for each mile traveled, by the nearest practical route, in going to, and returning from, the Capitol; but the President of the Senate and the Speaker of the House of Representativs, shall each receive not exceeding fifteen dollars per diem.

Section X
Paragraph I. Viva voce vote; place of meeting. All elections by the General Assembly shall be viva voce, and the vote shall appear on the Journal of the House of Representatives. When the Senate and House of Representatives unite for the purpose of elections, they shall meet in the Representative Hall, and the President of the Senate shall, in such cases, preside and declare the result.

RECORDS OF CONSTITUTIONAL COMMISSION

583

Article IV
Public Utilities, Eminent Domain, Police Power,
Insurance Companies, Contracts, etc.
Section I
Paragraph I. Public utility tariffs and charges. The power and authority of regulating railroad freight and passenger tariffs and of charges of public utilities for their services, of preventing unjust discriminations, and requiring reasonable and just rates of freight and passenger tariffs and of charges of public utilities, are hereby conferred upon the General Assembly, whose duty it shall be to pass laws from time to time, to regulate such tariffs and charges, to prohibit unjust discriminations by the various railroads and public utilities of this State, and to prohibit said railroads and public utilities from charging other than just and reasonable rates and to enforce the same by adequate penalties, provided, nevertheless, that such power and authority shall never be exercised in any way to regulate or fix charges of such public utilities as are or may be owned or operated by any county or municipality of this State.
Paragraph II. Rebates. No public utility company shall give, or pay, any rebate, or bonus in the nature thereof, directly or indirectly, or do any act to mislead or deceive the public as to the real rates charged or received for freight or passage or services furnished, any such payments shall be illegal and void; and these prohibitions shall be enforced by suitable penalties.
Section II
Paragraph I. Right of eminent domain. The exercise of the right of eminent domain shall never be abridged, nor so construed as to prevent the General Assembly from taking property and franchises, and subjecting them to public use.
Para1graph II. Police power. The exercise of the police power of the State shall never be abridged, nor so construed as to permit the conduct of business in such manner as to infringe the equal rights of others, or the general wellbeing of the State.

584

RECORDS OF CONSTITUTIONAL COMMISSION

Secthm III
Paragraph I. Charters revived or amended subject to Constitution, The General Assembly shall not remit the forfeiture of the charter of any corporation now existing, nor alter or amend the same, nor pass any other general or special law, for the benefit of said ,corporation, except upon the condition that such corporation shall thereafter hold its oharter subject to the provisions of this Constitution; and every amendment of any charter of any corporation in this State, or any special law for its benefit, accepted thereby, shall operate as a novation of said 'charter and shall bring the same under the provision of this Constitution.

Section IV
Paragraph 1. Contracts to defeat competition. All contracts and agreements, which may have the effect, or be intended to have the effect, to defeat or lessen competition, or to encourage monopoly, shall be illegal and void. The G~neral Assembly of this State shall have no power to authorize any such contract or agreement.
Paragraph II. General Assembly to enforce Article. The Genel'al Assembly shall enforce the provisions of this Article by appropriate legislation.
Paragraph III. Public Service Commission as constitutional officers. There shall be a Public Service Commission for the regulation of utilities, vested with the jurisdiction, powers and duties now provided by law or that may hereafter be prescribed by the General Assembly, not inconsistent with other provisions of this Constitution. Such Commission shall consist of five members, who shall be elected by the people. A chairman shall be elected by the members of the Commission from one of its members. The first Commission under this amendment shall consist of the commissioners in office at the time of the adoption of this constitutional amendment and they shall serve for the term to which each was elected. Thereafter all succeeding terms of members shall be for six years. The qualifications, compensations, filling of vacancies, manner and time of election, powers and duties of members of the Commission, including the ,chairman shall be such aB are now or may hereafter be provided by the General Assembly.

RECORDS OF CONSTITUTIONAL COMMISSION

565

Section V
Paragraph I. Wife's separate estate. All property of the wife at the time of her marriage, and all property given to, inherited or acquired by her, shall remain her separate property, and not be liable for the debts of her husband.

Section VI
Paragraph I. Nonresident insurance companies. All life insurance companies now doing busiJ::.es in this State, or which may desire to establish agencies and do business in the State of Georgia, chartered by other States of the Union, or foreign States, shall show that they have deposited with the Comptroller General of fue State in which they are chartered, or of this State, the Insurance Commissioner, or such other officer as may be authorized to receive it, not less than one hundred thousand dollars, in such securities as may be deemed by such officer equivalent to cash, subject to his order, as a guarantee fund for the security of policy-holders.
Paragraph II. License by Comptroller General. When such showing is made to the Comptroller General of the State of Georgia by a proper certificate from the State official having charge of the funds so deposited, the Comptroller General of the State of Georgia is authorized to issue to the company making such showing, a license to do business in the State, upon paying the fees required by law.
Paragraph III. Resident insurance companies; guarantee fund. All life insurance companies chartered by the State of Georgia, or which may hereafter be chartered by the State, shall, before doing business, deposit with the Comptroller General of the State of Georgia, or with some strong corporation, which may be approved by said Comptroller General, one hundred thousand dollars, in such securitie~ as may be deemed by him equivalent to cash, to be subject to his order, as a guarantee fund for the security of the policyholders of the company making such deposit, all interest and dividends from such securities to be paid, when due, to the company so depositing. Any such securities as may be needed or desired by the company maybe taken from said department at any time by replacing them with other securities equally acceptable to the Comptroller General, whose certificate for the same shall be furnished to the company.

566

RECORDS OF CONSTITUTIONAL COMMISSION

Paragraph IV. General Assembly to enact laws for people's pro. tection, etc. The General Assembly shall, from time to time enact laws to compel all fire insurance companies, doing business in this State, whether chartered by this State, or otherwise, to deposit reasonable securities with the Treasurer of this State, to secure the people against loss by the operations of said companies.
Paragraph V. Reports by insurance companies. The General Assembly shall compel all insurance companies in this State, or doing business therein, under proper penalties, to make semi-annual reports to the Comptroller General, and print the same at their own expense, for the information and protection of the people.

Article V
Executive Department
Section I
Paragraph I. Governor; Term of Office; Salary, etc. The executive power shall be vested in a Governor, who shall hold his office during the term of four years, and until his successor shall be chosen and qualified. He shall have a salary of seven thousand five hundred dollars per annum until January 1, 1947. The salary of the Governor for each year thereafter shall be twelve thousand dollars per annum until otherwise provided by a law passed by a majority votes of both branches of the General Assembly, which shall not be increased OP diminished during the period for which he shall have been elected; nor shall he receive, within that time, any other emolument from the United States, or either of them, or from any foreign power. The State officers required by this Constitution to be elected at the same time, for the same term, and in the same manner as the Governor shall also hold office for four years.
Paragraph II. Election for Governor. The first election for Governor, under this Constitution, shall be held on Tuesday after the first Monday in November of 1946, and the Governor-elect shall be installed in office at the next session of the General Assembly. An election shall take place quadriennially thereafter, on said date, until another date be fixed by the General Assembly. Said election shall be held at the places of holding general elections in the several counties of this State, in the manner prescribed for the election of

RECORDS OF CONSTITUTIONAL COMMISSION

58'1

members of the General Assembly, and the electors shall be the same.
Paragraph III. Returns of elections. The returns for every election of Governor shall be sealed up by the managers, separately from other returns, and directed to the President of the Senate and Speaker of the House of Representatives, and transmitted to the Secretary of State, who shall, without opening said returns, cause the same to be laid before the Senate on the day after the two houses shall have been organized, and they shall be transmitted by the Senate to the House of Representatives.
Paragraph IV. How returns published. The members of each branch of the General Assembly shall convene in the Representative Hall, and the President of the Senate and Speaker of the House of Representatives shall open and publish the returns in the presence and under the direction of the General Assembly; and the person having the majority of the whole number of votes, shall be declared duly elected Governor of this State; but if no person shall have such majority, then from the two persons having the highest number of votes, who shall be in life, and shall not decline an election at the time appointed for the General Assembly to elect, the General Assembly shall immediately elect a Governor viva voce; and in all cases of election of a Governor by the General Assembly, a majority of the members present shall be necessary to a choice.
Paragraph V. Contested elections. Contested elections shall be determined by both houses of the General Assembly in such manner as shall be prescribed by law.
Paragraph VI. Qualifications of Governor. No person shall be eligible to the office of Governor, who shall not have been a citizen of the United States fifteen years, and a citizen of the State six years, and who shall not have attained the age of thirty years.
Paragraph VII. Death, resignation, or disability of Governor. In case of death, resignation, or disability of the Governor, the President of the Senate shall exercise the executive powers of the government until such disability be removed, or a successor is elected and qualified. And in case of the death, resignation, or disability of the President of fhe Senate, the Speaker of the House of Representatives shall exercise the executive powers of the government until the removal of the disability, or the election and qualification of a Governor.

568

RECORDS OF CONSTITUTIONAL COMMISSION

Paragraph VIII. Unexpired terms, filling of. The General Assembly shall have power to provide by law, for filling unexpired terms by special elections.
Paragraph IX. Oath of office. The Governor shall, before he enters on the duties of his office, take the following oath or affirmation: "I do solemnly swear (or affirm, as the case may be) that I will faithfully execute the office ofGovernor of the State of Georgia, and will to the best of my ability, preserve, protect, and defend the Constitution thereof, and the Constitution of the United States of America."
Paragraph X. Commander-in-chief. The Governor shall be commander-in-chief of the army and navy of this State, and of the militia thereof.
Paragraph XI. Reprieves and pardons; State Board of Pardons and Paroles. The Governor shall have power to suspend the execution of a sentence of death, after conviction, for offenses against the State, until the State Board of Pardons and Paroles, hereinafter provided, shall have an opportunity of hearing the application of the convicted person for any relief within the power of such Board, or for any other purpose which may be deemed necessary by the Governor. Upon conviction for treason the Governor may only suspend the execution of the sentence and report the case to the General Assembly at the next meeting thereof, when the General Assembly shall either pardon,commute the sentence, direct its execution or grant a further reprieve. The Governor shall, at each session of the General Assembly, communicate to that body each case of suspension of sentence, stating the name of the convict, the offense for which he was convicted, the sentence and its date, the date of the reprieve or suspension, and the reasons for granting the same. He shall take care that the laws are faithfully executed, and shall be a conservator of the peace throughout the State. There shall be a State Board of Pardons and Paroles composed of three members, who shall be appointed by the Governor and confirmed by the Senate. Appointments made at times when the Senate is not in session shall be effective ad interim. The first members shall be appointed for terms of three, five, and seven years, respectively, to be designated by the Governor, and all subsequent appointments shall be for a period of seven years, except incase of an unexpired term. The Governor shall not be a member of the State Board of Pardons and Paroles. The members of the State Board of Pardons

RECORDS OF CONSTITUTIONAL COMMISSION

569

and Paroles shall each receive an annual salary of $5,000.00, payable monthly. The State Board of Pardons and Paroles shall have power to grant reprieves, pardons and paroles, to commute penalties, remove disabilities imposed by law, and may remit any pad of a sentence for any offense against the State, after conviction except in cases of treason or impeachment, and except in cases in which the Governor refuses to suspend a sentence of death. Provided that such board shall act on all applications within 90 days from the filing of same, and in all cases a majority shall decide the action of the Board. Except if any member for any cause is unable to serve in any case involving capital punishment, the Governor shall act as the third member of said Board and the action so taken in such instance shall be by unanimous vote. The State Board of Pardons and Paroles shall at each session of the General Assembly communicate to that body in full detail each case of pardon, parole, commutation, removal of disabilities or remission of sentences granted, stating the name of the convict, the offense for which he was convicted, the sentence and its date, the date of the pardon, parole, commutation, removal of disabilities or remission of sentence and the reasons for granting the same, and the State Board of Pardons and Paroles may make rules and regulations as may be authorized by law. The first Board of Pardons and Paroles under this provision may be those in office under an act of the General Assembly creating such a Board existing at the time of the adoption of this amendment, which, if so existing shall be in lieu of such a Board to be created by the General Assembly subsequent to the adoption of this amendment, and which Board shall have all the rights, privileges, powers, and duties the same as if it was so subsequently created, and the terms of members of such Board shall date from the time specified in the existing Act of the General Assembly. The General Assembly may enact laws in aid of, but not inconsistent with, this amendment.
Paragraph XII. Writs of election, called sessions of the General Assembly. 'rhe Governor shall issue writs of election to fill all vacancies that may happen in the Senate and the House of Representatives, and shall give the General Assembly, from time to time, information of the State of the Commonwealth, and recommend to their consideration such measures as he may deem necessary or expedient. The Governor shall have power to convoke the General Assembly on extraordinary occasions, but no law shall be enacted at called sessions of the General Assembly, except such as shall

570

RECORDS OF CONSTITUTIONAL COMMISSION

relate to the object stated in his proclamation convening them.
Provided, however, that when three-fifths of the members elected to the House of Representatives and three fifths of the members elected to the Senate shall have certified to the Governor of the State of Georgia that in their opinion an emel'igency exists in the affairs of the State of Georgia, it shall thereupon be the duty of said Gov~ ernor and mandatory upon him, within five day from the receipt of such certificate or certificates to convene said General Assembly in extraordinary session for all purposes; and in the event said Gov~ ernor shall, within said time, Sundays excluded, fail or refuse to convene said General Assembly as aforesaid, then and in that event said General Assembly may convene itself in extraordinary ses~ sion, as if convened in regular session, for all purposes, provided that such extraordinary, self convened session shall be limited to a period of 30 days, unless at the expiration of said period, there shall be pending an impeachment trial of some officer of the State Government, in which event the General Assembly shall be authorized to remain in session until such trial shall have been completed.
The members of the General Assembly shall receive the same per diem and mileage during such extraordinary session as is now or may be hereafter provided.
Paragraph XIII. Filling vacancies. When any office shall become vacant, by death, resignation, or otherwise, the Governor shall have power to fill such vacancy, unless otherwise provided by law; and persons so appointed shall continue in office until a successor is commissioned, agreeably to the mode pointed out by this Constitution, or by law in pursuance thereof.
Paragraph XIV. Appointments rejected. A person once rejected by the Senate, shall not be reappointed by the Governor to the same office during the same session, or the recess thereafter.
Paragraph XV. Govrnor's veto. The Governor shall have the revision of all bills passed by the General Assembly before the same shall become laws, but two-thirds of each house may pass a law notwithstanding his dissent; and if any !bill should not be returned by the Governor within five days (Sunday excepted) after it bas been presented to him, the same shall be a law; unless the General Assembly, by their adjournment, shall prevent its return. He may approve any appropriation, and disapprove any other appropriation, in the same bill, and the latter shall not be effectual. unless

RECORDS OF CONSTITUTIONAL COMMISSION

5'11

passed by two-thirds of each House.
Paragraph XVI. Governor to approve resolutions, etc. Every vote, resolution, or order, to which the concurrence of both houses may be necessary, except on a question of election or adjournment, shall be presented to the Governor, and before it shall take effect be approved by him, or, being disapproved, shall be repassed by two-thirds of each house, provided, however, that nothing contained in this Article shall be construed to confer on the Governor the right to veto or enter his disapproval of any proposal made by the General Assembly to amend this Constitution.
Paragraph XVII. Information from officers and employees; suspension of officers. The Governor may require information in writing from Constitutional officers, department heads, and all State employees, on any subject relating to the duties of their respective offices or employment. The General Assembly shall have authority to provide by law for the suspension of any Constitutional officer or department head from the discharge of the duties of his office, and also for the appointment of a suitable person to discharge the duties of the same.

Section II
Other Executive Officers
Paragraph I. Executive Officers, 'How Elected. The Secretary of State, Attorney General, Comptroller General, Treasurer, Commissioner of Agriculture, and Commissioner of Labor shall be elected by the persons qualified to vote for members of the General Assembly at the same time, and in the same manner as the Governor. The provisions of the Constitution as to the transmission of th~ results of the election, counting the votes, declaring the results, deciding when there is no election, and when there is a contested election, applicable to the election of Governor, shall apply to the election of the above named executive officers; they shall be commissioned by the Governor and hold their offices for the same time as the Governor.
Paragraph II. Duties, Authority, and Salaries of Other Executive Officers. The General Assembly shall have power to prescribe the duties, authority, and salaries of the executive officers, and to pro-

572

RECORDS OF CONSTITUTIONAL COMMISSION

vide help and expenses necessary for the operation of the department of each.
Paragraph III. Profit From Use of Public Money. No State official shall be allowed, directly or indirectly, to receive any fee, interest, or reward from any person, bank, or corporation, for the deposit, or use, in any manner, of the public funds, and the General Assembly shall enforce this provision by suitable penalties.
Paragraph IV. Qualifications., No person shall be eligible to the office of the Secretary of State, Attorney General, Comptroller General, Treasurer, Commissioner of Agriculture, and Commissioner of Labor, unless he shall have been a citizen of the United States for ten years, and shall have resided in this State for six years next preceding his election, and shall be twenty-five years of age when elected. All of said officers shall ,give bond and security, under regulation to be prescribed by law, for the faithful discharge of their duties.
Paragraph V. Fees and Perquisites Denied. No State official shall be allowed any fee, perquisite or compensation other than their salaries as prescribed by law, except their necessary expenses when absent from the seat of government on business for the State.

Section III
Paragraph I. Great seal; what coistitutes; custody; when affixed to instruments. The great seal of the State shall be deposited in the office of the Secretary of State and shall not be affixed to any instrument of writing except by order of the Governor or General Assembly, and that now in use shall be the great seal of the State until otherwise provided by law.

Section IV
Paragraph I. Game and Fish Oommission. There is her.eby created a State Game and Fish Commission. Said Commission shall consist of one member from each Congressional District in this State, and one additional member from one of the following named counties, to wit: Chatham, Bryan, Liberty, McIntosh, Glynn, or Camden. The first members of the Commission shall consist of those in office at the time this Constitution is adopted, with terms provided by law. Thereafter, all succeeding appointments shall be

RECORDS OF CONSTITUTIONAL COMMISSION

573

made by the Governor and confirmed by the Senate for a term of seven years from the expiration of the previous term. All members of the Commission shall hold office until their successors are appointed and qualified. Vacancies in office shall be filled by appointment of the Governor and submitted to the Senate for confirmation at the next session of the General Assembly after the making of the appointment.
The Commission shall have such powers, authority, duties, and shall receive such compensation and expenses as may be delegated or provided for by the General Assembly.

Section V
Paragraph I. There shall be a State Board of Corrections composed of seven members in charge of the State Penal System. The Board shall have such jurisdiction, powers, duties and control of the State Penal System and the inmates thereof as shall be provided by law. The Board shall elect a Director of Corrections who shall be the executive officer of the Board. The Board of Corrections shall be appointed by the Governor with the advice and consent of the Senate. The first appointments shall ,be for terms as follows: Two for two years, two for five years and three for seven years and thereafter all terms shall be for seven years. The compensation of the Director of Corrections and members of the State Board of Corrections shall be fixed by law.

Section VI
Paragraph I. There shall he a State Department of Veterans Service composed of seven members, who shall have such control, duties, powers and jurisdiction over Veterans affairs as shall be provided by law. The Department of Veterans Service shall appoint a Director who shall be the Executive Officer of the Department. Members of the Department of Veterans Service shall be appointed by the Governor with the advice and consent of the Senate and four members of the Department shall be selected from Veterans Organizations recognized by the U. S. Veterans Administration. First appointments shall !be for terms of 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, and 7 years. Thereafter all terms and appointments, except in case of vacancy, shall be for seven years. The compensation of the Director and members of the State Department of Veterans Service shall be fixed by law.

574

RECORDS OF CONSTITUTIONAL COMMISSION

All members of the Commission and the Director shall be veterans of some war of the United State.

Article VI
Judiciary
Section I
Paragraph I. Courts Enumerated. The judicial powers of this State shall be vested in a Supreme Court, a Court of Appeals, Superior Courts, Courts of Ordinary, Justices of the Peace, Notaries Public who are ex-officio Justices of the Peace, and such other Courts as have been or may be established by law.

Section II
Paragraph 1. Supreme Court Justices. Quorum. The Supreme Court shall consist of seven associate justices, who shall from time to tiine as they may deem proper, elect one of their members as Chief Justice, and one as Presiding Justice; the office of Chief Justice, as it has heretofore existed under this Constitution being hereby converted into the office of an associate justice, with the same right of incumbency and the same succession as to terms, as applied ot the former office. The Chief Justice so elected by the other Justicesshall be the chief presiding and administrative officer of the court, and the Presiding Justice, elected in like manner, shall perform all the duties developing upon the Chief Justice, when he is absent or disqualified. A majority of the court shall constitute a quorum.
Paragraph II. Court to Designate Judges to Preside, When; Means for Supreme Court to Prevent Delay in Congested Dockets. When one or more of the Justices of the Supreme Court are disqualified from deciding any case by interest or otherwise, the qualified Justices shall designate a judge or judges of the Superior Court to preside in said case, provided, that if all the justices are disqualified, they or a majority of them shall, despite their disqualification, select seven judges of the superior court to preside in the cause, but they shall make such selections by lot and in open court from not less than twelve names of such superior court judges.
Paragraph III. 'Terms of Office. The Justices aforesaid shall hold

RECORDS OF CONSTITUTIONAL COMMISSION

575

their offices for six years, and until their successors are qualified. They shall be elected by the people at the same time and in the same manner as members of the General Assembly; provided, that the successors to the two incumbents whose terms will expire on De cember 31, 1944, shall be elected for the succeeding terms at tht: time of electing members of the General Assembly during that year; successors to the two incumbents whose terms will expire On December 31, 1946, shall be elected in like manner during that year; successors to the two incumbents whose terms will expire on December 31, 1918, shall be elected in like manner during that year, and provided further that an additional or seventh Justice shall be immediately appointed by the Governor, his tenure under such appointment to expire on December 31, 19'46, and his successor for the ensuing regular term of six years to be elected at the time and in the manner aforesaid at such general election to be held during that year; and all terms (except unexpired terms) shall be for six years. In case of any vacancy which causes an unexpired term, the same shall be filled by exe.cutive appointment, and the person appointed by the Governor shall hold his office until the next regular election, and until his successor for the balance of the unexpired term shall have been elected and qualified. The returns of such elections shall be made to the Secretary of State, who shall certify the result to the Governor, and commission shall issue accordingly.
Paragraph IV. Jurisdiction of Supreme Court. The Supreml Court shall have no uriginal jurisdiction but shall be a court alonp for the trial and correction of errors of law from the superior courts and the city courts of Atlanta and Savannah, and such other like courts as have been or may hereafter be established in other cities, in all cases that involve the construction of the Constitution of the State of Georgia or of the United States, or of treaties between the United States and foreign governments; in all cases in which the constitutionality of any law of the state of Georgia or of the United States is drawn in question; and, until otherwise provided by law, in all cases respecting title to land; in all equity cases; in all cases which involve the validity of, or the construction of wills; in all cases of conviction of a capital felony; in all habeas corpus cases; in all cases involving extraordinary remedies; in all divorce and all mony cases, and in all cases certified to it by the Court of Appeals for its determination. It shall also be competent for the Supreme Court to require by certiorari or otherwise any case to be certified

576

RECORDS OF CONSTITUTIONAL COMMISSION

to the Supreme Court from the Court of Appeals for review and determination with the same power and authority as if the case had been carried by writ of error to the Supreme Court. Any case carried to the Supreme Court or to the Court of Appeals, which belonas to the dass of which the other court has jurisdiction, shall, until otherwise provided by law, be transferred to the other court under such rules as the Supreme Court may prescribe, and the cases so transferred shall be heard and determined by the court which has jurisdiction thereof.

Paragraph V. Cases, how disposed of. The Supreme Court and Court of Appeals shall dispose of every case at the term for which it is entered on the court's docket for hearing, as provided by Paragraph VIII of this Article and Section, or at the next term. If the plaintiff in error shall not be prepared to prosecute the case at the term for which it is so entered for hearing, unless prevented by providential cause. it shall he stricken from the docket and the judgment below shall stand affirmed. No writ of error shall be dismissed because of delay in transmission of the bill of exceptions and the copy of the record, or either of them, resulting from the default of the clerk or other cause, unless it shall appear that the plaintiff in error or his counsel caused such delay. Nothing herein shall be construed to excuse the clerk for any omission of duty or to relieve him of any liability resulting therefrom.

Paragraph VI. Judgments may be withheld. In any case the Court may in its discretion withheld its judgment until the next term after the same is argued.

Paragraph VII. The Supreme Court; how cases to be heard and

determined. The Supreme Court shall have power to hear and de-

termine cases when sitting in a body, under such regulations as

may be prescribed by the General Assembly.

I

Paragraph VIII. Court of Appeals. The Court of Appeals shall consist of the Judges provided therefor by law at the time of the ratification of this amendment, and of such additional Judges as the General Assembly shall from time to time prescribe. All terms of the Judges of the Court of Appeals after the expiration of the terms of the Judges provided for by law at the time of the ratification of this amendment (except unexpired terms) shall continue six years, and until their successors are qualified. The times and manner of electing Judges, and the mode of filling a vacancy which causes an

RECORDS OF CONSTITUTIONAL COMMISSION

577

unexpired term, shall be the same as are or may be provided for by the laws relating to the election and appointment of Justices of the Supreme Court. The Court of Appeals shall have jurisdiction for the trial and correction of errors of law from the superior courts by this Constitution upon the Supreme Court, and in such other
like courts as have been or may hereafter be established in other cities, in all cases in which such jurisdiction has not been conferred by this Constitution upon the Supreme Court, and in such other cases as may hereafter be prescribed by law; except that where a case is pending in the Court of Appeals and the Court of Appeals desires instruction from the Supreme Court, it may certify the same to the Supreme Court, and thereupon a transcript of the record shall be transmitted to the Supreme Court, which, after having afforded to the parties an opportunity to be heard thereon, shall instruct the Court of Appeals on the question so certified, and the Court of Appeals shall be bound by the instruction so given. But if by reason of equal division of opinion among the Justices of the Supreme Court no such instruction is given, the Court of Appeals may decide the question. The manner of certifying questions to the Supreme Court by the Court of Appeals, and the subsequent proceedings in regard to the same in the Supreme Court, shall be as the shall be reported of the Court of Appeals until otherwise provided by law. No affirmance of the judgment of the court below in cases pending in the Court of Appeals shall result from delay in disposing of questions or cases certified from the Court of Appeals to the Supreme Court, or as to which such certificate has been required by the Supreme Court as hereinbefore provided. All writs of error in the Supreme Court or the Court of Appeals, when received by its clerk during a term of the Court and before the docket of the term is by order of the Court closed, shall be entered thereon, and when received at any other time, shall be entered on the docket of the next term; and they shall stand for hearing at the term for which the are so entered, under such rules as the Court may prescribe, until otherwise provided by law. The Court of Appeals shall appoint a clerk and a sheriff of the court. The reporter of the Supreme Court shall be reported of the Court of Appeals until otherwise provided by law. The laws relating to the Supreme Court as to qualifications and salaries of Judges, the designation of other Judges to preside when members of the Court are disqualified, the powers, duties, salaries, fees and terms of officers, the mode of carrying cases to the Court, the powers, practice, procedure, times of sitting, and costs

578

RECORDS OF CONSTITUTIONAL COMMISSION

of the Court, the publication of reports of cases decided therein, and in all other respects, except as otherwise provided in this Constitution or by the laws as to the Court of Appeals at the time of the ratification of this amendment, and until otherwise provided by law, shall apply to the Court of Appeals so far as they can be made to apply. The decisions of the Supreme Court shall bind the Court of Appeals as precedents. The Court of Appeals shall have power to hear and determine cases when sitting in a body, except as may be ;()therwise provided by the General Assembly.

Section nI
Paragraph I. Terms, etc., of Superior Court Judges. There shall be a judge of the Superior Courts for each judicial circuit, whose term of office shall be for four years, and until his successor is qualified. He may act in other circuits when authorized by law. The legislature shall have authority to add one or more additional judges of the superior court for any judicial circuit in this State, and shall have authority to regulate the manner in which the judges of such circuits shall dispose of the business thereof, and shall fix the time at which the term of office of such additional judge or judges shall begin, and the manner of his appointment or election, and shall have authority from time to time to add to the number of such judges in any judicial circuit; or to reduce the number of judges in any judicial circuit; provided that at all times there shall be at least one judge in every judicial circuit of this State.
Paragraph n. Elections, when to be held. The successors to the
present and subsequent incumbents shall be elected by the electors entitled to vote for members of the General Assembly of the whole State, at the general election held for such members, next preceding the expiration of their respectice terms.
Paragraph :QI. Terms begin, when. The terms of the judges to be elected under the Constitution, except to fill vacancies, shall begin on the first day of January after their elections. Every vacancy occasioned by dealth, resignation, or other causes shall be filled by appointments of the Governor until the first day of January after the general election held next after the expiration of thirty days from the time such vacancy occurs, at which election a successor for the unexpired tenn shall be elected.
Paragraph IV. Division of Judicial Circuits; assistance to Judges

RECORDS OF CONSTITUTIONAL COMMISSION

579

of Superior Courts to relieve coigested dockets. The Supreme Court shall divide the judicial circuits of the State into seven subdivisions known as Districts for the purposes of this paragraph. And the Chief Justice shall assign each Associate-Justice to one of such judicial districts whose duty it shall be to acquaint himself with the volume of legal business in each judicial circuit of such district. Every two years the Chief Justice shall reassign the Associate-Justices to other and different districts until such Associate-Justice, or his successor in office, shall have served in all the districts. When.,. ever any judge of the Superior Courts, by reason of any disqualification, disability, or necessary absence from his circuit, or the accumulation or urgency of business, is unable to perform speedily all of the work of his circuit, the Associate-Justice of the Supreme Court soass~gned to the District in which his circuit is located, or in his absence or disability the Chief Justice, may, if in his judgment, the public interest requires, designate and assign any judge of the Superior Courts to acts as judge in such circuit and to discharge any or all of the judicial duties of a judge thereof for such time as the business of the circuit may require.
Sessions of the Superior Courts may be held in two or more counties in the same circuit at the same time. Before any such designation or assignment is made by an Associate-Justice of the Supreme Court, he shall submit the designation or the assignment to the Chief Justice and obtain his consent thereto.

Paragraph V. Cases furnished by Clerk of Superior Court. The Clerk of the Superior Court shall prepare as of the first day of January and July of each year, and before the expiration of 30 days from these dates shall transmit to the Associate-Justice of the Supreme Court having supervision of the district in which his circuit is located, a statement of all cases then pending in his court and the length of time that they have been so pending and whether the cause is civil or criminal. A failure to so do may be punished as for contempt of the Supreme Court.
ParaJgraph VI. Rule making power. On and after January 1, 1947, the rule making power for practice and procedure in the sev-: eralcourts of this State shall be vested in the Supreme Court of Georgia; provided, that the General Assembly shall have the power to create a Judicial Council and to confer on it this power; provided, further, that rules promulgated hereunder shall not abridge, enlarge

i80

RECORDS OF CONSTITUTIONAL COMMISSION

or modify the substantive rights of any litigant. The General As.sembly shall provide for the publication of the rules.

Section IV
Paragraph I. Exclusive jurisdiction. The Superior Courts shall have exclusive jurisdiction in cases of divorce; in criminal cases where the offender is subjected to loss of life, or confinement in the penitentiary, incases respecting titles to land, and equity cases.
Paragraph II. Equity may be merged in common law courts. The General Assembly may confer upon the Courts of common law all the powers heretofore exercised by Courts of equity in this State.
Paragraph III. General jurisdiction. Said Courts shall have jurisdiction in all civil cases, except as hereinafter provided.
Paragraph IV. Appellate jurisdiction. They shall have appellate jurisdiction in all such cases as may be provided by law.
Paragraph V. Certiorari, mandamus, etc. They shall have power to correct errors in inferior judicatories by writ of certiorari, which shall only issue on the sanction of the Judge, and said Courts, and the judges thereof shall have power to issue writs of mandamus, prohibition, scire facias, and all other writs ~hat may be necessary for carrying their powers fully into effect, and shall have such other powers as are, or may be conferred on them by law.
Paragraph VI. New Trials. The Superior, and City Courts may grant new trials on legal grounds.
Paragraph VII. Judgments by the court. The Court shall render judgment without the verdict of a jury in all civil cases where no issuable defense is filed except as otherwise provided in this Constitution.
Paragraph VIn. Sessions. The Superior courts shall sit in each county not less than twice in each year, at such times as have been, or may he appointed by law. The judges of said courts may, on reasonable notice to the parties, at any time, in vacation, at chambers, hear and determine, by interlocutory or final judgment, any matter or issue, where a jury verdict is not required, or may be waived.
Paragraph IX. Presiding judge disqualified. The General Assembly may provide by law for the appointment of some proper per

RECORDS OF CONSTITUTIONAL COMMISSION

581

son to preside in cases where the presiding judge is from any cause disqualified.

Section V
Paragraph I. Judges of superior and city courts may alternate, when. In any county within which there is, or hereafter may be a City Court. the Judge of said Court and of the Superior Court may preside in the Courts of each other in cases where the judges of either Court is disqualified to preside.

Section VI
Paragraph I. Appeals from Ordinary. The powers of a Court of Ordinary and of Probate shall be vested in an Ordinary for each county, from whose decision there may be an appeal, or by consent of parties, without a decision to the Superior Court under regulations prescribed by law.
Paragraph II. Powers. The Courts of Ordinary shall have such powers in relation to roads, bridges, ferries, public buildings, paupers, county officers, county funds, county taxes and other county matters as may be conferred on them by law.
The Court of Ordinary shall have jurisdiction to issue warrants, try cases, and impose sentence thereon in all misdemeanor calles arising under the Act known as the Georgia State Highway Pab 01 Act of 1937, and other traffic laws of the State in all counties of this State in which there is no city or county court, provided the defendant waives a jury trial. Like jurisdiction is also conferred upon the judges of the police courts of incorporated cities and municipal court judges, for offenses arising within their respective jurisdiction.
Paragraph III. Term of office. The Ordinary shall hold his office for the term of four years and until his successor is elected and qualified.

Section VII
Paragraph I. Number and Term of Office. There shall be in each militia district one justice of the peace, whose official term, except when elected to fill an unexpired term, shall be for four years: Pro-

582

RECORDS OF CONSTITUTIONAL COMMISSION

vided, however, that the General Assembly may, in its discretion, abolish justice courts and the office of justice of the peace and of notary public ex-officio justice of the peace in any city of this State having a population of over twenty thousand, and establish in lieu thereof such court or courts or system of courts as the General Assembly may, in its discretion, deem necessary, conferring upon such new court or courts or system of courts, when so established, the jurisdiction as to subject matter now exercised by justice courts and by justices of the peace and notaries public ex-oflicio justices of the peace, together with such additional jurisdiction, either as to amount or subject-matter, as may be provided by law, whereof some other court has not exclusive jurisdiction under this Constitution; together with such provision as to rules and procedure in such courts, and as to new trials and the correction of errors in and by said courts, and with such further provision for the correction of errors by the Superior Court, or Court of Appeals, or the Supreme Court, as the General Assembly may, from time to time, in its discretion, provide or authorize. Any court so established shall not be subject to the rules of uniformity laid down in Paragraph I of Section IX of Article VI of the Constitution of Georgia: Provided, however, that the General Assembly may, in its discretion, abolish justice courts and the office of justice of the peace and notary public ex-officio justice of the peace in any county in this State having within its borders a city having a population of over twenty thousand, and as well in the County of Glynn, and establish in lier thereof such court or courts or system of courts as the General Assembly may, in its discretion, deem necessary; or conferring upon existing courts, by extension of their jurisdiction as to subject matter now exercised by justice courts and by justices of the peace and notaries public ex-officio justices of the peace; together with such additional jurisdiction, either as to amount or to subject-matter, as may be provided by law, whereof some other court has not exclusive jurisdiction under this Constitution; together also with such provisions as to rules and procedure in such courts and as to new trials and the correction of errors in and by said courts, and with such further provision for the correction of errors by the superior court or the Court of Appeals or the Supreme Court as the General Assembly may, from time to time, in its discretion, provide or authorize. The civil court of Fulton County shall have jurisdiction in Fulton County and outside the city limits of Atlanta either concurrently with, or supplemental to, or in lieu of justice

RECORDS OF CONSTITUTIONAL COMMISSION

583

courts. as may be now or hereafter provided hy law. Any court so established shall not be subject to the rules of uniformity laid down in Paragraph I of Section IX of Article VI of the Constitution of Georgia.
Paragraph II. Jurisdiction. Justices of the peace shall have jurisdiction in all civil cases arising ex contractu. and in cases of injury or damage to personal property. when the principal sum does not exceed two hundred dollars. and shall sit monthly at fixed times and places but in all cases there may be an appeal to a jury in said court. or an appeal to the superior court under such regulation as may be prescribed by law.
Paragraph III. Elections and commissions. Justices of the peace shall be elected by the legal voters in their respective districts. and shall be commissioned by the Governor. They shall be removable on conviction for malpractice in office.

Section VIII
Paragraph I. Appointment; number; term; removal. Commissioned notaries public. not to exceed one for each district. may be appointed by the judges of the superior courts in their respective circuits. upon recommendation of the grand juries of the several counties. They shall be commissioned by the Governor for the term of four years and shall be ex-officio justices of the peace. and shall be removable on conviction for malpractice in office.

Section IX
Paragraph I. Uniformity provided for. Except as otherwise provided in this Constitution. the jurisdiction. powers. proceedings and practice of all courts or officers invested with judicial powers (except City Courts) of the same grade or class. so far as regulated by law. and the force and effect of the process. judgment and decree. by such courts. severally. shall be uniform. This uniformity must be established by the General Assembly and in case of City Courts. may be established by the General Assembly.

Section X Paragraph I. Election; term of office. There shall be an At-

584

RECORDS OF CONSTITUTIONAL COMMISSION

torney General of this State, who shall be elected by the people at the same time... for the same term and in the same manner as the Governor.
Paragraph II. Duties. It shall be the duty of the Attorney General to act as the legal adviser of the Executive Department, to represent the State in the Supreme Court in all Capital felonies; ani in all Civil and Criminal Cases in any Court when required by the Governor and to perform such other services as shall be required of him by law.

Section XI
Paragraph I. Number; term of office; vacancies. There shall be a solicitor general for each judicial circuit, whose official term (except to fill a vacancy) shall be four years. The successors of present and subsequent incumbents shall be elected by the electors of the whole State, qualified to vote for members of the General Assembly, at the general election held next preceding the expiration of their respective terms. Every vacancy occasioned by death, resignation, or other cause shall be filled by appointment of the Governor, until the first day of January after the general election held next after the expiration of 30 days from the time such vacancy occurs, at which election a successor for the unexpired term shall be elected.
Paragraph II. Duties. It shall be the duty of the Solicitor General to represent the State in all cases in the Superior Courts of his Circuit and in all cases taken up from the superior courts of his Circuit to the Supreme Court, and Court of Appeals and to perform such other services as shall be required of him by law.

Section XII
Paragraph I. Salaries of Justices and Judges. The Justices of the Supreme Court each shall have out of the treasury of the State salaries of $10,000 per annum; the Judges of the Court of Appeals each shall have out of the treasury of the State salaries of $10,000 per annum; the Judges of the Superior Courts each shall have out of the treasury of the State salaries of $6,000 per annum, with the right of the General Assembly to authorize any county to supplement the salary of a judge of the Superior Court of the Judicia:

RECORDS OF CONSTITUTIONAL COMMISSION

5.5

Circuit in which such county lies, out of county funds, provided, however, where such salary is, at the time of the adoption of this Constitution, being supplemented out of county funds under existing laws, such laws shall remain in force until altered by the General Assembly.
Paragraph II. Powers to abolish fees of Solicitor General. The General Assembly shall have power, at any time, by a majority vote of each branch, to abolish the fees at present accruing to the office of solicitor general in any particular judicial circuit, and in lieu thereof to prescribe a salary for such office, in addition to the salaries prescribed in Paragraph I of this Section, and without regard to the uniformity of such salaries in the various circuits; and shall have the further power to determine what disposition shall be made of the fines, forfeitures and fees accruing to the office of solicitor general in any such judicial circuit where the fees are abolished.

Section XIII
Paragraph I. Age; citizenship; practice of law. No person shall be Justice of the Supreme Court, Court of Appeals, Judge of Su~ perior Courts, or A:ttorney General, unless, at the time of his election, he shall have attained the age of thirty years, and shall have been a citizen of the State three years, and have practiced law for seven years; and no person shall be hereafter elected Solicitor General, unless at the time of his election he shall have attained twenty~ five years of age, shall have been a citizen of the State for three years, and shall have practiced law for three years next preceding his election.

Section XIV
Paragraph I. How granted. No divorce shall be granted except by the Superior Court.

Section XV
Paragraph I. Divorce Cases. Divorce cases shall be brought in the county where the defendant resides, if a resident of this state; if the defendant be not a resident of this state, then in the county in which the plaintiff resides, provided, that any person who has been a resi~ dent of any United States Army Post or military reservation within the state of Georgia for ~ne year next preceding the filing of the

586

RECORDS OF CONSTITUTIONAL COMMISSION

petition may bring an action for divorce in any county adjacent to said United States Army Post or military reservation.
Paragraph II. Land titles. Cases respecting titles to land shall be tried in the county where the land lies, except where a single tract is divided by a county line, in which case the Superior Court of either county shall have jurisdiction.
Paragraph III. Equity cases. Equity cases shall be tried in the county where a defendant resides against whom substantial relief is prayed.
Paragraph IV. Suits against joint obligors, co-partners, etc. Suits against joint obligors, joint promissors, co-partners, or joint trespassers, residing in different counties, may be tried in either county.
Paragraph V. Suits against maker, endorser, etc. Suits against the maker and endorser of promissory notes, or drawer, acceptor and endorser of foreign or inland bills of exchange, or like instruments, residing in different counties, shall be brought in the county where the maker or acceptor resides.
Paragraph VI. All other cases. AlI other civil cases shall be tried in the county where the defendant resides, and all criminal cases shall be tried in the county where the crime was committed, except cases in the Superior Courts where the Judge is satisfied that an impartial jury cannot be obtained in such county.

Section XVI
Paragraph I. Power to change venue. The power to change the venue in civil and criminal cases shall be vested in the Superior Courts to be exercised in such manner as has been, or shall be, provided by law.

Section XVII

Paragraph I. Right of trial by jury. The right of ,trial by jury,

except where it is otherwise provided in this Constitution, shall re-

main inviolate, but the General Assembly may prescribe any nmn-

ber, not less than five, to constitute a trial or traverse jury, except

in the superior court.

.

ParagJ,"aph II. ~Ieetion of jurors. The General Assembly shall

RECORDS OF CONSTITUTIONAL COMMISSION

587

provide by law for the selection of the most experienced, intelligent and upright men to serve as grand jurors, and intelligent and upright men to serve as traverse jurors. Nevertheless, the grand jurors shall be competent to serve as traverse jurors. The General Assembly shall have the power to require jury service of women also, under such regulations as the General Assembly may prescribe.
Paragraph III. Compensation of jurors. It shall be the duty or the General Assembly by general laws to prescribe the manner of fixing compensation of jurors in all counties in this State.

Section XViIn
Paragraph I. Power to create County Commissioners. The General Assembly shall have power to provide for the creation of county commissioners in such counties as 'may require them, and to define their duties.

Section XIX
Paragraph I. Power to abolish courts. All courts not specially mentioned by name in the first section of this Article may be abolished in any county at the discretion of the General Assembly.

Article VII
Finance, Taxation and Public Debt.
Section I
Paragraph I. Taxation, a sovereign right. The right of taxation is a sovereign right-inalienable, indestructible-is the life of the State, and rightfully belongs to the people in all Republican governments, and neither the General Assembly, nor any, nor all other departments of the Government established by this Constitution, shall ever have the authority to irrevocably give, grant, limit, or restrain this right; and all laws, grants, contracts, and all other acts, what soever, by said government, or any department thereof, to affect any of these purposes, shall be, and are hereby, declared to be null and void, for every purpose whatsnever; and said right of taxation shall always be under the complete control of, and revocable by, the State, notwithstanding any gift, grant or contract, whatsoever, by the General Assembly.

588

RECORDS OF CONSTITUTIONAL COMMISSION

The power to tax corporations and corporate property, shall not be surrendered or suspended by any contract, or grant to which the State shall be a party.
Paragraph II. Taxing power limited.
1. The General Assembly shall not by vote, resolution or order, grant any donation or gratuity in favor of any person, corporation or association.
2. The General Assembly shall not grant or authorize, extra compensation to any public officer, agent or contractor after the service has been rendered or the contract entered into.
. 3. The levy of taxes on property for anyone year by the General Assembly for all purposes, except to provide for repelling invasions, suppressing insurrections, or defending the State in time of war, shall not exceed five (5) mills on each dollar of the value of the property taxable in the State.
4. No poll tax shall be levied to exceed one dollar annually upon each poll.
Paragraph III. Uniformity; classification of property. All taxes shall be levied and collected under general laws and for public purposes only. All taxation shall be uniform upon the same class of subjects within the territorial limits of the authority levying the tax. Classes of subjects for taxation of property shall consist of tangible property and one or more classes of intangible personal property including money. The General Assembly shall have the power to classify property including money for taxation, and to adopt different rates and different methods for different classes of such property.
Paragraph IV. Exemptions from taxation. The General Assembly may, by law, exempt from taxation all public property; places of religious worship or burial; all institutions of purely public charity; all buildings erected for and used as a college, incorporated academy or other seminary of learning, and also all funds or property held or used as endowment by such colleges, incorporated academies or seminaries of learning, provided the same is not invested in real estate; and provided, further, that said exemptions shall only apply to such collegs, incorporated academies or other seminaries of learning as are open to the general public; provided

RECORDS OF CONSTITUTIONAL COMMISSION

589

further, that all endowments to institutions established for white people, shall be limited to white people, and all endowments to institutions established for colored people, shall be limited to colored people; the real and personal estate of any public library, and that of any other literary association, used by or connected with such library; all books and philosophical apparatus and all paint.. ings and statuary of any company or association, kept in a public hall and not held as merchandise or for purposes of sale or gain; provided the property so exempted be not used for the purpose of private or corporate profit and income, distributable to shareholders incorporations owning such property or to other owners of such property, and any income from such property is used exclusively for religious, educational and charitable purposes, or for either one or more of such purposes and for the purpose of maintaining and operating such institution; this exemption shall not apply to real estate or buildings other than those used for the operation of such institution and which is rented, leased or otherwise used for the primary purpose of securing an income thereon; and also provided that such donations of property shall nofbe predicated upon an agreement, contract or otherwise that the donor or donors shall receive or retain any part of the net or gross income of the property. The General Assembly shall further have power to exempt from taxation, farm products, including baled cotton grown in this State and remaining in the hands of the producer, but not longer than for the year next after their production.
All personal clothing, household and kitchen furniture, personal property used and included within the home, domestic animals and tools, and implements of trade of manual laborers, but not including motor vehicles, are exempted from all State, County, Municipal and School District ad valorem taxes, in an amount not to exeeed $300.00 in actual value.
The homestead of each resident of Georgia actually occupied by the owner as a residence and homestead, and only so long as actually occupied by the owner primarily as such, but not to exceed $2,000.00 of its value, is hereby exempted from all ad valorem taxation for State, and County, but not for school purposes, with the exception of taxation to pay interest on and retire bonded indebtedness, provided, however, should the owner of a dwelling house on a farm, who is already entitled to homestead exemption, partidpate in the program of rural housing and obtain a new house under

.590

RECORDS OF CONSTITUTIONAL COMMISSION

,contract with the local housing authority, he shall be entitled to receive the same homestead exemption as allowed before making such contract. The General Assembly may from time to time lower said exemptions to not less than $1250.00. The value of all prope:rty in excess of the foregoing exemptions shall remain subject .to taxation. Said exemptions shall be returned and claimed in such manner as prescribed by the General Assembly.
All cooperative, non-profit, membership corporations organized under the laws of this State for the purpose of engaging in rural electrification, as defined in sub-section 1 of Section 3 of the Act approved March 30, 1937, providing for their incorporation, and all of the real and personal property owned or held by such corporations for such purposes, are hereby exempted from all taxation, state, county, municipal, school district and political or territorial sub,divisions of the State having the authority to levy taxes. The exemption herein provided for shall expire December 31, 1961.
There shall be exempt from all ad valorem intangible taxes in this State, the common voting stock of a subsidiary corporation not doing business in this State, if at least ninety per cent of such common voting stock is owned by a Georgia corporation with its principal place of business located in this State and was acquired or is held for the purpose of enabling the parent company to carry {)n some part of its established line of business through such sub-
~sidiary.
All laws exempting property from taxation, other than the property herein enumerated, shall be void.
Paragraph V. Exemptions of certain industries continued. Existing exemptions under the amendment to the Constitution providing for the exemption of certain industries from taxation appearing in Acts of the General Assembly of 1923, extra session, page 67, ratified November 4, 1924, shall continue of force until the expiration of the term for which granted.

Section II
Purposes and Method of Taxation
Paragraph I. Taxation, how and for what purposes exercised. 'The powers of taxation over the whole State shall be exercised by the General Assembly for the following purposes only:

RECORDS OF CONSTITUTIONAL COMMISSION

591

1. For the support of the State Government and the public institutions.
2. For educational purposes.
3. To pay the principal and the interest on the public debt, and to provide a sinking fund therefor.
4. To suppress insurrection, to repel invasion, and defend the State in time of war.
5. To make provision for the payment of pensions to ex-Confederate soldiers and to the widows of Confederate soldiers who were married to such soldiers prior to January 1, 1920, and who are unmarried.
6. To construct and maintain State buildings and a system of State highways, airports, and docks.
7. To make provision for the payment of old-age assistance to' aged persons in need, and for the payment of assistance to the needy blind, and to dependent children and other welfare benefits; provided that no person shall be entitled to the assistance herein authorized, who does not qualify for such provisions in every respect, in accordance with enactments of the General Assembly, which may be in force and effect, prescribing the qualifications for beneficiaries hereunder: Provided no indebtedness against the Statp. shall ever be created for the purpose herein stated, in excess of the taxes, lawfully levied each fiscal year under Acts of the General Assembly authorized hereunder for such purposes.
8. To advertise and promote the agricultural, industrial, historic;,. recreational and natural resources of the State of Georgia.
9. For public health purposes.
Paragraph II. Teacher retirement system-taxation for. The powers of taxation may be exercised by the State through the General Assembly and by counties and municipalities, for the purpose of paying pensions and other benefits and 'costs under a teacher retirement system or systems; provided no indebtedness against the State shall ever be created for the purpose herein stated in excess of the taxes lawfully levied each fiscal year under Acts of the General assembly authorized hereunder.
Paragraph III. Revenue to be paid into general fund. All mone~'

592

RECORDS OF CONSTITUTIONAL COMMISSION

collected from taxes, fees and assessments for State purposes, as authorized by revenue measures enacted by the General Assembly, shall be paid into the General Fund of the State Treasury and shall be appropriated therefrom, as required by this Constitution, for the purposes set out in this Section and for these purposes only.
Paragraph IV. Tax returns of public utilities. The General As- sembly may provide for a different method and time of returns, assessments, payment and collection of ad valorem taxes, of public utilities.

Section III
State Debt
Paragraph I. Purposes for which contracted. No debt shall be contracted by, or on behalf of the State, except to supply such temporary deficit as may exist in the treasury in any year from necessary delay in collecting the taxes of that year, to repel invasion, suppress insurrection and defend the state in time of war, or to pay the existing public debt; but the debt created to supply deficiencies in revenue shall not exceed, in the aggregate, five hundred thousand dollars, and any loan made for this purpose shall be repaid out of the taxes levied for the year in which the loan is made. However, said debt may be increased in the sum of three million, five hundred thousand dollars for the payment of the public school teachers of the State only. The pri:I;lCipal amount borrowed for payment of teachers shall be repaid each year out of the common school appropriation, and the interest paid thereon shall be paid each year out of the general funds of the State.
Paragraph II. Bonded debt increased, when. The bonded debt of the State shall never be increased, except to repel invasion, suppress insurrection or defend the State in time of war.
Paragraph III. Form of laws to borrow money. All laws authorizing the borrowing of money by or on behalf of the State shall specify the purpose for which the money is to be used and the money so obtained shall be used for the purpose specified and for no other.
Paragraph IV. State aid forbidden. The credit of the State shall not be pledged or loaned to any individual, company, corporation or association and the State shall not become a joint owner or atock-

RECORDS OF CONSTITUTIONAL COMMISSION

593

holder in or with, any individual, company, association or corporation.
Paragraph V. Assumption of debts forbidden. The State shall not assume the debt, nor any part thereof, of any county, municipal corporation or political subdivision of the State, unless such debt be contracted to enable the State to repel invasion, suppress insurrection or defend itself in time of war. Provided, however, that the amendment to the Constitution proposed by the General Assembly and set forth in the published Acts of the General Assembly of the year 1931 at page 97, which amendment was ratified on November 8, 1932, and which amendment provided for the assumption by the State, of indebtedness of the several counties of the State, as well as that of the Coastal Highway District, and the assessments made against the counties of said district for the construction and paving of the public roads or highways (including bridges) of the State, under certain conditions and for the issuance of certificates of indebtedness for such indebtedness so assumed, is continued of full force and effect until such indebtedness assumed by the State is paid and such certificates of indebtedness retired.
Paragraph VI. Profit on public money. The receiving directly or indirectly, by any officer of State or county, or member or officer of the General Assembly of any interest, profits or perquisites, arisingfrom the use or loan of public funds in his hands or moneys tr be raised through his agency for State or county purposes, shall be deemed a felony, and punishable as may be prescribed by law, a part of which punishment shall be a disqualification from holding office.
Paragraph VII. Certain bonds not to be paid. The General Assembly shall have no authority to appropriate money either directl~ or indirectly, to pay the whole, or any part, of the principal or interest of the bonds, or other obligations which have been pronounced illegal, null and void by the General Assembly and the Constitutional amendments ratified by a vote of the people on the first day of May, 1877; nor shall the General Assembly have authority to pay any of the obligations created by the State under laws passed during the late war between the States, nor any of the bonds, notes or obligations made and entered into during the existence of said war, the time for the payment of which was fixed after the ratification of a treaty of peace between the United States and the Confederate States; nor shall the General Assembly pass any law,

594

RECORDS OF CONSTITUTIONAL COMMISSION

or the Governor or any other State official, enter into any contract or agreement whereby the State shall be made a party to any suit in any court of this State, or of the United States instituted to test the validity of any such bonds, or obligations.
Paragraph VIII. Sale of State's property to pay bonded debt. The proceeds of the sale of the Western and Atlantic Railroad, and any other property owned by the State, whenever the General Assembly may authorize the sale of the whole or any part thereof, shall be applied to the payment of the bonded debt of the State, and shall not be used for any other purpose whatsoever, so long as the State has any existing bonded debt; provided that the proceeds of the sale of the Western and Atlantic Railroad shall be applied to the payment of the bonds for which said railroad has been mortgaged, in preference to all other bonds.
Paragraph IX. State sinking fund. The General Assembly shall raise by taxation each year, in addition to the sum required to pay the public expenses, such amounts as are necessary to pay the interest on the public debt and the principal of the public debt maturing in such year and to provide a sinking fund to payoff and retire the bonds of the State which have not then matured. The amount of such annual levy shall be determined after consideration of the amount then held in the sinking fund. The taxes levied for such purposes and the said sinking fund, shall be applied to no other purpose whatever. The funds in the said sinking fund may be invested in the bonds of the State, and also in bonds and securities issued by the Federal Government and sub sidiary of the Federal Government, fully guaranteed by that gov ernment. If the said bonds are not available for purchase, the funds in the sinking fund may be loaned by the Treasurer of tht State, with the approval of the Governor, upon terms to be fixed by such officials and when amply secured by bonds of the State or Federal Government.

Section IV
Taxation by Counties
Paragraph I. Taxing power of counties. The General Assembly shall not have power to delegat~ to any county the right to levy a tax for any purpose, except:

RECORDS OF CONSTITUTIONAL COMMISSION

595

1. To pay the expenses of administration of the county government.

2. To pay the principal and interest of any debt of the county

and to provide a sinking fund therefor.

.

3. For educational purposes upon property located outside of independent school system, as provided in Article 8 of this Constitution.
4. To build and repair the public buildings and bridges.
5. To pay the expenses of courts, the maintenance and support of prisoners and to pay sheriffs and coroners and for litigation.

6. To build and maintain a system of county roads. 7. For public health purposes in said county, and for the collection and preservation of records of vital statistics. 8. To pay county police. 9. To support paupers.

10. To pay county agricultural and home demonstration agents.

11. To provide for payment of old age assistance to aged persons in need, and for the payment of assistance to needy blind, and to dependent children and other welfare benefits, provided that no person shall be entitled to the assistance herein authorized who does not qualify for such assistance in every respect, in accordance with enactments of the G~neral Assembly which may be in force and effect prescribing the qualifications for beneficiaries hereunder; provided no indebtedness or liability against the county shall ever be created for the purpose herein stated, in excess of the taxes lawfully levied each year under acts of the General Assembly authorized hereunder for such purposes.
12. To provide for fire protection of forest lands and for the further conservation of natural resources.
13. To provide medical or other care, and hospitalization, for the indigent sick people of the county.

Section V Paragraph I. Taxing power and contributions of counties, eitiN

596

RECORDS OF CONSTITUTIONAL COMMISSION

and political division reStricted. The General Assembly shall not authorize any county, municipal corporation or political division of this State, through taxation, contribution or otherwise, to become a stockholder in any company, corporation or association; or to appropriate money for, or to loan its credit to any corporation, company, association, institution or individual except for purely charitable purposes. This restriction shall not operate to prevent the support of schools by municipal corporations within their respective limits. If any municipal corporation shall offer to the State any property for locating or building a capitol, and the State accepts such offer, the corporation may comply with such offer.

Section VI
Paragraph I. Contracts for use of public facilities. (a) Any city, town, municipality or county of this State may contract for any period not exceeding fifty years, with each other or with any public agency, public corporation or authority now or hereafter created for the use by such subdivisions or the residents thereof of any facilities or services of any such city, town, municipality, county, public agency, public corporation or authority, provided such contracts shall deal with such activities and transactions as such subdivisions are by law authorized to undertake.
(b) Any city, town, municipality or county of this State is empowered, in connection with any contracts authorized, by the preceding paragraph, to convey to any public agency, public corporation or authority now or hereafter created, existing facilities operated by such city, town, municipality or county for the benefit of residents of such subdivisions, provided the land, buildings and equipment so conveyed shall not be mortgaged or pledged to secure obligations of any such public agency, public corporation or authority and provided such facilities are to be maintained and operated by such public agency, public corporation or authority for the same purposes for which such facilities .were operated by such city, town, municipality or county. Nothing in this section shall restrict the pledging of revenues of such facilities by any public agency, public corporation or authority.
(c) Any city, town, municipality or county of this State, or cny combination of the same, may contract with any public agency, public corporation or authority for the care, maintenance and hoec-

RECORDS OF CONSTITUTIONAL COMMISSION

597

pitalization of its indigent sick, and may as a part of such contract obligate itself to pay for the cost of acquisition, construction, modernization or repairs of necessary buildings and facilities by such public agency, public corporation or authority, and provide for the payment of such services and the cost to such public agency, public corporations or authority of acquisition, construction, mod~ ernization or repair of buildings and facilities from revenues real. ized by such city, town, municipality or county from any taxes authorized by the Constitution of this State or revenues tferived from any other sources.

Section VII
Limitation on County and Municipal Debts
Paragraph I. Debts of counties and cities. The debt hereafter incurred by any county, municipal corporation or political division of this State except as in this Constitution provided for, shall never exceed seven per centum of the aesessed value of all the taxable property therein, and no such county, municipality or division shall incur any new debt except for a temporary loan or loans, to supply casual deficiencies of revenue, not to exceed onejifth of one per centum of the assessed value of the taxable property therein, without the assent of two-thirds of those voting at an election for that purpose to be held as prescribed by law; Provided, that those voting at said election shall be a majority of the registered voters, and provided further that all laws, charter provisions and ordinances heretofore passed or enacted providing special registration of the voters of counties, municipal corporations and other political divisions of this State to pass upon the issuance of bonds by such counties, municipal corporations and otber political divisions are hereby declared to be null and void; and the General Assembly shall hereafter have no power to pass or enact any law providing for such special registration, but the validity of any and all bond issues by such counties, municipal corporations or other political divisions made prior to January 1, 1918, shall not be affected hereby; provided, that any county or municipality of this State may accept and use funds granted by the Federal Government, or any agency thereof, to aid in financing the cost of architectural, engineering, economic investigations, studies, surveys, designs, plans, working drawings, specifications, procedures, and other action preliminary to the construction of public works,

598

RECORDS OF CONSTITUTIONAL COMMISSION

and where the funds so used for the purposes specified are to be repaid within a period of ten years.
Paragraph II. Levy of taxes to pay bonds. Any county, municipal corporation or political division of this State which shall incur any bonded indebtedness under the provisions of this Constitution. shall at or before the time of so doing, provide for the assessment and collection of an annual tax sufficient in amount to pay the principal and interest of said debt, within thirty years from the date of the incurring of said indebtedness.

Paragraph III. Additional debt authorized when. In addition to the debt authorized in Paragraph I of this section, to be created by any county, municipal corporation or political subdivision of this State, a debt may be incurred by any county, municipal corporation or political subdivision of this State, in excess of seven per centum of the assessed value of all the taxable property therein, upon the following conditions: Such additional debt, whether incurred at one or more times, shall not exceed in the aggregate, three per centum of the assessed value of all the taxable property in such county, municipality or political subdivision; such additional qebt shall be payable in equal installments within the five years next succeeding the issuance of the evidences of such debt; there shall be levied by the government authorities of such county, municipality or political subdivision prior to the issuance of such additional debt, a tax upon all of the taxable property within such county, municipality or political subdivision collectable annually, sufficient to pay in full the principal and interest of such additional debt when and as due; such tax shall be in addition to and separate from all other taxes levied by such taxing authorities, and the collections from such tax shall be kept separate and shall be held, used and applied solely for the payment of the principal and interest of such additional indebtedness; authority to create such additional indebtedness shall first have been authorized by the General Assembly; the creation of such additional indebtedness shall have been first authorized by a vote of the registered voters of such county, municipality or political subdivision at an election held for such purpose, pursuant to and in accordance with the provisions of this Constitution and of the then existing laws for the creation of a debt by counties, municipal corporations and political subdivisions of this State, all of which provisions, including those for calling, advertising, holding and determining the result

RECORDS OF CONSTITUTIONAL COMMISSION

598

of such election and the votes necessary to authorize the creation of an indebtedness, are hereby made applicable to an election held for the purpose of authorizing such additional indebtedness.
Paragraph IV. Temporary loans authorized; conditions. In addition to the obligations hereinbefore allowed, each county, municipality and political subdivision of the State authorized to levy taxes, is given the authority to make temporary loans between January 1st and December 31st in each year to pay expenses for such year, upon the following conditions: The aggregate amount of all such loans of such county, municipality or political subdivision outstanding at anyone time, shall not exceed seventy-five per centum of the total gross income of such county, municipality or political subdivision, from taxes collected by such county, municipality or political subdivision in the last preceding year. Each such loan shall be payable on or before December 31st of the calendar year in which such loan is made. No loan may be made in any year under the provisions of this paragraph when there is a loan then unpaid which was made in a prior year under the provisions of this paragraph. Each such loan shall be first authorized by resolution fixing the terms of such loan, adopted by a majority vote of the governing body of such county, city or political subdivision, at a meeting legally held, and such resolution shall appear upon the minutes of such meeting. No such county, municipolity or subdivision shall incur in anyone calendar year, an aggregate of such temporary loans and other contracts or obligations for current expenses, in excess of the total anticipated revenue of such county, municipality or subdivision for such calendar year, or issue in one calendar year notes, warrants or other evidences of such indebtedness in a total amount in excess of such anticipated revenue for such year.
Paragraph V. Revenue anticipation obligations. Revenue anticipation obligations may be issued by any county, municipal corporation or political subdivision of this State, to provide funds for the purchase or construction, in whole or in part, of any revenueproducing facility which such county, municipal corporation or political subdivision is authorized by the Act of the General Assembly approved March 31, 1937, known as "The Revenue Certificate Laws of 1937," as amended by the Act approved March 14, 1939, to construct and operate, or to provide funds to extend, repair or improve any such existing facility. Such revenue an-

600

RECORDS OF CONSTITUTIONAL COMMISSION

ticipation obligations shall be payable, as to principal and interest, only from revenue produced by revenue-producing facilities of the issuing political subdivision, and shall not be deemed debts of, or to create debts against, the issuing political subdivision within the meaning of this paragraph or any other of this Consttuton. This authority shall apply only to revenue anticipation obligations issued to provide funds for the purchase, construction, extension, repair or improvement of such facilities and undertakings as are specifically authorized and enumerated by said Act of 1937, as amended by said Act of 1939; and no such issuing political subdivision of the State shall exercise the power of taxation for the purpose of paying the principal or interest of any such revenue anticipation obligations or any part thereof.
Paragraph VI. Refunding bonds. The General Assembly is hereby authorized to create a commission and to vest such commission with the power to secure all necessary information and to approve or disapprove the issuance of bonds for the purpose of refunding any bonded indebtedness of any county, municipality or political subdivision of this State issued prior to the adoption of this Constitution, including the authority to approve or disapprove the amount and terms of such refunding bonds, together with such other powers as to the General Assembly may seem proper, but not in conflict with the provisions of the Constitution. Such refunding bonds shall be authorized only where such county, municipality or political subdivision has not the funds available to meet the payment of outstanding bonded indebtedness through failure to levy and collect the required taxes, or through failure to maintain the required sinking fund for such bonds. The General Assembly may apporve the issuance of the said refunding bonds under the conditions stated. Such refunding bonds shall not, together with all other outstanding bonded indebtedness, exceed the limits fixed by this Constitution for the maximum amount of bonded indebtedness which may be issued by such county, municipality or political subdivision and shall be otherwise governed by all of the terms and provisions of this Constitution. No bonds shall be issued under this paragraph to refund any bonds issued after the adoption of this Constitution.
Paragraph VII. Refunding bonds ~ reduce bonded indebtedness. The General Assembly is further authorized to give to the said Commission the power and authority to approve or disapprove

RECORDS OF CONSTITUTIONAL COMMISSION

601

the issuance of bonds to refund any outstanding bonded indebtedness of any county, municipality or political subdivision now or hereafter issued, for the purpose of reducing the amount payable, principal or interest, on such bonded indebtedness, and upon the condition that the issuance of such refunding bonds will reduce the amounts payable upon such outstanding bonds, principal or interest. Such refunding bonds shall replace such outstanding bonded indebtedness. The said Commission shall have the authority to approve or disapprove the terms of any such proposed refunding bonds. The General Assembly may authorize the issuance of such refunding bonds issued for the said purpose, when approved by the said Commission and authorized by the governing authority of such county, municipality or subdivision, without an election by the qualified voters as otherwise required, but in all other respects such refunding bonds shall comply with the provisions of this Constitution.

Section VIII

Paragraph I. Sinking funds for bonds. All amounts collected

from any source for the purpose of paying the principal and in-

terest of any bonded indebtedness of any county, municipality or

subdivision and to provide for the retirement of such bonded in-

debtedness, above the amount needed to pay the principal and in-

terest on such bonded indebtedness due in the year of such col-

lection shall be placed in a sinking fund to be held and used to

payoff the principal and interest of such bonded indebtedness

thereafter maturing.

.

The funds in such sinking fund shall be kept separate and apart from all other moneys of such county, municipality or subdivision, and shall be used for no purpose other than that above stated. The moneys in such sinking fund may be invested and reinvested by the governing authorities of such county, municipality or subdivision, or by such other authority as has been created to hold' and manage such sinking fund, in the bonds of such county, municipality or subdivision, and in bonds or obligations of the State of Georgia, of the counties and cities thereof and of the government of the United States, of subsidiary corporations of the Federal Government fully guaranteed by such government, and no other. Any person or persons violating the above provisions, shall be guilty of malpractice in office and. shall also be guilty of misde-

602

RECORDS OF CONSTITUTIONAL COMMISSION

meanor, and shall be punished, when convicted, as prescribed by lav/ for the punishment of misdemeanors, until the General Assembly shall make other provisions for the violation of the terms of this paragraph.

Section IX
Appropriation Control
Paragraph 1. Preparation and submission of General Appropriation Bill. The Governor shall, after obtaining such information as he deems necessary as to the needs of the various state departments and agencies, submit to the General Assembly within fifteen days of its organization, a budget message accompanied by a draft of a General Appropriation Bill, which shall provide for the appropriation of the funds necessary to operate all the various departments and agencies, and to meet the current expenses of the State for the ensuing fiscal year.
Paragraph II. Continuation of General Appropriation Act. Each General Appropriation Act, with such amendments as are adopted from time to time, shall continue in force and effect for each fiscal year thereafter until repealed or another General Appropriation Act is adopted; provided, however, that each section of the General Appropriation Act in force and effect on the date of the adoption of this Constitution, of general application and pertaining to the administration, limitation and restriction on the payment of appropriations and each section providing for appropriation of Federal Grants and other continuing appropriations and adjustments on appropriations shall remain in force and effect until specifically and separately repealed by the General Assembly.
Paragraph III. Other or supplementary appropriations. In addition to the appropriations made by the General Appropriation Act and amendments thereto, the General Assembly may make additional appropriations by Acts, which shall be known as supplementary appropriation Acts, provided no such supplementary appropriation shall be available unless there is an unappropriated surplus in the State Treasury or the revenue necessary to pay such appropriation shall have been provided by a tax laid for such purpose and collected into the General Fund of the State Treasury. Neither House shall pass a Supplementary Appropriation Bill until

RECORDS OF CONSTITUTIONAL COMMISSION

603

the General Appropriation Act shall have been finally adopted by both Houses and approved by the Governor.
Paragraph IV. Appropriations to be for specific sums. The appropriation for each department, officer, bureau, board, commission, agency or institution for which an appropriation is made, shall be for a specific sum of money, and no appropriation shall allocate to any object, the proceeds of any particular tax or fund or a part of percentage thereof.
Paragraph V. Appropriations void, when. Any appropriation made in conflict with either of the foregoing provisions shall be void.

Section X
Paragraph I. Existing amendments continued of force. Amendments to the Constitution of the State of Georgia of 1877 in effect at the date of the ratification by the voters of the State, of this proposed Constitution, shall continue of full force and effect after the ratification of this proposed Constitution, where such amendments are of merely local, and not, general application, including the amendments pertaining to the Coastal Highway District of this State. There is also continued under this provision in force and effect, amendments to the Constitution of 1877 applicable to counties and cities having a population in excess of a number stated in such amendments, and amendments applicable to counties having a city therein with a population in excess of a number stated in such amendment, where such amendments are in force and effect at the time of the ratification of this proposed Constitution.

Article VIII
Education
Section I
Paragraph I. System of common schools; free tuition, separation of races. The provision of an adequate education for the citizens shall be a primary obligation of the State of Georgia, the expense of which shall be provided for by taxation. Separate schools shall be provided for the white and colored races.

604

RECORDS OF CONSTITUTIONAL COMMISSION

Section II
Paragraph I. State Board of Education; method of appointment.
There shall be a State Board of Education, composed of one member from each Congressional District in the State, who shall be appointed by the Governor, by and with the advice and consent of the Senate. The Governor shall not be a member of the State Board of Education. The first State Board of Education under this Constitution shall consist of those in office at the time this Constitution is adopted, with the terms provided by law. Thereafter, all succeeding appointments shall be for seven year terms from the expiration of the previous term. Vacancies upon said Board caused by expiration of term of office shall be similarly filled by appointment and confirmation. In case of a vacancy on said Board by death, resignation, or from any other cause other than the expiration of such member's term of office, the Board shall by secret ballot elect his successor, who shall hold office until the end of the next session of the General Assembly, or if the General Assembly be then in session to the end of that session. During such session of the General Assembly the Governor shall appoint the successor member of the Board for the unexpiring term and shall submit his name to the Senate for confirmation. All members of the Board shall hold office until their successors are appointed and qualified. The members of the State Board of Education shall be citizens of this. State who shall have resided in Georgia continuously for at least five years preceding their appointment. No person employed in a professional capacity by a private or public education institution, or by the State Department of Education, shall be eligible for appointment or to serve on said Board. No person who is or has been connected with or employed by a school book publishing concern shall be eligible to membership on the Board, and if any person shall be so connected or employed after becoming a member of the Board, his place shall immediately become vacant. The said State Board of Education shall have such powers and duties as provided by law and existing at the time of the adoption of this Constitution, together with such further powers and duties as may be hereafter provided by law.

Section III
Paragraph I. State School Superintendent; election, term., etc.

RECORDS OF CONSTITUTIONAL COMMISSION

605

There shall be a State School Superintendent, who shall be the executive officer of the State Board of Education, elected by the State Board of Education, for such term as it may fix, except that the term fixed shall not exceed four years. The State School Superintendent shall have such qualifications and shall be paid such compensation as may be fixed by law. No member of said Board shall be eligible for election as State School Superintendent during the time for which he shall have been appointed. The first appointment under this provision shall be made at the expiration of the term of the State School Superintendent in office at the time of adoption of this Constitution.

Section IV
Paragraph I. University System of Georgia; Board of Regents. There shall be a Board of Regents of the University System of Georgia, and the government, control, and management of the University System of Georgia and all of its institutions in said system shall be vested in said Board of Regents of the University System of Georgia. Said Board of Regents of the University System of Georgia shall consist of one member from each Congressional District in the State, and five additional members from the State-at-Iarge, appointed by the Governor and confirmed by the Senate. The Governor shall not be a member of the said Board. The first Board of Regents under this Constitution shall consist of those in office at the time this Constitution.is adopted, with the terms provided by law. Thereafter all succeeding appointments shall be for seven year terms from the expiration of the previous term. Vavancies upon said Board caused by expiration of .term of office shall be similarly filled by appointment and confimation. In case of a vacancy on said Board by death, resignation of a member, or from any other cause other than the expiration of such member's term of office, the Board shall by secret ballot elect his successor, who shall hold office until the end of the next session of the General Assembly. Or if the General Assembly be then in session to the end of that session. During such session of the General Assembly the Governor shall appoint the successor member of the Board for the unexpired term and shall submit his name to the Senate for confirmation. All members of the Board of Regents shall hold office until their successors are appointed. The said Board of Regents of the University System of Georgia shall have the powers and duties as provided by law existing at

606

RECORDS OF CONSTITUTIONAL COMMISSION

the time of the adoption of this Constitution, together with such further powers and duties as may be hereafter provided by law.

Section V
Paragraph I. County System; Board of Education; election, term, etc. Authority is granted to counties to establish and maintain public schools within their limits. Each county, exclusive of any independent school system now in existence in a county, shall compose one school district and shall be confined to the control and management of a County Board of Education. The Grand Jury of each county shall select from the citizens of their respective counties five freeholders, who shall constitute the County Board of Education. Said members shall be elected for the term of five years except that the first election of Board members under this Constitution shall be for such terms that will provide for the expiration of the term of one member of the County Board of Education each year. In case of a vacancy on said Board by death, resignation of a member, or from any other cause other than the expiration of such member's term of office, the board shall by secret ballot elect his successor, who shall hold office until the next Grand Jury convenes at which time said Grand Jury shall appoint the successor member of the Board for the unexpired term. The members of the County Board of Education of such County shall be selected from that portion of the County not embraced within the territory of an independent school district.
Section VI
Paragraph I. County School Superintendent; election, term, etc. There shall be a County School Superintendent, who shall be the executive officer of the County Board of Education. The method of the selection of the said County School Superintendent shaH be determined by the people of the County. He shall hold his office for a term of four years. The qualifications and the salary of and support the same as authorized by special or general law. No member of the County Board of Education shall be eligible for election as County School Superintendent during the time for which he shall have been elected.

RECORDS OF CONSTITUTIONAL COMMISSION

607

Section VII
Paragraph I. Independent systems continued; new systems prohibited. Authority is hereby granted to municipal corporations to maintain existing independent school systems within their limits, and support the same as authorized by special or general law. No new independent school system shall hereafter be established.

Section VIII
Paragraph I. Meetings of Boards of Education. All official meetings of County Boards of Education shall be open to the public.

Section IX
Paragraph I. Contracts for care of pupils. County Boards of Education and independent school systems may contract with each other for the education, transportation, and care of pupils.
Section X
Paragraph I. Certain systems protected. Public sohool systems established prior to the adoption of the Constitution of 1877 shall not be affected by this Constitution.
Section XI
Paragraph I. Grants, bequests and donations permitted. The State Board of Education and the Regents of the University System of Georgia may accept bequests, donations and grants of land, or other property, for the use of their respective systems of education.
Section XII
Paragraph I. Taxation by Counties for education. The fiscal authority of the several counties shall levy a tax for the support and maintenance of education not less than five mills nor greater than fifteen mills (as recommended by the County Board of Education) upon the dollar of all taxable property in the County located outside independent school systems, and the provisions of this section shall apply to the public school systems referred to in Section X.

608

RECORDS OF CONSTITUTIONAL COMMISSION

Article IX
Homestead and Exemptions
Section I
Paragraph I. Amount of homestead and exemptions. The Gen4 eraI Assembly shall h~ve authority to exempt from levy and sale, by virtue of any process whatever under the laws of this State, the property of every head of a family, or guardian, or trustee of a family of minor children, or every aged or infirm person, or person having the care and support of dependent females of any age, who is not the head of a family, realty or personalty, or both, to the value in the aggregate of sixteen hundred dollars; to provide the manner of exempting said property, the sale, alienation and encumbrance thereof, and to provide for the waiver of said exemption by the debtor.
Paragraph II. Homestead and exemption laws continued. The laws now of force with respect to homestead and exemptions shall remain in full force until changed by law.

Article X
Militia
Section I
Paragraph I. Or:ganization of Militia. A well regulated militia being essential to the peace and security of the State, the General Assembly shall have authority to provide by law how the militia of this State shall be organized, officered, trained, armed and equipped; and of whom it shall consist.
Paragraph II. Volunteers. The General Assembly shall have power to authorize the formation of volunteer companies, and to provide for their organization into battalions, regiments, brigades, divisions, and corps, with such restrictions as may be prescribed by law, and shall have authority to arm and equip the same.
Paragraph III. Pay of militia and volunteers. The officers and receive any pay, rations, or emoluments, when not in active service men of the militia and volunteer forces shall not be entitled to by authority of the State.

RECORDS OF CONSTITUTIONAL COMMISSION

609

Article XI Counties and Municipal Corporations
Section I

Paragraph I. Counties a corporate body; boundaries. Each county shall be a body corporate with such powers and limitations as may be prescribed by law. All suits by or against a county shall be in the name thereof; and the metes and bounds of the several counties shall remain as now prescribed by law, unless changed as hereinafter provided.
Paragraph II. Number limited. There shall not be more than one hundred and fifty-nine counties in this State.
Paragraph III. New counties permitted when. No new county shall be created except by the consolidation or merger of existing counties.
Paragraph IV. Consolidation of counties; method. The General Assembly shall have power, with the concurrence of a majority of the qualified voters of each of the counties to be affected who participate in elections held for that purpose, to provide for the consolidation of two or more counties into one, or the merger of one or more counties into another, or the division of a county, and the merger of portions thereof into other counties.
Paragraph V. Dissolution of counties; method. Any county may be dissolved and merged with a contiguous county or counties by a majority of the qualified voters of each of the counties affected who participate in elections held for that purpose. On the petition of one-fifth of the registered voters of anyone of the counties to be affected, the proper althorities of all of the counties concerned shall call an election for the purpose of deciding the question of consolidation or merger.
Paragraph VI. County governments uniform; exceptions. Whatever tribunal, or officers, may be created by the General Assembly for the transaction of county matters, shall be uniform throughout the State, and of the same name, jurisdiction, and remedies, except that the General Assembly may provide for Commissioners of Roads and Revenues in any county, may abolish the office of County Treasurer in any county, may fix the compensation of County Treasurers, and may consolidate the offices of Tax Re-

'10'

RECORDS OF CONSTITUTIONAL COMMISSION

ceiver and Tax Collector in the office of Tax Commissioner, and may fix his compensation, without respect to uniformity.
Paragraph VII. Consolidation of governments; submission to Yoters. The General Assembly may provide by general law optional systems of consolidated county and municipal government, providing for the organization and the powers and duties of its officers. Such optional systems shall become effective when submitted to the qualified voters of such county and approved by a majority of those voting.
Paragraph VIII. County lines. County lines shall not be changed, unless under the operation of a general law for that purpose.
Paragraph IX. County sites changed; method. No county site shall be changed or removed, except by a two-thirds vote of the qualified voters of the county, voting at an election held for that purpose and by a majority vote of the General Assembly, except in case of a merger or a consolidation.

Section II

Paragraph I. County officers; election; term; removal; eligibility. The county officers shall be elected by the qualified voters of their respective counties or districts, and shall hold their office for four years. They shall be removed upon conviction for malpractice in office; and no person shall be eligible for any of the offices referred to in this paragraph unless he shall have been a resident of the county for two years and is a qualified Yoter.

Paragraph II. Compensation of county officers; changed how.

Upon the recommendation of two successive Grand Juries the fis-

cal authorities of the county may place county officers on a fee

basis, salary basis, or fee basis supplemented by salary, and may

change such basis from time to time upon recommendation of two

successive Grand Juries.

.

Article XII
The Laws of General Operation in Force In This State
Section I Paragraph I. Supreme law. The laws of general operation in this State are, first: As the Supreme law: The Constitution of the

RECORDS OF CONSTITUTIONAL COMMISSION

611

United States, the laws of the United States in pursuance thereof and all treaties made under the authority of the United States.
Paragraph II. ' Second in authority. Second. As next in authority thereto: This Constitution.
Paragraph III. Third in authority. Third. In subordination to the foregoing: All laws now of force in this State, not inconsistent with this Constitution shall remain of force until the same are modified or repealed by the General Assembly.
Paragraph IV. Local and private acts. Local and private acts passed for the benefit of counties, cities, towns, corporations and private persons, not inconsistent with the Supreme law, nor with this Constitution and which have not expired nor been repealed, shall have the force of statute law, subject to judicial decision as to their validity when passed, and to any limitations imposed by their own terms.
Paragraph V. Proceedings of courts confirmed. All judgments, decrees, orders, and other proceedings, of the several courts of this State, heretofore made within the limits of their several jurisdictions, are hereby ratified and affirmed, subject only to reversal by motion for a new trial, appeal, bill or review or other proceedings, in conformity with the law of force when they were made.
Paragraph VI. Existing officers. The officers of the Government now existing shall continue in the exercise of their several functions until their successors are duly elected or appointed and qualified. But nothing herein is to apply to any officer whose office may be abolished by this Constitution.

Article VllI
Amendments to the Constitution
Section I
Paragraph I. Proposed by General Assembly; submission to people. Any amendment or amendments to this Constitution may be proposed in the Senate or House of Representatives and if the same shall be agreed to by two-thirds of the members elected to each of the two houses, such proposed amendment or amendments shall be entered on their journals, with the yeas and nays taken thereon. And the General Assembly shall cause such amendment or

612

RECORDS OF CONSTITUTIONAL COMMISSION

amendments to be published in one or more newspapers in each Congressional District, for two months previous to the time of holding the next general election at which election members of the General Assembly are chosen; and if such proposed amendment directly affects only one or more political subdivisions of the State, then it shall also be advertised in the area to be directly affected thereby; and shall also provide for a submission of such proposed amendment or amendments to the people at said next general election, and if the people shall ratify such amendment or amendments, by a majority of the elertors qualified to vote for members of the General Assembly voting thereon, such amendment or amendments shall become a part of this Constitution; provided that if the proposed amendment is not one that directly affects the whole State, but only one or more sub-divisions thereof, said amendment shall be submitted to the voters in the area affected in a special election, designated in the proposed amendment, which said special election shall be held not more than 90 days after the adjournment of the General Assembly at which said amendment is proposed. The result of said election shall be certified to the Secretary of State. If a majority of those voting in said special election shall vote for the proposed amendment the Governor shall cause said amendment to be placed on the ballot and submitted to the voters in the next general election as herein provided. When more than one amendment is submitted at the same time they shall be so submitted as to enable the electors to vote on each amendment separately.
Paragraph II. Convention, how called. No convention of the people shall be called by the General Assembly to revise, amend or change this Constitution, unless by the concurrence of twothirds of all members of each house of the General Assembly. The representation in said convention shall be based on population as near as practicable. This Constitution shall not be revised, amended, or changed by the Convention until the proposed revision, amendment, or change has been submitted and ratified by the people in the manner provided for submission and ratification of amendments proposed by the General Assembly.
Paragraph III. Veto not permitted. The Governor shall not have the right to veto any proposal by the General Assembly to amend the Constitution.

RECORDS OF CONSTITUTIONAL COMMISSION

613

Article XIV
Merit System
Section I
Paragraph I. Personnel Board; appointment; terms. There shall be a non-salaried State Personnel Board composed of three citizens of this State of known interest in the improvement of public administration and in the impartial selection of efficient personnel on the basis of merit and fitness. The members of the State Personnel Board shall be appointed by the Governor. The first members shall be appointed for terms of three, five, and seven years, respectively, to be designated by the Governor, and all subsequent appointments shall be for a period of seven years, except in case of an unexpired term. Neither the Governor or any other State employee shall be a member of the State Personnel Board.
Paragraph II. Duties, powers and authorities. The State Personnel Board shall have such duties, powers and authorities a~ provided by law.
Paragraph III. The leislature may establish an actuarially sound retirement system for persons holding positions under the merit system.
Paragraph IV. Adequate appropriations shall be made by the legislature to carry out the purposes of this provision.

Article XV
Horne Rule
Section I
Paragraph I. The organization, powers and duties of county and municipal governments shall be defined by general law. Optional plans of county and municipal governments shall be provided to be effective in any county or municipality when submitted to the qualified voters thereof, and approved by a majority of those voting. No special or local law or general law having only local application affecting county or municipal governments shall be enacted in any case for which provision has been made by existing general laws. No special law or general

614

RECORDS OF CONSTITUTIONAL COMMISSION

law with only local application affecting county or municipal governments shall become effective unless submitted to the qualified voters of the county or municipality; or the counties or municipalities affected and approved by a majority of those voting, providing upon the request of the governing authority of a county or municipality, the General Assembly may amend the charter of such municipality or the law regulating such county now of force or hereafter adopted, but no provision in any such amendment which conflicts with a provision in such charter or law previously adopted by popular vote shall be valid unless such new provision is ratified by the vote of the electors of such municipality or county. The results of the election, upon ratification by the voters, shall be certified to the Secretary of State by the governing authorities of the county or municipality affected and shall be published in the months of January and June of each year by the Secretaary of State in bound volumes.
Paragraph II. When a county or municipality adopts one of the alternative plans of government provided by the General Assembly, or when a county or municipal government adopts one of the plans of consolidating county and municipal government provided by the General Assembly, such county or municipality shall certify the plan chosen to the Secretary of State.

Section II
Paragraph I. In addition to the grant of legislative authority contained in this Constitution, the governing authorities of any county or municipality in this State are empowered to enact any local law operative only within the area of the county or municipality and not inconsistent with general law or this Constitution.
Paragraph II. The methods of exercising the powers herein granted are:
(1) The people of any county or municipality may require a referendum on any local legislation sought to be enacted by the governing authority of the county or municipality, said local legislation affecting only the territory included in the county or municipality, by petition of one-third of the registered voters of the county or municipality affected. Upon the filing of such proposed petition for referendum signed by one-third of the registered vot-

RECORDS OF CONSTITUTIONAL COMMISSION

81~

ers of the county or municipality affected, it shall be the duty of thegoverning authority to place the same on the ballot at the next reuglar county or municipal election; provided, however, that the petition for referendum must be filed with the governing authorities within sixty days after publication, if the enactment of local legislation by the governing authority has been made. If a majority of the voters voting therein favor the local legislation it shall become law upon certification of a copy thereof to the Secretary of State, whose duty it shall be to publish the local acts in conformity with the provisions hereinbefore provided.
(2) The people of any county or municipality may initiate local laws affecting only the territory included in the county or municipality by petition of ,one-third of the registered voters of the county or municipality. Upon the filing of such proposed local legislation together with a petition signed by one-third of the registered voters of the county or municipality requesting it, it shalt be the duty of the governing authorities to place the same on the ballot at the next regular county or municipal election. If a majority of the voters voting therein favor the local legislation it shall become the law upon certification of a copy thereof to the Secretary of State, whose duty it shall be to publish such local acts.
Paragraph III. This provision shall not authorize the people of counties or municipalities or the governing authoritites thereof to change county or municipal boundaries or to abolish county or" municipal governments.
Paragraph IV. The governing authorities of the counties and' municipalities of this State, in conformity with the provisions hereinbefore contained, are authorized and empowered to enact zoning laws.
Paragraph V. No law shall be enacted by the governing authorities of the counties or the municipalities of this State which deals with more than one subject matter.
Paragraph VI. All local laws in conflict with general law as now in force or hereafter adopted shall be null and void.
Paragraph VII. This section applies to those counties and municipalities in which the people by majority of those voting in an election vote to adopt the provisions of this section. The General Assembly shall provide for such electipn.

INDEX
A. BY Articles
Article I, Bill of Rights Vol. I, 58-92, 153-60, 208-16, 523-33; Vol. II, 545-50.
Article II, Elective Franchise Vol. I, 93-124; Vol. II, 272-73, 333, 337, 537-39, 550-53.
Article III, Legislative Department Vol. I, 325-74; Vol. II, 158-72, 174, 176-81, 209-13, 227-56, 276-77, 279-87, 299-319, 329-30, 337-42, 370-462, 476-517, 525-27, 553-61.
Article IV, Public Utilities, Eminent Domain, Police Power, Insurauce Com. panies, Contracts Vol. I, 170-96; Vol. II, 120-21, 340-41; 561-64.
Article V, Executive Department Vol. I, 196-208, 221-76; Vol. II, 181-88, 223-24, 256, 259-67, 291-95, 328-29, 462-76, 524-25, 531-37, 539-44, 564-72.
Article VI, Judiciary Vol. I, 512-27; 532-98; Vol. II, 3-56, 118-20, 191-94, 197-206, 213-21, 267, 273-75, 277-78, 320-26, 329, 355, 362, 572-85.
Article VII, Finance, Taxation and Public Debt Vol. I, 378-481, 528-32; Vol. II, 56-7, 91-115, 188-90, 193-97, 206, 221-23, 270-71, 275, 287-90, 295-98, 330-32, 342-55, 356-70, 519-24, 539-40, 585-601.
Article VIII, Education Vol. I, 227-325; Vol. II, 58-118, 290-91, 527-31, 601-05.
Article IX, Homesteads and ExempiIDns Vol. II, 128-29, 606.
Article X, Militia Vol. II, 129-30, 606.
Article XI, Counties and Municipal Corporations Vol. II, 130-58, 191, 267, 607-08.
Article XII, The Laws of General Operation in Force In This State Vol. I, 484-89; Vol. II, 359, 608-09.
Article XIII, Amendments to the CoDstUution Vol. I, 489-511; Vol. II, 175-76, 227, 609-11.
Article XIV, Merit System Vol. I, 136-37; Vol. II, 179-81, 229-56, 287, 466-68, 531-37, 601.
Article XV, Home Rule VoL I, 357; Vol. II, 124-25, 137-42, 150-55, 191, 279-86, 299-319, 370-482, 476-517, 611-13.

118
INDEX

B. By Titles

Ackers, C. S., I, 417 Advertisement of resources, I, 415 Agriculture, Commissioner of, I, 197,
201; II, 182, 183, 257 Airports, taxation for, I, 413-14 Alimony, I, 68 Allison, Marshall, Assistant Attorney
General, I, 53, 139 Allman, J. I., official of State Dept.
of Education, I, 304-09; II, 118 Allocation of taxes forbidden, I, 416,
476 Amendments to Constitution, Gover-
nor's veto, I, 253-59, 271-76, 363-64; local, continued, I, 480-81; method for, I, 489-511; advertisement of, I, 490; Governor's veto, I, 493; convention for, I, 493-96; of local application, I, 496-501; ratification in general election, I, 501-03; 507-11; convention for, I, 504-06; Governor's veto, II, 175-76, 227; local, continued, II, 517-19 American Legion, I, 125, 135-36; II, 237 Appropriation bills, general, I, 47579; supplementary, I, 476-79 Arnall, Ellis Gibbs, biography of, I, i, 20; elected Chairman, I, 4 Armstrong, W. W., Judge of Lexington City Court, I, 483 Arnold, David Johnson, biography of, I, ii Arnold, Zach, Secretary of Municipal Association, II, 121, 127, 342, 351 Athens, Greece, democracy in, II, 308 Atkinson, David Scarlett, biography of, I, ii, 21 Atlanta, contracts by, II, 539-40 Attorney General, election and term, I, 570; duties, I, 570; a judicial officer, I, 579; salary, I, 581, 587; qualifications, I, 588 Auditor, State, I, 197, 201, 204; II, 170, 539 Automobile tags, I, 417
Ballot, 5 % voter's law, I, 120-21 Bane, Frank, Secretary of Councilof
State Governments, I, 47-49, 184 Bank charters, reading of, I, 345-49 Banking, Constitutional board of,
proposed, I, 34, 40, 198-99, 201-05 Banking, Dept. of, examiners, I, 417 Bar Association, I, 125, 142-44, 169;
II, 220-22, 295 Barbers, fees from, I, 418

Beauticians, fees from, I, 418 Block, Charlie, President of Bar As-
sociation, I, 142-44, 169; II, 220-22, 295 BoBaordardof Corrections, see P. rison
Boller Case, I, 389 Bonds, limited for counties and mu-
nicipalities, I, 149-50; elections for, I, 151-52; for schools, I, 290-91; serial, I, 409; for roads, I, 425; certain ones void, I, 428-29; sale of State property to pay, I, 429-30; sinking fund for, I, 430-34; owned by University, I, 434; vote for, I, 439-54; refunding, by local governments, I, 469-73; serial, I, 473-74; sinking fund, I, 474-75; owned by University, II, 88-89; of school districts, II, 105-08, 115-17; municipal, II, 121-22, 362-70, 519-24 Books, free texts, I, 59-60; publishers, I, 283-85 Brittain, Dr. M. L., President Emeritus of Georgia Tech, II, 12-13 Brown, Joseph E., Civil War Governor, mentioned, II, 168 Budget, Governor's power over, I, 480 Bulloch, Archibald, President of Council of Safety, I, x Bus companies, I, 172
Candler, Thomas Slaughter, biography of, I, iii, 20
Carmichael, James Vinson, biography of, I, iii, 22
Chancellor of University System, I, 199-200
Chaplain, I, 44 Charters, see Contracts City Courts, not uniform, I, 142-43;
jurisdiction of, I, 483; judges may preside in Superior Courts, I, 562; not uniform, I, 568-69 Civil service, I, 136-37; II, 179-181, 229-256, 287, 466-68, 531-37 Classic Case, I, 120-21 Coastal Highway District, I, 426, 48081 Coca Cola Co., I, 404-05 Collins, Dr. M. D., State School Superintendent, I, 281, 293-95;11, 118 Commission to Revise Constitution, authorized, I, i, 1-3; composition of, I, i, ix-x, 2; subcommittees, 12, 15, 26-29, 38; Chairman of, to vote, I,

619
INDEX

64-65, 67; Policy Committee of, 162-66, 246, 268, 280, 283, 374-75; II, 173-208; Committee of on Final Hevuuon, I, 170, 192, 205, 249, 286, 553; II, 544-45; compensation of, I, 16'1-68, 315-16; procedure of, illustrated, I, 44, 56-7, 59, 64, 78-90, 141-42, 162-66, 274-75; II, 173-74, 224, 544-45 Community property, I, 399 Comptroller General, I, 197-98, 434 Confederate soldiers, I, 410-13 Constitutional boards, I, 143, 199-203; II, 463-75, 531-37 Constitution of 1877, printed with amendments, I, 43, 51, 56 Constitutional officers, I, 243; II, 18185,256-57 Contracts, impairment of, I, 72-75; by counties and cities, I, 96; impairment of, I, 160-67, 178-81, 184-90, 209-13; for educational purposes, II, 80-82, 89-90 Convention of 1877, records quoted, I, 186-87, 262-63; mentioned, I, 294 Copeland, Arthur, Solicitor of Chattahoochee Circuit, I, 213-23 Corporations, I, 181-85, 357-59, 404 Corrections, Board of, see Prisons Council of State Governments, I, 47, 49 Counties, recommendations of Commissioners of, I, 40, 55, 145-52; consolidation, I, 151-52; taxation by, I, 288-95, 300-04, 310-14, 436; II, 91-115; government of, II, 145-57; see Home rule; corporate bodies, II, 130; number of, II, 130-32; consolidation of, II, 130-36; uniform government, II, 137-40; optional forms of gov't., II, 141-42; boundaries of, II, 142; sites of, II, 143; officers of, II, 144-45, 191, 267-69; Association of Commissioners of, II, 366
County Courts, number, I, 573
Courts of Appeals, I, 142, 512, 519-24, 534-52, 588; II, 37-52, 119-20, 198206, 321
Crawford W. Long Hospital, taxation of, 529-31
Culpepper, James Wesley, biography of, I, iii, 22
Dartmouth College Case, I, 73, 179 Davis, Jefferson, President of Con-
federacy, mentioned, 168, 170 Debt, county and municipal, I, 149-
153, 290-91, 409-75, 459-60; II, 121-

22, 288-90, 362-70, 519-24; State, I, 424-34, 474-75; II, 88-89, 105-08, 115-17, 121-22, 362-70, 519-24 Declaratory judgments, I, 144 Democratic White Primary, see Primaries Divorce cases, I, 142, 260-63, 588-91; II, 213-21, 277-78 Docks, taxation for, I, 414 Dodd, Walter F., Professor of government, I, 51, 119, 183-84, 203 Duckworth, W. H., Justice of Supreme Court, I, 37-47 Dueling, I, 116 Duggan, J. H., Jr. & Associates, court reporters, I, x, 9-10 Durden, Adie Norman, biography of, I, iii
Education, State Boards of, I, 200, 282-85; taxation for, I, 286; county board of, I, 287-91; local districts, I, 295-321; constitutional county systems, I, 321-24; taxation for, I, 401-03; bond elections for, I, 44354; separate school for races, II, 59; State Board of, II, 59-61; State School Superintendent, II, 61-68; Board of Regents, II, 68-69; county board of, II, 69-72; County School Superintendent, II, 73-80; independent systems, II, 80; contracts for, II, 80-82; county systems antedating 1877, II, 82-84; publication of county expenditures, II, 84-86; State School Superintendent, II, 8788; funds for University, II, 88-89; contracts for, II, 89-90; county taxes for, II, 91-115; municipal taxes for, II, 115; bonds for, II, 115-17; State School Superintendent, II, 290-91; 527-531
Elections, appeals in, I, 110; June and August, I, 490
Electorate, see Art. II Electricity, municipal, I, 399; rural, I,
403-05; municipal, I, 459-69 Eminent domain, I, 70, 75-77, 153-60,
177-78, 185-86, 213-16 Equity cases, I, 591 Ethridge, Jack, Judge of Fulton Coun-
ty Superior Court, I, 489 Eve, R. E., Judge, I, 483 Extra compensation forbidden, I, 385-
86
Finances, public statement of, I, 350 Fischer, Dr. L. C., I, 138-141, 389, 3'91,
530-31

620
INDEX

Fitzhugh Lee School District, I, 306 Foley, Frank D., biography of, I, ill-
iv, 19 Fortson, Ben, Member of General As-
sembly,I, 103-04, 362; 11,223 Franklin, O. W., City Attorney of Val-
dosta, I, 460 Fraud, I, 69 Fulton County, Civil Court of, I, 565;
clerks in, II, 147
Game and Fish Commission, I, 200, 268-270
Gas systems, revenue certificates by municipalities for, proposed, I, 460
Gasoline tax, I, 416-17 George, Walter F., Senator, II, 289 Georgia Education Association, I, 64-
65, 445 Georgia Power Co., I, 461-62 Georgia Railroad, I, 179-181, 187-190,
203, 210-213, 485 General appropriation bill, contents
of, I, 349; prepared by Governor, 475-76; duration of, 476-77; enactment of, 477-79 General Assembly, vacancies in, I, 251-52; special sessions of, I, 24749, 275; election of members, I, 333; vacancies, I, 333-34; meetings, I, 334-40; eligibility of members to executive offices, I, 341; journals, I, 343-44; reading of bills, I, 344; ordinance, one subject matter, I, 345; appropriation bills, I, 349-50; local bills, I, 351-58; yeas and nays, when entered, I, 360-61; adjournment of, I, 365; clerical expense, I, 369-70; compensation of members, I, 370-73; elections by, I, 374; salaries of members, II, 161-62; eligibility of members for executive offices, II, 168-172, 176-79, 207-08, 227-29; composition of Senate, II, 209-13, 276-77; sessions, II, 337-38; journals, II, 338; salary of members, II, 525-27 Governor, mentioned, I, 196; salary, I, 222-230; election of, I, 230-45; appointing power, I, 249-50; veto power, I, 252-59; 265-67; clerical assistance, I, 264, 267-68; veto power, I, 363; control over budget, I, 480; salary, I, 574-79; may suspend taxes, II, 163; term, II, 223, 291-95; salary, 326-29, 462, 524-25; term, II, 541-44 Gowen, Charles Latimer, biography of, I, iv, 22

Grady, Henry, mentioned, I, 262
Gratuities forbidden, I, 382-85 Graves, W. Brooke, author, I, 49-50,
184, 202 Greene, Mrs. Harry L., entertains
Commission, I, 53 Grice, Warren, biography of, I, iv-v,
21 Griffin, Marvin, Lt. Col., II, 8-9 Gross, Frank Cleveland, biography of,
I, v, 19

Haas, Mrs. Leonard, biography of, I,

v, 21

Hamilton, George B., State Treasurer,

I, 362; II, 125-27, 206-07, 270

Hand, Frederick Barrow, biography

of, I, v, 22; elected Vice Chairman

of Commission, I, 5

Harris, Roy Vincent, biography of, I,

vi, 21

Hartsfield, Wm. B., Mayor of Atlanta,

II, 121-25, 383-87

Hatchett, Frank, Member of House

of Representatives, II, 351-52

Head, Thomas Grady, biography of,

I, vi, 22

Health, taxation for, I, 415-36; County

Board of, II, 108

Highways, Department of, 1,217; tax-

ation for, I, 413; Users Conference,

I, 416; bonds for, I, 425-27; Depart-

ment of, II, 541-42

Holt, Hamilton T., biography of, I, iv,

20

Home rule, for cities and counties,

I, 357; II, 124-25, 137-42, 150-55,

191, 279-86, 299-319, 370-462, 476-

517

Homesteads, exemption from sale,

I, 128-29; exemption from taxation,

II, 342-50

Hospitals, I, 55-57, 138-41, 390-92,

438; II, 275

House of Representtaives, number

of members, 328-32; term of mem-

bers, 332; Clerk of, 369-70; see Gen-

eral Assembly

Housing program, rural, I, 362-63;

II, 125-27, 206-07, 270-71

.

Howell, Hugh, represents American

Legion, I, 135-37; II, 237

Impeachment, I, 342
Insurance, Commissioner of, I, 198; companies, I, 374; mutual, by State, I, 425; reports on, II, 341
Intangible property, classification for
taxation, II, 193-97

621
INDEX

Johnson, Olin, Governor of South Carolina, II, 187, 261
Judiciary, courts named, I, 512; uniformity in, I, 567-70; salary of judges, I, 575-87; II, 10-11; abolition of certain courts, II, 14-15; rules of procedure, II, 31-36, 5356; salary of, II, 191-94, 321-26
Jury service, for women, I, 3-6; compensation for, I, 6-7; length of, I, 7-8
Justices of the peace, constitutional officers, I, 243; abolition of, I, 56365; number of, I, 564; jurisdiction of,. I, 565; election of, I, 566; Association. of, II, 258; abolition of, II, 273-75
Kennon, J. H., Member of General Assembly, II, 209-13, 276
Labor, Commissioner of, I, 197; II, 182-83, 257
LaGrange, financial status of City of, I, 447-48
Land titles, cases respecting, I, 591 Laws of general operation, I, 484-89 League of Women Voters, entertains
Commission, II, 53 Lee, Edward, supports poll tax, I, 99 Lewis, J. Tom, attorney, I, 483 Lieutenant Governor, I, 342 Liquor, I, 117-18, 286 Lobbying, I, 60-67, 85-86 Local amendments, carried forward,
I, 32, 398, 480-81 Local legislation, I, 32, 39; II, 339-40;
see Home rule Lovejoy, Hatton, biography of, I, iv,
20
MacIntyre, Hugh James, biography of, I, vii, 19
Marriage licenses, II, 361-62 Married women's property, I, 374;
II, 174 Majors, Robert Edward Lee, biog-
raphy of, I, viii, 21 Mayor's Association of Georgia-, II,
122, 366 McCain, James Ross, President of
Agnes Scott College, I, 218 McCracken, James Roy, biography of,
I, viii, 19 McCurdy, Julius, represents Associa-
tion of County Commissioners, I, 55, 75-76, 145-53 McCutchen, P. T.,. Jr., Clerk of House CJf Representatives, I, x; appointed

Assistant Secretary of Commission,

I, 7, 8, 42

McElreath, Walter, author, I, x; quot-

ed, I, 261-62

Merit system, see civil service

Militia, II, 129-30

Milledgeville Hospital, I, 465

Ministerial Association of Atlanta, II,

271, 361



Money, how drawn from Treasury,

I, 350

Monopoly, I, 181-87

Moore, Arthur, Methodist Bishop, I,

217, 219

Moore, Wiley L., ent~rtains Commis-

sion, II, 258

Motor Carriers' Act, I, 143

Municipal Association, I, 39, 55, 75-

76, 145-53, 368; II, 121

Municipal courts, not uniform, I, 570

Municipalities, utilities owned by, I,

145, 172-76; 399, 459-69; govern-

ment of, II, 152-57; see Home rule

Negro suffrage, in Atlanta, II, 123; see Primaries
Newton, Louie D., Baptist Minister, II, 8, 217-19
Notaries Public, abolition of, I, 56365, appointment of, I, 566; number of, I, 566-68; name of, II, 355
Old age pensions, I, 414

Ordinary, appeals from court of, I, 562; powers of, I, 562; term, I, 563; county administrator, II, 139-40; marriage ceremony by, II, 362
Oyster beds, II, 359-61

Parsonages, subject to taxation, I, 395-97; II, 271
Partnerships, I, 185 Patterson, Mrs. S. C., President of the
Georgia Education Association, I,
64-65, 104 Pensions, for Confederate soldiers, I,
410-13; old age, I, 414-15; teachers,
I, 416 Peterson, Mrs. Z. V., represents Busi-
ness and Professional Women's Club, I, 55 Petroleum Institute, I, 41, 217 Police power, I, 177-78, 185-86 Poll tax, I, 37, 95-101, 386-87; II, 357 Pope, Jefferson Austin, biography of, I, viii, 21 Power companies, I, 172-76 Presbyterian Ministers Association of Atlanta, II, 361

Q2

INDEX

Primaries, I, 112-15, 119-21, 316; II, 272-73
Printing, public, I, 434 Printup, Neal, Secretary of Georgia
Petroleum Committee, I, 217, 416 Prison Board, I, 200, 246; II, 186-88,
257-67, 463-65, 469-73 Private ways, I, 70, 75-77, 153-60,
213-16 Public hearings, I, 135-53, 217-20 Public Service Commission, I, 173-
76, 191-96, 220-31; II, 120-21, 122, 127 Public utilities, I, 145, 171-77, 221-24, 460-69; II, 120-27
Railroads, taxation of, I, 70-73, 16067, 171-77; branch roads, I, 179-81, 186-87; taxation of, 186-90, 223, 210-13; reading of charters of by General Assembly, I, 345-49; taxation of, I, 422-23
Real Estate Boards, Georgia Association of, II, 221, 330
Recognizances, I, 359 Regents, Board of, I, 199-200 Registration, I, 114-16 Reidsville, State Prison, II, 186 Revenue certificates, by municipali-
ties, I, 399, 460-69 Revenue Commissioner, State, I, 197,
201, 424 Reynolds, Clayton, member of Gen-
eral Assembly, I, 260-63 Roads, allocation of funds for, I, 417 Roads and Revenue, County Boards
of, II, 156 Rural Carriers Association, Ga., I, 417
Salaries, of executive officials, I, 22230, 280, 574-79; II, 326-39, 462; of members of General Assembly, I, 370-73, II, 161-62, 525-27; of county officers, II, 191, 267; of judges, I, 575-87; II, 191-94, 321-26; power of Personnel Board over, II, 251-52
Self incrimination, I, 67 Senate, composition of, I, 326-28;
President of, 342-43; Secretary of, 369-70; composition of, II, 209-13, 276-77, 337 Sheriff, County, compensation of, II, 191, 268 Sinking funds, of counties, I, 149; of State, I, 409; of political subdivisions, I, 474-75; of State, I, 430-34 Small, Samuel W., records by quoted, I, 186-87, 262 Smith, Hoke, mentioned, I, 108

Smith vs. AUwright, reference to, r,
of Regents, I, 88 Smith vs. Allwright. reference to, I,
112, 119-20 Smith, William Rufus, biography of,
I, viii-ix, 20 Solicitors General, election of, I, 571;
duties, I, 572-74; salaries of, II, 13,
192 Southeastern Tariff Association, I,
183 stare decisis, doctrine of, I, 211 State House Officers, see Constitu-
tional officers Street railways, I, 359-60 Strickland, Robert, suports tax ex-
emption for hospitals, II, 275 Sumners, Hatton, Chairman of Ju-
diciary Committee, U. S. House of Representatives, I, 46, 125-35, 211 Superintendent of Schools, County, I, 314; II, 12-13, 290-91, 351 Superintendent of Schools, State, I, 200, 279-81, 318; II, 87-88, 183-184, 290-91, 527-30 Superior Courts, term, I, 555-57; jurisdiction, I, 558; new trials, I, 558-60; jury, I, 560-61; sessions, I, 561; judges may alternate, I, 562; appeals from Ordinaries, I, 562; qualifications of judges, I, 588; judicial districts, proposed, II, 16-31 Supreme Court, costs in I, 88; composition of, I, 512; Chief Justice, I, 512-13; when justices are disqualified, I, 513-16; term of justices, I, 516-17; jurisdiction, I, 518-19; two
divisions, I, 519; refuses to state
general principles, I, 512; two divisions, I, 524; certiorari by, I, 52527, 532-35; disposition of cases, I, 536; two divisions, I, 537-43; seven justices, I, 534-44; two divisions, I, 544-48; number of justices, I, 55254; qualifications of justices, I, 588; cost in, II, 15-16, rules of procedure, II, 31-36; certorari by, II, 3752; rules of procedure, II, 53-56; certiorari by, II, 119-20, 198-204; number of justices, II, 320-21, 329
Taxation, limited by charters, I, 7075; exemptions of personal property, I, 146; for elections, by counties, I, 147; of liquor, for schools, I, 218-19; for emergencies and reserve funds, by counties, I, 147-48; a sovereign right, I, 170-71, 378-79; of corporations, I, 380-82; CId

123
INDEX

oo101'em limit, I, 386; uniformity in,
I, 388; exemptions, I. 388-408; pur-
poses of, State, I, 408-16; alloca-
tion, I, 416-19; new taxes, I, 419; of utilities, I, 421-24; purposes of
by counties, I, 435-37; exemptions: I, 528-31; II, 56-57; for county schools, II, 91-115; by municipalities, II, 115; date effective, II, 16268; classification for, II, 194-97; 35 ~ill limit, proposed, II, 221; adJustment board, proposed, II, 222; elimination of State ad valorem,
r~ommended, II, 222-23; exemptlOns, II, 270-71, 275; elimination of State a.d valorem, discussed, II, 295-98, 330-31; 35 mill limit, II 331; adjustment board, II, 332; by school districts, II, 342-49; for
C?unty schools, II, 350-52; exemptions, II, 352-55; limit for education, by counties, II, 356-58 Teacher retirement, I, 416 Telephone companies, I, 172
Temperance League, I, 218
Thompson, Melvin E., speaks on education, I, 295-301; II, 67
Thrasher, B. E., biography of, I, ix,
21; elected Secretary, I, 6-7 Tidal lands, II, 359-61
Toombs, Robert, mentioned, I, 186, 187, 213, 319
Torrence Land Registration Act, I, 143
Traffic laws, I, 152

Treasurer, State, I, 198, 434 Trust companies, II, 329-30

University of Georgia, funds tor I,

434, II, 88-89

'

University of Georgia's Institute of

Public Affairs, bulletin by, I, i, 59;

II, 147, 152, 153

Veterans, preferences, I, 136-37; II, 232-52, 286-87; board, II, 465-66,
473-75 Vocational education, II, 89, 90

Wallace, Henry A., Vice President, II, 136
Walker Hauling Co., I, 417 War Mobilization and Reconversion
Act of 1944, II, 225-26, 287 Water works, I, 172-73 Watkins, Edgar, advocates abolition
of poll tax, I, 54, 95-99 Welfare benefits, taxation for, I, 414-
15 Wells, Jere, speaks on education, I,
443-45, 459 Western and Atlantic Railroad, I,
278, 429-30 Women, Business and Professional,
I, 55 Workmen's Compensation Act, I, 141-
44, 312; II, 188-90
Young, Owen D., mentioned. I, 481
Zoning laws, I, 365-69; n, 154.