USA > Rhode Island > Rhode Island : three centuries of democracy, Vol. II > Part 12
Note: The text from this book was generated using artificial intelligence so there may be some errors. The full pages can be found on Archive.org (link on the Part 1 page).
Part 1 | Part 2 | Part 3 | Part 4 | Part 5 | Part 6 | Part 7 | Part 8 | Part 9 | Part 10 | Part 11 | Part 12 | Part 13 | Part 14 | Part 15 | Part 16 | Part 17 | Part 18 | Part 19 | Part 20 | Part 21 | Part 22 | Part 23 | Part 24 | Part 25 | Part 26 | Part 27 | Part 28 | Part 29 | Part 30 | Part 31 | Part 32 | Part 33 | Part 34 | Part 35 | Part 36 | Part 37 | Part 38 | Part 39 | Part 40 | Part 41 | Part 42 | Part 43 | Part 44 | Part 45 | Part 46 | Part 47 | Part 48 | Part 49 | Part 50 | Part 51 | Part 52 | Part 53 | Part 54 | Part 55 | Part 56 | Part 57 | Part 58 | Part 59 | Part 60 | Part 61 | Part 62 | Part 63 | Part 64 | Part 65 | Part 66 | Part 67 | Part 68 | Part 69 | Part 70 | Part 71 | Part 72 | Part 73 | Part 74 | Part 75 | Part 76 | Part 77 | Part 78 | Part 79 | Part 80 | Part 81 | Part 82 | Part 83 | Part 84 | Part 85 | Part 86 | Part 87 | Part 88 | Part 89 | Part 90 | Part 91 | Part 92 | Part 93 | Part 94 | Part 95 | Part 96 | Part 97 | Part 98 | Part 99 | Part 100
LATER CONSTITUTIONAL AMENDMENTS-An amendment to the Constitution providing for (I) the substitution of the Lieutenant Governor for the Governor as presiding officer in the Senate with power to vote only in instance of a tie; (2) election of members of the House of Representatives in districts instead of on general tickets by towns, and (3) biennial elec- tions, was proposed at the January session, 1895, approved at the May session, 1895, and rejected by the electors, September 25, 1895, by a vote of 10,603 reject to 7449 for approval. The Constitution forbade the General Assembly to incur state debts to an amount exceeding $50,000 except in time of war or in case of insurrection or invasion, without the express con- sent of the people. Resort to selling tax assignment orders was taken in 1896 .* The Supreme Court ruled that no officer of the state can incur a debt without authority of the General Assembly ; that the Assembly could not incur indebtedness to an amount exceeding $50,000 at any time beyond the state's income, and that the word "people" in the expression "without the express consent of the people" means "all the electors, registry voters as well as tax- payers."" In a referendum on November 3, 1896, the people approved the borrowing of $250,000 from time to time on the credit of the state, 22,631 to 15,733. This measure had been proposed in view of the large expenditures at the time for buildings for various state institutions, at the suggestion of members of the General Assembly who were opposed to incurring long term indebtedness and commitments for interest by bond issues.
THE CONSTITUTIONAL COMMISSION-The Governor was authorized in 1897 to appoint a commission of fifteen to draft a revision of the Constitution and report it to the General Assembly for submission to the referendum. His excellency appointed Thomas Durfee, ex-Chief Justice of the Supreme Court; John H. Stiness, Chief Justice; Samuel W. K. Allen, Edward L. Freeman, William W. Blodgett, David S. Baker, Samuel P. Colt, Nathan F. Dixon, E. Charles Francis, Robert H. I. Goddard, Charles E. Gorman, Edwin D. McGuin- ness, Augustus S. Miller, William P. Sheffield, Jr., and William B. Weeden. Nathan F. Dixon died before the commission had completed its labor, and Ellery H. Wilson was
§That is the election following that for which the caucus was held.
*Sustained. In re Tax Assignment Orders, 19 R. I. 729.
¡In re the Incurring of State Debts, 19 R. I. 610.
667
IDEALS AND STATE POLITICS
appointed instead. The commission was notable, including as it did an unusual group of men who had been and were prominent in the political and economic life of Rhode Island. The majority were Republicans, but the Democratic party was represented in the commission by several of its most active and most capable leaders. The lawyers in the group, besides the two Chief Justices, were selected from the ablest in Rhode Island. The commission reported a complete draft of a revised Constitution for Rhode Island, which incorporated in it most of the changes that had been advocated by those who believed that the Constitution of 1842 had ceased to serve as a satisfactory fundamental law.
The proposed new constitution opened with a bill of rights in twenty-two sections, sub- stantially similar to the bill of rights in the Constitution of 1842, with the exception that sec- tion four of the old bill of rights, "slavery shall not be permitted in this state," had been omitted because of the anti-slavery amendment to the Constitution of the United States. Sec- tion three, dealing with religious liberty, had been modified by slight change of language, and the addition of a proviso that "nothing in this section shall be so construed as to excuse any violation of the law on civil things." The clause, "nor shall he be deprived of life, liberty or property unless by the judgment of his peers or the law of the land" had been removed from section ten, rewritten as "or be deprived of life, liberty or property without due process of law," and transferred to section twelve. The section dealing with eminent domain had been extended and amplified, as had that declaring freedom of speech, the latter to read: "Every person may freely speak, write and publish his sentiments on all subjects, being responsible for the abuse of that liberty; and in all trials for libel or slander, both civil and criminal, the truth, unless published or uttered from malicious motives, shall be sufficient defence to the persons charged." The more significant changes in the body of the proposed Constitution referred to (1) suffrage; (2) meetings of the General Assembly; (3) pay of Assemblymen ; (4) the borrowing power of the General Assembly; (5) apportionment of representation ; (6) reorganization of the Senate; (7) a limited veto power for the Governor; (8) elec- tions ; (9) the courts, and (10) the process of amendment. The changes in general detail were as follows: (I) the period of residence required for suffrage was reduced to one year for registry as for property voters, and a literacy qualification was proposed for new voters. The qualification proposed was adult male United States citizenship, acquired in the instance of naturalized citizens more than ninety days before election; residence in Rhode Island one year and in the town six months; registration. For all persons attaining majority or natural- ized after the date of the adoption of the proposed Constitution a literacy qualification was prescribed thus: "he shall be able to read this Constitution in the English language and write his name." Idiots, maniacs, paupers and persons under guardianship, persons convicted of offences "against the fairness and freedom of election," or of offences punished by imprison- ment, were to be excluded. The property qualification for participation in the election of city councilmen and in financial town meetings was retained. (2) The May session of the Gen- eral Assembly at Newport was abolished by provision for one annual session in Providence opening on the first Tuesday in January. (3) The pay of Assemblymen was raised from one dollar per day of actual attendance to $300 per year, with $300 additional for the Speaker of the House of Representatives. (4) The power of the General Assembly to borrow money, restricted in 1842 except "in time of war or in case of insurrection or invasion," to $50,000, was increased to $500,000. (5) Membership in the House of Representatives was increased from seventy-two to 100, the apportionment to be made on the basis of population as dis- closed by state or federal census, with not less than one Representative for each town, and not more than one-fourth of the total to any town, representatives to be elected by districts and not on the general ticket, the practice under the Constitution of 1842. The District of Narragansett was to become a town by separation from South Kingstown. (6) The Lieutenant Governor was no longer to be a member of the Senate; instead he was to replace the Governor as pre-
668
RHODE ISLAND-THREE CENTURIES OF DEMOCRACY
siding officer. The Senate was to consist of one Senator from each town. The Lieutenant Governor was to have no vote except in the instance of a tie. The creation of the town of Narragansett would continue the Senate as a body of thirty-seven members, the number before the removal of the Lieutenant Governor. The Senate was to elect a presiding officer pro tem, and its own secretary and clerks. Under the Constitution of 1842, the Secretary of State was ex-officio Secretary of the Senate. (7) The Governor had no veto power under Charter or Constitution of 1842. Under the proposed Constitution, he might exercise a dilatory veto ; that is, if he disapproved a bill and returned it to the General Assembly, it might be passed by the Assembly, after reconsideration, by a majority of the members elected to each house. In the instance of adjournment of the General Assembly within the period for disapproval, the presumption of approval ran with the bill; that is, it did not fail to become a law by failure to approve; it became a law unless it was disapproved. (8) The proposed Constitution pro- vided for biennial elections, on the Tuesday after the first Monday in November of even years, and for the inauguration of general officers with the opening of the annual session of the General Assembly, on the first Tuesday in January following. (9) The Supreme Court was described as consisting of a chief justice and not less than two nor more than six associate justices, with power vested in the General Assembly to provide for the organization of appel- late and trial divisions. Under the Constitution of 1842 a Supreme Court justice might be removed by concurrent resolution adopted in each house of the General Assembly by a major- ity of the members elected. The proposed Constitution provided for removal by impeach- ment or by concurrent resolution adopted by a majority of three-fifths in each house. (10) The Constitution of 1842 had provided for amendment by concurrent action of two succes- sive General Assemblies, and ratification by sixty per cent. of the electors participating in a referendum.
The proposed Constitution permitted any General Assembly to propose an amendment upon a record vote of two-thirds of the members elected to each house, and the electors to ratify the amendment by a majority of the electors participating in the referendum. Further- more the proposed Constitution made provision for revision of the Constitution in constitu- tional convention. Thus, in 1910, and every ten years thereafter, the question, "shall there be a convention to revise the Constitution?" must be submitted to the electors. Upon an affirmative answer the General Assembly was required to make suitable provision for the election of delegates equal in number to the total membership of the General Assembly, each town to elect one delegate at large corresponding to its senator, and one delegate at large cor- responding to its representative, except that towns divided into representative districts should elect one delegate for and from each representative district. Any revision or amendment pro- posed by the constitutional convention must be submitted to the electors, and became effective if approved by sixty per cent. of those participating in the referendum. The proposed Con- stitution included also provisions for continuance of the government under the Constitution of 1842 until a new government under the new Constitution, if adopted, could be inaugurated ; and provisions for registration of voters, election of officers and Assemblymen, continuance of laws consistent with the new Constitution and repeal of inconsistent statutes.
ENTIRE CONSTITUTION REJECTED-The new Constitution was submitted to the people on November 8, 1898, and rejected 17,660 to 13,510 for approval. It was submitted a second time on June 20, 1899, in a special election ordered for the purpose, and rejected more deci- sively 12,742 to 4097 for approval. The proposed Constitution had met the fate apparently reserved for most propositions to adopt whole Constitutions or extensive revision. Electors opposed seriously to any of the large number of new propositions had voted no; others had voted no because the new Constitution included part only but not all of what they wished, and they feared that acceptance of part might delay the attainment of all. There were vigorous
669
IDEALS AND STATE POLITICS
supporters of the proposed Constitution in the ranks of both Republican and Democratic parties, who interpreted the work of the commission as a sincere undertaking to accomplish a reasonably progressive revision; there were also in both parties equally vigorous objectors, Republicans because too much had been conceded, and Democrats because not enough had been obtained, by their representatives on the commission. Like the Albany plan for the union of the colonies, which had been too American to suit England, and too English to suit America ; the proposed Constitution was too radical to suit conservatives, and too conservative to suit radicals. Many who believed that the Constitution should be revised by a popular convention voted against the proposed Constitution because it was the work of a small number of men, albeit a most able group. These voted against a method of amendment that would have made a decennial referendum on a constitutional convention mandatory. The total vote in the spe- cial election, 16,839, was small as contrasted with the vote of 1898, 31,170. In the second election, 9500 who had favored the new Constitution had changed their opinions or had refrained from voting. The utter hopelessness of the situation was grasped immediately, and return was made to the process of piecemeal amendment by submitting as a rule one proposi- tion for amendment at a time, and each proposition as a separate question, the plan declared to be characteristic of Rhode Island by Governor Davis in one of his messages to the General Assembly ten years earlier.
Governor Dyer, commenting in his message to the General Assembly in 1900 on the failure to approve the "revised Constitution," recommended piecemeal amendment. Governor Gregory, 1901, said: "After the rejection of the so-called 'revised Constitution,' it was urged by supporters of the notion of a constitutional convention on the part of the people of Rhode Island that authority should be found for calling a constitutional convention with a corresponding determination to frustrate all future attempts to amend the instrument in the only way provided by the Constitution itself. This interpretation of the vote failed to take into account the fact that the rejection of the revision was accompanied by the return of a General Assembly which was opposed to a constitutional convention by an overwhelming majority. . It appears to me fair to assume that no sentiment in behalf of a constitutional con- vention is possessed by more than a small minority of our people, but that the great majority are prepared to continue to indorse propositions in amendment from time to time made in accordance with the method provided in the Constitution itself."
On the contrary, Governor Garvin, in 1903, declared: "The usual American way of effecting a change in the organic law of a state is through a constitutional convention. The objection raised in the past that an opinion of our Supreme Court stands in the way of legis- lative action was never anything but an excuse, and is less of an excuse today than ever before. . . In our state, after an almost unanimous opinion had been given by our Supreme Court that the law of April 2, 1902, which limited the hours of labor for motormen and con- ductors at ten hours per day within twelve consecutive hours, was constitutional, that opinion had no binding force whatsoever upon the street railway companies. . . . . Now if an advi- sory opinion expressed by the court had no weight with corporations which are creatures of the General Assembly, no reasonable claim can be made that such an opinion can have any binding force upon a coordinate department of the state government, the General Assembly. I, therefore, earnestly recommend to you the passage of an act providing for the election of delegates, fairly representative of the people, who shall assemble in convention at an early day and frame a new constitution of government, to be submitted to the people for their adoption or rejection."
THE RAILWAY STRIKE OF 1902 --- The extraordinary situation to which Governor Gar- vin referred had been precipitated by a statute enacted at the January session, 1902, by which the General Assembly established ten hours within twelve consecutive hours as the legal working day for conductors, gripmen and motormen employed on street railways. The statute
670
RHODE ISLAND-THREE CENTURIES OF DEMOCRACY
was to become effective June 1, 1902. Before that date a notice was posted in the stations of the company operating the street railways to the effect (1) that the law applied only to con- ductors, gripmen and motormen, and not to other employes; (2) that the company would arrange schedules for conductors, gripmen and motormen who wished to work only ten hours with a reduction in wages proportionate to the shortening of the working day; (3) that con- ductors, gripmen and motormen who chose to work longer than ten hours would be continued in regular employment, at the company's risk, inasmuch as the statute imposed no penalty upon employes; (4) that the company believed the statute to be unconstitutional and void.
The company position was made clear through a statement published by Walter Angell, of counsel, on June I: "We claim that under the Constitution of the United States, and under the Constitution of Rhode Island, a man has a right to contract to labor for eleven hours a day ; that a street railway had a right to hire a man to work eleven hours; and that any law which denies to either party such right is unconstitutional and void. We shall com- mence proceedings as soon as we possibly can in the form which will bring the question at the earliest possible date into the Supreme Court of the United States for a decision. What the form of proceedings will be is now under consideration." The Amalgamated Association of Street Railway Employes, Division 200, of which most street railway employes were mem- bers, met and threatened to strike unless the company complied with the law. The company did not recede from its position; instead it threatened final discharge of employes who par- ticipated in the strike. Many veteran employes who realized the difficulty that would confront them in finding places to work remained with the company, and operated the cars after the strike order had become effective.
The sympathy of the mass of the public was with the strikers, because the company had assumed the attitude of defying the law. A general boycott was started, and the cars carried very few passengers. In Providence the police were aggressive to prevent disorder, and enforced ruthlessly orders issued by the police commission that crowds should not be permit- ted to gather on the streets of the city, and that demonstrations of any sort should be sup- pressed. It was whispered at the time that a strong body of naval militia had been assembled in a building convenient to the centre of the city, and that it was held in reserve, fully armed and equipped for riot duty should occasion arise. More than a little dissatisfaction was created by rigorous enforcement of peremptory orders to move on issued to citizens who stopped in an orderly manner for conversation on sidewalks. Mounted policemen patrolled the principal thoroughfares. Police guards were assigned to crews operating street cars.
In Pawtucket, Mayor Fitzgerald refused to place policemen on the street cars unless and until it could be shown that there was a genuine need. His position, frankly stated, was that the company was asking the police to protect it while it was engaged in flagrant and willful defiance of the law, and that his obligation as head of the police department, to maintain order, did not call for the assignment of special guards unless it was certain that violence was threatened. The company obtained the services of deputy sheriffs. Stones were thrown, ropes on trolley poles were cut, obstructions were placed on the tracks in some sections. The company was not popular in Pawtucket, even before the strike, because of.complaints of poor service. The company appealed to the Governor, and Governor Kimball sent 700 militia to Pawtucket, and proclaimed military law. Not since the Dorr rebellion, sixty years before, had the militia been called out for active duty. Service was restored on all electric lines grad- ually under military protection; the soldiers remained in Pawtucket until quiet had been com- pletely restored. The experience cost the State of Rhode Island $25,213.06 for militia, all of which was expended in maintaining order on behalf of a corporation that was defying the statute law.
Governor Kimball asked the Supreme Court for an advisory opinion on the constitution- ality of the ten-hour law. Five of the Justices, Douglas excused because interested in one of
671
IDEALS AND STATE POLITICS
the companies to which the act applied and Blodgett dissenting, ruled that the ten-hour law was constitutional .* The court had held in 1891 that a weekly payment law is valid under the statutory reservation of a right to amend a corporation charter .; The ten-hour law was sus- tained as an amendment to a corporation charter, as a valid exercise of the police power in the instance of a "public corporation, the use of a public franchise, and a provision for public safety," as a general law applicable to all street railways under the same circumstances, and as not in violation of any contract, inasmuch as it did not undertake to amend or abolish contracts for service made before the statute became operative. The strike was practically over, when the opinion was announced, and the company continued to operate in defiance of the opinion of the judges as well as the statute.
In the fall election Lucius F. C. Garvin, who had been defeated as the Democratic candi- date for Governor in 1901 by 6531 plurality, defeated Governor Kimball as a candidate for reelection by 7738 plurality. The Republican vote was reduced 1000; the Democratic vote was increased by 13,000. Governor Kimball called a special session of the General Assembly after election, the old General Assembly that had enacted the ten-hour law, not the new Gen- eral Assembly elected with Governor-elect Garvin. The General Assembly repealed the ten- hour law to all practical intents and purposes by making it applicable to contracts for employ- ment in which no hours were stipulated. Out of the conflict of opinions, colored by the pas- sions aroused in the crisis of a strike that had paralyzed urban transportation for several weeks, one merits quotation as a sound and judicious summary of the situation.
Edward L. Freeman, on retiring from membership in the General Assembly, had been congratulated by his colleagues on the completion of more than thirty years of service as rep- resentative of his town. As Railroad Commissioner he reported, in 1903: "There is no doubt that the great majority of the people of the state believed that it was the duty of the railroad corporation to obey the ten-hour law, so-called, until it was declared unconstitutional or repealed. They could see no reason why a corporation should pursue a different course or be under different obligations in regard to an act of the General Assembly from those of any private citizen under similar circumstances. They believed that the act of the General Assem- bly could be taken to the Supreme Court, and until that tribunal had decided adversely it was the law of the state, and that all persons and corporations were bound to obey it." Governor Garvin, in his message to the General Assembly, 1903, recommended reenactment of the ten- hour law in its original form, but such action was not taken.
PIECEMEAL AMENDMENTS-Returning to piecemeal amendment, article XI of amend- ment was submitted to the electors November 6, 1900, and approved 24,351-11,959. It abol- ished the annual May session of the General Assembly at Newport after 237 years under Charter and Constitution with rarely an exception save during the Andros usurpation and during British occupation in the Revolutionary War. The January session was continued as the only stated session, commencing annually on the first Tuesday at Providence. Thus New- port ceased to be a capital, or "the metropolitan" as it had been called in colonial days; and Providence became the single capital of Rhode Island. The amendment also increased the pay of Assemblymen from one dollar per day to five dollars per day for not exceeding sixty days annually and mileage. The Speaker of the House of Representatives is allowed ten dol- lars per day. The annual election was removed from April to the Tuesday after the first Monday in November; the first election was ordered for 1901, and general officers and Assemblymen elected in 1900, whose terms under the Constitution before amendment would expire in May, were continued until their successors were elected. The amendment provided for succession and filling vacancies in general offices and for the organization of the grand committee. The closing of registration for suffrage was moved back from December 31 for
*Opinion to the Governor, 24 R. I. 603.
¿State vs. Brown and Sharpe Mfg. Co., 18 R. I. 16.
672
RHODE ISLAND-THREE CENTURIES OF DEMOCRACY
the April election, to June 30 for the election to be conducted in November. Governor Gregory, who had been reelected in November, 1901, died December 16, 1901; Charles Dean Kimball, elected as Lieutenant Governor, was inaugurated as Governor, 1902, in accord with the pro- visions for succession in Amendment XI.
Need help finding more records? Try our genealogical records directory which has more than 1 million sources to help you more easily locate the available records.