« ПретходнаНастави »
of paper. Out of that circumstance, gentlemen, arose whatever demand there is in this State for a short ballot. I hope that cobweb is cleared away.
Mr. Betts You spoke of Governor Hughes. I would like to clear him of the charge of passing this law. It was passed by a Democratic Legislature.
Mr. Quigg-Well, all right. Take it amongst them, just as they please, it is an iniquity that the people of this State resent. They want to come back, in order to have a ballot just as short as you want it, just as long as you want it and it is very hard to please everybody - All you have got to do is to restore the circle and the emblem and then it can be as short as anybody wants and as long as anybody wants, and that is your opportunity to please everybody. A thing that does not often happen. Now I have come to another thing. This is not the short ballot, Mr. Tanner, and you know it. The short ballot is the election of a governor and a lieutenant-governor, the Governor to appoint the other officers. You put in the Attorney-General- really I do not know why. The Governor can pick a man that knows all about agriculture, if he can pick out a man that knows all about how to administer highways and to engineer everything, I do not see why he cannot pick out a lawyer. There are lots of us right around this circle. I do not see why you should have put in the Attorney-General. That means nothing. Then in your bill you were going to elect an expert accountant, whom you could hire for, oh, easily $2,500 a year, merely an expert accountant, who is to be called a treasurer. Then murmurs were heard from down the State, loud murmurs, too. There are fourteen or fifteen — I forget just the number of murmurs from that locality right here now. They murmured loud. Then you see, there are those of us who object to the principle of the bill. And the murmurers from down below, from Kings county, raised such a loud murmur that it became possible that this bill might be beaten here. Now what happened? What did you do? You surrendered the whole principle of the bill without making it palatable to anybody who objected to it on principle. You did it two or three nights ago, when we began to hear that. Then in the next afternoon in the Brooklyn Eagle I read this: "The short ballot advocates have similar statements (that is, pledges) from the 168 members of the Convention and eventually all of them are to be made public. The material collected by these bodies is said to be in the hands of Republican State Chairman (not Delegate) - Republican State Chairman Frederick C. Tanner, and will in all probability be used as a whip to keep the delegates in line.
Now if that statement is challenged, then I want another opportunity before the Convention. If not, I do not. Now, what is the situation in the National government? Are the members of the President's cabinet constitutional officers? Not at all. They are created by Congress. They can be removed by Congress. Congress can add to the number of them as it has in our memory, all of us, several times. Here you have got a provision that, for twenty years there shall be no other department added to the list you create, and you put them into the Constitution. The Federal Constitution contains no such provision. I can illustrate the situation in Congress in Washington in Washington-very clearly, by recalling to your attention the form in which we address the President, or, in which we address a cabinet minister when we ask for information. To the President we say: "Be it resolved, that the President is requested, if in his judgment, not incompatible with the public interest, to supply to the House the following information." But, when in Congress we address a cabinet minister, an officer created by Congress, an officer whom they can remove at any time, we simply say: "Resolved, That the Secretary of the Treasury,"-no, I will put it this way: "Resolved, That the Attorney-General be, and he is hereby directed to supply to the House the following information." They are the instruments of Congress. They are simply assistants to the President, to carry out his direction, under the Constitution, to enforce the laws, and responsible to Congress. The responsibility to the President is merely a part of himself. They are responsible to Congress. Now, Mr. Chairman, with the budget that we have adopted we give to the Governor of this State almost absolute control of its expenditures. I applaud what you have done in that respect. I did not like one feature of the bill, but I knew that the bill as a whole was sound, because it enables the people to see what is being spent on their behalf. It enables them to understand it. It is intelligible to them. It has that great virtue. But, still, it is in his hands. What he ordains is almost certain to pass the Legislature, mostly as he ordains; except, as you know, for some additional things that he may veto, he has all the power.
Now you are giving him- except for a law officer, the anomaly of that is funny, I don't understand that, and for the gentleman from Brooklyn, who hopes to be, and properly hopes to be reelected you are giving him the control in seventeen departments of every functionary in this State. It was 152. I think Mr. Tanner said. Gentlemen, it is harder for a man who has power and who wants to perpetuate his power, to control 152 appointees than it is to control seventeen, when the real power is lodged in three. You might make the accident of appointing Dr. Schur