|
stitution for it, and I believe that if you
vote to keep section 1.17 in the constitution,
you may very well jeopardize the constitu-
tion. It is for that reason, Mr. President
and ladies and gentlemen, that I believe we
should accept the original compromise of
the Committee. The compromise was that
there would be no pro-management plan-
ning and no pro-labor planning. This was
the compromise.
I did not favor it, but I believe feelings
and emotion have grown to the point in
this State where the original compromise
should be retained. For that reason, I be-
lieve that we should strike section 1.17
from the constitution.
THE PRESIDENT: Does any other dele-
gate desire to speak in favor of it?
Delegate Bothe.
DELEGATE BOTHE: Mr. Chairman, as
one of the principal proponents of the lan-
guage of section 1.17 and also as someone
who supported the amending language be-
cause it appeared to satisfy the storm and
cry that has been raised since the passage
of it, I feel it incumbent upon me to rise
now in answer to what Delegate Hardwicke
has said. Whatever way this vote goes, we
are not going to find a solution that satis-
fies the constitution or satisfies the voters
who have been very disappointed by the
action of this Convention. Please remem-
ber that only thirty-seven of those dele-
gates here in this room today originally
voted against putting this proposal in the
Constitution. Eighty-three of us voted for
it, an overwhelming majority of this
group, after five and a half hours of de-
bate, after a presentation made without
pressure, made on the issues, and as Dele-
gate Hardwicke admits, the decision was a
moral one. It was made by the majority of
this group because it was believed by them
to be right, proper, and correct.
What has happened to that majority,
that we are deadlocked here today? I say
that nothing has happened to that majority
that would justify us as delegates to this
Constitutional Convention to change our
minds on the issue. We are here to decide
what should go into the constitution, and
to do it on the basis of our conscience, and
to let that be our guide, and that only. We
did once, and in the intervening few weeks
we have been barraged by the kind of re-
crimination that employers visit upon em-
ployees who try to organize. I think the
analogy is very apt.
All kinds of pressures have been brought
to bear. All kinds of things have been said
|
that are inaccurate. The hue and cry has
been made that there will be strikes. The
answer is simple: there will not be strikes.
There will not be any more or less, perhaps
less. The hue and cry has been raised that
it does not belong in the constitution. That
question was fully debated and considered.
THE PRESIDENT: You have one-half
minute, Delegate Bothe.
DELEGATE BOTHE: I say to you that
if this decision which was made fairly and
in good faith only two and a half weeks
ago is reversed by this group, the good
faith of the voters of this State, many of
whom are working people, many of whom
count on this constitution having real
meaning to them, will not be able to sup-
port the document, not only because of
their disappointment in what we exclude,
but because in their disappointment in the
kind of people we are to be susceptible to
this kind of pressure.
THE PRESIDENT: Does any other dele-
gate desire to speak in opposition to the
question ?
Delegate Henderson.
DELEGATE HENDERSON: Mr. Presi-
dent, I had hoped to maintain complete si-
lence during this long afternoon. I really
wonder if we are not getting the thing a
little out of perspective. The effect of leav-
ing this in the constitution, I think, will
antagonize and raise the fears of a great
many people throughout the State, prob-
ably unnecessarily, because, after all, the
matter is left ultimately to the legislature
to decide how far they will go to imple-
ment this provision. In the other hand, if
the provision is deleted, the legislature has
plenary power to deal with these things
and to make all the necessary exceptions
in favor of public employees or people who
are engaged in businesses that are charged
with the public interest. It seemed to me,
to my way of thinking, that the safest
thing to do was to leave this provision out;
in short, to leave it to the legislature
where, indeed, this ultimately leaves it if
you put the thing in. I say, is the game
worth the candle? Why not just leave it
out instead of putting a novel and new
thing into the constitution?
THE PRESIDENT: Does any other dele-
gate desire to speak in favor of this sec-
tion?
Delegate Bennett.
DELEGATE BENNETT,: Mr. Chairman,
when you say in favor of retaining the
section —
|
