satisfied me that the volunteer militia of this State does not stand in coincidence with the national, enrolled militia. I think that the chairman of the Committee also, not by any means wishing to disparage his sagacity, would be willing to confess that some new views had presented themselves to his mind in relation to the subject. I desire, then, to have the matter well and thoroughly considered and understood; and I have moved the recommittal in order that the distinction which exists between the volunteer militia and national militia may be put beyond all doubt, or may be removed. I believe that it is in the power of the Committee on the Militia, more, perhaps, than in that of anybody else, by giving a little more consideration to this subject, to place it in a clear light. And, further, I should be sorry to have a system of details relating to the organization of the militia adopted into our Constitution, any part of which may at any moment be changed by an act of congress which would necessarily entail upon us the duty of changing the Constitution of Massachusetts. That is to say, if a mere act of congress, changeable at any moment, has provided for the organization of the militia by the States, it would not be wise for us to provide for that organization in our Constitution; since, in that case, if the act of congress should change that organization, we should be obliged to change our Constitution to correspond with the change of the act of congress. This is a consideration which I deem deserving of some weight; and I trust that the Convention will think it worth while to let the subject go back to the Committee. I do not believe, with the gentleman from Braintree, (Mr. Stetson,) that we shall lose any time by so doing. I do not desire to have this matter acted upon by the Convention, while it is either misunderstood or not fully understood; and I do not believe that there is any disposition to waste time upon it. I have such entire faith in the Committee on the Militia, that I believe when they consider this thing thoroughly and report it back, their Report will carry such conviction to all our minds, that we shall not wish to debate the subject at all. Mr. OLIVER. I trust, Mr. President, that the motion for recommitment will not prevail. This subject has been argued here, on both sides, with great ability, by gentlemen learned in the law-far more so, certainly, than I am, and probably more so than most of my associates upon the Committee; I believe in fact, we have only one or two lawyers, at most, upon that Committee, the members being of other professions, though connected, for a greater or less time, with the military of the Commonwealth. We have put this Report into the best form we could devise. It is admit [June 22d. ted on all hands, I believe, that this is a subject which is not without difficulty; and although the gentleman representing Manchester, whom I highly esteem, seems to think that a great deal of light has been shed upon the subject in the debate which has taken place this morning, I am sorry to say that I cannot fully agree with him. It seems to me as if" words had darkened counsel." I think that we shall make the best progress by suffering the discussion to go on here. So far as the questions are concerned, which have been raised here, as to the conformity or nonconformity of the present organization of the militia to the Constitution and the laws of the United States, I am inclined to think, that if the legal gentlemen who have debated and discussed it so ably, were to be retained as advocates, they would be quite as ready to be retained upon the one side as upon the other. I infer from the bland smile which pervades the face of my friend from Lowell, on my left, (Mr. Abbott,) that he is of the same opinion. Now I do not think that it will be in the power of the Committee on the Militia, to mature anything which would be better adapted to the condition of the militia, if this should be recommitted to them, and they should go over the whole ground again. They would still be compelled to provide for the subalterns and captains of the companies, for the field-officers of regiments, squadrons and battalions, for the brigadier-generals of the brigades, and for the major-generals of the divisions, as they have already done. I need not refer to other countries or to other times-I need not go back to the days of Greece and Rome, and cite the various divisions of their armies and the various titles of the officers by whom they were commanded, and which correspond, in some measure, to those which we have in our own organization. Such divisions and such officers must be had, and I do not see how it would be possible for this Committee to improve on what they have already done. I should like to ask my ingenious friend who represents Manchester, in what particular mode he thinks that these articles could be improved. Here is a provision in the second article, for the division of the militia "into convenient divisions, brigades, regiments, squadrons, battalions, and companies." What different names or what better arrangement than that, could be made? The third article provides for the election of the captains and subalterns of the militia; how can that be altered? The fourth article goes on to provide for the election of the field-officers; what amendment can the gentleman suggest to that article? And so I might ask of the whole. I do not believe, Mr. President, that the poor wisdom or Wednesday,] SCHOULER-GARDNER-UNDERWOOD. small experience of the Committee with whom I am associated—I speak now, measuring myself, and not them,-would be able to originate and bring forward anything different or better than they have done. I am confident that the Constitutions of nearly three-fourths of the States of this Union go into details quite as far as we have done, in relation to the organization of the militia. The provisions which have been submitted, are, in my judgment, as few and plain as they could be made, and were designed to perfect that which in our present Constitution, seemed to be somewhat imperfect. I do not see what we could change for the better, if we were to go over the whole ground again. So, Sir, in regard to the ninth and tenth sections, I do not see what else we can do. In regard to the twelfth section, I should propose no change. I do not see that anything can be done; and as I said to my friend for Manchester, whether the organization of the militia of Massachusetts be in accordance with the national usage or not, the people, I believe, will take no other; and whether you organize a larger one, or retain the present small one, the arrangement set forth by the Committee must be adopted. You have now a skeleton organization, which is good so far as it goes, and may be expanded if need arises; and I must confess that I do not see how we should be able, if this Report were recommitted, to present anything essentially different from it, as it now stands, though I do not care to object to the amendment of the gentleman from Cambridge, and am willing to put points that may seem to be in language not guarded enough, or that may possibly lead to uncertainty, into more certain phraseology, if such be offered by the Convention. Mr. SCHOULER. Under the Constitution as it now stands we have had a very good and efficient militia-the best, perhaps, in any State of the Union; and I do not see why we should not have the militia organization as we have had it in times past, and which has been entirely satisfactory all round. The PRESIDENT. The Chair must remind the gentleman from Boston that the question is on the motion to recommit the Report. Mr. SCHOULER. I beg pardon; I was just going to conclude, and I will do so by making this remark that all the Committees which have reported seem to think that they were bound to report some change in that portion of the present Constitution which was referred to them. Why, Sir, when I was in the Chair this morning-the Convention being in Committee of the Whole-I tried to court debate in order that I might remain [June 22d. there a little longer; but the Committee, unexpectedly to me, determined to rise. [A laugh.] If the gentleman for Manchester, (Mr. Dana,) would withdraw his motion for a moment, I think we can settle this question without the necessity of recommitting; and my purpose would be to let the Constitution remain just as it is; but as I cannot proceed without being out of order, I will withhold what I was about to say for the present. Mr. GARDNER, of Seekonk. I hope that this subject will be recommitted. It seems to me that, after all, the Committee themselves are not satisfied with the Report they have made. They propose to acquiesce in amendments to some five or six of the articles, and, under these circumstances, I think it would be much better, on all hands, that this Report should be recommitted and perfected in the Committee. I am opposed, Mr. President, to making any change in the Constitution of the Commonwealth of Massachusetts that might not be strictly in accordance with the Constitution of the United States, either on the subject of the militia or on any other subject. I hope, therefore, Sir, as this is acknowledged on all hands to be a subject of considerable importance, and although I am not a military man, yet I think everything inserted in the Constitution on this subject should be in accordance with the Constitution of the United States; and I was convinced this morning during the debate that this would be a proper course to be pursued—that this Report should be recommitted, and perfected by the Committee which have had this subject under consideration. I hope, therefore, that that Committee will be willing that it should be recommitted. Mr. UNDERWOOD, of Milford. I hope, for one, that this Report will not be recommitted. I do not pretend to speak for the chairman of the Committee, but, for myself, I must say that if it were recommitted I should not know how to alter it. The Committee has had it under consideration for quite a number of sittings, and, so far as I know, they have brought it forward in as good a shape as they could devise. I do not see in what respects it can be materially and advantageously altered. With the slight alterations suggested by my friend from Freetown, (Mr. Hathaway,) I think it would be improved; but these alterations can be made in the Convention just as well as if the matter was referred back again to the Committee on the Militia. If the Convention see fit to recommit, with instructions to report certain alterations, why not make these alterations in the Convention at once? For one, if the Report were recommitted, I could not con scientiously agree to make any alterations. I am therefore decidedly opposed to the motion for a recommitment, and think if it prevailed it would result in nothing useful. Mr. MORTON, of Quincy. It seems to me, Mr. Chairman, that this matter has been discussed quite long enough. We have gone over all the ground that appears to be necessary for us to go over, and I therefore move the previous question. [June 22d. interrupt the gentleman from Lowell, but he will Mr. BUTLER. I am aware of it, Mr. Presi- The PRESIDENT. The Chair would suggest to the gentleman from Quincy that the gentleman from Freetown has offered an amendment which is now pending, and, if that amendment is adopt-in the rule. ed, several other verbal amendments will be necessary in order to make the whole article consistent. Mr. MORTON. I was not aware of the precise state of the question, and, under the information stated by the Chair, I will withdraw my call for the previous question at present. Mr. BUTLER, of Lowell. I desire to say a word or two in regard to this Report. I am opposed to the motion to recommit, and for this reason-that I think where a Committee of ability that thoroughly understand a subject committed to them-as I know the chairman of this Committee does, for one, without speaking of any other member of the Committee-I say that where a Committee like this, understands the subject referred to them, have made a report which bears evidence of ability, and where, above all, when that chairman says that he sees no place in which he can make, or recommend to be made, any change, I hardly think it becomes necessary for us to interpose our necessarily crude notions in opposition to the well and carefully considered reports of such a committee. Why, Sir, for what purpose do we have committees to make reports, if, as soon as these rep rts come in, every member of the Convention endeavors, by every or all means, to incorporate his own particular hobby or his own individual notions on the subject? What is the use of having committees if such is to be the fate of their reports? and especially when a committee is chosen with regard to its known ability to consider the subjects that are to be referred to it? Why, Sir, there is no use in it whatever; we might as well have no committees at all, but just take up indiscriminately anything and everything which any member of this Convention may choose to propose. Sir, I think I can in one or two matters relieve the trouble of my friend for Manchester. He says that he does not understand how we can go on and The PRESIDENT. The Chair is sorry to The PRESIDENT. The gentleman may allude to the provisions of the Report to show his reasons why it should not be recommitted; but the question of commitment is a very narrow one. Mr. BUTLER. And so is the question of noncommitment. I hold, then, Sir, that it is not necessary to make our Constitution conform to the Constitution of the United States because in an act of congress passed on the 8th of May, 1792, when the meaning of the Constitution in this particular must have been well and distinctly known to every member of that body, it is provided that "Within one year after the passing of this act the militia of the respective States shall be arranged into divisions, brigades, regiments, battalions and companies, as the legislature of each State shall direct; and each division, brigade, and regiment shall be numbered at the formation thereof, and a record made of such numbers in the adjutant-general's office in the State." For that reason, Sir, I hold that in the adoption of this Report we are not in conflict with either the Constitution or the laws of the United States, and it therefore seems to me that the question of commitment cannot be sustained on that ground. Nor do I think it is necessary to recommit in order further to mature this plan; for, so far as I can see, the plan cannot be amended. And further, Sir, if we have this matter recommitted we shall have every word of this debate over again. Nor, Sir, do I see the propriety of having this Report recommitted for the purpose of leaving the Constitution to stand as it now is, so that a certain class of officers shall be chosen by their companies, while certain other classes are to be appointed by the legislature. I hope, therefore, that the Report may be adopted, for this, among other reasons, that it gives to the militia the entire choice of their officers; and that the Convention will not agree to the motion to recommit. The question was then taken on the motion to recommit and it was decided in the negative. The PRESIDENT. The question now recurs on the amendment proposed to the first paragraph by the gentleman from Freetown. Mr. SCHOULER. The words proposed by my friend from Freetown do not alter the meaning of the resolve. Now, in regard to the operation of the present Constitution, in respect to the militia, it has thus far operated well. There has been no kind of opposition to it so far; nor do I believe that any part of the Constitution relating to the militia was found fault with, either by the people who authorized this Convention or the legislature which passed the Act by which it was called. I say, therefore, that so far as the Constitution has operated well and satisfactorily, let it alone. The Report submitted by the Committee on the Militia does make a few detailed alterations; and every one of those alterations proposed by the Committee, if adopted, is subject, on any day when congress comes together, to be entirely annulled. The gentleman from Lawrence, (Mr. Oliver,) shakes his head; but I believe it to be so notwithstanding. Now, Sir, under the present Constitution, the militia have it pretty much all their own way. A MEMBER. Except in the election of their officers. Mr. SCHOULER. Well, Sir, they do elect pretty nearly all their officers; and I do not see that, because it provided that the legislature should elect one or two officers who may be called upon to fill the most important and responsible positions, there is any necessity for all this change in the Constitution. I do not know why majorgenerals may not be chosen by the legislature. It seems to me that such a mode of appointment or election, would give the people a degree of confidence in them which they would not otherwise have. But we had a good militia when we used to have the standing companies under the Constitution as it now stands; and we have had the volunteer system, and we have it now, as the Constitution now stands. And I want to know what is the difficulty about it? Why put a question to the people that three-fourths of them do not understand?-because I have no hesitation in saying that three-fourths of them do not know anything about militia matters. Why, Sir, not only is that so, but a large portion of them are opposed to having any militia regulations at all; and yet we are proposing to put a number of new questions to the people on a subject about which three-fourths of them know little or nothing, and care less, and for which they have not asked, and all that, too, while we have every [June 22d. thing that is necessary in the Constitution as it is at present. Why not, therefore, leave it to congress to legislate upon this subject as they may think proper. I repeat, Sir, that we might insert all these fifteen resolves into our revised Constitution, and yet, perhaps, before any one of them could go into effect there might be a law of congress that would annul the whole of them with the exception of the election of officers as already provided for, and it seems to me that these fifteen resolves are more like a law than like a Constitution. We have the Constitution, as it now stands, with the laws of congress before us; we have our militia laws made in accordance with the laws of congress and the Constitution of the United States, and, if we put these new things into our Constitution, we shall have another law; and it was said by the chairman of the Committee this morning that the laws on this subject were so numerous and complicated that even Judge Shaw himself could not tell what they were. I happened to be chairman of the Committee on the Militia in the legislature for five years, and, in that time, I know there was never a year passed over without some change being made. But now, Sir, we have what may be called a voluntary militia, and since its formation, we have had comparatively little change in the militia laws. Sir, I am opposed to making any changes in the Constitution which are not required by the public exigencies, and the public demand; and no man on this floor can truly say there is any such exigency or any such demand for a change of this kind. I do not wish to confuse the judgments of the people by putting to them a great many questions. I want to have all the important questions put to them clearly and plainly so that they may understand them; and all this matter which is here involved in regard to the militia I say they do not and will not understand. There will be discussions as to whether they are in conflict with the laws of the United States. We have had lawyers disagree here, upon this floor, upon questions relating to this matter, and we shall have people disagreeing. We shall have arrayed against it a class of people, who, like the gentleman who represents Boylston, (Mr. Whitney,) go dead against the militia; and then, another class who, like the gentleman representing Abington, (Mr. Keyes,) have some peculiar notions about the Constitution of the United States; and we may, perhaps, have mixed up with the matter the question which came up this morning as to whether colored persons shall be permitted to carry arms. Now, all these questions are springing up, and they are to be referred Wednesday,] SARGENT-HATHAWAY-HOPKINSON - BUTLER. to the people of Massachusetts, who, with few exceptions, have not been at all engaged actively in the militia, and those who remember the militia, remember it because they dislike it, and for no other reason. Yet we propose to present these fifteen resolutions to the people of Massachusetts, in order for them to say whether they will accept of them or not, and that, too, when the very next congress may sweep all of them from the Constitution. I say let the Constitution remain as it is. We know, the people know, what that is, and we know we have laws made under it, and in accordance with it, which have worked well. Considering this to be the common sense view of the question, without entering into detail, I trust that the Constitution in this respect will be allowed to remain without alteration. Mr. SARGENT, of Cambridge. I am opposed to the amendment, as I am opposed to the whole resolves. And first, because the laws of the United States provide that the arranging of the militia into divisions, brigades, regiments, battalions, and companies, shall be as the legislatures of the States direct. Now, you here propose to arrange these matters in the Constitution. It is, therefore, in my humble judgment, directly in violation of the law of congress. That is my first reason for opposing this resolution. My second is, that if it were constitutional to insert it into the Constitution, while the power rests with congress to change this law at any time, I would not put into the Constitution a provision which will compel you to change it, if congress changes her statute law. I think it would be unwise. For these two reasons I am opposed to this resolution. The question was then taken upon the pending amendment which was offered by the gentleman from Freetown, (Mr. Hathaway,) and there were, upon a division-yeas, 89; noes, 66. So the amendment was agreed to. Mr. HATHAWAY. I move to amend the eleventh article, by striking out from the third line the words "the legislature," and insert in lieu thereof the word "law," so that the section shall read as follows: The salary of the adjutant-general, of the quartermaster-general, and of such other general staff-officers as may be provided for by law, shall be fixed by law, and shall be in full for all services rendered by them in their several offices. The amendment was agreed to. Mr. HATHAWAY. I move to amend article fourteenth by striking out the four first words thereof, being "the legislature shall prescribe," and at the end of the article append the words [June 22d. "shall be prescribed by law," so that the article shall read as follows: The time and manner of convening the electors herein before named, of conducting the elections, and of certifying to the governor the officers elect, shall be prescribed by law. Mr. HOPKINSON, of Boston. I rise simply to inquire of the mover of the amendment whether it expresses precisely the idea he wishes to get at? The form of the section when so amended will be imperative. It requires that somebody shall prescribe certain things by law. Of course, the gentleman means that the legislature of Massachusetts shall prescribe those things, and not the congress of the United States. I think he should express it so that it may not be open to construction. Mr. HATHAWAY. I am not entirely clear, after all, but that the section had better stand as it is. But my difficulty was this, that in organizing the militia, I did not know, and do not know, but that congress may take some measures in reference to the election of officers, prescribing who shall be eligible; and hence, if they should take into consideration at all, and act upon the question of qualification of officers, we might possibly get into difficulty with the government of the United States in reference to that matter. It seems to me that we shall be perfectly safe, and beyond the reach of all question, if we should provide that these matters shall be prescribed by law, without our saying anything about our legislature, whereas we might not be safe by adhering to the language of the article as it is. I do not consider it a matter of any great consequence, I admit. Mr. BUTLER, of Lowell. Would not the object of the gentleman from Freetown be accomplished by inserting the word "as before the words "prescribed by law," so that the words which he proposes to add shall read "shall be as prescribed by law." Mr. HATHAWAY. There is so much doubt about this matter, that I withdraw my amend |