Houghton, Samuel
Howland, Abraham H.
Hunt, Charles E.
Huntington, Charles P
Huntington, George H.
Hyde, Benjamin D.
Ide, Abijah M., Jr.

Absent and not voting, 102.

So the Report of the Committee was concurred in and the resolves were ordered to a second reading.

Personal Explanation.

[July 14th.

Mr. ALLEY, of Lynn. I rise, Sir, for the purpose of asking the indulgence of the Convention to make a personal explanation.

The PRESIDENT. If no objection be made, the gentleman will be at liberty to proceed.

The Chair understands that no objection is made.

Mr. ALLEY, of Lynn. Mr. President, it was my purpose to have remained silent in relation to the unprovoked attack upon me, which was made the other day by the gentleman from Boston, (Mr. Hillard). I have always recognized the wisdom of the advice of Chesterfield to his son: That he should never notice an insult; for no gentleman will insult you, and no one else can.” I have been informed that it was the purpose, or desire, of that gentleman, to have the remarks which he made the other day suppressed from the records; but I notice in one of the daily papers of this morning, a full report of that gentleman's speech, revised and corrected, I presume, by himself, in which occurs this language :

"The gentleman from Lynn, (Mr. Alley,) the other day, upon this text, discharged at me a small pellet of something that tried to be sarcasm, but could not. The report of his pop-gun was so faint that I do not think it was heard by half the Convention. Indeed, nothing but a respect for the decorum of the place, prevented me from calling out encore! I thought it selfish to be amused by an exhibition in which so few participated."

Mr. President: In view of this publication, and finding that some misapprehension exists with regard to the occasion of that attack, I feel it is due to myself to say a few words of explanation. In the first place, I would remark, that I was not present when the attack was made. In what I have to say, my purpose is not to return railing for railing, for I speak more in sorrow than in anger. Permit me to say, that I have been associated in legislative halls and deliberative assemblies, in the counting-room and in the workshop, with men of every degree, calling, and profession, and this is the first time in my life that I have ever been so grossly assailed. It is inexplicable to me why I should be attacked by one who has occupied so high a position in social and literary life-an individual some ten years my senior -one to whom I never spoke in my life but once, and then only a few words upon matters of business. When I consider, Sir, that the attack was made upon one whom the gentleman evidently supposed had not the power of repelling it, I have no language adequate to the expression of the sentiments of my heart. I have made no extend

ed remarks in this Convention but once, and then only in obedience to the call of duty.

In attempting to speak before this Convention under any circumstances, I feel very much, as I doubt not many others do in this body, who are, like me, men of acts rather than of words-that it is complete martyrdom. A few days after I had the honor to address the Convention, the gentleman from Cambridge, misapprehending my remarks, ascribed to me sentiments which I did not utter, and it was only for the purpose of putting myself right upon the record, that I occupied just two minutes, as appears by the record of the chairman at the time, in making an explanation of my views. Upon that occasion, I simply alluded, without a word of commentary, to the famous declaration of the gentleman from Boston, that "we should be careful how we strike the hand that feeds us." This, Sir, was the whole length and breadth of my offending; and for this I have been assailed with a contempt of manner and appearance of malignity, almost without parallel in the history of legislative bodies.

The gentleman complains most bitterly that he was misapprehended and misrepresented; but I submit, Sir, whether the language of the gentleman is not justly susceptible of such a construction. When I heard the gentleman make the remark, I said to a friend near me, that I was sorry to hear him make it, and that I did not believe that he meant it. I also added, that he would never hear the last of it; and, Sir, I think my prediction is likely to be fulfilled. I have heard many of that gentleman's political friends say that they so understood it; and that, farthermore, they believed that he had thus unwittingly revealed the real sentiments of his heart. Now, Sir, if members of that gentleman's political party say that the language was clearly susceptible of such a construction, certainly he cannot expect his political opponents to be any more charitable. But permit me to say, that I am unwilling to believe that the gentleman intended to make an exhibition of such base servility as those remarks would seem to indicate. I advise him, however, for the future, instead of abusing others, for which his own imprudence is justly responsible, to try and learn wisdom from experience.

That gentleman spoke of me in terms of contemptuous disparagement. Sir, I lay no claim to the graces of oratory, but I was sent here by as good a constituency as those whom that gentleman represents. I came here for the purpose of endeavoring to discharge my duty-not as brilliantly, but as faithfully, and perhaps, as usefully as some of those who belong to the class whom that gentleman represents; and I certainly did not expect

[July 14th.

to be assailed with such severity of criticism, representing, as I do, so modest a class as the practical business men of the community. I have lived long enough to value men for their deeds, rather than for their words. I am too much occupied with the cares and perplexities of other and more congenial avocations, to spend a great deal of time in preparing speeches. That gentleman has lived long enough, and has studied history often enough, to know that great results are seldom achieved by mere rhetoricians. Edmund Burke once said that the graces of oratory and solidity of judgment are seldom combined in the same individual. Another great writer has said: "Give me, to found an empire, or raise a nation, the farmers, the sailors, and the mechanics, for when grand objects are to be attained, how real and how solid such men appear in the presence of mere scholars and talkers."

A distinguished gentleman once said to mean individual of great attainments, and an acquaintance of the gentleman from Boston-"How astonishing it is that some men talk so well when they have so little practical sense;" and, said he, "how much knowledge some people have, with very little wisdom!" Far be it from me to disparage literary attainments; no man values mental culture more than I do. Heaven knows how gladly I would part with pecuniary possessions for a little, even, of that culture which is the pride and boast of the gentleman from Boston. But, Sir, if I could have it all, if its possession involved the sacrifice of judgment and common sense, I should say it was not worth having. Sir, I prize but little mere talking men. As an eminent poet says-one whom the gentleman himself is so fond of quoting :

"How fluent nonsense trickles from his tongue."

I have said thus much, Mr. President, because I believed that the occasion demanded it; and if the gentleman from Boston is satisfied to have his unprovoked attack upon me go down to posterity without a single word of explanation or apology, upon the enduring records of this Convention, so let it be-I am content.

Mr. HILLARD, of Boston. The gentleman from Lynn has come here with an elaborate speech, studiously prepared, stuffed with quotations, and committed to memory, the whole purport of which is a glorification of himself and disparagement of me,-a glorification of men of judgment, men of common sense, and men of practical skill, and a disparagement of men endowed with those scholarly qualities which he supposes I am endowed with. That part of his remarks, Mr. President, I shall not reply to. I

doubt if there is any gentleman in this Convention or out of it who has a lower estimate of my powers or my attainments, than I have myself. On that side, at least, the gentleman may be assured that I am not vulnerable.

I never, to my recollection, saw the gentleman from Lynn, until I met him in this Convention, and certainly never in any way gave him any provocation. The other day, when he was addressing the Convention upon some matter connected with the question of representation, I was listening to him with attention, for his manner was becoming and gentlemanly. As he had spoken but seldom, I listened to him with a sincere wish to learn what manner of man he was. To my great surprise he wound off by saying, that after the threat or the intimation which has fallen from the gentleman from Boston, it became the Convention so to arrange the system of representation as to protect the country against the city, or words to that effect, at the same time feathering his shaft by an expressive glance at me.

Was that an attack, or was it not? Was my reply provoked, or was it not? I submit that I felt then, and I feel now, that the remark was made for the purpose of the fling at me, for no man could make so fatuous a remark upon any other explanation. The man who really thinks that the country ought to be protected against the city, has no right to be here. His place is in a certain other Convention in the town of Somerville-a Convention that never adjourns, and which is presided over by a member of this body. You, Mr. Chairman, (Mr. Wilson, of Natick,) with that courage and readiness which always characterize you, came to the aid of our friend, and you said that I had not done right to bear so hard upon so respectable and so well-informed a gentleman. Sir, I thought of that scene in the Merry Wives of Windsor" between Dr. Caius and Mrs. Quickly, when the doctor found the young man in his closet. Mrs. Quickly was sure that he was an honest man; whereupon the doctor replied by a pertinent question, "What is the honest man doing in my closet?" Now I say, as Dr. Caius said: Why does this respectable and well-informed gentleman attack me without any provocation. So far as that attack was concerned, he was neither respectable nor wellinformed. I contend that my comment was no more than the hard hitting which he had began, and of which he has no right to complain.

Mr. President, the gentleman in this personal explanation has adverted to many matters which I will not go into. A few days ago I took occasion to make a personal explanation and vindication, which sometimes took the form of attack.

[July 14th.

I hope that those who remember it against me will remember the provocation also. I am not going to repeat that performance. It is not to my taste, and I do not think that any provocation which can pass under the President's hammer, will induce me to recall this determination.

Sir, the time of the Convention is precious. I will not occupy one moment of it in anything like personal altercation or party contest. And, Sir, still more:-the shadow of death is resting upon the assembly. The hand of God has been stretched forth, and has taken from us one whose hopes where as warm, and whose prospects were as bright, as those of any of us. Some of the clergymen in the Convention, the other day, took occasion to enforce this dispensation upon our minds, to speak to us of the vanity of human hopes and wishes, and to remind us that no one knew on whom the lot next might fall. I took their admonitions to heart, and, were there no other reason, I would not, while their teachings are so fresh, obtrude upon the notice of the Convention topics of discussion like those for which I asked their attention a few days ago.

So much for our rights and duties as members of this Convention. As between man and man, if I have done the gentleman wrong, or wounded his feelings, I regret it. And I hope he will believe me, when I say that nothing that has passed between us shall leave any permanent shadow of unkindness or ill-will to rest upon my heart; and if an opportunity should occur hereafter, in the chances and changes of life, in which I can be of service to him, then, perhaps, I may be able to convince him of my sincerity in this last remark.

Mr. OLIVER, of Lawrence. I move that the Convention do now adjourn.

Mr. BIRD, of Walpole. On that motion I ask for the yeas and nays.

(Cries of "No, no;" and "It will not save time.")

The yeas and nays were not ordered, and the question recurring on the motion to adjourn, it was decided in the negative.

Suspension of the Rules.

Mr. FRENCH, of New Bedford. I move that the rules of the Convention be suspended, in order that the Convention may now proceed to the second reading and final passage of the resolves in relation to the judiciary. We have now as full a house as we shall perhaps ever have; the subject has been most amply discussed, and I think by taking the final question to-night, we shall save time and finally settle a question which

[July 14th.

Thursday,]

has been much agitated. I hope the rules will be suspended.

(Loud cries of "No, no, no.")

Mr. BUTLER, of Lowell. I desire to say that these resolves have been discussed and voted upon at a time when it would hardly be proper to take a final vote. Since the vote ordering them to a second reading was taken, a large number of members have left the hall; and I think it would be better for us to pause for a moment before we do this.

motion was, just that we might get at the matter in the mode in which the chairman of that Com

mittee has suggested. This resolve is now in Committee of the Whole, and the only way that we can get at it, is first to go into Committee of the Whole on the subject, and then report it to the Convention with a recommendation that it be referred to the Committee on the House of Representatives, and then it will come back to us from that Committee. It was for the purpose of getting rid of one more subject from our calen

Quorum of the House of Representatives. On motion of Mr. BUTLER, of Lowell, the Convention resolved itself into

COMMITTEE OF THE WHOLE,

For the purpose of taking up a resolution offered by Mr. COLE, of Cheshire, in relation to the number of members necessary to constitute a quorum of the House of Representatives, Mr. Giles, of Boston, in the chair.

The resolution was read, as follows:

Resolved, That the Constitution be so amended

that a majority of the members of the House of Representatives shall be necessary to constitute a

quorum.

Mr. GRISWOLD, for Erving. I would suggest to the gentleman from Lowell, not to go into Committee on this subject at this time. The proposition before the Committee of the Whole is an order or resolve offered by the gentleman from Cheshire, for the purpose, mainly, I apprehend, of calling the attention of the Committee on the House of Representatives to the subject. The Committee on that subject have waited until this time to see what disposition the Convention would make of the representation question, in order that they might know how large a House we would be likely to have. I purpose to call the Committee together to-morrow, for the purpose of acting upon this and several other subjects which yet remain for their consideration, and I would inquire of the gentleman from Lowell, whether he does not think that we will dispose of this matter better by leaving it for that Committee to report upon, taking this order also into consideration, and then for us to act upon the Report of that Committee? I merely make this suggestion. I am willing that the question should be taken up but I think it would save time to wait until we have the Report of the Committee which has this matter specially under its consideration.

now,

Mr. BUTLER. The reason why I made this

tee of the Whole, so that this resolution might go to its proper Committee and be disposed of in the shortest possible manner. I hope that it will not generate any discussion, and that the Committee will now report it back to the Convention, with a recommendation that it be referred to the Committee on the House of Representatives.

Mr. HALLETT, for Wilbraham. I would suggest to the gentleman from Lowell, whether we cannot get an expression of opinion upon this subject now, and thus avoid the necessity of this reference, and perhaps of considerable discussion afterwards. I am wearied with seeing these subjects referred and re-referred, and brought back again here. Here is a simple proposition in regard to a single delegate as to the number of members necessary to constitute a quorum of the House of Representatives. I do not believe that there is any material difference of opinion in regard to this subject. Nobody supposes that we shall have less than three nor more than four hundred representatives. Can there be any difficulty, then, in fixing a number-say a hundred and fifty, or two hundred? I would submit whether this resolve could not be amended so as to fix the number here, now, and then let the resolve, as amended, be reported to the Convention? Or, if it is to be referred, let it be referred with instructions, so that the Committee may report it back, and it may be passed here without discussion. Unless we adopt some such course as this, we shall lose all the time we have spent upon it. If we expect to get through with this Convention by August, we must dispose of these things as they come up. I move, therefore, to amend the motion of the gentleman from Lowell, so as to resolve that it is inexpedient to adopt this recommendation, and that we so report to the Convention. I move that the Committee report to the Convention that it is inexpedient that this resolution should pass.

Mr. GRISWOLD, for Erving. I have no objection to this matter being discussed and settled here, instead of being referred back to the Committee on the House of Representatives; but

Thursday,]

there are serious differences of opinion in relation to this matter. I incline myself to the opinion, that the number necessary for the transaction of business, should be higher than the present number of sixty. I think it should be a hundred; but I shall go with the majority in regard to whatever number may be determined upon. I hope, therefore, that the amendment of the gentleman for Wilbraham, will not prevail, because I suppose it precludes any action upon the subject by the other Committee. If the Committee of the Whole are disposed to act finally upon the subject now, I would move to amend the amendment by substituting the number "one hundred" for the "majority;" but I do think that it would simplify the matter at this time to adopt the motion of the gentleman from Lowell, by having this Committee rise and report a reference of this resolution to the Committee on the House of Representatives. If, however, the gentleman for Wilbraham insists upon his amendment, I have no objection, provided that the number be fixed at one hundred.

Mr. HALLETT. I have not the least objection to recommend to the Convention now, the amendment of the gentleman, to my motion, that hereafter a quorum of the House should consist of one hundred members. That, perhaps, would meet the wishes all round. It is now required, by the Constitution, to be sixty. I see no practical inconvenience in having it increased to one hun

dred.

Mr. BUTLER, of Lowell. I have a word to say upon this matter, which I endeavored or intended to have said when I arose before.

The CHAIRMAN. The Chair would state that the third amendment is not strictly in order at this time. If the gentleman for Wilbraham, will withdraw his amendment to the motion of the gentleman from Lowell, (Mr. Butler,) then the amendment of the gentleman for Erving, (Mr. Griswold,) will be in order.

Mr. HALLETT. I accept the amendment of the gentleman for Irving, as a substitute for mine.

Mr. BUTLER. I was about to say that the reason for my motion was this. This whole subject was referred to the Committee on the House of Representatives. The gentleman from Cheshire, (Mr. Cole,) brought in a resolution on this subject—which he had a perfect right to do-and by inadvertence that resolution was referred directly to the Committee of the Whole, instead of to the Committee having in charge matters of that nature. I knew that the Committee on the House of Representatives was to have a meeting to-morrow morning to discuss this very question, and if we

[July 14th.

should go on and discuss it here to-night, the Committee would come to their conclusion upon it, and report the same to the Convention, and then we should have the whole subject up, and it would all be gone over again. It was, therefore, in order to save time all around, that I made the motion, and if it had not been for the amendment of the gentleman for Wilbraham, (Mr. Hallett,) we should have been through with it, and have proceeded to something else. What use is there in trying to settle the matter here, while the whole subject is before the Committee on the House of Representatives? The majority of that Committee are not here, and when they come together, they may come to the conclusion to report a very different resolve, and then we must review the whole matter. Why not have the whole subject before us at once?

The gentleman thinks one hundred members a good number to constitute a quorum. Well, perhaps I think one hundred and twenty-five, another thinks a hundred and fifteen; four or five think a hundred and fifty is a good number. And so we have a variety of opinions, and the whole matter must be discussed. The gentleman himself says there is a difference of opinion about it. When we come to go into the discussion of this matter, I shall be ready to say that I do not think the Constitution should give permission to threequarters of the House of Representatives to go home and leave the other quarter here to do business. I have seen fifty thousand dollars of the State's money voted away when there were only forty-four members voting upon one side and forty odd upon the other, and I do not think it was a good sight. However, I am not going into the general question. I think we had better let the whole matter go to the Committee on the House of Representatives, and we shall thereby save the time of the Convention.

Mr. SCHOULER, of Boston. I suppose that under the general resolution, which refers all matters having reference to the House of Representatives to the Committee upon that subject, this matter of a quorum would be naturally brought before us. As that subject is before the Committee, of which I am a member, I trust that this matter will be referred to it, so that we may act upon it and make one report upon the whole matter. I think that is the quickest way to dispose of it.

I think, upon reflection, that it will be found that sixty members is a sufficient number to form a quorum, because the only difficulty about a quorum has been when the House meets in the morning, and, for the last few years, the Speaker has not called the House to order until some