Thursday,] BILL OF RIGHTS.-ROCKWELL-DAY-DANA - BROWN. thing about legislative assemblies, that propositions which have passed their first and second stages by a great majority, have been defeated by common consent at the last or a subsequent stage. Now this is a practical question. The heavens will not fall, however we may decide it to-day; the heavens may never fall, however it may be decided. Nevertheless, it may be, as I deem it to be, of great importance to this community upon which it is to operate. Now, Sir, my practise has been in the country part of the Commonwealth, and I confess here that there have been times, when the law has been pressed hardly upon my clients, when I was ready to go out of the court-room, dissatisfied with the law as laid down by the bench, and ready to vote, and give my influence to give that question to the jury, with whom I might have supposed I would have a better chance for the relief of my client. But, upon cooler reflection, I have been led to doubt how I could follow up these impulses of my mind properly thereafter. Now, what is the situation of those persons usually, who are indicted in the counties in the country? Most of them are poor, without pecuniary means; most of them unable to demand counsel. They have against them always the friends of the Commonwealth; they have against them the most respectable men to take care of the Commonwealth. They must either have no counsel at all, or such counsel as may be induced to volunteer for them, or be obtained by other motives than those which they can present in a pecuniary form. There is the judge upon the bench, perfectly understanding the law. No matter who their counsel is, so that he present all the points that can be presented in the case. And if any one of them is such that the court can recognize it as a protection to the accused, then he has the benefit of the law as fully as though he were defended by the ablest counsel that money could obtain. Now how is it that so many persons are indicted every term, and that, in so many cases, the law steps in to relieve them? Every-body knows it, that knows anything of the practise of our criminal courts. Is this worth nothing? Consider if you were indicted, as any man may be indicted; consider if you were brought to the bar of the court of common pleas in this Commonwealth; consider that you have an able district-attorney learned in the law and armed with experience; consider that he may call to his aid, also, the best legal talent in the Commonwealth, even the present attorney-general; consider this to be the situation of the person indicted, and whether he ought not to have, also, the influence of the law and the influence derived from the power to instruct the jury, which the learned judge has. But, Sir, this matter may come up perhaps, not to your or my experience, but to the experience, however, of some of our posterity, or of the citizens of this Commonwealth, in times of political excitement, when that spirit rages which no man who has attempted has succeeded in controlling ; when that mob spirit, which, in the power of the tempest, has no parallel in the comparison, and of which hurricanes and earthquakes are but feeble illustrations-when that rages abroad in the community, and the accused is brought to the bar where the public opinion is arrayed against him and he receives his doom. What then? We all claim, every-body claims who knew him, that he was a peace-loving man. What then will be the influence upon that jury, I ask? Now, it will be said, here has been a verdict of public opinion against the popular sentiment. But a learned judge has declared the law, is bound to declare the law to the jury, and the jury under that instruction has given its verdict. But suppose the judge could walk above that enraged community, and could say that the jury have given a verdict which I would not have given; I have not instructed them at all; I am under no responsibility. Then comes upon the devoted heads of those twelve men, unprotected by the shield of the law, the indignation of the excited community. I do not overdraw this picture at all. I believe there are elements in this community, that in time, may produce these effects. And I have seen them, and any man who has seen them will never forget them. Now the judge is bound --and this is my safety and yours also-the court is bound to declare the law. As it has been decided, and is the law, that the court is bound to declare it, the judge upon the bench has more reasons than one why he should declare it So. In the first place, his legal reputation, which is, in most instances, his only property, is at stake. In the next place he is liable to impeachment; and the fact that he has given a flagrant decision and flagrant instructions to the jury, under circumstances which may lead to corruption, or may be the effect of corruption, is a portion of the evidence which may lead to conviction upon a trial for impeachment, and he knows it. Then the protection of the individual is, that in the first place every safeguard which can be given has been thrown by the law around the law itself, and also in the opportunity which he may have before the jury in setting forth the facts of his case. To say nothing of any other reasons, it seems to me that this is conclusive why we should not now allow this innovation to be made. It has been suggested to me by some gentlemen, for whose opinions I have a great respect, that this is one of the reforms of the present time, and that all reforms are resisted, but that all reforms prove to be beneficial. Let us consider that matter. There are millions of reforms proposed, while there are but thousands or perhaps hundreds adopted; and those are only adopted after undergoing the agony of investigation and argument, persistent argument on both sides, stage after stage, and time after time. It is only reforms of that kind which are finally adopted, and which are beneficial. Whether this is one of those, will depend upon the issue of this debate. It is not enough to say to us that this comes in the shape of a reform; it may be one of those which, like millions of others, has only to be examined in order to be rejected. Mr. DAY, of Templeton, then moved the vious question. pre Mr. DANA, for Manchester, moved that the resolve and amendments be laid upon the table. Mr. EARLE asked the yeas and nays upon the motion of Mr. Dana; and they were ordered. Mr. BROWN, of Medway, moved a reconsideration of the vote by which the yeas and nays were ordered; which was agreed to. The question then recurred upon the motion for the yeas and nays-and they were again ordered, more than one-fifth voting therefor. The question being then taken on the motion of Mr. Dana, the result was-yeas, 153; nays, 182-as follows: Adams, Benjamin P. YEAS. [July 28th. Bennett, William, Jr. Kellogg, Giles C. Bigelow, Jacob Bliss, Gad O. Bradbury, Ebenezer Eustis, William T. Harmon, Phineas Haskell, George Kendall, Isaac Kinsman, Henry W. White, Benjamin Wilbur, Joseph Hathaway, Elnathan P. Wilkins, John H. Hayward, George Heard, Charles Abbott, Josiah G. Wilson, Milo Winn, Jonathan B. Woods, Josiah B. NAYS. Baker, Hillel Bennett, Zephaniah Thursday,] Boutwell, George S. CONSTITUTIONAL CONVENTIONS, &c. Knox, Albert Burlingame, Anson Caruthers, William Case, Isaac Morss, Joseph B. Clark, Henry Clark, Ransom Clark, Salah Morton, Marcus, Jr. Clarke, Alpheus B. Knight, Jefferson Vinton, George A. Wood, William H. Abbott, Alfred A, Allen, Charles ABSENT. Appleton, William MORTON-LORD-JENKINS. Kellogg, Martin R. Lawton, Job G., Jr. Lincoln, Abishai Lincoln, F. W., Jr. Little, Otis Marble, William P. Meader, Reuben Morton, Marcus Nayson, Jonathan Newman, Charles Norton, Alfred Ober, Joseph E. Oliver, Henry K. Paige, James W. Parker, Joel Parker, Samuel D. Parsons, Samuel C. Payson, Thomas E. Peabody, Nathaniel Phinney, Silvanus B. Preston, Jonathan Prince, F. O. Putnam, George Rockwood, Joseph M. Sheldon, Luther Sherman, Charles Stevenson, J. Thomas Storrow, Charles S. Stutson, William Taber, Isaac C. Taylor, Ralph Tower, Ephraim Turner, David P. Tyler, John S. Tyler, William Upton, George B. Wales, Bradford L. Warner, Marshal Whitney, James S. Wilkinson, Ezra Winslow, Levi M. Huntington, George H. Wood, Nathaniel Holder, Nathaniel Absent and not voting, 84. So the motion was not agreed to. The question then recurred on the motion of Mr. Day, of Templeton, that the main question be now put; which was agreed to. The first question was on the amendment of Mr. Huntington, of Northampton, to add at the close of the resolve, the following: But it shall be the duty of the court to superintend the course of the trial, to decide upon the admission or rejection of evidence, upon all questions of law raised during the trial, and upon all collateral and incidental proceedings, and also to allow bills of exceptions; and the court may grant a new trial in cases of conviction. The amendment was agreed to; and the resolve, as thus amended, was passed. Amendments of the Constitution. The resolves on the subject of Amendments of the Constitution were then taken up, and read the second time, as amended; and the question was stated on their final passage. Mr. MORTON, of Quincy. Mr. President: This subject has been considered by the Convention at length; the resolves have been printed, and put into the hands of every member of this body, so that there has been a full opportunity to examine the whole subject, and I think we are prepared to vote upon it without any farther discussion. I therefore move the previous question. Mr. LORD, of Salem. I want to know if the previous question was not ordered on this matter last night, on the ground that the question was [July 28th. not on the final passage of the resolves, and that there was to be another stage; and was it not the express understanding that when they came up on their final passage, there would be an opportunity afforded to discuss them farther? That is the way that I understood it. I do not believe that this Convention is quite ready to put this matter through without another word being said about it. It is a most important proposition, and I desire to have it thoroughly understood before we proceed to vote upon it; and I am not ready to believe that the Convention will order the previous question without allowing an opportunity for farther amendments to be proposed. Mr. President, I move that when the question be taken upon ordering the previous question, it be taken by yeas and nays. Mr. DANA, for Manchester. The gentleman from Salem is right in his statement. Mr. MORTON, of Quincy. If the gentleman will allow me, in order to stop discussion, I withdraw the motion for the previous question. The question then recurred on the final passage of the resolves, as amended. Mr. JENKINS, of Falmouth. Mr. President: In all future Conventions of the people for the purpose of amending their Constitution, I think it is obviously just and proper that delegates shall be so elected as fully and fairly to represent the will of a majority of the people of the Commonwealth. But, Sir, as I understand it, these resolves do not so provide; and to this I object. For the purpose of remedying what I consider to be a defect, I propose to introduce an amendment to the first resolve. I think it is desirable that in all Conventions the people should be fairly and fully represented; but how is it in this Convention? Here is one of the north-western counties in this Commonwealth, having a population of thirty thousand, and it is represented upon this floor by twenty-six delegates; and here is another county, having a much larger population, or fifty thousand, which has only twenty-three delegates. Is this a fair representation? I ask members of this Convention if they regard this as fair and equal? Now, Sir, these resolves, as they are reported, are designed to perpetuate this inequality; and it is this provision that I wish to strike out. Sir, the gentleman from Boston, upon my left, said, the other day, that the chain was put about our necks but this provision designs to rivet it there. I agree with him in that expression. Sir, if one portion, and one section, of this Commonwealth is to be disfranchised in part, I think that the emblem of industry in this hall should be taken down. I do not wish to have it there as a memorial of oppression; and in the name of that portion of the people whom I have the honor to represent here, I protest against this. The amendment which I propose is this: to strike out the following words, immediately after the word "ensuing," in the first resolve, "Meetings shall be held, and delegates shall be chosen, in all the towns, cities, and districts in the Commonwealth, in the manner and number then provided by law for the election of the largest number of representatives, which the towns and cities shall then be entitled to elect," and to insert in lieu thereof the words: "The qualified voters of each senatorial district in the Commonwealth shall elect, in the same manner as they shall elect senators to the general court, delegates." I leave the blank for the Convention to fill with such num ber as they shall think proper; and upon the amendment I ask the yeas and nays. Mr. BRADFORD, of Essex, moved to amend the amendment, by striking out all after the word "chosen," to the end of the sentence, and inserting, in lieu thereof, the following: In the same manner as the senators shall by law be chosen, in the proportion of to each senator, to be elected by general ticket in each senatorial district, unless before that time the State shall be by law divided into single districts for that purpose, or for the election of representatives; in which case, one delegate shall be chosen for each district thus constituted. The question being taken on the amendment to the amendment, it was not agreed to. The question being taken on ordering the yeas and nays on the amendment of Mr. Jenkins, on a division there were-ayes, 72; noes, 158-so the yeas and nays were ordered. Mr. BRADBURY, of Newton. This is a proposition I did not expect to hear, but it is one I very much like. I think it may reach and remedy the enormous evils which must naturally and inevitably result from the constitution of the House of Representatives, as settled by this Convention. If the question were simply whether we should now undertake to establish the organic basis for a future Convention, on the principle upon which this body is instituted, I could not give my vote for it, because I should deem it an unjust violation of popular rights. The injustice of such a basis was clearly demonstrated during the discussions of the basis of the House. It was shown that a small minority of the people, as represented in this Convention, had undertaken to establish what shall be the present and prospective constitution of the House of Representatives; but I shall not now go into that question, or comment upon what has been definitely decided by the Convention. If we are to have another Convention, either in ten, or twenty years, or at any other period, let its constitution rest upon contemporary facts and considerations-let it be based upon the population of the period. I cannot believe that this body fully comprehends the prospective operation of the last modification it gave to the basis of the House of Representatives. That modification was submitted but thirty minutes previous to the final vote, and no adequate examination was, or could be, given to that radical proposition. Sir, in 1873, by the resolves under consideration, a much smaller minority of the people will be here, constituting a controlling majority of a Convention for modifying your organic law,-a minority smaller than that which all men know -in and out this house-controls the action of this body upon all questions of the division of power, and the assignment of representative rights. But this unjust inequality will be constantly augmenting by the legitimate action of the system attempted to be fastened upon the State. By the estimated census of 1870 it will be enormously increased. It will then be but a small portion of the Commonwealth which will possess a control over its legislation, and that same small portion will, by the resolves under consideration, be invested with a power that can, in a Constitutional Convention, effectually secure that power in its own hands. That small minority can, as it pleases, preserve, for its own advantage, the basis of representation, or it can surrender its advantages and consent to alter the most vital part of your organic law, as an act of magnanimity. The question submitted in such a case will be this: Will you retain the political power with which you are now constitutionally clothed, or surrender magnanimously what has been wrongfully held, if not improperly acquired? Sir, if we are to have a Convention in 1870, founded on the basis of the representation that will then exist, it will be utterly impossible, in any degree, to modify the basis of the House of Representatives. There have been, as gentlemen well know, without reference to particular instances, numerous cases of unequal representation in the political history of the older States of this Union, which have been the result of popular changes and the unequal growth of different sections represented. I need but advert to a single instance under the Constitution of Virginia. The slave-holding and planting sections of that State controlled the government completely. Less than a third of the free people held a majority of legislative power over the two-thirds, and this minority succeeded, for twenty years, in resisting all attempts at an equalization of representation. But, in 1830, after violent agitation, and an apprehended division of that State, a Convention was obtained. Upon the question of representation, those scctions of the State in possession of an undue share of legislative power, clung tenaciously to the retention of the power they had enjoyed, and by an adroitness of management not exceeded by minorities elsewhere, they succeeded, at a late day, in shutting the door to all farther concessions of power to the popular majority. How? By limiting the future distribution of representatives to counties and cities, so as not to disturb certain lines between slavery and freedom. And here we have from gentlemen who detest the motives that guided the minority of that Convention, a carefully prepared plan, having the same objectthe establishment of a constitutional guarantee of unjust authority and power against the popular majority. Sir, there is some extenuation for that community that endures inequalities of representation which have grown up gradually, as the unavoidable result of popular changes, and the varying ratios of increase in its different sections. It is impossible that any advancing community should not change the relations of its different parts, and no honest man will advocate an organic law, destitute of a provision to meet and equalize these relations. All will admit the necessity of some provision of this kind, and no man expects or dares to go before his constituents to defend its omission. Now if we are to establish a mode of effecting a change of our organic law, let us have reference to the condition of things which may demand it, and not attempt to bind the future action of the people by an iron rule, made for the present condition of things. Let us not attempt to confine the people in their future action upon their organic law, by a rule founded on the present interests, condition, or politics of the State. Let us not say to the future that it shall act only in the manner which we, under existing circumstances, consider it proper to proceed. Sir, I have not the statistics here, but I am sure [July 28th. that a much smaller minority will have the power of determining the time and manner in which the Constitution is to be amended again; the power of determining what shall be the basis of the House; and whether, and how long, an increasing majority of the people of the Commonwealth shall submit to a waning minority. There can be little doubt that the number of members of the House of Representatives will, in 1870, be four hundred and forty, exclusive of those from the new towns, which will be created between now and then. And how many such will be incorporated within that period? Why, Sir we made seven within the last three years, and according to that ratio, it will give us fifty additional by the creation of new towns up to 1873. Then, Sir, we shall have four hundred and ninety representatives, and the majority of the people in that House will have some thirty per cent. less power to rectify that inequality, if this is to be the basis of a Constitutional Convention. I would ask, Sir, what any honest, liberal man, can say against a rule which shall be precisely in proportion to the people as they exist in different parts of the State? Why should you fix a rule that in 1873 will give to about one-fourth of the people of Massachusetts-and I am certain I speak within bounds-the right to elect a majority of a Constitutional Convention which is to have submitted to them the question whether they will retain or surrender that proportion of the law-making power. Sir, it is an enormity that cannot be found in the history of law-making or Constitution-altering in the whole country, enormous as they have been, and condemned as they have been, by every man in Massachusetts who has looked at them. Sir, the Rhode Island revolution proceeded from the same grasping of power. Our forefathers submitted to a rotten-borough system and its enormities, for a while, but they did not from choice. It grew up with the peculiar institutions under which they lived. And here we are, without any excuse or extenuation, sending out, at the last hour of a protracted Convention, a system of representation which we know will grow more and more unequal every year. And more-and more inexcusable-we now propose, as a future remedy for the inequalities we have created, to submit the question of their rectification to the magnanimity of their beneficiaries! If an aggrandized minority choose to grant the principle of equal representation, the people will gain their rights, if not, they must endure them for two more decades for a new chance. Sir, I wish some gentleman, better posted up in these prospective legislative statistics than I am, had risen to present to the Convention more clearly the inequalities thus produced, and the enormous injustice of submitting the questionwhether we shall have the Constitution altered in 1783 to a legislature elected by one-fourth of the people of Massachusetts. Sir, I want the people to settle the question; and I hope that this amendment will be adopted. Limitation of Debate. Mr. ALVORD, for Montague. In order to let in a motion for the limitation of debate upon this subject, I move that the Orders of the Day be laid upon the table. The motion was agreed to. Mr. ALVORD. I now move that debate cease upon this subject, and that we proceed to take the vote upon this question at fifteen minutes past one o'clock, Mr. ASPINWALL, of Brookline. I move that when the question is taken on that motion, it be taken by yeas and nays. A division was called for on the demand for the yeas and nays, and resulted-54 in the affirmative and 133 in the negative-and, there being more than one-fifth in favor of the yeas and nays, the yeas and nays were ordered. Orders of the Day. Mr. ALVORD, for Montague. I move that the Convention now proceed to the consideration of the Orders of the Day. Mr. GRISWOLD, for Erving. I wish the gentleman for Montague would withdraw that motion for a moment. I wish to make a motion that will occupy no time. Mr. ALVORD. I withdraw the motion for the Orders of the Day. Hour of Adjournment. Mr. GRISWOLD, for Erving. I understand that there are some matters now pending which it is important should be disposed of to-day, so that they may go to the Committee on Enrolment to-night. I therefore move that our session this afternoon may be continued until eight o'clock. The PRESIDENT. The question pending before the Convention is on the motion limiting debate on the Orders of the Day, which has just been laid on the table, and fixing the time for taking the question at fifteen minutes past one o'clock. The Chair is of opinion that the motion of the gentleman for Erving is not in order at this time. It may be accomplished by moving to lay the question limiting debate upon the table. Mr. GRISWOLD. Then I make that motion. The question was accordingly laid upon the table. Mr. GRISWOLD. I now move, that in our afternoon session the Convention shall sit until eight o'clock this evening. Mr. GARDNER, of Boston. I wish to inquire whether, if this motion is adopted, it will preclude the Convention from adjourning at an earlier hour? The PRESIDENT. The Convention can adjourn at any time it pleases. Mr. GARDNER. Then I do not see the object of the motion of the gentleman for Erving. Mr. GRISWOLD. I think, for the reasons I have stated, it will be necessary for the Convention to sit until that time, and I merely make the motion with the view of giving the members notice, so that gentlemen might not leave us without a quorum. Mr. THOMPSON, of Charlestown. I very much doubt the expediency of that motion, for I think that long before that period we shall be left without a quorum. We intended last evening to sit somewhat later than usual, but we found that long before seven o'clock there was not a quorum here. It appears to me to be inexpedient to pass such a vote when it has been thoroughly proved that we cannot have a quorum. And I would ask whether it is possible to act here without a quorum? If not, I think we had better wait till the afternoon, and see whether members are here. The question on the motion to continue the session until eight o'clock was then taken, and on a division, there were-ayes, 106; noes, 109. So the motion was not agreed to. Priority of Motions. Mr. GRISWOLD. I now move to take the motion of the gentleman for Montague from the table. Mr. LORD, of Salem. I am as desirous of hurrying business as anybody, and am sorry to see these motions made, which merely tend to the consumption of time. I move that we proceed to the consideration of the Orders of the Day. The PRESIDENT. The Orders of the Day are upon the table. Mr. LORD. Precisely, Sir; so I understood; and I move to take them up from the table. The PRESIDENT. The first question in order is the motion of the gentleman for Erving, (Mr. Griswold,) to take from the table the motion of the gentleman for Montague, (Mr. Alvord). Mr. LORD. I move that the Convention proceed to the consideration of the Orders of the Day, and I make that motion as a privileged motion. The PRESIDENT. The Orders of the Day are upon the table. Mr. LORD. I am aware of it, and move to take them up. Mr. GRISWOLD. I wish to inquire whether the motion which I made has not precedence of the motion of the gentleman from Salem? The PRESIDENT. The Chair is of opinion, without having time to reflect upon or consider the subject, that the motion to take up the Orders of the Day will have precedence over the motion fixing the time for closing debate. The question was then taken on the motion to proceed to the consideration of the Orders of the Day, and, a division being demanded, there were -ayes, 87; noes, 126. So the motion to take up the Orders of the Day, was not agreed to. Mr. GRISWOLD. I now move to take from the table the motion of the gentleman for Montague. The motion was agreed to. The PRESIDENT. The question now recurs on the motion to limit debate on the first question in the Orders of the Day, to fifteen minutes past one o'clock. Amendments of the Constitution. Mr. SCHOULER, of Boston. I now move to take the Orders of the Day, from the table. The question was put, and the motion was agreed to. The PRESIDENT. The question is upon the amendment of the gentleman from Falmouth, (Mr. Jenkins). Mr. JENKINS, of Falmouth. I desire to modify my amendment by striking out the last four lines, all after the word "and," and insert the words " the legal voters of each senatorial district shall, by general ticket, in the manner then provided by law for the election of delegates, choose delegates." The PRESIDENT. The question is upon the amendment as modified, and upon that the Convention have ordered the yeas and nays. Mr. SCHOULER. I would inquire if the hour of two o'clock should arrive before the calling of the roll shall be finished, would the Convention be adjourned at that time? [July 28th. The PRESIDENT. If the Convention commence to divide, the rule in relation to the time of adjournment will not interrupt the proceeding. The question was then taken, and there were -ayes, 90; nays, 161-as follows: YEAS. Hurlburt, Samuel A. Aldrich, P. Emory Tileston, Edmund P. Train, Charles R. Abbott, Josiah G. Adams, Shubael P. Allen, Charles Allen, James B. Allen, Joel C. Allen, Parsons Alvord, D. W. Baker, Hillel Ball, George S. Bancroft, Alpheus Barrett, Marcus Bates, Moses, Jr. Bennett, William, Jr. Bennett, Zephaniah Bigelow, Edward B. Bird, Francis W. Booth, William S. Boutwell, Sewell Breed, Hiram N. Brinley, Francis Briggs, George N. Brown, Artemas Brownell, Joseph Bryant, Patrick Cady, Henry Case, Isaac Chapin, Daniel E. Churchill, J. McKean Upton, George B. Wales, Bradford L. Walker, Samuel Weeks, Cyrus Wetmore, Thomas Wheeler, William F. Wilkins, John H. Williams, Henry Wilson, Milo NAYS. Crane, George B. Denton, Augustus Griswold, Josiah W. Hapgood, Lyman W. Thursday,] Hapgood, Seth Hobbs, Edwin Hood, George Lincoln, Abishai CONSTITUTIONAL CONVENTIONS. - HOOPER-ASPINWALL-LORD- ALVORD. Phelps, Charles Vinton, George A. ABSENT. Chapin, Henry Banks, Nathaniel P., Jr. Cook, Charles E. Bartlett, Russel Beach, Erasmus D. Beal, John Beebe, James M. Bell, Luther V. Bishop, Henry W. Blagden, George W. Bliss, Gad O. Bliss, Willam C. Boutwell, Geo. S. Brewster, Osmyn Crittenden, Simeon Bradford, William J. A Davis, Robert T. Brown, Adolphus F. Brown, Alpheus R. Brown, Hammond Brown, Hiram C. Buck, Asahel Bullock, Rufus Bullen, Amos H. Bumpus, Cephas C. Burlingame, Anson Butler, Benjamin F. Caruthers, William Chandler, Amariah Chapin, Chester W. Day, Gilman Dehon, William French, Charles H. Parsons, Samuel C. Payson, Thomas E. Absent and not voting, 168. So the amendment was rejected. The hour of two o'clock having arrived, the Convention then adjourned. AFTERNOON SESSION. The Convention reassembled at three o'clock. On motion of Mr. HOLDER, of Lynn, the consideration of the Orders of the Day, being the resolves in relation to Conventions to Revise the Constitution, was resumed. Mr. HOOPER, of Fall River. We have directed the census to be taken in 1855, and every ten years thereafter; consequently, it will be taken in 1865 and in 1875; so that, if this provision is adopted, the Convention will be held the year before the census will be taken. For this reason I move that the figures 64 1873" be stricken out, and "1875" inserted, in the following part of the first resolve: A Convention to revise or amend this Constitution, may be called and held in the following manner: At the general election in the year 1873, and in each twentieth year thereafter, the qualified voters in State elections shall give in their votes upon the question, "Shall there be a Convention to revise the Constitution:" Mr. ASPINWALL, from Brookline. I suggest to the gentleman, that the census will be [July 28th. taken in May, 1875, and it will be impossible to apportion the representation before the time provided for holding the Convention, and therefore, the delegates to the Convention of 1875 cannot be elected on the basis of the representation of 1875. It seems to me that the year should be changed, if changed at all, to 1876, if the intention is that the Convention shall be regulated by the basis of representation of 1875. Mr. HOOPER. I accept the suggestion, and modify my motion accordingly. The question was then taken upon the motion of Mr. Hooper, and there were, upon a division -ayes, 54; noes, 80. So the amendment was rejected. Mr. LORD, of Salem. I would inquire if there is any amendment pending? The PRESIDENT. There is not. Mr. LORD. I move, then, to insert after the word "affirmative," in the first resolve, in the thirteenth line, the words, " and if the number of affirmative votes shall be at least in number twofifths of the whole number of votes cast for governor at such election," so that that portion of the resolve shall read : Which votes shall be received, counted, recorded and declared, in the same manner as in the election of Governor; and a copy of the record thereof, shall, within one month, be returned to the office of the Secretary of State, who shall, thereupon, examine the same, and shall publish, in the newspapers in which the laws are then published, the number of yeas and nays given upon said question, in each town and city, and if a majority of said votes shall be in the affirmative, and if the number of affirmative votes shall be at least in number two-fifths of the whole number of votes cast for Governor at such election, it shall be deemed and taken to be the will of the people that a Convention should meet accordingly. I do not propose to make any extended remarks at this stage of the proceeding. I proposed an amendment yesterday afternoon, which received no attention whatever. The PRESIDENT. The Chair would remind the gentleman, that the Convention have ordered that no debate should be had after a certain hour, which hour is already passed. Mr. LORD. That being so, I move the yeas and nays upon the amendment. The House was divided upon ordering the yeas and nays, and there were, upon a division-ayes, 18; noes, 153. So the yeas and nays were refused. The question then recurring upon the amendment offered by Mr. Lord, it was put, and there were, upon a division-ayes, 30; noes, 136. So the amendment was rejected. Mr. ALVORD, for Montague. I move to amend the resolves by striking out the last one, which is as follows: 3. Resolved, The foregoing provisions shall in nowise restrain or impair the reserved right of the people, in their sovereign capacity, and by such mode of proceeding as shall fully and fairly collect and ascertain the will of the majority, at all times, to reform, alter, or totally change their Constitution and Frame of Government. Mr. SIMMONS called for the yeas and nays upon the motion, but they were not ordered, twenty members only voting in favor thereof. The question was then taken upon the amend |
